Human Trafficking
Objectives in the Beginning Stage
The beginning stage is often considered, by both novice and experienced workers, to be a difficult
stage of group work because members often seek direction about how to proceed but are
ambivalent about following any suggestions. Members struggle to maintain their autonomy but, at
the same time, to fit in and get along with others in the group. The worker’s primary goals are to help
members feel comfortable in the group, to work together in a cooperative and productive manner,
and to feel that their unique contribution to the group is respected and appreciated. To accomplish
these goals it is helpful to:
Ensure a secure environment where members begin to bond with the leader and with each other
Facilitate member introductions
Clarify the purpose and function of the group, as it is perceived by the worker, the members, and the
sponsoring organization
Discuss and clarify the limits of confidentiality within the group
Help members to feel that they are an important part of the group
Guide the development of the group
Balance task and socio-emotional aspects of the group process
Set goals
Contract for work
Facilitate members’ motivation and ability to work in the group
Address ambivalence and resistance
Work with involuntary members
Anticipate obstacles to achieving individual and group goals
Monitor and evaluate the group as the change process begins
In the following pages, these tasks and the corresponding skills necessary to carry them out are
presented sequentially. In actual practice, of course, the group worker should be concerned about
these tasks simultaneously.
Ensuring a Secure Environment
No work can be accomplished in groups unless members feel secure when participating. Therefore,
a fundamental and essential role for the worker in the beginning stage is to make sure that members
are feeling comfortable, safe, and secure with their participation in the group. New workers should
recognize that members of groups might come from environments that are not comfortable, safe, or
secure. In fact, some members may be hypervigilant, expecting the worst in all or most
environments. This could be because of any number of adverse childhood events, or current bio-
psycho-social-environmental assaults on their integrity. For example, members could have
witnessed or experienced repeated trauma during childhood, such as neglect, or emotional and
physical abuse. They could have experienced severe poverty, racism, or violence. They may have
been bullied as a child or adolescent or learned that the way to survive in their neighborhood was to
become a gang member. As adults they may continue to experience violence, marginalization,
exploitation, oppression, or other factors that make them wary of participating in a group.
Workers should display patience and equanimity, gradually demonstrating to these traumatized
members that the group is a positive place for support, healing, and rejuvenation where they can
trust the worker and fellow members to work together to accomplish meaningful goals. Workers have
to spend time to build security and trust before proceeding with agendas and goals. Workers who do
not build a secure and safe environment early in the group will not be successful over the long-term.
It is a mistake to pursue mandated goals without physical and emotional safety and security assured
to members. Proceeding without safety and security also violates ethical principles.
There are too many settings where workers are expected to work on mandated goals before
members are ready. Workers should keep in mind members’ rights to self-determination and social
justice. There are limits to what can be accomplished with some members. Workers need to
recognize and be comfortable with the limits of what they are able to accomplish in some situations
and engage in self-care. The goal should be engagement and respect, using a positive, relaxed
pace where members are encouraged to gradually share their stories, and reveal what help they
would like from the group. Workers should listen intensely, learning all they can while encouraging
members to use their resilience, skills, and strengths to overcome adversity and move toward
healthier lifestyles. Group leaders may have an immediate or delayed impact on some members,
and may not be able to help others. It is often difficult for workers to know what if any impact they
have had on members. Therefore, they should remain positive and self-soothing even when they
question whether they are having a positive impact.
There are many ways to build a safe and secure environment. First, the worker should acknowledge
that members might not feel secure or be ready to self-disclose. In some families and cultures,
showing vulnerabilities, such as insecurity, may not be acceptable. Therefore, members may not
want to risk sharing feelings at first, and this should be acknowledged by the worker. Workers can
begin by asking members to present whatever information about themselves they are willing to
share. Workers can be role models sharing information about themselves first. After this occurs,
members can be encouraged to talk about their aspirations, goals, and dreams. Workers can tie
these aspirations to what the group may be able to help them accomplish.
Another step is to take every opportunity to support members’ goals, paying close attention to both
their immediate and longer term needs and wants. Workers should be role models, describing their
previous positive experiences in similar groups and how they might be able to help members have
better lives. They can ask for members help to make the group a safe, enjoyable place to heal and
grow.
In the early stages, conflict, criticism, and other forms of negative feedback should be avoided. If any
verbal or nonverbal interactions occur that are not supportive or encouraging, workers should
intervene, gently modeling supportive interactions that are uplifting and self-esteem building.
Workers should remember that time will be available later in the development of the group to focus
on problems and issues and to use confrontation or other strategies that are more appropriate in
later group meetings when respectful, trusting relationships have been established.
The beginning of groups should be reserved for pointing out and building on members’ strengths and
resiliencies, helping them to become empowered and vital contributors to the success of the group.
A positive, upbeat, and warm manner that praises and encourages members for their unique
contributions is essential in early group meetings, especially when working with members who are
reluctant, resistant, or mandated participants. As members tell their stories, and have them affirmed,
they begin to grow more trusting and open with their fellow group members. By affirming and
validating members’ experiences, workers show that they are attentive and understanding, starting
with the members and staying with them. This, in turn, can help to form therapeutic alliances with
members, where trust grows. As genuine and warm interactions continue, members begin to bond
with the worker and each other, and can begin to feel safe to tackle some of the difficult issues they
face as they move forward. Building a base of trust, and feelings that the group can be helpful, is of
utmost importance when reluctant members first begin to participate and engage in beginning group
meetings.
Assess your understanding of the objectives and skills that are useful in the beginning stage of
group work by taking this brief quiz.
Introducing New Members
When the participants have arrived and the group is ready to begin, the first task of the worker is to
introduce members to one another. Introductions help members share their mutual concerns and
interests, and they develop trust. The worker should decide what information is important for
members to share with the group. Beyond each member’s name, the information revealed by each
member should depend on the purpose of the group. For example, if the group is an interagency
task force to study the problems of battered women, members might be expected to share their
position in their agency, their experiences with services for battered women, and their reasons for
becoming involved in the task force. If the group is for parents with children who have behavior
problems, in addition to information about themselves, members might briefly describe their children
and the behavior problems they are experiencing.
Introductions can give members a starting point for interaction. Therefore, the information that is
shared should attempt to bring out commonalities. The worker can facilitate this process by noting
common characteristics and shared concerns disclosed by different members. Rather than
proceeding through the introduction mechanically, the worker should encourage members to discuss
commonalities. This process helps members feel at ease with one another. It also helps develop
group cohesion and demonstrates to members that they are not alone with their problems and
concerns.
Case Example A Support Group for Caregivers of Persons with Dementia
The worker asked each member in turn to talk about themselves, the person for whom they were
caring, and the problems they were experiencing. One member, Mary, mentioned how concerned
she was about her husband driving even though he refused to give it up. The worker stopped the
group introductions at this point and asked if anyone else had experienced a similar problem and
how they handled it. Several members began to talk about the problem and their concerns about it.
The worker suggested that since this seemed to be a concern for many members that they continue
with the introductions, but take up the topic of driving later during the group meeting. Later during
introductions, another member brought up the topic of her husband’s agitated behavior and how he
paced and followed her from room to room. Again, the worker asked if any other group members
had experienced that problem, and several said they had. The worker said that they would also talk
about that behavior later in the group meeting or during the next group meeting if there was not time
to get to it in today’s meeting.
The opportunity for members to share common concerns and issues with one another is one of the
unique aspects of social group work practice. Yalom (2005) has called this phenomenon universality.
People who come to treatment groups often believe that they are alone with their problems. In
reality, although they may have been experiencing their problems in isolation, other people
experience similar concerns. The first group meeting provides them with feelings of support and
comfort as they realize they are not alone.
A similar process occurs in task groups. For example, workers from different community agencies
often experience the same frustrations and problems in serving clients with particular social service
needs. Alone, workers may think they can do little to make the system more responsive to clients.
Together, in a task force, a treatment conference, or in any other task group, workers can share their
concerns, coordinate their efforts, and work to change problematic situations.
Round Robin
The most common method of introducing members to one another is to have them speak in round
robin fashion. If this method is used, it is helpful for the worker to go first. In the early stages of the
group, members take many of their cues from the worker who can serve as a model by disclosing
personal characteristics. Once members hear the worker’s introduction, they are likely to focus on
the disclosures as they introduce themselves.
Sometimes, the worker may want members to disclose information about areas of concern that the
worker does not share. For example, in a group of parents, the worker may not have children.
Workers should note the absence of this characteristic in their own lives, state how it might affect
their work in the group, and ask members to comment on this factor in their introductions. For
example, the worker might say, “I don’t have any children of my own, but I’ve worked with children in
the past at summer camp, in foster care, and for the past four years in my current position.”
When they introduce themselves, members rarely disclose more than the worker has disclosed. In
fact, they initially tend to disclose less than the worker. Therefore, if workers expect a certain level of
self-disclosure or want to foster disclosures in a certain area, their introductions should reflect what
is expected. This is not to suggest that the introductions should call on members to reveal in-depth,
personal life experiences. Pressing for such disclosures at the beginning of a group is likely to
increase rather than decrease barriers to open communication.
Communication styles and expectations about self-disclosure are influenced by our cultural heritage.
Pearson (1991) suggests, for example, that clients who identify with the cultural imperatives in
Chinese society may believe that close, personal relationships are usually reserved for family and
that high levels of self-disclosure are not as desirable as a “balance and restraint in the experience
and expression of emotions” (p. 51).
Variations on Round Robin
Several variations on the round robin may be useful in opening different types of groups. To
increase interaction, for example, members can be divided into pairs. One member of each pair
interviews the other for five minutes by asking for details specified by the worker. When time is up,
members reverse roles and continue for another five minutes. When the group reconvenes,
members introduce their partners to the group by recalling the facts learned during their
conversation. In addition to helping members develop a relationship with a partner, group workers
find that this method of introduction sometimes leads to a greater depth of self-disclosure than round
robin because new group members are likely to reveal more about themselves on a one-to-one
basis than when they face the entire group.
