Ek Ruka Hua

Power of CommunicationEk Ruka Hua Faisla ?Elegance of language may not be in the power of all of us; but simplicity and straightforwardness are. Write much as you would speak; speak as you think. If with your inferior,speak no coarser than usual; if with your superiors, no finer. Be what you say; and, within therules of prudence, say what you are.? The Power of Communication comes from knowing the right questions to ask and practicinggood listening skills. The secret weapon of power negotiators is being skilled in askingquestions.

Why? One of the reasons is that questions get the communication going andencourages the other party to talk, to share information with you. And what you are always,always looking for is information, particularly something you do not know. Even when youthink you know the answers, get in the habit of asking questions; at the least, it will confirmyour knowledge. And if you have somehow missed asking the really right question, theanswer you need will likely come out the more the other party is forced to talk and you aretalking less.

The 80s was a period of experimental films and serious cinema. Movies were made not forcommercial success and some of the best films were churned out during this period, which areremembered and appreciated even today. One such film is Ek Ruka Hua Faisla. Inspired fromthe English flick Twelve Angry Men (1957), Ek Ruka Hua Faisla is a rare remake which is betterthan the original! Sometimes in life your professions reflect on your personalities. And more often more thanprofession communication may represent your Personality.

In this movie we observe theentire decision making process and way the people communicate with each other, whereeach individual had different perception and different behavior in particular situation. theirpersonal opinion leads them to one wrong decision first but later on with just one leading,convincing, neutral and practical individual, they were able to think on the other side of thecase and finally they reached to right conclusion. There are twelve male members of a jury who have gathered together in an enclosed room todeliberate on charges of murder against a young boy accused of killing his father.

The caseagainst the boy looks irrefutable and indomitable, as there is a witness in the form of an oldman who claims to have heard the incident and another woman who claims to have seen theactual act of stabbing. Plus there is the murder weapon – a knife – that was found at the crimescene, seemingly implicating the boy without any fragment of doubt. But all is not what itseems like. All the jury members, except one, are convinced that the boy is guilty of the crime and thetask before them is to reach a unanimous decision to expedite the case.

But there is only onejury member who is not completely convinced about the case and he starts the deliberations,in which all the members have to participate to reach a common conclusionAN OVERVIEW Twelve jurors – common people with their usual daily problems, emotional swings and theirregular habit to stick to what is obvious – are selected to judge a case where very strongevidences are available against the accused. Everything was transparent and vividly clear. The case was supposed to end with common opinion against the accused within no time.

Butone person was against this common judgment and this is the point where story builds up. This one person make other eleven to change their decision. The movie opens in the first state of Group Development, the opening period. This is thetime when people in small groups will small talk, introduce themselves, and begin to learn alittle about one another. During this stage in the movie, jurors discuss the view, old buildings,hot weather colds, and some even share what they do for a living. And this is the stage whenthe group dynamics start showing, and how in the heat of discussion, the true feelings startshowing through.

People’s biases, bigotry, temper, all start showing through. Gradually, wecome to know the communication skills of each and every jury member in the room beingopened. Eventually we see the missing links, the loopholes in the vital clues, andtestimonies, and eventually persuade all except Pankaj Kapoor. Pankaj is not so easilypersuaded because his son has left him, and he has a bias against youth, but eventually he isalso persuaded with more m. Members involved in the conflict want to create and maintainstability. However, they also want to move forward which requires change.

Conflict then existsas the individuals struggle between creating both at the same time. This struggle is seen inthe film as the jury members struggle between their desire for stability and their desire forchange. Initially, it is seen that all the jury members except one have a guilty verdict. The factthat one member, KK Raina, has a not guilty verdict is an initial source of conflict. For theremaining jury members, their focus is not on understanding why Mr. Davis is saying notguilty. Instead, they want him to agree with them and choose a guilty verdict.

In doing so, theyare trying to achieve stability, since if KK Raina says not guilty, there will be no conflict. KEY TAKEAWAYS y Transistion from Communication to Conflict Management y Situational Understanding with all possible Permutations and Combinations y Team Dynamics for a Decision making process REVIEWS OF THE MOVIE: ?A masterful work of debate and dialogue; of shifting momentum and the ideal of sticking toyour scruples in the face of antagonistic groupthink? ?This is a film where tension comes from personality conflict, dialogue and body language, notaction.? – one is so consumed by the brilliance of the script and the acting that it doesn’t matter whatthe jurors’ names are? CONCLUSION: The issues in the movie are addressed to the Indian audiences and in Indian setting, withIndian characters and in Hindi language. Even after a quarter of a century later the movie stirsyou with its treatment of topics because the issues of caste, class, materialism, loopholes injudicial process and of course human prejudices and judgement still plague us. So this movie ? Ek Ruka Hua Faisla? is a very good example of the power of communication .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *