The Use of Groups in Non-Clinical Social Work Practice

Step Seven of the Decision Tree

Chapter 17

Policy, Advocacy, Management &

Community Practice: Group Dynamics

• Unlike clinical group work practice, where group is one method choice among several clinical method options, the use of groups is integral to policy, advocacy, management and community practice.

• Accountability depends on the practitioner’s ability to manage group dynamics consistent with the demands of each macro practice area.

• This chapter explores group dynamics in non-clinical areas of practice.

Non-Clinical GroupsPart of Professional Career

• Regardless of concentration (clinical or non-clinical), all social workers will lead or staff groups throughout their professional career.

• As in clinical groups, constructive and destructive forces co-exist in non-clinical groups.

• All social workers must be taught to manage the “disastrous power of group associations and intervene in the skilled misuse that could be made of group dynamics” Konopka.

Non-Clinical GroupsProfessional Career

• Social workers may chair or serve as a member of a board, delegate council, coalition, committee, deliberative meeting, task group, project team, or activist group.

• Social work curricula includes little on managing the dynamics of such non-clinical groups.

• Yet, as members of non-clinical groups, all social workers share collective responsibility for the group’s process and outcome.

Obligations of Social Workers Non-Clinical Groups

All social workers need to be: (1) knowledgeable about how groups work (cause- effect).

(2) be able to use moral reasoning and ethics to assess group behavior and desired end goals.

(3) possess skills (theory-based) needed to manage group dynamics specific to each area of non- clinical practice.

Non-Clinical GroupsTheories From Sociology

Five major theories from sociology provideinformation on the dynamics of non-clinical groups:(1) Structure-Functional theory: Socialization to law and order; conformity to rules and norms;

social stratification; group pressure to go along(2) Symbolic Interaction theory: Social and

reference group identity; cultural pluralism; tolerance for difference; inter-group dynamics the meaning of things.

Non-Clinical GroupsTheories from Sociology

(3) Power-Conflict theory: Rule, empowerment,

advocacy, social activism/organizing, challenge

and disruption to the status quo, use of group

power; dominance-submission, oppression

(4) Social Exchange Theory: Transactions

between individuals and between individuals

and organizations are regulated by threats of loss

or promises of gain between the parties.

Non-Clinical GroupsTheories from Sociology

(5) Management Theories: Scientific,

bureaucratic and human relations – such

theories guide agency administration and

workforce productivity and morale.

Non-Clinical GroupsMoral Philosophy: Theories

Five major perspectives from moral philosophy provide value-based guidance to understanding group dynamics:(1) Common good/Public square vs. individual or private morality

and minority rights(2) Deontological vs. Teleological reasoning(3) Analysis of group purpose vs. consequences(4) Analysis of group goals and means(5) Theories of Social Justice: Egalitarianism, Utilitarianism,

Libertarianism, Contractarianism.

Non-Clinical GroupsSocio-Political Thought

Political theories on forms of governance alsoguide practitioners in their work with non-clinical groups:(1) Forms of governance: Totalitarianism,

anarchy, kingdom, monarchy, democracy, socialism(1) Political thought: Conservative, liberal,

socialist, other

Goals Of Non-Clinical Groups

• Policy-Advocacy Practice: social goals; the use of groups to bring about social reform.

• Management Practice: work goals; groups are used to accomplish tasks within agencies.

• Advocacy Practice: social action goals: use of small and large groups to bring about structural societal change.

• Community Practice: Cohesion/tolerance: practitioners intervene with inter-group dynamics to promote tolerance and solidarity.

Historical PerspectiveNon-Clinical Groups

Settlement House Roots:

(1) Settlement house workers engaged in activist research and community advocacy to identify and ensure that the needs of all members of the community were met; subpopulation groups

(2) Settlement house workers responded to population shifts, immigrant populations and those groups that experienced discrimination and poverty.

Historical PerspectiveContinued

(3) Settlement house workers educated community members in participatory democracy; citizen groups.

(4) Settlement house workers provided opportunities for skill acquisition and leisure pursuits to build community; community groups

(5) Settlement house workers believed in the power of small groups to problem-solve social issues on the local level.

Large GroupsSocial Goals - Social Action

• Social workers have been involved in major social reform/social change efforts.

• Examples: civil rights movement, labor movement, feminist movement, welfare rights movement, gay rights movement and the environmental movement.

