what is a group?, Group cohesion, and types of groups

This said, it is possible, as Jarlath F. Benson has done, to identify a list of attributes:

• A set of people engage in frequent interactions • They identify with one another. • They are defined by others as a group. • They share beliefs, values, and norms about areas of common interest. • They define themselves as a group. • They come together to work on common tasks and for agreed purposes (Benson 2009: 4)

Life Skills Groups

A life skills group is also often called an independent living skills or daily living skills group. This group is most commonly used with adults with chronic mental illness, adults with developmental or cognitive disabilities, and teenagers and young adults. The focus is on teaching skills to improve the participant's ability to live independently. These groups tend to be much more didactic in nature but utilize the group process for collaborative learning and support-system building. Individual group sessions may focus on managing money, budgeting, accessing public transportation, securing and maintaining housing, housekeeping, laundry, grocery shopping, cooking, accessing healthcare and prescrip- tions, finding employment, job skills, and healthy living. Groups may cover a myriad of topics and be customized to the specific needs and developmental and skill levels of participants.

TYPES OF GROUPS

A variety of groups occur in social work—social conversation, recreation skill building, educational, task, problem solving and decision making, focus, self-help, socialization, treatment, and sensitivity and encounter training. According to Johnson and Johnson, a group may be defined as two or more individuals in face-to-face interaction, each aware of positive interdependence as they strive to achieve mutual goals, each aware of his or her membership in the group, and each aware of the others who belong to the group.

Planned and emergent groups

Alongside discussion of primary and secondary groups, came the recognition that groups tend to fall into one of two broad categories: Planned groups and emergent groups

Education

Although the topics covered vary widely, all educational groups teach specialized skills and knowledge, such as classes on child rearing, stress management, parenting, English as a foreign language, and assertiveness training. Orientations offered by social service organizations to train volunteers fall into this category as well. Educational groups usually have a classroom atmosphere, involving considerable group interaction and discussion; a professional person with expertise in the area, often a social worker, assumes the role of teacher.

Anger Management Groups

An anger management group is one of the most common types of groups found in treat- ment settings. An inability to manage one's feelings is a common deficit, especially in people with emotional problems. The emotion of anger is given special attention because of the unhealthy behavior choices people often make when they are angry. Verbal or physical aggression is a common behavioral manifestation of anger. These groups often focus on finding healthier ways to channel feelings, learning more effective coping skills, building better assertiveness skills, improving problem-solving ability, challenging distorted think- ing patterns, resolving conflicts collaboratively, and learning to express feelings without aggression. The group process is used as an opportunity to practice these skills with the assistance of the facilitator and other participants

The higher the level of attraction (payoffs), the greater the attractive qualities of cohesion ( group cohesion).

An individual's willingness to risk and to become involved in a group depends to a large extent on the degree to which his or her needs for belonging are met. Often, members join groups to help meet the need to belong. Membership in a group or a person's willingness to share himself or herself often hinges on the degree of acceptance experienced in the group. The climate in a group is a crucial factor in determining the actual sense of belonging that members achieve. Clearly, the need for belonging can be a powerful factor in joining and remaining a member of groups. Obviously, group members are most attracted to group meetings when friendly, pleasant interactions take place. Besides feeling relaxed, members are more apt to share their ideas and relate to others within the group. Initially, icebreaker exercises can help members become more comfortable, and goals can be set that incorporate the personal goals of members (see Chapter 4). The more members feel involved in making decisions, the more they will feel that their views are respected. Highly cohesive groups have low rates of absenteeism and low turnover in member- ship. In addition, members are generally motivated to complete assigned tasks, and they are apt to conform to group norms. They are more willing to listen, accept suggestions, and defend the group against external criticism. Because a group provides a source of security, it often rewards members by becoming a support system that reduces anxiety, heightens self-esteem, adds meaning to living, and often helps members resolve personal problems. Therefore, membership in a cohesive group enhances a member's psychological health by transmitting feelings of being valued, accepted, and liked. Members should be rewarded for jobs well done rather than coerced or manipulated to help create a cooperative atmosphere, not a competitive one. Again, pleasing interactions, rather than a constant war of words or negative banter, increase a group's cohesion. If a difficult situation arises, a problem-solving approach should be used. A win-lose approach usually decreases cohesion (see Chapter 6). Trust among group members is another necessary condition for effective communication, cooperation, and cohesion. When distrust exists, individuals will not disclose sensitive personal information or commit their resources to accomplishing group goals. Even though some groups have "built-in" prestige, being a member of certain groups can potentially damage a member's reputation (for example, a member of a board of directors of a nursing home beset by a well-publicized scandal involving extensive patient abuse). A group's cohesion will generally decrease when there is a long-term disagreement on how to define or resolve a major problem. Unreasonable or excessive demands on members, such as forcing a shy person to give a speech, will also sharply reduce the group's attractiveness. Dominating members and those who engage in repulsive behavior are certainly not large drawing cards. Scapegoats who are blamed for difficult situations may react aggressively or drop out. Finally, cohesion can be decreased if outside activities of the members are curtailed because of the group. For example, a student group that meets 2 or 3 nights a week may interfere with study time, exercising, and socializing.

