Stages of Group Work

8/3/2019 Stages of Group Work

1/11

EssayWith extensive reference to appropriate theoreticalliterature, and supported by examples from your ownexperience, describe in detail how a group focused around

either a youth centre or community centre develops from itsinception. Consider the effect of group size on therequirements for group leadership style. Consider the effectformal (appointed) and informal (personality-related) rolescan have on a group. Consider possible explanations foroppressive behaviour by individual group members atdifferent stages in the life of a group."

Introduction

In this essay we will examine how certain theories of group work and groupdynamics may be applied within a youth work setting. We will first brieflydescribe what may be understood by the terms `group`, and `group work`with specific regard to groupwork theory. We will then look at Tuckmanstheory of group stage development, describing each stage and relating thistheory to practical examples from my own experience and look briefly atthe potential for oppressive behaviour in each stage and how this can beminimized. Next we will look at what is understood by group leadership,looking at three broad styles of leadership and how these may be appliedeffectively within a youth work setting. We will then look at how individualroles can develop and inhibit group development.This essay is illustrated throughout with examples from my own practiceexperience. These examples are drawn from two particular groups with

which I have been involved in a leadership capacity.

The first group was a very small group of ten and eleven year olds fromYouth Action Middlesbrough (YAM). The group never consisted of more thaneight and was often as low as four or five. This evenly split mixed sex groupwas set up for long term activity based work one evening each week, whichwould encourage social interaction and thus help to develop positive socialand interpersonal skills. This was a long-term group and was only terminatedafter four years of activities, planned and delivered by two female co-workers and myself.The second group I have made reference to in my examples, is that of agroup of ten Princes Trust Volunteers (PTV). A distinction which may bemade between a group and a team is that `Teams are co-operative groupsin that they are called into being to perform a task or tasks that cannot beattempted by an individual` (Douglas, 1983, p. 123). The all male team ofsixteen to twenty three year old unemployed volunteers was set up todeliver a sixteen week full-time personal development programme. This wasthe first team that had been run by Cleveland Youth Association and ran toa set PTV skeleton programme that was fleshed out by a co-worker andmyself.What is A Group: Defining Groupwork

Groups may be defined in many ways, indeed providing an absolute

definition of a group, as with much of the theory around group work, ishighly problematic and contestable. However for the purposes of discussing


2/11

groupwork within a context of working with young people we may define agroup as a small gathering of young people. Group work may simplisticallybe described as the study and application of the processes and outcomesexperienced when a small group comes together.Konopka (1963) defines groupwork as a method of social work that is utilisedin order to `help individuals to enhance their social functioning throughpurposeful group experiences, and to cope more effectively with theirpersonal, group or community problems`. This definition shows a traditionwithin groupwork of helping individuals with problems. Brown provides amodernised and more comprehensive definition of group work (1994, p.8).He states that `groupwork provides a context in which individuals help eachother; it is a method of helping groups as well as helping individuals; and itcan enable individuals and groups to influence and change personal, group,organisational and community problems` (original emphasis). He goes on todistinguish between `relatively small and neighbourhood centred` work and`macro, societal and political approaches` within community work,explaining that only the former may be properly classified as groupwork.Thus the role of groupwork can be seen as one which places emphasis onsharing of thoughts, ideas, problems and activities.Stages of Group Development

Groups, like individuals are each unique with their own experiences andexpectations. However many commentators studying group developmentand dynamics have recognised that group development, as a generalisation,is more predictable than individual behaviour. Thus many theories of groupstage development have been cultivated, some linear, others more cyclical,and it must be stressed that no definitive model of group stage developmentexists.Two of the most useful theories of group stage development are thosediscussed by Tuckman (1965), and Rogers paper on encounter groups (1967).These models, like others (for example Heap, 1977) propose that as groupsdevelop and change they pass through stages which may be conceptualised.Tuckmans model has been used extensively within youth work theory andpractice and is an excellent model for attempting to analyse individual andgroup behaviour. A brief synopsis of each stage is outlined below, withexamples from personal practice.Stage 1: Forming

