Erin Brockovich - Movie Review Example

Discussion Paper The movie watched The discussion is based on the film, ‘Erin Brockovich’, which not only sharesits author’s name portrayed as Roberts but also Brockovich history as the premise upon which inferences are drawn to aid in the discussion of various thematic topics. The film is coined in manner to dramatize the author’s true story based on his history and contribution on lawsuits with respect to PG&E’s environmental crime (Nanda 134). Some view Brockovich as distraction or caricature based on his unwise wardrobe decisions following a critical examination of Roberts’ performance upstages. The film is framed in terms of court battles aimed at showcasing the significance of local arbitration in contrast to courtroom battles. The discussion is sectioned into the following subheadings; Leadership In the context of leadership, it will be a two-fold discussion; on one end we look at PG&E and on the other we discuss the Girard & Keese New York law firm. With respect to PG&E Company, the leadership was poor as they never cared for the community as well as their employee’s health (Michael 87). The management’s irrational decision of disposal of wastewater in unlined ponds caused a major environmental crime. Leadership is essential in any organization based on ensuring that safety standards for all are attained. Leadership is also portrayed in the films clearly outlining types and styles leadership take. Environmental pollution can be hazardous to people and hence ethical standards should be upheld in every decisions made (Michael 122). This unwise decision saw them loss a lot of funds to the tune of 333 million dollars. The Company was far from being trustworthy as it presented a platform where incongruent, conflicting and dysfunctional activities such as intentional environmental pollution that had such a magnitude damage to its employees as well as the residents. The leaders lacked emotional intelligence despite massive technical skills and Intelligent Quotient endowments. Their actions were not empathy-based end hence saw it impractical to act proactively to engage in environmental-friendly actions by not letting wastewater percolating to underground water thus causing life impairments. With respect to Girard& Keese New York law firm, it is revealed that it was until Brockovich was hired that such huge amount of money was paid to plaintiffs. This indicates an earlier laxity in their functions as they were unable to realize environmental crime advanced by PG&E Company (Michael 156). Brockovich leadership enabled the firm to benefit as her attorneys were paid 40% of the total amount. This also made her benefit as we realize that she was offered a bonus of 2 million dollars and the firm gaining 10 million dollars. She employed authoritative leadership style as we see how she investigated the crime and convinced her employer to take the case despite their earlier opposition. Ethics In regard to the PG&E Company, it is quite evident how they were driven by unethical motive. They have no care to the residents and hence use Hexavalent Chromium to prevent corrosion in the cooling towers without a predetermined strategy to prevent its hazardous nature to the environment (Seglin 176). This was driven by the need to benefit at the expense of the mentioned plaintiffs. On the other hand, the attorneys also acted unethically as they held up the payment for over six months without advancing to plaintiffs. Besides, Brockovich is opportunistic and is driven by her personal gain but acting on an ethical issue to rescue the plaintiffs from their damages. Critical examination of the private judges’ activities also reveals unethical practices behind an ethical practice. The film has captured how people undertake ethical activities but indulge in unethical issues during execution of activities. Environmental pollution can be hazardous to people and hence ethical standards should be upheld in every decisions made (Michael 122). They are seeing retiring from public offices, particularly from courts room cases and joining arbitration in order to gain by earning over 500 million dollars daily in contrast to 150 million dollars in public courts. Court judges who serve in public offices complain of the change of events resulting from early retirements of judges to act as arbitrators. Negotiation Negotiation occurs in the movie as we see arbitration process settles on 333 million dollars to be paid to plaintiffs by the energy Company. The film is informed by the need for justice resulting from pollution activities undertaken by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). This is informed through investigation by Brockovich to unearth the magnitude of the damage alleging that over 300 persons had contracted cancer resulting from the PG&E use of hexavalent Chromium six (Stephen 123). Other cases of negotiation arise from agreement between attorneys and plaintiffs to be paid a 40% of the money paid. Various negotiated