A variation on this opening is what Shulman (2016) has called “problem swapping” (pp. 428-429).
Members volunteer to discuss their problems or concerns openly before the group. This opening
promotes group interaction, leads to the identification of shared problems and concerns, and helps
members consider how they might proceed.
An opening that is useful in growth-oriented groups is known as top secret. Members are asked to
write down one thing about themselves that they have not or would not ordinarily reveal to new
acquaintances. The leader collects the top secrets and reads them to the group. Members attempt to
identify the person who made each revelation, giving a reason for their choice. This exercise can be
repeated in a later group session to illustrate the extent to which trust and cohesion have increased
in the group. Members often reveal more intimate or personal top secrets after they come to know
and feel comfortable with the members of their group. Variations on this opening exercise are my
most embarrassing experience and my greatest success.
Another opening exercise that can help members disclose something about themselves or their
family of origin is called my name. Members can be asked to discuss how they got their names and
what meaning the name has for them and for their family of origin. For example, a member might
state that his father felt strongly that he should be named Samuel, after an uncle who had died. The
member goes on to discuss the uncle and other facts about his family of origin. He might also
mention that he disliked being called Sam by his parents and decided at age 13 to insist that his
parents and friends call him by his middle name, Allen. This exercise can often lead to interesting
discussions of members’ feelings about themselves now and in the past. It also helps members
learn each other’s names, which is important for open and personal interaction.
Other openings, such as treasure hunt, can be useful. Members are asked to find two or three facts
about each of the other group members. This activity offers much structured but informal interaction,
helping members overcome initial anxieties and shyness about participating. The facts obtained are
shared when the group reconvenes.
Program activities can also be used in opening a group. Such activities help members share
important information about themselves while working on an assigned task or activity. In addition to
increasing members’ self-disclosure, program activities can build cohesion in the group. For
example, in children’s groups, members may be asked to pick an animal that represents them.
When introducing themselves, members can name the animals they have selected and state what
characteristics of the animal they identify with. Another program activity for children or adolescent
groups is to have members stand in a circle and hold hands with two members who are not next to
them. Members are then asked to untangle themselves and form a circle without letting go of each
other’s hands.
Variations in Group Beginnings
A number of factors can change the way a worker begins a group. Sometimes workers become
involved with groups of people who have known each other before the group was formed. This can
occur when the members are clients of a neighborhood center, a residential treatment facility, or are
friends in the community. Similarly, in task groups, members may be familiar with one another as
coworkers in the same agency or as coworkers in a network of agencies working with similar clients
or a similar social problem. When members know one another, the challenges for the worker are
different from the challenges that occur in a group of strangers.
Members who have had previous contact with one another are more likely to relate in ways that are
characteristic of their previously established patterns. Roles and relationships established earlier
may be carried into the new group, regardless of their functional or dysfunctional nature in the
current group situation. In groups in which only a few members know one another or in which
previous relationships between members vary from friendly to neutral or unfriendly, subgroups are
likely to develop more often than they would in groups composed of strangers. There is also a
natural tendency for friends or acquaintances to interact with one another and exclude strangers.
When it is possible to obtain information about potential group members, the worker should try to
find out about any relationships that may exist among them. This will give the worker some indication
of what form members’ relationships are likely to take as they begin the group. It also gives the
worker an opportunity to plan strategies to intervene in dysfunctional relationship patterns. The
worker may wish to use information about members’ previous relationships to reconsider the
composition of the group and to understand members’ interactions as the group unfolds. For
example, a worker in a group home might use knowledge about the relationships that have
developed among residents when deciding how to intervene to change communication patterns in a
group that has just been established within the facility.
Another common variation in beginning a group occurs when the worker becomes involved in a
previously formed group (see, for example, the following case example). This can happen when a
worker (1) reaches out and works with a gang of adolescents, (2) is a consultant for a self-help
group, (3) is asked to staff a previously formed committee, or (4) is asked to replace the leader of an
intact treatment group. These situations are different from one in which all members are new to the
group. Instead of members looking to the leader for direction, as in a new group, the worker in a
previously formed group is the newcomer in a group with established patterns of relating. Members
of previously formed groups are concerned with how the worker will affect the group, what they will
have to do to accommodate the worker, and what the worker will expect of them. Members may also
act on feelings resulting from termination with a previous worker. This is demonstrated in the
following case example.
Case Example Dealing with Feelings about a Worker Leaving the Group
In assuming leadership for an existing substance abuse prevention group, the new worker began the
meeting by asking members to discuss how they felt about her replacing their former worker.
Because the group had been meeting together for over a year, members freely discussed their
concerns about changing group leaders. They also asked very direct questions about the new
worker’s credentials, experiences, and leadership style. During these discussions, the new worker
listened carefully to what members were saying. She chose to be less verbal so that members had
more opportunities to talk. By encouraging members to be more verbal, the worker was able to make
a preliminary assessment of the group’s structure and was able to identify the informal leadership
structure that had previously developed in the group.
In working with previously formed groups, the worker should become familiar with the group’s
structure and its current functions and processes. It is especially important that the worker become
familiar with the formal and informal leadership of the group, with members’ relationships with one
another, and with the tasks that face the group. Information obtained from a previous leader or from
agency records may offer some indication of how to approach the group. In working with gangs or
other community groups for which little information is available, the worker may find it helpful to
gather information about the group. Any information obtained before contact with the group should
be considered tentatively, however, because it is difficult to predict how an ongoing group is likely to
react to a new worker. The worker may also want to observe the group before attempting to
intervene.
The worker’s presence in a previously formed group will cause adjustments. A process of
accommodation to the new worker and assimilation of the worker into the culture of the group will
occur. In general, cohesive and autonomous groups that have functioned together for some time will
find it difficult to accommodate a new worker and will expect the worker to become assimilated into
the ongoing process of the group. For example, a worker from a neighborhood center who is
interested in working with a closely knit gang of adolescents who grew up together may have to
spend a considerable amount of time developing trust and rapport with the group before members
will seriously consider participating in a recreational activity at the neighborhood center.
Defining the Purpose of the Group
Opening Statement
After introductions, the worker should make a brief statement about the group’s purpose and the
worker’s function in the group. When members are not clear about the purpose of the group or the
motives of the worker, their anxiety increases, and they are less likely to become involved in working
toward group goals. Evidence suggests that workers often fail to define the purposes of the group
they are leading (Fuhriman & Burlingame, 1994). Even if the purpose has been explained to
members during pre-group intake interviews, the worker should be sure to restate the purpose
during the first meeting and in subsequent meetings.
Workers should take the lead and make a broad but concise statement of purpose to members.
These statements help members to become aware and focus on goals enabling them to reflect on,
and determine, whether they want to become involved in the group. When stating purposes, workers
should be clear about the role of the sponsoring organization, legal and funding mandates, and any
other factors that may affect group members’ participation. Members should be fully informed about
what their participation entails. Workers should use simple straightforward language, interpreting
complicated mandates in terms of what they mean for members’ participation in a group.
Demonstrating that workers are open and willing to inform members fully is one way to build trust
and a working alliance. Encouraging members to have input is also essential because it enables
members to feel that they are partners with the worker in deciding how to proceed. Workers should
do as much as possible to develop a climate that helps members feel that they “fit in” and are
welcome in the group (Paquin, Kivlighan, & Drogosz, 2013). This includes fostering complementary
interactions, when members are helped to identify with their fellow members’ situations rather than
contrasting or comparing their situations to those of other members. Identification with other
members’ situations helps everyone to feel that they have commonalities that build cohesion,
whereas contrasting or comparing situations can lead to alienation, competition, or the enhancement
of perceptions of difference (Maxwell, et al., 2012).
Case Example Statement of Purpose in a Domestic Violence Group
The following statement of purpose was made by a worker in a new group for female victims of
domestic violence at a shelter: “This group will provide support, empowerment, and resources to all
of you who have experienced domestic violence and homelessness as a result of having to flee from
the person who abused you. This domestic violence shelter has a long history of helping people like
you in similar situations. Here we encourage you to keep confidential all that is shared while at the
same time being supportive and empathic as we help one another heal and transition to a better life
path. Remember, this is a safe space where you can share whatever you want, to the extent that
you want. It is expected that you will help each other and that we will also do our part to support you
in your path to a better life.”
Notice how this statement of purpose encourages members to trust that the worker and fellow
members will engage in a process of healing and growth through mutual aid and support in the safe
environment of the group. The statement illustrates the worker’s attempt to foster a therapeutic
alliance among all participants. It emphasizes safety, security, freedom to participate, and mutual
aid, and explicitly acknowledges members’ rights to share only as much as they are comfortable with
disclosing. The worker can then go on to discuss confidentiality and the safety features in the
sponsoring organization that protect anonymity, which are so important to members of these kinds of
groups.
Helping the Group Define Its Purpose
Construct a brief statement of purpose and clearly articulate it to the group.
Present the purpose as a positive statement that includes what members can accomplish.
When possible, have members present and discuss their views of the group’s purpose, especially
when orienting new members to the group.
State the purpose in a manner that enhances members’ “fit” within the group.
Mention the importance of members feeling secure and safe during emotional disclosures.
Emphasize the importance of identifying with members’ situations.
Encourage mutual aid and complementary interactions that build camaraderie and dispel distrust.
Do not focus on differences and conflicting viewpoints in early group meetings
Highlight commonalities and shared visions for a better future.
Discuss the role of the group in relation to its sponsoring agency, stressing the mutual contributions
that can be made by both the group and the agency.
Involve members by asking for feedback, and use this feedback to refine or modify the purpose.