The first stage of this group process is joining, referred to as engagement byRogers. This phase involves significant testing, and trial and error. Initialconcerns about openness and support within the group are manifested by alack of cohesion and a difficulty in sharing thoughts, feelings andexperiences with each other. An internal appraisal of group value and howeach individual belongs to the group are key features of this stage. Anxiety,isolation, inadequacy and frustration are common emotions felt by groupmembers at this early stage in the life of a group, as well as beingemotionally threatened by members of the group who are perceived to bestronger or better. Thus the group seeks to create a comfort zone in whichindividuals are not keen to upset the status quo for fear of alienation.Oppressive behaviour is least likely within the formation stage of a group asindividuals generally look to create a comfort zone and do not wish to rock


3/11

the boat. Often frustrations will be built upon between individuals whodisagree strongly, but this will generally not surface until storming begins.A knowledge and understanding of the feelings and emotions felt by groupmembers in this stage is helpful, if not essential, to the effective structuringof a programme to work towards the desired outcome for the group. Forexample both the YAM and PTV groups I had experience with were set up toencourage social interaction and personal development. Having anawareness of group stage theory enabled my colleagues and myself tostructure the early encounters for the groups to be;

a) fun and enjoyable to encourage continued attendance;b) relaxed - offering the promotion of effective communication

and allowing members to get to know each other a littlewhilst gaining in confidence and trust.

To this end ice breakers, introduction and communication exercisers such as

those provided by Brandes and Phillips (1979), Bond (1986), Leech andWooster (1986) and Dearling and Armstrong (1994) were used. As Dynes

describes `[games] stimulate the imagination, make peopleresourceful andhelp develop social ability and co-operation` (Dynes, 1990).Stage 2: Storming

This stage sees group members begin to confront each other as they beginto vie for roles within the group that will help them to belong and to feelvalued. Thus as members begin to assert their individual personalities, thecomfort of the forming stage begins to come under siege. Membersexperience personal, intra and inter group conflicts. Aggression and

resentment may manifest in this stage and thus if strong personalitiesemerge and leadership is unresponsive to group and individual needs, thesituation may become destructive to the group s development. Indeedthere is a high potential for individuals to abandon the group during thisstage, as for some the pressures created by the group may become toomuch of a strain.The potential for oppressive behaviour is strong within the storming phaseas group members vie for preferred roles and release frustrations builtwithin the forming period. This personal oppression should be discouragedwhilst it is understood that a degree of conflict is necessary if the group isto further develop.In the YAM group this stage was represented by a rebellious streak withinthe young people and much of the storming was directed towards the adultleaders. Boundaries within the group were tested as the group explored howfar they would be allowed to go and what they could get away with. One ortwo individuals in turn challenged this behaviour as they felt it was unfairand could jeopardize future activities.The PTV groups storming phase was altogether different. Two of the groupwith strong personalities began to vie for intra-group leadership. Each usedtheir own abilities to strengthen their claim to lead the group, whilst alsosabotaging and undermining the others efforts in an attempt to usurp theleadership role. This situation caused a degree of infighting and at one point

created two sub-groups, one following each of the `pretender` leaders.


4/11


5/11

group, through achievement of task, leadership, reviewing, moving on, or bymonitoring the groups process.Stage 5: Mourning

The final stage in the life of a group ultimately is its termination. Thoughoften overlooked, this stage in group development is equally important topositive outcomes. The ending of a group can be a very unhappy anddistressing time for some members, as they may feel some extent ofdependency on the group. Garland et al. describe some of the typicalresponses to the ending phase as:

Denial `forgetting` the time of the groupstermination.

Regression reverting to a less independent state offunctioning.

Need expression in the hope the group will continue. Recapitulation detailed recall of past experiences

within the group. Evaluation detailed discussion on the value of the

group experience. Flight destructive denial of any positive benefit of the

group, or a positive disengagement towards otherinterests.