• Social work has close ties to the Peace Corps, Vista, Community Action Programs and the War on Poverty.

Use Of Groups ForSocial Justice

• Social workers have engaged in social policy advocacy and reform.

• Social workers have variously supported or protested against armed conflict here and abroad.

• Social workers have raised consciousness about issues of social justice.

• Social workers have challenged the status quo and discriminatory institutional practices

Community PracticeInter-group Dynamics

• Courses on inter-group dynamics became a dominant part of the social work curriculum targeting racism (and other isms) in the 1980s.

• CSWE made content on cultural diversity an accreditation standard. Controversy exists to date, on whether such courses should be taught didactically or experientially.

• Schools and the workplace, including the military, often require participation in sensitivity training groups.

Management PracticeThe Organization as a Group

• Groups (task, committees, project teams, deliberative meetings) facilitate the work of agencies.

• Organizations are, themselves, group entities.

• Organizational dynamics are group dynamics.

Typology of Groups in Management Practice

Administrative functions are performed by:

1. Boards, cabinets

2. Deliberative meetings

3. The organization as an entity

Division of Labor

1. Task groups

2. Project teams

3. Committees

Boards and CabinetsComposition

• Social exchange theory informs the creation and use of boards and cabinets.

• Members are recruited and appointed to serve on the basis of their:

a) political or social influence

b) ability to raise funds/contribute financially

c) representation of a constituent group

d) possession of needed expertise.

Boards and CabinetsTasks

• Provide agency with high profile support• Make agencies attractive to potential donors• Make agencies valuable in the exchange of social

and political influence.• Provide administrative oversight to agency

executives and directors.• Positive publicity adds to the prestige of board

members and agency alike (reciprocity of exchange).

Management PracticeThe Meeting

• Meetings are the most common form of group used in all areas of social work practice

• Good meetings are rare. Conveners and attendees alike may be suspicious of the process and outcome of meetings.

• Two types of meetings: (1) Informational

(2) Deliberative- collective decision-making

Management Practice Deliberative Meeting

• All organizations call meetings where some members are expected to participate in collective decision-making on actionable items as part of legitimized shared governance. Such meetings are referred to as deliberative.

• Meetings go through group stages.

Deliberative MeetingsBeginnings

The beginning stage of a deliberative meeting:(1) Requires a quorum to do business(2) Robert’s Rules of Order- govern interactive

procedures and provide mechanism (majority or 2/3rds vote) for validating group decisions.(3) Chair calls meeting to order.; an agenda is

distributed and approved; minutes of the previous meeting are read, amended, and

approved

Meetings-BeginningsContinued

• Agenda items should be manageable within the timeframe allowed.

• The first item on the agenda should not be controversial.

• The beginning stage of a deliberative meeting can be used to divert or delay the substantive work of the group; Meetings can get stuck in the beginning stage. Most work occurs in the middle stage.

• Any stage of a meeting can be manipulated for personal or political gain.

Organizational Problem-SolvingShared Governance

• The deliberative meeting is the forum of shared governance.

• Often such meetings become the forum for the enactment of organizational politics.

• If the group dynamics of deliberative meetings are not properly managed, procedural tactics can undermine governance and disfranchise members.

Organizational PoliticsThe Deliberative Meetings

When organizational politics are at play:• Discussion is scripted and votes for or against

action items have already been counted.• The meeting is a “presentation” (Goffman) of decisions reached outside the designated forum

for shared governance.• Participants have aligned (social exchange theory) with power bases seeking a pre-determined

outcome.

Collective ResponsibilityThe Deliberative Meeting

• Organizational politics, though effective, undermines legitimate collective authority and responsibility.

• Bad process may lead to poor outcome or sabotaged implementation.

• Groups (leaders and followers) can choose to base collective decision-making on empirical evidence, open discourse, and value analysis.

The Deliberative MeetingCommon Good

• Groups can choose to use their collective power to advance the common good over personal or subgroup gain.

• Complete & undistorted facts are presented.• Opposing views (ideology) are presented in well-

argued position papers.• When values guide desired end goals, moral

argument is used to advance a higher moral order.