conflicts arose between the clerk and her employer based on the dressing code as she was viewed as putting on miniskirts. The attorneys held money for more than six months before finally paying it out despite several threats of lawsuits which further escalated build up of conflicts. There were also conflicts based on the firm’s 10 million dollars benefit without proper detail-based illustration on its expenses. Negotiation is further extended in determining amount to be paid to private judges that preside over arbitration process. Brockovich goes through the negotiation steps starting with the perusal of files she got in the office indicating land transactions the energy firm is to pay. This is followed by taking own initiative to investigate unearthing every detail about the extent of the pollution. Bargaining is thus done culminating into agreement via the application of deliberate negotiation based. We see a win-win outcome as the PG&E Company benefiting by paying less, plaintiffs and attorneys gaining via arbitration. Teams Teamwork is evident in the movie with respects to arbitration. Brockovich realizes the shocking revelations and initiates her own investigation after convincing her employers to take the case. The attorneys then team up to marshal the plaintiff resulting into gathering of 650 plaintiffs. Goals are clearly outlined resulting from the agreement of the stakeholders to work as a team. The claim is drafted according to the information gathered from investigation and agreement is reached to settle the case via arbitration. The team debates based on evidences in order to lay down grounds for winning and defending based on the discussion aimed at each side persuading another so as to reach amicable solution where we see each side agreeing on 333 million to rest the case (Aranda & Luis 89). The film helps us appreciate the need to form a working teamwork during arbitration of cases and clearly set objectives, rules and goals. Through the formation of the teamwork, a win-win agreement was reached hence saving the PG&E many costs that could have been incurred in courtrooms. A long term solution was thus reached helping the energy producing firm to engage in practices that ensure safety in the environment. Problem Solving A problem is only solved when it exists and well identified and designed by the parties. Alternatives to a problem solution even make it easier for a problem to be solved. In this regard, environmental crime that was unethically executed by PG&E was the source of conflicts between the Hinckley residents and the company (Ken & Joan 177). The problem stayed for long under the surface before realization based on the laxities on the then investigative bodies. We see Brockovich taking an initiative to investigate the issue following the realization of a planned skewed land transaction between PG&E and a resident near the Company’s Plant site. After unearthing every detail, the clerk vowed to seek the solution in court. An option is identified and adopted to settle the issue outside court through arbitration informed by consequences and tradeoffs. An objective of finding a solution to a problem is seen as vital in resolving conflicts. It was her objective to amicably solve the problem and this was in accordance with the law that governs the plaintiffs based on externalities. We see other objective of Brockovich as to personally gain as well her attorneys from the suit. This is why she took her own initiative to convince her employer and to investigate and reach a consensus. Managing Conflicts Conflicts may take various forms; individual verses individual, within individual, between teams in organizations and within teams of individuals. The Company, in its bid to prevent the corrosion in the cooling towers uses hexavalent chromium 6. The wastewater dissolves this anti-corrosion chemical and percolates into groundwater from the unlined ponds where it was stored. This externality culminates into serious damages to the residents near the plant attracting several lawsuits saves to Brockovich. Despite the author being a mere clerk, without formal education in law, he managed to convince his employer to take the case and brought PG&E to book paying the plaintiffs 333 million dollars and himself getting a bonus of two million dollars. Conflicts amplify after the payment as many plaintiffs wondered where the huge amount was spent despite their earlier agreement on 40% to be taken by the author’s attorneys. The film reveals existence of a conflict between an organization and a team of individual, conflict between attorneys and team of individual (plaintiffs) as well as conflicts between private and public judges. In this context, we focus on conflict management between PG&E Company and team of individual residing near the Plant’s site (Ken & Joan 197). It is revealed by the film that arbitration can be used to manage conflicts by getting amicable solution. Management of conflicts starts with establishment of the causes of such