The group’s purpose should be presented in a positive and hopeful manner. In a classic book,
Frank (1961) pointed out the importance of persuasion, expectancy, and placebo effects in
psychotherapy. These factors are also present in group work practice. Presenting a positive, hopeful
image of what can be accomplished in the group makes use of the beneficial effects of these
cognitive expectancies. Rather than focusing on members’ problems or concerns, the worker can
express the group’s purpose in terms of members’ strengths and resiliency and the goals to be
accomplished. Thus, statements that focus on positive objectives and goals, such as “Through this
group experience you can learn to build on your. . .,” “With the assistance of fellow group members
you can get in touch with your strengths to overcome. . .,” or “Through all of our efforts in this task
force we can. . .,” are preferable to statements that focus on the negative aspects of problems or
concerns.
If the worker has successfully led a previous group that focused on similar concerns, the worker can
mention this success. In treatment groups, such as a statement by the leader offers members the
hope that the group will help them to achieve their goals. In task groups, members are more likely to
be motivated and to persist in goal achievement.
In open-ended treatment groups, when new members replace old ones, it is often helpful to have
those who have been in the group for some time state how the group has been helpful to them.
Professional group workers can learn from the way that self-help groups, such as Alcoholics
Anonymous, rely on the testimony of successful members as a major component of their group
program. In task groups, members who have had some experience in the group can be asked to
orient new members.
The opening statement about the group’s purpose should include a brief description of the functions
of the agency sponsoring the group. Notice, for example, in the previous example of the domestic
violence group, there was a very brief mention of the agency’s purpose. In treatment groups, the
opening statement should define the limits of service so that members will have a clear notion of
what services they can expect and what services are beyond the scope of the agency. There is
nothing more frustrating for members than having their expectations go unfulfilled. The opening
statement should include a brief statement about how the worker will help the members
accomplish their goals.
In task groups, relating the agency’s function and mission to the group’s purpose helps members
understand why they were called together to participate in the group. The opening statement
allows members to see how the agency’s functions are related to the group’s task. It is not
uncommon, for example, for members of task groups to ask about how the results of their work
will be used. Task group members may be interested, for example, in the extent to which their
group can make permanent changes in policies, procedures, and practices through its findings
and recommendations.
Involving Members
The opening statement focuses the group on considering the purposes for meeting. It should be
presented as a starting point for further discussion rather than as an immutable definition that is
not open to negotiation, modification, or change. Attempting to impose a definition of the group
without input from members tends to reduce their commitment and motivation and to increase
their suspicions that their autonomy may be threatened.
The stated purposes and goals should be broad enough that members can formulate their own
purposes and their own goals, but not so broad that almost any purpose or goal can be contained
within it. Statements about improving members’ social functioning or coping ability may be too
abstract for members to comprehend. Opening statements should be presented in clear, jargon-
free language. However, the leader should avoid being overly specific. Instead, the worker
should solicit members’ ideas and suggestions about how to operationalize particular purposes
and goals.
In the beginning stage, members are often reluctant to risk their own tentative position within the
group by expressing opinions that differ from those expressed by the worker or other members.
Therefore, in addition to providing members with opportunities to express their opinions and
concerns regarding the group’s purpose and goals, the worker should actively reach out for
members’ input. This can be done in a variety of ways. In treatment groups, the worker should
state clearly that the group is meant to serve the needs of its members, who ultimately determine
the group’s purpose and goals. Members can then be asked to state their own purposes and goals
and to comment on the broad purposes and goals articulated by the worker. During this process,
workers can encourage feedback by taking comments seriously and praising the members for
sharing their feelings and thoughts. In task groups, the worker should encourage members to
comment on the group’s charge from the sponsoring organization, and discuss with members
how any suggested changes will be brought to the attention of administrators or others who
formulated the initial charge.
Members can sense whether the worker’s call for feedback is genuine or perfunctory. If the
worker makes a continuous effort to solicit feedback by encouraging all members to express their
thoughts and feelings, members are more likely to feel that their input is welcome. For example,
members can be asked to make a statement about how the group’s purposes and goals meet their
needs and to suggest how the group could be improved. Members can also simply be asked about
their goals, as illustrated in the following example.
Case Example A Mandated Group for Men Who Batter
During the opening statement the worker mentioned that one of the primary goals of the group
was to help the men in the group control their tempers. The worker asked the members what else
they wanted to accomplish. This was first met by silence. The worker did not say anything, and
after a minute, one member stated that he wanted to get back together with his girlfriend.
Another member began to talk about how he had done things that he regretted and wanted to
“make things right.” At the same time, several members said that they felt backed into a corner
by their partners and finally “exploded.” They had tried to get out of the situation but their
partner kept at them. The worker acknowledged these statements and indicated that the group
was there to give them the tools to help them deal with these situations.
Ethical and Professional Behavior
Behavior: Make ethical decisions by applying the standards of the NASW Code of Ethics, relevant laws
and regulations, models for ethical decision-making, ethical conduct of research, and additional
codes of ethics as appropriate to context
Critical Thinking Question: 1. Group rules often have ethical implications. How can the group worker help members to
observe confidentiality in groups?
Confidentiality
In treatment groups and certain task groups, it is important for the worker to lead a discussion of
confidentiality during the opening portion of the group meeting. This will be the first time that
many of the members may have been asked to keep the proceedings of a group meeting
confidential. Therefore, it is important for workers to emphasize the need for confidentiality and
the harmful and destructive effects that can result when breaches occur. Trust among group
members is essential for cohesion and the smooth functioning of the group. When workers
reassure members that the group is a safe haven, a place where they can discuss emotionally
charged issues in confidence and without fear of reprisal, trust deepens and cohesion develops. In
treatment groups, members are often concerned about how information they share with the group
will be used outside the group meeting by the worker and other group members. Members cannot
be expected to disclose intimate concerns or develop a sense of trust unless they can be assured
that discussions within the group will not be shared outside of meetings. It can be helpful to
remind members about the confidentiality of meetings periodically throughout the life of the
group. This is particularly important in residential settings because frequent interaction outside
the group may promote violations of confidentiality.
As mentioned in Chapter 1, in some cases, the worker may be obligated to share information discussed in the group with law-enforcement officials. Workers are also likely to share
information with supervisors and fellow staff members during treatment conferences. Therefore,
workers have an ethical obligation to be clear about the limits of confidentiality and with whom
and under what circumstances data may be shared.
Confidentiality is also an important issue in many task groups. Members are often unsure about
what issues, proposals, and facts can be shared with colleagues and others outside of the group.
Because sensitive personal information is usually not discussed in task groups, it is especially
important for the leader to mention if the content of group meetings should be kept confidential
or if it can be shared with others outside the group to get their input, as illustrated in the
following example.
Case Example A State-Level Task Force
A state-level task force designed to study ways to improve services to older people trying to live
independently in the community deliberated for six months about a single-point-of-entry system
that could be used to assess all individuals who might need long-term care services in the
community or in a nursing home. The leader of the task force emphasized the confidential nature
of the proceedings, letting members know that premature or partial release of the information
discussed in the task force could hinder its work and upset various stakeholders who now
screened older people for long-term care services. The leader pointed out that another reason for
keeping the report of the task force confidential was because it was preliminary and advisory. It
would not be released by the governor until it was approved after extensive deliberation and
hearings by the legislature in consultation with the governor’s office.
The time set aside for the discussion of confidentiality also provides an ideal opportunity for the
worker to bring related value issues to the attention of the group. For example, the worker might
engage the group in a discussion of how social group work values, such as democratic
participation, respect for the individuality of each member, self-determination, cooperation,
mutual decision making, and the importance of individual initiatives will be operationalized in
the group. Depending on the type of group, workers might also talk about the problems that may
arise when group members form intimate relationships outside of group meetings. These dangers
include (1) distraction from the group’s purpose, (2) side conversations, alliances, and other
effects of being a couple on group dynamics, and (3) dealing with conflict and the breakup of
relationships that developed in earlier group sessions.
It is helpful for the worker to assist the group in formulating a set of principles—a code of
behavior for its operation—to which each member agrees to adhere. These are sometimes
referred to as group rules. For example, members might agree to the following group rules. Group Rules • Come to the group on time.
• Give the worker prior notice if you are unable to attend.
• Listen without interruption when another group member is talking.
• Avoid dominating the group discussion.
• Be respectful of each other’s thoughts and feelings.
• Be sincere and honest when communicating thoughts and feelings.
• Make positive, cooperative, helpful, and trustworthy contributions in response to each other’s
comments.
Group rules should not be imposed unilaterally by the worker. Instead, members should help
formulate the rules so that they take ownership of them. Group rules should not be confused with
norms. They may become norms if they are adhered to by the group over time. However, norms
develop gradually, and it is the workers’ roles to guide group development to embrace norms that
foster socio-emotional well-being and task accomplishment. Rules may be a first step in this
process but they need to be gently enforced and followed if they are to become the norms that
govern the group’s work.
Assess your understanding of the the techniques used to introduce members and to
begin the group by taking this brief quiz.
Helping Members Feel a Part of the Group
When a group begins, there is little sense of belonging or cohesion. As members begin to feel
secure and safe, an important early objective is to help a diverse collection of individuals, who
may be apprehensive and ambivalent, begin to identify themselves as a collective of supportive
partners in a common enterprise. The worker aims to build a fellowship where mutual aid and
respect are normative.
To empower members and build self-esteem, it is important to ensure that the demands of
participating in the group do not exceed members’ abilities. Thus, workers may have to tone
down expectations for intimate disclosures implied by a member’s early disclosure or scale back
unrealistic expectations about what can be accomplished in a given period. In Acceptance and
Commitment Therapy (ACT) (Hays, Strosahl, & Wilson, 2011) and Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT; Linehan, 2015), for example, no expectations or judgments are made about a person’s disabilities. The member is helped to practice acceptance of past and current events.