BenchmarksCollective Responsibility

Benchmarks of shared governance, collectiveresponsibility and collective decision-making

1. Respect for dissent2. Compromise for the sake of consensus3. Rational discourse-facts, argument, logic,

evidence4. Moral analysis of value or ideological positions5. No pre-determined outcome based on misuse of

power; avoidance of organizational politics;

Meeting AnalysisPower vs. Governance

Analysis of the following variables helps

determine whether power or governance is at

play:

1. Physical setting

2. Agenda

3. Procedural rules

4. Membership

Physical SettingMeetings

Analysis of the physical setting examines where themeeting is being held:

1. Regularly scheduled time and place within the organization

2. At a retreat2. Someone’s office3. Outside of work; someone’s home4. Over lunch, dinner, drinks

Is the setting designed to co-opt? to work?

MembershipInclusion/Exclusion

• Is the meeting formal or informal?

• Who is included/excluded?

• When meetings are informal, is the lunch group, exercise group, socialization group . a “cover” to form and enforce a power alliance?

Analysis of the Agenda

Analysis of the Agenda offers clues to power

vs. governance:

1. Who can place an item on the agenda?

2. Is the agenda confined to “safe” issues?

3. Who determines the order of items on the agenda?

4. Are items “accidentally” left off?

Procedural RulesDiscourse

1. Are items discussed in principle with the absence of details thereby allowing the administrator freedom to do whatever s/he wishes.

2. Are procedural rules used to prevent sufficient time to deliberate the issues?

3. Are procedures used to defer decisions to other bodies?

Procedural RulesDiscourse-Continued

4. If deferred, is committee membership unbalanced favoring one position over another e.g. composed to assure a pre-determined outcome?

5. Are procedural rules used to block dissenting viewpoints?See chapter 7: Dynamics of leaders & followersSee discussion of the virtue of deliberation later inthis chapter under community practice.

Management & WorkTask Groups and Project Teams

• Small groups are used within organizations to perform work.

• Organizations rely on project teams, committees, and task groups to divide the work load.

• A task may be an instruction, perceived concern or perceived opportunity

Task GroupProduct and Process

• Task performance requires a tangible product and a process.

• To be productive, work needs to be structured and follow a timeline.

• The goal of a project or task group leader is to manage the socio-emotional needs of individuals

so that group members work cooperatively to produce a quality product or service in a timely manner.

Task GroupsComposition

• Most task groups, committees, and project teams mirror top-down bureaucracy or political alliances; such composition defeats their purpose.

• The premise underlying the use of such groups in the workplace is to flatten bureaucracy, thereby allowing diverse talent and leadership to emerge.

• Coverdale offers a systematic approach to structuring the work of task groups.

Coverdale ModelGoals

Goals:

(1) facilitate cooperation

(2) maximize the use individual talent within

task groups

(3) ownership and by-in of the product or service

Coverdale ModelComposition

Composition: (1) Conceptualizers; big picture or idea people-

clarify task, set goals, determine standards, envision final product

(2) Planners: attend to detail; determine who will do what, when, and in what order, monitor timeline

(3) Organizers: determine and secure needed resources

(4) Workers: doers; perform the work

CoverdaleComposition Discord

• Potential discord is possible when task group members are too similar or too dissimilar.

• Members possessing the same skills often compete with each other for power

• Members who are too dissimilar perceive each other as liabilities to the process and product of the group.

Dissimilarity

• Conceptualizers: find planners and organizers too detailed

• Planners and organizers find conceptualizers too abstract

• Workers (doers) complain that planners, conceptualizers,and organizers are “all talk” and no action.

• Planners, organizers, and conceptualizers find that doers rush to action without a well-thought out plan or needed resources.

Work Group Competency

• Social workers must possess the skill to intervene in the dynamics of task groups so that the diverse work talents of all members can be utilized to benefit the organization as a whole.

• Despite the prevalence of task groups, most individuals are reluctant to work in groups because of the risks it entails.

Work GroupsRisks

• If a group lacks diverse talents, the group is unlikely to produce a quality product or service.

• If the project manager or team leader cannot manage the dynamics of similarity and diversity

within the group, the process will fail and members will decline to work together cooperatively.

• Individuals are always at-risk when group dynamics govern the behavior of members.

The OrganizationA Group Entity

• An organization is a large group composed of smaller subgroups.

• Organizations must engage in problem-solving deliberations and governance related to the organizational environment.

• Organizations permit members to influence its policies and procedures to some extent.

Organizational Dynamics

• It is critical to have a clear delineation of who has the authority and power to develop or change organizational policies.

• Hierarchical organizations (businesses) hand down decisions made at the top with minimal input (if any) from those lower in the chain of the command.