conflicts. This is supported by Brockovich own initiative to investigate planned land transaction that was to be effected by PG&E Company. We see the significance of investigation in conflict resolution as the investigator gathers strictly necessary information to understand the case at hand. This presents a platform to understand the case and the parties fully prior to actual resolution so as to help make facts-supported decisions. The film reveals different causes of conflicts; facts, attitudes, behavior and aims that make it difficult to for people and firms to harmoniously coexist. In this context, the main conflict between the PG&E Company and residents arises from different goals and unacceptable behavior of the company to dispose its wastewater that percolates causing damage to the society. This was managed and solved through bargaining via arbitration so as to create a win-win scenario. Managing Change Analysis of the film reveals several areas that have undergone changes as the film unfolds. In respect to conflict resolution, it is revealed that most cases are now solved outside courts through arbitration since arbitration saves on time as well as costs associated with lawsuits (Herbert 198). The case between the residents and PG&E resulting from use of hexavalent Chromium that led to damage to residents was solved through arbitration. However, this change faced a lot of resistance from the public judges who feel that their private counterparts benefit more from such arrangements. Through the analysis of Brockovich real story, we realize of changes that are being proposed in court proceedings. We realize that most cases are currently settled outside courts despites minor resistance for such changes. Such arrangements present a platform where justice is not delayed at minimum costs This can be attributed to difficulty associated with management of change resulting from skewed ways those initiating such changes employ. Another change portrayed by the film is in the investigation departments as we see Brockovich taking the initiative to convince her employers to take the case despite their earlier low profile. Other remarkable change is evident where the Company was instructed to ensure that residents were safe by installation of proper disposal systems to prevent such hazardous percolation. Addressing the unethical behavior of PG&E Company helped managed change in this film. Proposed changes call for proper analysis of consequence attached to such strategies and goes through stagnation, preparation, implementation to determination process without bypassing each stage. Address behavior and explain the motivations that inform and inspired such need for changes. This was not the case as revealed by the film where Brockovich adopted the option to leading colleagues through change. Listening Listening contributes greatly to our behaviors based on the decisions we make when faced with difficulties. Poor listeners ranked as level two and three where a person would hear words spoken but does not listen and in listening in spurts respectively lead to irrational decisions. Listening skills have also been attached as the bedrock upon which decisions made are embedded and hence people have to pay much attention and remain focused on messages conveyed to store necessary information needed to make rational decisions. Empathetic listening is required during discussions and good listeners use time-thought advantage trying to seek for evidence while guessing speakers’ next assertion as well as engaging minds to recap to reinforce memory. In this context, good listening skills played a pivotal role during the investigation and arbitration process as portrayed by the film (Nanda 111). Brockovich applied high level of listening ability to collect the necessary claims from the plaintiffs to aid in drafting the case. Arbitrators also applied listening skills paying attentions to each plaintiff’s attorneys and defendants to get the main ideas. This helped them concentrate on the debate and discussion as they sort, search, sift and stored information via writing points that aided in making their rulings based on facts and evidences gathered. Work Cited Aranda, Eileen K. & Luis, Team, Structure, Process, Culture, and Politics, Prentice Hall, 1998 Harvard Business School, “Resolving Conflicts Creatively”, Crisp Publication, 1996 Herbert S. KLinder, Managing Disagreement Constructively, Crisp Publication, 1996 John S. Hammond, Ralph L. Keeney & Howard Raiffa, Smart Choices, Harvard Business School, 1999. Press Ken Cloke & Joan Goldsmith, “How to Handle Difficult Behaviors” Harvard Business School, 2000 Michael Watkins, “Diagnosing and Overcoming Barriers to Agreement”, HBS, 2000 Michael Wheeler, “Negotiating Analysis”, HBS, 2001 Nanda Ashish, “The Professional Pledge and Conflict of Interest, Harvard Business School, 1999 Seglin, Jeffrey, “How to Make Tough Ethical Calls”, Harvard Business School, 2000 Stephen Kozicki, Creative Negotiating, Adams Press, 1988 Read More