There is internal conflict within some of the jurors. For example, Juror #3 the messenger service owner, is wrestling with his own feelings about his estranged son while juror #10, the garage owner, is becoming aware of his prejudices toward the slum dwellers.
There is conflict between individuals as their differing backgrounds and characteristics unfold. Juror #2 is not taken seriously because he has a weak personality and feels the others squash his contributions. Various prejudices pit juror against juror as well as their changing votes. There is conflict on the organizational level as some of the jurors enter a collective action against the others as the deliberation continues. The societal level of conflict emerges when some of the jurors display their ignorance and prejudice. This occurred when Juror #10 goes on his tirade about slum people and the rest of the jurors leave the table to display their disgust.
.
It is interesting that there is no conflict evident in the jury room until the first vote is taken. It appears that some of the votes are tentative. Several of the jurors raise their hands later after seeing the majority vote guilty. The conflict starts with Fonda's dissenting vote.
Conflict Resolution.
Fonda seemed to recognize that the climate of conflict could be beneficial to raise questions and help the group come to an agreement. He used the principle of win-win in his tactics. Fonda tried to promote a climate of cooperation and negotiation. He was not dominating and he realized compromise would not bring a unanimous verdict. Fonda stated calmly that he was not sure of the defendant's guilt or innocence, but that a life or death situation required more thought. He immediately stated and clarified the goal of the group. Fonda's air of self-confidence helped him convey his ideas. He seemed to learn about his audience quickly. He knew that the salesman wanted to go to the ball game and assured him there was plenty of time to discuss the case and still make the game.