• Organizations with shared governance (partners, tenured faculty, senior management) make decisions in accord with a participatory process.

Dissent Within Organizations

• Those who disagree with management decisions in a hierarchical organization have the option of going along or moving along.

• Dissent in organizations with shared governance and collective responsibility is more complex.

• Collective governance obligates the organization and its members to approach problem solving with an open mind (rational deliberation) and a participatory process that is not corrupted by organizational politics.

Sources of OrganizationalDiscontent

• Competing interests of actors within and outside the organization

• Irreconcilable differences over positions and prerogatives

• Differences over deeply held values and beliefs related to organizational goals and programs.

• Polarization within the organization caused by those who seek to exercise and enhance their own power.

Solutions Organizational Dynamics

• See chapter seven on leaders and followers.

• See Coverdale as a model to manage the dynamics of work groups.

• Refer to management theories discussed earlier in this chapter and in chapter seven.

Community Groups Definition

• A community is a political entity and a social web of moral values and shared meanings.

• A community is a large group composed of many smaller groups.

• Group dynamics apply to the community as a whole as well as to the relationship between subgroups within the community and between these subgroups and the community as a whole.

Community Functions(Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2000)

All communities perform 5 functions:1. Socialization-transmission of values, culture,

beliefs, & norms to members2. Resource allocation-the distribution of goods

and services to community members3. Social Control –enforcement of community

norms through laws, ordinances, and a police force

4. Support-formal and informal sources of aid

Community Functions(Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2000)

5. Socializing opportunities-opportunities to participate in activities to enhance the quality of community or group life.

• Psychology: All humans have a basic need for group connectedness and shared values.

• Sociology: Communities are necessary for survival of the individual.

7 Typologies of Communities

• Typology OneA. Geographical communities (Physical spaces)B. Functional communities (professional

membership, religious affiliation, etc. )C. Reference group communities (defined by

socio-demographics- race, gender, ethnicity)• Typology Two

A. Homogeneous communities (Melting pot)B. Heterogeneous communities (Pluralistic)

Typologies of CommunitiesContinued

• Typology Three (Fowler, 1995)A. Communities of Ideas (formal documents or

emotion-based B. Communities of Crisis (formed to overcome social or ecological crises)

C. Communities of Memory (traditional values) • Typology Four

A. Particularistic or Tribal communitiesB. Universalistics or Global communities

Typologies of CommunitiesContinued

• Typology FiveA. Priority on the Common GoodB. Priority on Individual & Minority Rights

• Typology SixA. Community as the Public SquareB. Community as Protector of the Right to Privacy

• Typology SevenA. Community as State Laws and RegulationsB. Community as Protector of Civil Rights

Social BondsRelationship: Individual/Community

• The relationship between the individual and the community is nuanced; both mutually supportive and tensed (Etizioni, 1995).

• All communities face problems they must solve; primary among which are:1. Composition ( inclusion/exclusion)2. Collective governance and decision-

making

Human Nature and SocietyAssumptions

• Some hold that humans are basically good and reasonable and should determine the direction of the collectivity- Consistent with liberal socio-political thought.Individual over the group

• Others perceive the individual as impulsive and irrational and in need of social control through laws and instilled community values. Group over the individual.

Social Work

• Falck: takes exception to the idea that the end-goal of client self-determination is individual autonomy (independence); all decisions are social in nature and have consequences for everyone.

• Social workers walk the line between client rights and the common good.

The Common Good Etizioni

• Tension is inherent in the quest for community (order/chaos)

• Tyrannical possibilities of community must be weighed against the anarchical danger of desiccation of community.

• As a communitarian Etizioni argues for renewed commitment to public virtues and social institutions

Determining Community ValuesMoral Scrutiny

• Etizioni focuses on how communities determine their value commitments.

• Etizioni prioritizes the common good over that of the private good but tempers it with a call for value scrutiny.

• Even if a community follows a consensus building process, Etizioni holds that such values must to scrutinized against a universalistic ethic.

Traditional CommunitiesA Universalistic Ethic

• Traditional, value-based communities may be authoritarian and oppressive leading to particularistic evils such as intolerance, group egotism, and atavism.

• All community-values need to be scrutinized against a universalistic ethic (core or overarching values).

• Value scrutiny can occur only within a democracy where normative value exploration is condoned.

Argument Against A Universalistic Ethic: Rorty

• In contrast to Etizioni, Rorty, a post- modernist, argues that all communities are locally constructed and non-privileged.