Potential exists within this stage for members to be oppressed asscapegoats, that is blamed or at fault for the ending of the group. This canbe minimised by constant focusing and refocusing on group end points andstaged celebrations of group achievements.With the PTV group it was relatively easy to develop strategies to minimisethe effects of the groups termination. The groups life span was structuredto a tight time-scale and end point from the outset. This was reinforced bygetting the group to maintain a counting down chart which was marked offeach day. The end of the group was marked by a large presentation to which

friends and relatives were invited. The presentation marked a clear endingfor the group from day one, whilst also serving as a celebration of all thegroups achievements during its existence. Thus the end did not come as a`surprise`, and was something to look forward to.As we have seen the value of a theoretical understanding of conceptualisingthis group stage theory in youth work and other helping professions, lies inenabling group workers to `tune into the groups processes and respondappropriately` (Preston-Shoot, 1987).

Group Leadership

Effective groups should promote the value of all of its constituent members.One of the keys to establishing this end is competent leadership.


6/11

Leadership can beand hasbeendefinedin many

ways. Itis seen as` the actofcommanding anddirecting, theactionsof

leaders, the process by which groups achieve their goals, the antithesis offollowership` (Sessoms and Stevenson, 1981, p. 5). Leadership can be seenas the act of `moving people towards goal achievement`, and may beviewed as an interactionbetween leaders, followers and goals (see Fig. 1,above), thus it may be described as a process (Sessoms andStevenson, ibid).Fig. 1. - Source: Sessoms and Stevenson (1981)So `In a broad sense, leadership may be described as influence` (Barker etal, 1979, p. 224), thus the individual who will often be seen as the leader ofa youth group, that is the adult, often may in fact not be the most

influentialmember of thegroup.Effective

leadershipdepends onthe balancingof the threevariables indiagram Fig.2. (left), thusthe groupstask,individualneeds andgroupmaintenance

must all beconsidered.

Fig. 2. - Source: Adapted from John Adair (1988) Effective Leadership

Fundamentally within youth work we must recognise the `possibility of allmembers contributing to the process by which groups seek and achievegoals` (Barker et al, 1979, p. 226-229). Thus leadership is a dynamic


7/11

variable and any `person who performs actions which move a group towardits goal and/or maintain the group more frequently and more effectivelythan other group members` may be identified as group leaders (Barker etal, 1979, ibid.).Leadership is often described within a context of three differing styles,laissez faire, democratic and autocratic (or authoritarian).Simplistically the three styles can be described as; Laissez faire letting members do pretty much as they please without theleader offering judgement on other members decisions. This works bestwhen a well functioning group, i.e. one than may be in a performing phase,is working towards a well defined task. This method is exceptionally difficultif more than a handful of group members are present and is often usedwithin sub-groups developed to perform specific sub-tasks. For example thePTV team would use this style for brainstorming specific ideas for projects,as the non-judgemental attitude facilitated more group responses.Democratic consultation and discussion takes place before decisions aremade. This allows group members to have their say but does not guaranteethat these feelings will be acted upon. This style is an ideal method ofleadership within youth work as the group is more likely to contribute to thedecision making process and also the group is more likely to buy-in todecisions which are made. Again this style works best with smaller groups,the larger the group the longer the decision making processes will tend tobecome. It is often preferable to separate a very large group into sub-groupsto ensure all have a chance to input into decision making and thenreconvene all group members into a plenary session where all ideas can befed back and shared, resulting in an ultimate group decision. This style wasused within the PTV group in order to achieve a shared sense of belongingwithin the group and to get all the members to `buy-in` to completing thetasks in hand.