Pointing out shared interests and common goals among members helps them to feel that they are
a part of the group. Members are comforted by the familiar. Knowing that they are not alone
with their concerns or issues helps them feel closer to other participants in the group. There is
also a growing body of evidence that members from similar backgrounds, who share
complementary life views and values, develop trust faster than members with clashing
backgrounds, interests, and values (Forsyth, 2014). Careful planning can help, but workers also need to draw out members, helping them to identify with each other and emphasizing
commonalities and complementary skills, while simultaneously steering clear of comparisons
that focus on difference or conflict.
Differences and conflicts should be acknowledged rather than ignored. Workers can reframe
them as opportunities to understand how other members see the problems or issues facing the
group. They can also encourage members to postpone discussions of differences and conflicts
until they have gotten to know one another more fully and developed enough trust to tackle these
more difficult issues in a productive manner.
In early group meetings, the leader can use several techniques to help members acknowledge and
begin to appreciate differences that can be addressed more fully later in the group. For example,
the leader can point out the contributions that different backgrounds and different perspectives
make to the group. They can encourage members to welcome or at least be open to new
perspectives and to explore differences gradually as therapeutic alliances and member-bonding
occur as the group progresses. The leader can ask nonthreatening, direct questions that help
members explore, understand, and appreciate the different perspectives that are present within
the group.
The leader can also use program activities or exercises to help members explore differences in an
entertaining and lively fashion. For example, a leader might help the group plan a dinner to
which members would bring a dish representative of their culture, ethnicity, or nationality.
Another activity is for each member to design a coat of arms that represents something about his
or her personal background and to present the coat of arms to the group for discussion. The
leader might also ask each member to create a self-disclosure collage that artistically represents elements of them not known to other members of the group. Overall, differences among
members in their backgrounds and life experiences should be neither magnified nor ignored.
Instead, the worker’s task is to help members appreciate and respect differences in early group
meetings and explore them in more depth as the group meets and becomes more comfortable.
The worker also helps members feel that they are a part of the group by protecting them from
injury. Thus, misinformation should be corrected, and personal attacks should not be condoned.
In addition, the worker should continually scan the group to ensure that the content of the
meeting is not having an adverse emotional effect on members. Empowering members by
fostering active participation in group decision making can also help members feel that they have
an important and meaningful role to play in the group.
Assess your understanding of the techniques used to help members feel a part of the
group by taking this brief quiz.
Guiding the Development of the Group
Different theoretical writings suggest a range of possibilities for guiding the development of a
group. Some writers suggest that the worker should provide little or no direction at the beginning
of a group and prefer an approach that encourages members of the group to struggle with
purposes and goals until mutual agreements about them can be achieved. Unstructured
approaches to group beginnings are often used in t-groups (group dynamic training groups) and other growth groups when the purpose of meeting is to learn about group dynamics and one’s
own interpersonal interaction style. The process of struggling to develop purposes and goals
without any direction from the leader, however, is often anxiety provoking. Therefore, workers
should be cautious about using unstructured approaches with members who are not functioning
at optimal levels, when time to achieve particular outcomes is limited, and when exploration of
one’s interpersonal style is not a primary goal.
Structure in Treatment Groups
Humanistic and mutual aid approaches to group work practice often have limited structure. They aim to empower members in early group meetings by ensuring that consensus building is used during the decision-making processes about how groups will operate. Techniques can be used to shape interaction and self-expression processes, but these approaches should take care not to manipulate, coerce, or control members (Glassman & Kates, 1990; Steinberg, 2004). Humanistic and mutual aid approaches to
leadership during the beginning stage is especially appropriate in support, self-help, social action, and coalition groups in which the empowerment of members and the mobilization of their collective energy and wisdom are primary goals (Saleebey, 2013). However, elements of humanistic and mutual aid approaches, such as respect for the dignity and individuality of each member and the belief in each member’s potential for growth and development, are essential in all group work efforts. Writers within the humanistic tradition point out that techniques such as “directing” and making a “demand for work” can help members develop and implement mutually agreed-on purposes (Gitterman & Shulman, 2005; Shulman, 2014, 2016). Yet, few writers within the humanistic and mutual aid traditions spend time addressing issues of limit setting, socialization, and structure in groups of severely impaired individuals and in groups with members who have been ordered into treatment because of delinquent or criminal behavior. Yet there are many practice situations in which the sponsoring organization and the larger society expect that workers will use their authority to help members function as more productive members of society. Yalom (1983), for example, points out the need for limit setting and a clear structure when working with psychiatric inpatients. Levine and Gallogly (1985) suggest methods for dealing with challenges to the worker’s authority when working with groups of alcoholics in inpatient and outpatient settings. Similarly, DBT and other practice methods described in Chapter 10 designed for work with individuals who have borderline personality disorders, suicidal behavior, and other severe psychiatric disabilities prescribe active structuring of the work of the group by the leader.
Intervention
Behavior: Critically choose and implement interventions to achieve practice goals and enhance capacities
of clients and constituencies
Critical Thinking Question: 1. Group workers use multiple skills during the life of the group. What skills are used by
group work practitioners during the beginning stage?
In many practice settings, short-term psychoeducational groups, such as social skills for children, life skills training groups for psychiatric inpatients, groups to help new parents learn parenting skills, and anger control groups, are offered because workers have specific information and specific skills they think will benefit members (see, for example, Walsh, 2010). In these groups, the worker is designated by society and the sponsoring organization as an expert who provides direction and structure so that the members can learn new skills. Of course, even in these groups, members should have the opportunity to shape individual goals, group goals, and meeting agendas, and to share their concerns and learn from one another. Too often novice group workers try to stick to structured psycho educational group agendas without first taking the time to build trust and to help members feel comfortable and safe in the group.
An example of a session agenda for a time-limited, structured, psychoeducational parenting group is presented in Figure 7.1. The agenda provides the organizing framework for the first meeting. It indicates the goals for the session, the material to be covered during the group meeting, and the reading assignments and tasks required of each parent during the following week. Similar session agendas are prepared by the worker for each of the 10 sessions in the time-limited parenting group. In structured, time-limited groups, it is quite common for the agenda to be developed before the group session. As compared with less structured, process-centered approaches, structured group approaches give the worker greater responsibility for group goals and the way the group conducts its work. In process-centered approaches, members are encouraged to take informal leadership roles and develop their own goals, agendas, and contracts, whereas in time-limited psychoeducational groups, members’ input is sometimes limited to modifying goals, agendas, and contracts that the worker has already developed.
There are many types of time-limited, structured groups for
acquiring skills, managing anxiety, coping with life transitions, and
learning parenting skills (see, for example, Bauer & McBride,
2003; Bieling, McCabe, & Antony, 2006; Garvin, Guterrez, &
Galinski, 2004; LeCroy, 2008; McKay & Paleg, 1992; Passi,
1998; Rose, 1989, 1998; Shapiro, Peltz, & Bernadett-Shapiro,
1998; White & Freeman, 2000). These groups often use
evidence-based manuals or field-tested curricula, specifying
agendas for 6 to 20 meetings. Structured psychoeducational
groups using manuals and field-tested curricula usually contain a
mixture Figure 7.1 Sample Session Agenda for a Time-Limited, Structured Parenting Group AGENDA
Date
Session I
Goals By the end of this session, each parent will be able to
1. Describe the purpose of the group program 2. State how behavior is learned 3. Describe specifically one behavior of his or her child 4. State the behavior he/she will monitor during the next week 5. Describe how each behavior will be monitored
Agenda 1. Introduction
A. Leader introduces self to group
B. Each member introduces self to group (name, number of children, current problems you would like to work on)
2. Orientation to the group program A. Purpose of the group session
1. Goals 2. Why should parents be trained in parenting skills? 3. Who is responsible for what?
B. Group contracts—read, modify, sign 3. Introduction to behavior modification—lecture
A. Behavior is learned 1. Reinforcement 2. Extinction 3. Punishment
B. Role-play demonstration 4. Break 5. Assessment
A. Discuss behavior checklist B. Describe one behavior of your child C. Develop monitoring plan: what, who, how, when
6. Buddy system A. Description B. Choose buddy, exchange numbers, arrange calling time
7. Assignment A. Monitor chosen behavior and begin to chart it B. Call buddy C. Read units 1 and 2 (exercises at the end of each chapter are optional)
8. Evaluation of (1) educational materials; (2) exercises to help members practice the material; (3) discussions
of the material and the problems members are experiencing outside the group; (4) weekly
assignments for members to do outside the group; and (5) a very brief evaluation of the meeting.
The following case example illustrates one type of psychoeducational group.
Case Example A Healthy Heart Group in a Medical Setting
A medical social worker decided to form a group for patients who had recently undergone heart
bypass surgery. Family members were invited. This six-session daily group meeting was
structured so that there was a speaker followed by a discussion period. Topics included nutrition,
diet, exercise, keeping a positive mood, engaging in sexual activity, and other lifestyle issues,
such as a moderation in drinking alcoholic beverages and stress reduction techniques. After the
speaker’s presentation, each meeting provided the members with a chance to talk about their
specific concerns and issues and to practice stress reduction techniques.
Studies about the efficacy of group work found that groups with specific purposes, homogeneous
concerns, clear agendas, and structured group meetings were more effective than groups with
less structure (Bauer & McBride, 2003). Members reported appreciating that the leader provided specific information and effective strategies to help them with their concerns as the
case example illustrates. Workers should keep in mind, however, that members’ concerns and
needs are not always most appropriately served by a time-limited, structured group approach. In
support groups, for example, a flexible structure that maximizes member input may be more
effective than a structured approach in helping members to ventilate their concerns and to give
and receive help from fellow group members. In these groups, members are encouraged to reach
out to one another as much as possible. Goals and specific agendas for each meeting are
determined based on feedback and mutual agreement among all members during meetings.