• Where there is group consensus, he argues, the values of the group are appropriately moral.

• Etizioni takes sharp leave from this position

Value-ExplorationThe Role of Democracy

• Understanding the role of democracy in value exploration is fundamental to the study of community values.

• Gutmann (1995): community values must not violate two cardinal principles of democracy: 1. Non-discrimination- equal moral and political

standing of all2. Non-repression – ensures civil liberties and

participatory deliberation

Constitutional DemocracyIndividual and Minority Rights

• Under a constitutional democracy (compared to a simple democracy) some rights (Bill of Rights) are declared out of bounds for the rule of the majority.

• Some matters are exempt from consensus building.

• To safeguard against majoritarianism, the tilt in America is toward a civil society rather than state rule.

Democracy’s Three Virtues:

• To safeguard against majoritarianism, a constitutional democracy relies on 3 virtues:

1. Deliberation

2. Non-repression

3. Non-discrimination

Deliberation

• All communities must engage in discourse to create the common ground needed to solve social problems

• To the extent that discourse is deliberative (leads to action) the standard of reasonableness applies.

• Pluralistic composition requires that all citizens be given the means of addressing & deciding public issues even in the face of deep disagreement.

DeliberationContinued

• In dialectical fashion, deliberation generates such virtues as honesty, tolerance, and non-violence.

• As a positive virtue, deliberation is complemented by two other necessary virtues:

(1) non-repression (2) non-discrimination. • When the powerful “thwart” honest deliberation,

“soft despotism”crowds out alternative opinions and subverts democratic participation in collective governance.

Non-RepressionActive Liberty

• As a positive virtue, non-repression requires the assurance and cultivation of the capacity for political deliberation among community members.

• Citizens come together in a town meeting based on the expectation that reasonable people will deliberate to reach an agreed upon course of action. (Breyer, 2005)

• The rights of citizens are balanced by their obligation to responsibly shape and play a role in their public institutions.

Non-RepressionOrdered Liberty

• Less optimistic about the capacity of humans to engage in evidence-based and morally reasoned decisions, Etizioni holds that social mores assist emotionally-driven, impulsive, and self-interested individuals arrive at a decisions; common good.

• The rule of law and socialization to community values, guide community decision-making.

• Without such rules and social moorings, individuals lose their capacity to reason or act morally.

Inter-group DynamicsTavistock and Sensitivity Training

• The goal directed activity of social work community practice is to increase tolerance for the rights of all subgroups.

• Social workers are obligated to intervene in the harmful dynamics of social groups.

• Tavistock is an experiential learning tool that allows participants to learn about group dynamics by studying their own group process.

• Sensitivity training is a group process designed to combat “isms” by raising personal awareness.

Managing the Harmful Dynamics of Social Groups

• Recognize that harmful group dynamics are occurring

• Retain individual identity when a member of a group

• Retain individual moral compass when in group; evaluate morality of proposed actions; state position; opt out if necessary.

• Hold the group collectivity responsible for its actions by raising moral discourse.

Social GoalsOrganizing

• Why: The purpose of organizing groups is to build a better society and to empower the disfranchised.

• How: Organizing seeks to alter the relations of power though campaigns:

1. Election campaign2. Educational campaign

3. Fund raising campaign4. Issue campaign

CampaignsIncremental Change

• A campaign refers to a series of organized events such as photo opportunities, actions, public hearings, accountability hearings, negotiations and media events.

• Events are extended over a period of time and are designed to achieve a specific outcome.

• Campaigns exercise power by exerting pressure on administrators, bureaucrats, or regulators,; by conducting boycotts or by pursuing legal or regulatory processes to win.

Social Action GoalsDirect Action Organizing

• Unlike community practice where groups are used to build tolerance and cohesion, the use of groups in direct action organizing is to disrupt the equilibrium of the status quo.

• Small and large groups are used tactically to create instability and provoke conflict; polarizing.

• Organizing harnesses the power of groups (strength-in-numbers) to bring about structural change within an existing social order.

Group Power and Social Justice

• “Good” persons operating within a group context can and do harm other “good” people.

• Group power may lead to a different social order but does not, in and of itself, lead to a higher moral order.

• Social workers must understand and control the dynamics of social groups.

• Polarizing and demonizing (Us-Them) is neither an explanation nor an intervention for bad group process.