Autocratic or authoritarian one leader is the sole person involved inmaking decisions within the group, the information is passed on to the grouprather than options being discussed openly. This is a style that I havepersonally seldom used as it is not ideal for achieving the educational aimsof youth work. However I am aware that very large groups may find anautocratic leader can speed up a decision making process. This can beimportant when issues such as the groups physical safety are involved, forexample if a group is on expedition on the side of a mountain and theweather becomes rough, it may become necessary to enforce a quick

decision to retreat, to ensure group safety. The process of this decisionmaking can then be evaluated and debated once the group is in a safesetting.Roles within Groups

Each individual within a group has a role to play in the development of thatgroup to a greater or lesser extent. Through observation, understanding ofdifference, awareness of personal resources and effective communication(Douglas, 1995), each member may affect group processes and individualemotions. Roles develop within groups both through formal appointment andbecause of the personal characteristics and interpersonal relationships thatdevelop between members. Roles which develop can be constructive andsupport the group and its members in achieving its goals, or can bedestructive and work against the overall group aims. Individuals within the


8/11

group can develop several roles and at times these may conflict. Forexample a PTV member who was designated as leaderfor a specific task,also played a clown and was fond of practical jokes. The fooling around ledto a lack of trust from other group members creating a conflict with theleadership role.As the group begins to develop an understanding of four things can beobserved:Observation: the way we behave is based upon what we observe ofourselves, and what we make of others and their reactions to us. Differences: personally and socially generated; the effects they have onbehaviour and understanding.Resources: frequently stemming from difference but are the source ofpotential power for a group and an individual.Communication: considered to be natural but subject to many barriers thatremain largely unknown unless a conscious effort is made to find them:

(Douglas, 1995, p. 80-97)

Through supportive roles, groups may play a part in reducing oppressiongenerated externally to the group. Groupwork can be used as a medium foroppressed groups to `help these groups adjust in society`, and moreover tohelp society to adjust towards these groups. This can be achieved by`individual rehabilitation` in which we can `help individuals to adjust tosocial life and manage tension gain confidence, high self esteem`, andin `getting and keeping employment etc.`. `Societal or community

rehabilitation` involves `helping the society to have meaningful contact`with individuals and groups which are discriminated against and oppressed(Osei-Hwedie, Mwansa, and Mufune, 1990, p. 188).Preston-Shoot describes groupwork creating a `sense of belonging andmutual identity` encouraging `the formation of relationships which fostermutual identification and influence`, thus feelings of isolation andsingularity with issues of difference and oppression may be reduced. Also,the group may be encouraged to use its internal resources to move towardsindividual or group `problem-resolution`, reducing feelings of helplessness,building self worth, and discouraging worker dependency (Preston-Shoot,1987, p. 6-28). Smith concurs with this view of the suitability of groupwork,stating `Groups are obvious sites of interaction and within them a sense ofconnectedness or community with others can be fostered` (Smith, 1994,p.111). This `connectedness` is a valuable tool with which to challengediscrimination and oppression, for as Piven and Cloward argue, it is onlywhen we act collectively that change can begin (Piven and Cloward, 1993).Conclusion: Group Work Double Edged Sword?

To state that group work is not an exact science is something of anunderstatement. As we have seen, it is problematic to even define what ismeant by a group as no absolute definition exists. Similarly most, if not all,concepts within group work theory can be, and are, contested.Groups are extremely important in the lives of all individuals. Johnson andJohnson (1975, p1-2) state `many of our goals can be achieved only with the


9/11

cooperation and coordination of others`.However `the success of any group depends on the ability of its members toexchange ideas freely and to feel involved in the life and decisions of thegroup` (Massallay, 1990). All groups within youth work have goals, i.e. afuture state of affairs. It is important that short term and long term goalsare set realistically if the group is to develop and function effectively.These functions are achieved through the direction of leadership and thedevelopment of individual roles within each group.A group is said to be successful if it:1. accomplishes group tasks2. maintains the group internally, and;3. develops and adapts to improve effectiveness.