It is unfortunate that there is not more dialogue among scholars who promote short-term,
structured, behavioral, and task-centered approaches to treatment groups and those who promote
long-term, process-oriented, humanistic approaches. Scholars who promote one approach over
another often fail to acknowledge the value of alternative approaches, actively dismiss important
contributions of alternative approaches, and ignore the core skills that form the base for all group
work. It is the thesis of this text that both approaches have much to offer and that social work
practice situations fall along a continuum. At the ends of the continuum, pure approaches may be
effectively applied, but in most practice situations, a blending of approaches makes the most
sense. Structure should be viewed as a tool to be used differentially in practice situations to help
members and the group as a whole achieve agreed-on objectives. The work of McKay and colleagues (2011) is one encouraging attempt to bridge the divide. To find protocols for leading specific types of groups for individuals with the types of concerns
you encounter in practice settings, it is best to search databases, subscribe to book publishing
catalogues, and search for websites with the latest information in your area of group work
expertise. For example, World Cat can help to identify books and chapters that contain evidence-
based manuals and field-tested protocols, and Psych Info, Medline, and Google Scholar can be
used to identify articles that describe evidence-based interventions, programs, and
practices. Macgowan (2008) and Barlow (2013) have written books that can also help group workers to conduct evidence-based group work.
Structure in Task Groups
Written agendas are frequently used in task groups to keep groups focused on the work that is to be accomplished. Figure 7.2 shows an example of an agenda for a meeting of a delegate council. The example agenda shown in the figure follows a standard outline as shown in the following:
Meeting Agenda Outline • Approve the minutes of the previous meeting
• Call for new agenda items
• Make announcements
• Receive reports from standing committees and administrative officers
• Work on current business
• Discuss any new agenda items that might have been introduced earlier in the group meeting
• Adjourn
Agenda items can be divided into three categories: information, discussion, and action. Often, agendas are accompanied by attachments to explain the agenda items. Agendas with their attachments are usually given to all group members several days before the meeting so they can become familiar with the business that will be discussed during the meeting.
In task groups, feedback is encouraged in several ways. Members might be encouraged to submit formal agenda items before group meetings. The items are then placed
Figure 7.2 Sample Agenda for a Delegate Council
Meeting date
CYPRUS HILLS DELEGATE COUNCIL
Order of Business
Information Discussion Action
1. Call to order
X
2. Approval of the
minutes of the
previous meeting
X
3. Call for new
agenda item
X
4. Announcements X
5. Treasurer’s report X
6. Program
committee’s report
X
7. Director’s report X
8. Emergency
housing proposal
X
Meeting date
CYPRUS HILLS DELEGATE COUNCIL
Order of Business
Information Discussion Action
9. Proposed changes
in bylaws (see
attachment A)
X
10. Election of
members of the
women’s issues task
force (see attachment
B for slate of
candidates)
X
11. Proposal to
develop an ad hoc
committee on
community health
care
X
12. New business
X
on the agenda. When the item is considered by the group, it is often helpful for the member who
submitted the item to present it to the group. During meetings, members’ feedback is usually
limited to a discussion of the specific task or agenda item currently being discussed. Members
have a chance to add new agenda items during a meeting only if the group’s predetermined order
of business can be concluded in time to discuss new business at the end of the meeting. For
additional information about leading task groups in the beginning stage, see Levi (2014) and Tropman (2014).
Balancing Task and Socio-emotional Foci
Another objective of the worker in the beginning stage is to balance the task and socio-emotional
aspects of the group process. Through systematic observation of leadership training groups,
committees, juries, classes, therapy groups, and labor relations teams, Bales (1950) established a set of 12 categories to describe group interactions. Half the categories are in problem solving or
task-focused areas and the other half pertain to socio-emotional areas. Bales’ scheme for
observing a group is instructive because it points out that in all groups the worker must be
conscious of both the task and socio-emotional aspects of group process.
In task groups, it has been found that about two-thirds of group interactions are focused on task
accomplishment and one-third on socio-emotional aspects, such as giving support and releasing
tension (Bales, 1955). Evidence concerning treatment groups suggests that they often spend more time on socio-emotional aspects than on task-focused discussion (Munzer & Greenwald, 1957). Despite the difference in emphasis, pioneering studies by Bales (1950, 1955) and more recent studies by other researchers (Forsyth, 2014) suggest that in both task and treatment groups, neither the task nor the socio-emotional aspects of group process should be neglected.
An exclusive focus on tasks in any group may lead to members’ dissatisfaction with their social
and emotional interaction in the group. An exclusive focus on the social and emotional aspects of
group interaction can lead to a group whose members will be satisfied with their relationships
with one another but will be dissatisfied about what has been accomplished. Thus, a balance
between the task and the socio-emotional aspects of group process is essential. No magic
formula exists for achieving the appropriate balance between task and socio-emotional aspects of
the group. Only through careful, ongoing assessments of group and member needs can the
worker determine the appropriate balance.
Goal Setting in Group Work
In the first few meetings, groups often spend a considerable amount of time discussing goals. When the worker discusses the group’s purposes, the process of goal formulation begins. Goals emerge from the interaction of individual members, the worker, and the system in which the group functions.
Workers’ goals are influenced by the values and aims of the social work profession. As members of social service organizations, workers are aware of the aims and the limitations of the services they provide. Workers should also be cognizant of their function in the larger society that sanctions and supports their work. Workers’ formulation of goals reflects what they believe can be accomplished with the support, resources, and limitations within the environment where the group operates.
Workers’ goals also are affected by what they know about the group members. In treatment groups, workers often have an opportunity to meet each member during the planning stage. Potential members are selected, in part, because of their compatibility with the purposes and goals developed for the group. Workers make preliminary assessments of members’ needs and the capacities of each group member, as well as the tasks that face them. Goals are formulated based on the assessment process.
In task groups, a similar process occurs. Goals are formulated by the worker in relation to the charge of the group from the sponsoring organization and the roles and status of
the members who compose the task group. The following case example of a task group illustrates that the roles and the status of committee members limit their ability to make binding recommendations.
Case Example Task Group to Examine Interdepartmental Coordination
A worker is charged with leading a committee to examine interdepartmental coordination of
client services. Representatives from various departments throughout the agency are represented,
but not the department heads. The committee meets a number of times and comes up with a
series of goals and recommendations for better coordination. However, given the status and the
roles of the members of the committee, the recommendations about improving coordination
between departments are not adopted. Instead, a report is prepared and sent to the executive
committee of the agency for additional action, because the members of the committee do not
have the authority to implement the recommendations without approval from top-level
management.
Goals are formulated by individual group members who have their own perspective on the particular concerns, problems, and issues that affect them and their fellow group members. In previously formed or natural groups, members have the advantage of knowing more than the worker does about the concerns of the other group members.
In formed groups in which members do not know each other before the first group meeting, members’ goals are based on a variety of factors.
Factors Affecting Members’ Goals • An assessment of their own needs
• Their previous attempts to accomplish a particular goal
• The environmental, social, and familial demands placed upon them
• Their assessment of their own capacities and capabilities
• Their impressions or experiences of what the social service agency sponsoring the group has
to offer
Goals for the group are formulated through a process of exploration and negotiation in which the worker and the group members share their perspectives. In this process, members and the worker should communicate openly about the goals they have formulated individually.
The extent to which common goals can be developed for all group members varies from group to group. In some groups, members have one, overriding concern in common. For example, a group of cigarette smokers suffering from chronic lung disease may be able to move quickly to a discussion of a specific contract to reduce cigarette smoking. In groups that are more diverse, such as outpatients in a mental health setting, it is often more difficult to develop common goals. In these groups, common goals are often formulated on a general level, for example, to improve the interpersonal social skills of members. Goals for individuals in the group are formulated at a more specific level. For example, an individual goal might be “To improve my skills when confronting others about behaviors I find unacceptable.”
The process of goal setting, therefore, is one in which the goals of the worker and the members are explored and clarified. Three types of goals emerge from this process: (1) group-centered goals that focus on the proper functioning and maintenance of the group; (2) common group goals that focus on the problems, concerns, and tasks faced by all group members; and (3) individual goals that focus on the specific concerns of each group member. In an educational treatment group for parents of young children, a group-centered goal might be to increase the group’s attraction for its members. A common group goal might call for the parents to learn about the normal growth and developmental patterns of young children. An individual goal for the parents of one child might be to reduce their son’s temper tantrums.
In task groups, three levels of goals can also be identified. For example, in a committee mandated to review intake procedures in a family service agency, a group-centered goal might be to establish open, member-centered interaction patterns. A common group goal might be to make several recommendations to the program director to improve admission procedures. An individual goal for a committee member might be to interview workers in two other agencies about different approaches to intake procedures that can be shared with the committee at the next meeting.
The worker should help members develop clear, specific goals. Early in the process, members formulate general goals they would like to achieve. Examples include statements such as “I would like to be less depressed” or “The group should try to reduce the paperwork involved in serving our clients.”
After members have stated their goals for the group, workers can help to clarify them and make them as specific as possible. Workers help members identify objective and subjective indicators of their goals and the criteria that will be used to evaluate them. The case example that follows illustrates this process.
Case Example Clarifying Goals and the Criteria for Evaluating Them
For the goal statement “I would like to be less depressed,” a member might be helped by the
worker and the other group members to define indicators of depression, such as sleeplessness,
lack of appetite, lack of energy, depressed affect, and so forth. The worker can then lead the
group’s efforts to help the member identify criteria that would indicate goal achievement. For the
depressed member, this might include (1) sleeping through the night and not waking up early in
the morning, (2) eating three meals a day, (3) having the energy to do things, and (4) smiling and
laughing more often.
Defining goals clearly helps both workers and members focus on what they are attempting to achieve in the group. Developing clear goals is a prerequisite for entering the middle stage of group work. Before goals can be prioritized and a contract between worker and members developed, goals should be stated as clearly as possible. All members should have input into the development of goals and an opportunity to influence the direction the group will take to accomplish them.