(Massallay, 1990)Groupwork can be used as an effective tool for many youth work situations,not least of which is as a medium for challenging oppression both withingroups and individuals. Thus, we have seen the emergence and developmentof girls issue groups and black young peoples projects that offer mutualsupport as well as working to challenge oppression. Yet we have seen thatthrough the development stages of a groups life there are manyopportunities for individuals to develop and focus oppressive behaviourinternally within a group.A grasp of theoretical understanding of group behaviour and functioning can

help to explain individual and group behaviour, and help us to achieve ourultimate aim as youth workers, that of informal education. It is importantnot to treat group work as an exact science with definitive answers. Indeedmany of the questions we must ask ourselves are unclear, thus the answersare a best guess, or a benchmark that we can develop on and work around.Finally, let us consider briefly the historical context of group workdevelopment and the purpose it has not only within youth work, but societyat large. As Taylor reminds us `A moments reflection shows that the socialgroupwork beloved of liberalism is the product of the American capitalistconcern to develop more sophisticated management techniques` (Taylor,1987, p. 140). Let us be careful to use group work to promote democracy

and not fall into the trap of using group work as yet another tool forpromoting social control in a capitalistic state. Student Youth Work Online 1999-2001 Please always reference the authorof this page.References & Recommended ReadingAdair, J. (1988) Effective Leadership London: Pan

Barker, L. L., Cegala, D. J., Kibler, R. J. and Wahlers, K. J. Groups InProcess New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall

Bond, T. (1986) Games for Social and Life Skills London: Hutchinson


10/11

Brandes, D. and Phillips, H (1977) Gamesters Handbook GreatBritain: Stanley Thornes

Brown, A. (1994) Groupwork 3rd Edition Great Yarmouth: AshgatePublishing

Dearling, A. and Armstrong, H. (1994) The New Youth Games BookGreat Britain: Russell House Publishing

Douglas, T. (1983) Groups: Understanding People GatheredTogether London: Routledge

Douglas, T. (1995) Survival In Groups: The Basics of GroupMembership Buckingham: Open University Press

Dynes, R. (1990) Creative Games in Groupwork Great Britain:

Winslow Press

Garland, J. Jones, H. and Kolody, R. (1968) A model for stages ofdevelopment in social workgroups` in Bernstein, S. (Ed.)Explorations in Groupwork Boston: Boston University School ofSocial Work

Heap, K. (1977) Group Theory for Social Workers Great Britain:Pergamon Press

Konopka, G. (1963) Social Group Work : a Helping ProcessEnglewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall

Leech, N. and Wooster, A. D. (1986) Personal and Social Skills APractical Approach for the Classroom Great Britain: RMEP

Massallay, J. L. (1990) `Methods, Techniques and Skills of Youth andCommunity Work: Community Action and Group Work` Chapter 4. InOsei-Hwedie, K., Mwansa, L-K. and Mufune, P. (Eds.) Youth andCommunity Work Practice Zambia: Mission Press

Osei-Hwedie, K., Mwansa, L-K. and Mufune, P. (1990) Youth andCommunity Work Practice: Methods, Techniques and Skills Zambia:

Mission Press

Piven, F. F. and Cloward, R. A. (1993) Regulating the Poor : TheFunctions of Public Welfare USA: Vintage Books

Preston-Shoot, M. (1987) Effective Groupwork Hampshire: Macmillan

Rogers, C. R. (1967) `The process of basic encounter group` InBugental, J. F. T. (Ed.) TheChallenges of Human Psychology NewYork: McGraw-Hill

Sessoms, H. Massachusetts, D. and Stevenson, J. L. (1981)Leadership and Group Dynamics in Recreation Services USA: Allyn


11/11

and Bacon

Smith, M. K. (1994) Local Education: Community, Conversation,Praxis Great Britain: Open University Press

Taylor, T. (1987) `Youth Workers as Character Builders` Chapter 9.In Jeffs, T and Smith, M. (Eds.) Youth Work Basingstoke: MacMillan

Tuckman, B. W. (1965) `Developmental Sequences in Small Groups`in Psychological Bulletin No. 63 p. 384-399

Site LinksSYWO Groupwork

http://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/sean3.htm

Groups and GroupworkAuthor Sean HarteKey Concepts Groups, groupwork,

theories, models

1999-2001
http://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/theory_groups.htmhttp://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/sean3.htmhttp://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/sean3.htmhttp://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/sean3.htmhttp://youthworkcentral.tripod.com/theory_groups.htm

Documents

Stages of Group Work