In previously formed groups with preexisting goals, the worker has a different role in goal
formulation. In some groups, goals may not have been clearly defined, and the worker’s task is
to help members clarify their goals. This is often the case with groups of teenagers and children
who have not carefully considered their goals. In other previously formed groups, clear goals
may exist. The worker’s task in these groups is to help members achieve the goals that can be
accomplished and modify or abandon those that are not likely to be achieved.
Achieving consensus about purposes and goals can be particularly difficult with involuntary
members who are often pressured into participating in a group. Still, there is usually some
common ground on which mutually agreed-on goals can be developed. For example, youthful
offenders are sometimes given the choice of participating in group treatment or being sentenced
through the juvenile court system. The worker can begin by stating the conditions and standards
for continued participation and then encouraging members to develop their own goals within
these minimally acceptable conditions and standards. Trust takes longer to develop in such
groups, but if the worker consistently shows interest in the members’ goals, concerns, and
aspirations, the group can be a useful treatment modality (Bauer & McBride, 2003).
Contracting
In group work, contracts are mutual agreements that specify expectations, obligations, and duties. The types of contracts that can be developed are presented in the following list. Contracts
involving the group as a whole are usually developed around group procedures. Individual
members’ contracts are usually developed around individual treatment goals or individual task
assignments.
Assessment
Behavior: Collect and organize data, and apply critical thinking to interpret information from clients and
constituencies
Critical Thinking Question: 1. Helping members articulate their goals is important. How can the group worker help
members state goals so that they are measurable?
Types of Contracts • The group as a whole and the agency
• The group as a whole and the worker
• The worker and the group member
• Two or more group members
• The group as a whole and a member
The most common form of an individual-member contract is between a member and the worker.
For example, a member may contract with the worker to stop smoking, to become more
assertive, or to make more friends.
Contracts can also be developed between two or more group members to help each other achieve
particular goals. For example, in an assertiveness training group, one member might decide to
practice being assertive in two situations during the group meeting and in one situation during
the week. The member may ask another member to praise her if she is assertive in the group and
to telephone her during the week to see if she has been assertive in a situation outside the group.
In return, she agrees to help the other member achieve a particular goal.
A third form of individual contracting occurs between a member and the group. The member, for
example, can agree to obtain information about a resource for the group or can promise to report
to the group about the results of a particular meeting. In a cohesive group, member-to-group
contracts can be quite effective because members do not want to let each other down by failing
to follow through on the contract.
When contracting with individual members for goals or tasks, it is important to be as specific as
possible about formulating behaviorally specific outcome goals. Goals specified in a written or
verbal contract should state briefly who will do what, under what circumstances, and how results
will be measured.
Facilitating Members’ Motivation
After an initial clarification of the purposes and goals of the group, the worker helps members
increase their motivation for accomplishing the goals that have been mutually agreed on.
Motivation is the key to the successful achievement of group and member goals. To a large
extent, motivation is determined by members’ expectations about (1) the worker’s role in the
group, (2) the processes that will occur in the group, and (3) what can be accomplished through
the work of the group. Members bring a set of expectations to any group experience, and the
expectations have a powerful influence on the way the members behave in the group. For
example, if a member expects the worker to tell him or her how to proceed, it is unlikely that the
member will take much initiative in the group. If the member has been involved in a previous
group experience in which little was accomplished, the member’s expectations and motivations
to work hard to achieve individual and group goals are likely to be diminished.
As the worker and the members begin to explore how they can work together, the worker should
help members identify their expectations and motivations. The worker can do this by asking
members direct questions about what they think they can accomplish in the group and how they
expect the group to function. These questions often uncover ambivalence about giving up old
ways of doing things and fear about what new and unknown changes may bring. At the same
time, they can empower members, helping them to feel that they are a vital part of the group and
have an important stake in the agenda (Saleebey, 2013).
Addressing Ambivalence and Resistance
Sometimes members respond evasively to direct questions about their motivations and expectations, particularly when the worker has made an early and clear “demand for work” before assessing members’ expectations and motivations (Schwartz, 1971, p. 11). Members may be reluctant to state ambivalent feelings about their ability to accomplish the goals for which they have contracted because they fear that the worker will disapprove. Mandated members may not be prepared to acknowledge problems others have identified. The following list summarizes some techniques for dealing with ambivalence and resistance.
Addressing Ambivalence and Resistance in the Group • Pay attention to overt and covert messages about accomplishing the group’s work.
• Acknowledge members’ ambivalence and provide a realistic appraisal of members’ chances
for accomplishing successful change.
• Help members work through their ambivalence and resistance.
• Assist members to recognize the range of choices they have for participating in the group.
• Help members work with each other to recognize where points of resistance may occur and
to overcome challenges to their full participation.
Before the worker states expectations about what members need to do to accomplish their goals, the worker should notice the overt and covert messages members give about accomplishing the group’s work. If the worker picks up signals indicating a lack of motivation to accomplish goals, the worker should check the perception of the meaning of the message with the group members.
Ambivalent feelings about change are common and should not be viewed as an obstacle to accomplishing the group’s work. It is rare for changes to be proposed and worked on without ambivalent feelings, and it is often difficult and painful to change problematic areas of one’s life. At the very least, it requires giving up the security of old ways of doing things. Rather than ignoring, playing down, or attacking the ambivalence, workers should help members work through it. Acknowledging a member’s ambivalence is a helpful way to get members to recognize their reactions to change. A frank discussion of a member’s ambivalence about change and the perceived ability to achieve a goal helps all members see that this is a common reaction to the changes they are planning to make. In addition, a realistic appraisal of the chances for success is much preferred to covering up barriers to task achievement.
One exercise that can help uncover ambivalence is to have each member focus on a goal and list psychological, social, and environmental factors that hinder and promote its achievement. A variation on this exercise done with individual clients has been called a “force field analysis” (Egan, 2013). In task groups, all members focus on one group goal. In treatment groups, it is more common for members to focus on one member’s goal, but occasionally it is possible to select a common group goal on which to focus. The exercise can be done by all group members, in pairs, or at home between sessions. In a force field analysis, the worker helps members list on paper or a blackboard the positive and negative aspects of attaining a goal and displays the results before all group members. This process facilitates an organized discussion of the factors that can help members achieve goals and the factors that may hinder them. Such a visual display helps members to realize that many factors may be detracting from their motivation.
An example of a list of positive and negative factors that could influence a group member’s decision is shown in Figure 7.3. The decision involves whether the member should separate from her husband. An examination of a list of factors can help group members decide whether there are sufficient positive motivations for achieving a particular goal.
If a member reaches a decision to pursue a goal despite numerous factors that reduce motivation, the task of the worker and the other group members is to suggest ways to decrease the negative factors and increase the positive factors. For example, in the situation in Figure7.3, the member decides to separate from her husband. To change some of the factors that reduce her motivation, the group helps the member to (1) overcome her fear about the effects of the separation on her children by suggesting that the children may be harmed more by seeing mom and dad constantly fighting than by experiencing their parents’ separation; (2) examine her finances, her plans for child care, and other
Figure 7.3 Analysis of Factors that Increase and Decrease the Motivation of a Member of a
Treatment Group
Problem: Whether to separate from my
husband
Factors Increasing
Motivation
Factors Decreasing
Motivation
1. Tom drinks
too much.
2. Tom has
been
physically
abusive
twice in the
last year.
3. There is
almost daily
verbal
conflict
between
Tom and
me.
4. Staying in
the
1. Concern
about what
breaking up
will do to the
kids.
2. Worried
about
whether I
can live on
only my
salary.
3. Wonder if I
can care for
three kids
and keep
working 40
relationship
causes me
to feel
angry and
depressed.
5. My
relationship
is interfering
with the
quality of
my work at
my job.
6. Tom and I
have
infrequent
sexual
relations.
7. The kids
are being
affected by
our
constant
fighting.
hours a
week.
4. Feeling as if
I would be
breaking my
commitment
to Tom.
5. I’ll have to
explain the
separation to
my parents,
friends, etc.
practical needs that she may have as she considers living independently; and (3) build her self-confidence and self-esteem by providing support and positive feedback during the separation process. Through this process, the group helps the member become motivated to achieve her goal with as little ambivalence, fear, and anguish as possible.
In some groups, workers encounter members who feel pressured or coerced into coming to the group. Members who feel pressured or coerced often are not ready to engage in the work of the group. They may delay or obstruct other members’ work.
In an excellent text on working with resistant group members, Rooney (2009)suggests that the worker can point out that the members chose to participate in the group. Although some individuals may have chosen to participate in the group to avoid other less desirable choices, the choice was an agreement made with a referring agency. For
example, in the case of being found guilty of driving while intoxicated, the member may have agreed to participate in a group treatment program instead of losing his driver’s license. The worker should acknowledge that the member might not want to be in the group, but also note that the person freely chose the group over an alternative. The worker should also state that members are free to terminate their participation at any time, but their decision to participate implies that they will adhere to the group norms and contractual obligations agreed to during the intake interview or the first group session. As the group progresses, it may be necessary to remind members that it was their choice to participate rather than experience a serious consequence, such as going to jail or being put on probation. The group also needs to help reluctant and resistant members to find reasons to participate. For example, the leader can encourage members to help each other to figure out what is positive and negative about their current lifestyle and what they want to change. Then, members can decide how they want the group to support them and help them to accomplish these changes. This type of empowerment helps members feel that they have a stake in the group and that their views are being considered and acted on. At the same time, the worker can point out members’ strengths and resiliencies, helping them to feel that they have the power to grow and to change (Saleebey, 2013). It can also be helpful for the worker to use “I” statements and to make a clear demand for work, as the following case example illustrates.
Case Example Use of “I” Statements
I have a problem. Some of you do not seem to want to be here. If you do not want to be here, you
do not have to be here. I do not want you to get the wrong impression—I’d rather you stay.
However, if you don’t like being in the group, you can take it up with the agency that sent you
and deal with the consequences of not continuing your participation. My job is to help you use
your time in this group productively. Therefore, I would like those of you who choose to stay to
think now about how you will use the group—what you want to accomplish. Think about the
problems and issues in your life and what you’d like to work on in this group. I’ll give you a few
minutes. Then, let’s go around and see what we can do together. I suggest that we begin the go-
round by saying what we like and do not like about our current lifestyles and what changes we
want to make. Then, later, we can focus on creating a plan to make these changes, what strengths
you bring to the process, and how the group can help you to accomplish the changes you want to
make.
Expectations about Role Performance
In addition to ambivalence about changing a way of doing things, members often are concerned
at the beginning of the group that they will not be able to contribute in the way they think is
expected of them. For example, members of a committee may think they will be asked to do too
much to prepare for group meetings, or they may fear they have nothing to contribute. Similarly,
members of educational groups are often apprehensive about their ability to learn new material,
and members of support groups are fearful that members will not understand or share their
concerns. Because expectations about role performance can interfere with a member’s
participation in the group, it is helpful for workers to describe their expectations of members and
solicit feedback and input. Role clarification is a key leadership skill in working with mandated
members (Trotter, 2015). This process provides a forum for members to air their fears about the challenges they face. It also helps clarify any mistaken or distorted expectations that
members may have and provides an opportunity for workers to modify or change their own
expectations.
Role clarification also helps members to understand the dual role of the worker as an agent of
social control as well as a helper (Trotter, 2015). With respect to members’ behavior inside and outside of the group, the worker can clarify what is negotiable and what is not negotiable.
Workers can also help members to think about their own expectations versus the expectations
held by other constituencies, such as the referral source that suggested members attend the group
as an alternative to a harsher punishment, the worker, the member’s family, and so forth.
Clarifying roles in this way can create greater empathy and understanding, and it will ensure that
all parties are clear about what goals are shared in common and what goals are not. Work can
then proceed based on tackling shared goals. The worker might also discuss the consequences, if
any, of not working on the goal expectations of the referring agency, the worker, or the
member’s family. This helps to clarify the choices members are making and the likely
consequences in their lives.
Authentic Communication about Purposes and Goals
Ambivalence about changing and fears about the demands that may be placed on them may lead
members to be less than candid in early group meetings. Shulman (2016) points out that members of treatment groups may begin by sharing problems that do not directly address some
of the more difficult and hard-to-talk-about issues they are experiencing. Building trust involves
enabling members to talk about “safe” problems to gauge the reaction of the leader and other
members before sharing more emotionally charged problems. In task groups, members may
bring up peripheral issues that could potentially sidetrack the group. The worker may also want
to view these as safe problems that can be addressed without getting into difficult or
controversial issues.
To increase authentic communication as the group develops, the worker can take several steps:
• Always treat members’ suggestions and ideas about how to proceed with respect. The worker
should not dismiss or ignore what a member says or treat it as a smoke screen or a red
herring. This will only alienate members and certainly will not encourage them to open up
and reveal the issues that are more meaningful. Instead, the worker should strive to
understand the deeper issues implied by the member’s message.
• Link the member’s statements with the larger purposes of the group. The worker can do this
by asking members how the suggestions or ideas fit in with the agreed-on purposes of the
group.
• Place the relevant parts of the member’s message in the context of themes or issues that have
been previously discussed in the group.
• Support the initiative the member demonstrated by speaking up without endorsing the
message. Statements such as “I’m glad to see that you are thinking about what you want to
accomplish in the group” or “I’m happy to see that you care enough about the direction of the
group to make that suggestion” lets members know that their perspectives are welcome and
valued without indicating that the worker supports the content of the message.
Promoting Prosocial Behaviors
Trotter (2015) also points out that it is important to promote prosocial behavior when working with mandated members. He suggests doing this by (1) pointing out prosocial comments made
during group interaction, (2) praising prosocial comments, suggesting that others emulate these
comments and rewarding prosocial comments in other ways, (3) acting as a model by using
problem-solving skills and coping skills that are prosocial, and (4) identifying and challenging
antisocial comments or behaviors.
Prosocial comments can be rewarded, for example, by sending a note to members’ probation
officers about how well they are doing in the group. Members can also be encouraged to discuss
their attempts at engaging in prosocial behaviors between meetings, the successfulness of these
attempts, and obstacles to engaging in prosocial behaviors outside of the group. Both ACT and
DBT use homework assignments and experiential exercises extensively to promote prosocial
behaviors and self-statements between meetings (see, for example, Linehan, 1993; Neacsiu, Bohus, & Linehan, 2014; McKay, Wood, & Brantley, 2007).
Engagement
Behavior: Apply knowledge of human behavior and the social environment, person-in-environment, and
other multidisciplinary theoretical frameworks to engage with clients and constituencies
Critical Thinking Question: 1. Groups sometimes have involuntary members. How can the worker engage involuntary
members in the group?
Working with Involuntary Members
There are many situations when group workers are called upon to work with involuntary
members who are mandated to attend groups. Involuntary members are those who are pressured
or required to attend a group in lieu of some worse punishment, such as going to jail, losing a
driver’s license, or as a condition of probation. Involuntary members may also be those who are
forced into a group by a school system, a therapeutic community, or some other entity with the
notion that it will do them some good to participate. In these latter situations, the consequences
of not following through by attending the group may not be clear, although the members know
that they simply have to attend the group. Involuntary and mandated members put workers in an
awkward position, because they are being asked to help members make changes that they may
not want to make.
One of the first steps in working with involuntary members is to assess their readiness for
change. Prochaska, DiClimente, and Norcross (1992) have developed a five-part model of change: (1) pre-contemplation, (2) contemplation, (3) preparation, (4) action, and (5)
maintenance. Mandated members often start in the pre-contemplation stage that may take on
many forms. According to Goldstein (2001), there are reluctant pre-contemplators who do not want to consider change because they do not have sufficient information about what change
might mean or simply because of inertia. There are also rebellious pre-contemplators who are
motivated to avoid change and maintain the status quo. This may be because of peer pressure or
fear that change will make things even worse for them. There are resigned pre-contemplators
who have given up hope that change is possible. They are demoralized and lack the energy to
make changes. There are also rationalizing pre-contemplators who either do not see the problem
or view the problem as a problem for someone else but not for them. When working with groups
of mandated members, the worker should carefully assess whether group members are reluctant,
rebellious, resigned, or rationalizing pre-contemplators. Reluctant pre-contemplators may simply
need information or a heightened sense of the consequences of their actions to move to the next
stage of change. Rebellious pre-contemplators actively resist change because of peer pressure or
feeling that their lifestyle is the better alternative. Resigned pre-contemplators are those who
have tried and failed. They lack the motivation and the feelings of self-efficacy to do anything
about their situation. Rationalizing pre-contemplators are those who blame others for their
problems. Although each of these group members may respond to somewhat different
approaches, there are some common strategies that the worker can use to help all members of
mandated groups begin to make changes.
In order to determine where members are at on the continuum of change, the worker can start by
asking members how they feel about attending the group and what they hope to get out of it. By
reflective and skillful listening, the worker seeks to understand members’ feelings without being
judgmental, critical, or blaming (Lynch & Cuper, 2010; Miller & Rollnick, 2013; Waltz & Hays, 2010). Rooney and Chovanec (2004) point out that in the early stages of the group the members may express their hostility at the worker. The worker should not be put off by this but
instead may want to make statements early in the group that acknowledge the members’ feelings
about being pressured or coerced to attend and their wary, noncommittal approach to the group.
The worker should also look for nonverbal signs about the members’ motivation. Peer pressure,
despair, hopelessness, and other factors that hold members back from contemplating change may
not come out directly, but instead may be expressed in silence or rebellion. Workers who are
aware of these nonverbal cues should acknowledge them, feeding them back to the members of
the group, and letting them know that the worker is aware of their feelings. The worker should
avoid arguing or disputing what members are saying verbally and nonverbally and instead should
roll with the resistance, acknowledging it and letting the members know that they are at best
ambivalent about their participation and, at worst, unwilling participants in the change process
(Miller & Rollnick, 2013). After acknowledging the resistance to change, the worker has to figure out what can motivate
members to engage in the work of the group. There is no easy way to accomplish this, and for
each member the motivation may come from different sources. Miller and Rollnick (2013)suggest trying to develop a discrepancy between members’ current behaviors and their long-term personal goals. The problem in some groups is that members have not thought about
their long-term goals, or their long-range goals have become distorted by dysfunctional home
lives and impoverished neighborhood environments. Poverty, despair, abuse, and neglect are
often the root causes of these problems. Peer pressure, repeated failure, a lack of self-efficacy, or
other issues may also work against developing the discrepancy between current dysfunctional
behavior patterns and the positive long-range goals that the worker is seeking to help members
achieve. When this is the case, the worker should acknowledge these issues with empathy and
concern. The worker should show a genuine concern for members’ long-term well-being and
realistically mention some of the consequences of continuing on the same path of dysfunctional
behavior. Members may not buy into the worker’s view, so a portion of the group’s time may
need to be spent on acknowledging these feelings and asking members to discuss their own
worldview and to describe where they think their current patterns of behavior will lead. Although
at first members may rage against persons, situations, or systems that are unfair, gradually the
worker can reframe the discussion into how they can negotiate the system and get what they need
to live better lives. This discussion can also heighten the discrepancy between members’ current
behavior patterns and future desired behaviors. The worker can use these discrepancies to
motivate members to make the changes they find desirable.
Gradually, the worker sets expectations for the group but at the same time tries to maximize
choice and minimize demand, helping the members themselves come up with what they would
like to do in the group (Welo, 2001). Rooney (2009)noted that it is helpful to point out what choices members have within mandates. For example, workers can point out that members have
the choice not to follow mandates and accept the consequences, or to use mandated group time to
work on goals of value to themselves while acceptable to the authority that mandated their
treatment. In this way, members are able to see that change is under their control and is possible
despite the operation of coercive forces.
At some point during this process, it can be helpful for the worker to bring a guest speaker to the
group with whom the members can identify. By relating his or her story about being a mandated
client and overcoming obstacles to change, the speaker may help members see a path out of their
current situation and open possibilities that the members may not have contemplated. The worker
may also have some members in the group who are further along on the change continuum, such
as those who are actively contemplating change or who have moved beyond contemplation to
take some action. The worker can help these members become a catalyst for those who are still
in the pre-contemplation stage by encouraging them to describe how they moved from pre-
contemplation to contemplation or action. Through dialogue and interaction members can be
encouraged to form a peer support network to help everyone move to the next stage of change,
and to overcome any obstacles they face as they attempt to change.
Those who work regularly with involuntary and mandated members recognize that change does
not come easily or without setbacks. Working with involuntary members is one of the most
difficult challenges a worker can face, but seeing members becoming motivated to make changes
is also one of the most rewarding experiences a worker can have. It is very important to keep in
mind that change has to come from within each member and that the workers’ roles are to foster
a group climate where members can feel comfortable enough to talk about change and begin to
attain their aspirations for themselves. External incentives, such as getting a driving license back,
getting out of the therapeutic community sooner, or reduced probation time will not lead to
change over the long term unless the members can see a better future for themselves and develop
the feelings of self-efficacy that are necessary for them to become self-motivated. Workers can
be ready by being empathic about the difficulties the members face but at the same time offering
the encouragement and the resources that are needed to help motivate members to make a better
life for themselves. For more about working with mandated members, see Edelwich and Brodsky (1992); Goldstein (2001); Miller and Rollnick (2013); Rooney (2009); Rooney and Chovanec (2004); Schimmel and Jacobs (2011); Welo (2001); and Chapter 9 of this text.
Anticipating Obstacles
In the beginning stage of group work, it is important for workers to help members anticipate the
obstacles they may encounter as they work on specific goals and objectives. It is useful to ask
members to describe the obstacles they foresee in accomplishing individual and group goals.
Sometimes it is useful to encourage members to engage in a time-projection program activity. In
this exercise, members are asked to imagine what it will be like for them at the end of the group
when they have accomplished their goals. Members can be encouraged to discuss how changes
brought about in the group are likely to be received by those around them and to focus on what
might prevent accomplishments in the group from being implemented in settings outside the
group. As members share potential impediments to long-term, meaningful change, the worker
can facilitate a discussion about overcoming the impediments.
Experience suggests that when members and the leader are aware of potential obstacles, they can
often plan ways to overcome them before the middle stage of the group. Some workers’ and
scholars’ research suggests that meditation, mindfulness, or other experiential exercises can help
to bring about acceptance of one’s past and present situation (Hays, Strosahl, & Wilson, 2011; Linehan, 1993, 2015; Lynch & Cuper, 2010; Waltz & Hays, 2010). Chapter 9 describes a variety of methods that can be used during the middle stage of a group to help members overcome obstacles to accomplishing specific goals.
Assess your understanding of the possible challenges to member participation in the
group by taking this brief quiz.
Monitoring and Evaluating the Group: The Change Process Begins
It is important to start the monitoring and evaluation process as soon as the group begins. In
treatment groups, at the start of monitoring, the worker should carefully note the problems and
concerns members state at the onset of the group and the tentative goals they wish to establish.
Keeping careful notes of this is important because the worker can show members right from the
beginning how their initial concerns and problems have been clarified, redefined, or adjusted as
they get feedback and support from the group. This, in itself, can be useful because it
demonstrates to members that the change process has already begun. The worker should point
out positive changes as the group progresses and be liberal with their praise of members. Those
who are not changing as rapidly can be reassured that change will come if they continue to work
at it. Workers should encourage these members to avoid being critical of themselves. In the
beginning, members need encouragement to forge ahead with change goals and to avoid slipping
into self-defeating and self-critical statements that often accompany low self-esteem, and life-
long living in an adverse environment. Being positive about change processes can help members
grow and flourish, and it reassures them that the progress they are already making can continue
even in the face of obstacles and setbacks.
Monitoring initial goals can also help to establish a purpose for the group and make clear to
members what they are working toward achieving. In subsequent meetings, we have found it is
often helpful to start with a check in when members are asked to present their tentative goals.
This keeps them focused on what they are trying to accomplish and allows them to modify and
reformulate goals they may have mentioned during the first meeting. It also provides an
incentive for members who do not yet have goals to begin the process of formulating them. The
second group meeting can be used to begin to partialize goals and to suggest what members may
be able to do between meetings to clarify goals and begin to take the first tentative steps to
accomplish them. It is never too early to have group members focus on goals and what they want
to accomplish through their participation in the group. At the same time, some members may
need time to formulate goals. The worker should make the group a safe place for members so
that the demand for goal formulation is tempered by an understanding that the change process is
a difficult one that takes time to take shape.
In task groups, monitoring should focus on the goals of the group as a whole. The worker should
keep notes on each member’s contributions to goal formulation. Sources of agreement and
disagreement should be monitored, with the worker looking for common ground on which the
task group can move forward. Just as in treatment groups, goal clarification is essential in task
groups. It is also important for the worker to start the beginning of subsequent group meetings by
describing agreements and common ground and where compromise or more work toward
clarifying goals is necessary.
The beginning of a group is also the time for any evaluation processes to be put into place. In
treatment groups, workers may want to distribute baseline measures that group members can take
to monitor their progress. For example, in a group for members with depression, the worker may
want to distribute a depression inventory or have members begin to monitor their depression in a
chart, a diary, or a log book. As the group progresses, the worker can ask members to review
their forms to see what progress, if any, is being made. Demonstrating progress builds cohesion
and optimism that the group members are accomplishing their goals. Similarly, in task groups, in
the initial meetings, members can be asked to take a baseline or a benchmark reading of where
they are in relationship to the goal of the group. This baseline or benchmark can be used as a
progress indicator throughout the life of the group.
Case Example
At first, Drew felt enthusiastic about being assigned to lead a group called “the Lunch Bunch.”
His enthusiasm was tempered when his field instructor told him that it would be composed of 10
fourth- and fifth-grade boys who were suspended from the school lunchroom because of acting-
out behavior. The purposes of the group were to help members learn acceptable ways of dealing
with their peers and to reintegrate each member into the main lunchroom milieu.
In addition to having no control over the composition of the group, Drew was concerned about
what might happen when all of the “offending parties” would come together for the first session.
He interviewed each of the members assigned to the group to introduce himself, to learn about
their expectations, and to begin to orient them to the group’s purposes and goals. During the
interviews, he learned that various members were suspended from the lunchroom because they
fought with other students and expressed their anger in inappropriate ways, such as yelling,
cursing, and throwing food. Most of the youngsters he met seemed to act appropriately during
the initial interview and appeared enthusiastic about meeting with the Lunch Bunch.
On the day of the first session, Drew came prepared. In addition to a written agenda, name tags,
art supplies, and some CDs for music, he brought chocolate chip cookies, hoping that after
members ate their lunch, dessert would be an incentive for them to act appropriately until the
group ended. As members entered, most seemed to know each other from classes they took
together. Drew chose to help members introduce themselves by playing a version of “Top
Secret” in which each member wrote down something about himself that others would not
ordinarily know. He read what each boy had written and had fun trying to figure out who had
written each statement. Drew felt that this activity was moderately successful because it helped
the members get involved with the group right away.
Next, Drew made an opening statement about the purpose of the group. He was careful to word
the statement of purpose so that the boys could understand it and so that it gave them some
guidance about what would happen in the group. He noted that the group’s purpose was “to work
together to learn safer ways of handling yourselves in the lunchroom and to have fun while
learning.” Two of the members stated that they thought the group was like detention and was
punishment for their behavior. Drew clarified that it was true that their behavior had gotten them
referred to the group, but that the group was not punishment. He noted that both he and the
members could plan some of the activities, and these would take into account what members
wanted to do during group sessions. The boys seemed skeptical about this, so Drew asked for
more discussion. He clarified that his role was to help them explore how to act with each other
and to help them plan activities in the group.
One of the most difficult discussions that took place early in the first session concerned
confidentiality. One member wanted to know if Drew was going to tell the principal or his
parents about what he might say or do in the group. Drew recognized that many of the boys
frequently interacted with each other in settings outside the group, and this could easily
compromise any promises of confidentiality. In addition, Drew was responsible for reporting
the progress of members to his field instructor and, ultimately, to the school principal. Drew mentioned these two issues to the members and suggested a few ground rules about confidentiality that the group might discuss at their next meeting. He suggested that it would be appropriate for a member to discuss aspects of his participation with his parents, but members should not refer to group members by name. He emphasized that under no circumstances should members talk to other students about what went on inside the group. Finally, Drew said that he had to report on each member’s progress to his field instructor, but that he would try to share what he would say with each boy individually before he discussed it with his field instructor.
After this, the group started to work on other rules for how the group should operate. During the first session, they agreed that they should all be good listeners, should wait their turn before speaking, and should try to help each other. Drew was satisfied that, in the time allotted, the group seemed to be making some progress on formulating a beginning contract. He suggested that members might think of other rules for the group and could bring these up in the next meeting.
Drew recognized that the time allotted for this first session was running out, and he wanted to provide the members with a fun experience before they left to return to their classes. During the remaining time, they played some music from Drew’s collection. Drew asked members what they felt after listening to each song. This discussion was difficult for some of the members because they were not familiar with some of Drew’s musical selections. Drew suggested that members could bring in some of their favorite
music for the next session. The members received this news with enthusiasm. Drew said that when a member brought in a favorite musical selection, his responsibility would be to ask other members to identify what they felt after listening to it. Chocolate chip cookies for dessert tempered this early “demand for work.”
References:
Toseland, R. W., & Rivas, R. F. (2017). An introduction to group work practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.