Group size

An obvious but crucial consideration is the size of the group. Large groups function differently in a number of important respects to smaller groups. Size impacts on group communication, for example. In smaller groups a higher proportion of people are likely to participate - there is potential more time for each, and the smaller number of people involved means that speaking may not be as anxiety-making as in a large group. In addition, large groups are more likely to include people with a range of skills and this can allow for more specialization of labour. In addition, larger groups can also allow us to feel more anonymous. 'As a result, we may exhibit less social responsibility..., which in turn will often lead to less task involvement and lower morale on the part of many group members as size increases' (Baron 2003 et. al.: 7).

Group goals

An obvious, but sometimes overlooked, factor in group processes and dynamics is the reason why the group exists. What does it do for its members? What is its object? How did it come to be created? As Alvin Zander (1985: 1-13) has shown, the form that a group takes is often heavily dependent on its purpose. Moreover, a group will often have several and possibly conflicting purposes which can then become expressed as tensions between members. Group goals are ideals - they are the ends (the aims or the outcomes) sought by the group and its members. They entail some sort of joint vision (Johnson and Johnson 2003: 73; 2016). Without some commitment to the pursuit of common goals the group will not survive or be effective (Benson 2001: 66). Of great significance then is what might be called goal structure. Here a key distinction is between cooperative and competitive goal structures: A co-operative goal structure develops when the individual goals of members are visible and similar... A competitive goal structure emerges where the individual goals of members are hidden or seen as different or opposed. (Benson 2001: 67) Hidden agendas can be very destructive and lead to conflict in the group.

Group interdependence

As Robert S Baron et. al. (2003: 139) have argued it is a basic feature of groups that group members' outcomes often depend not only on their own actions, but also on the actions of others in the group. One member's feelings, experiences and actions can come to be influenced in whole or in part by others. In all this it is also helpful to take up a distinction formulated by Morton Deutsch (1949) (one of Lewin's graduate students) when looking at cooperation and competition in groups. He contrasted social interdependence - which exists when people share common goals and each person's outcomes are affected by the actions of others - with social dependence where the 'outcomes of one person are affected by the actions of a second person but not vice versa' (Johnson and Johnson 2003: 94; 2016).

Problem Solving and Decision Making

Both providers and consumers of social services may become involved in groups concerned with problem solving and decision making. (There is considerable overlap between task groups and these groups; in fact, problem-solving and decision-making groups can be considered a subcategory of task groups.) Social service providers use group meetings for objectives such as developing a treatment plan for a client or a group of clients, or deciding how best to allocate scarce resources. Potential consumers of services may form a group to meet a current community need. Data on the need may be gathered, and the group may be used as a vehicle, either to develop a program or to influence existing agencies to provide services. Social workers may function as stimulators and organizers of these group efforts. In problem solving and decision making groups, each participant normally has some interest or stake in the process and stands to gain or lose personally by the outcome. Usually, there is a formal leader, and other leaders sometimes emerge during the process.

Primary and secondary groups

Charles Horton Cooley (1909) established the distinction between 'primary groups' and 'nucleated groups' (now better known as secondary groups):

Each individual member of the group

Each individual member of the group

Emergent groups

Emergent groups come into being relatively spontaneously where people find themselves together in the same place, or where the same collection of people gradually come to know each other through conversation and interaction over a period of time. (Cartwright and Zander 1968).

Sensitivity and Encounter Training

Encounter groups, sensitivity training groups, and T (training) groups all refer to a group experience in which people relate to each other in a close interpersonal manner and self-disclosure is required. The goal is to improve interpersonal awareness. The goal of sensitivity training groups is to have members develop an increased sensitive awareness and understanding of oneself and one's relationships with others. Members participate in discussions and experiential activities to improve interpersonal awareness.16 An encounter group may meet for a few hours or over a few days. Once increased interpersonal awareness is achieved, it is anticipated that attitudes and behaviors will change. For these changes to occur, a three-phase process generally takes place: unfreezing, change, and refreezing.17 Unfreezing occurs in encounter groups through a deliberate process of interacting in nontraditional ways. Our attitudes and behavior patterns have been developed through years of social experiences. Such patterns, following years of experimentation and refinement, have now become nearly automatic. The interpersonal style we develop through years of trial and error generally has considerable utility in our everyday interactions. Deep down, however, we may recognize a need for improvement but are reluctant to make the effort, partly because our present style is somewhat functional and partly because we are afraid to reveal things about ourselves. Unfreezing occurs when we decide certain patterns of our present behavior need to be changed and we are psychologically ready to explore ways to make changes. Tubbs and Baird describe the unfreezing process in sensitivity groups: Unfreezing occurs when our expectations are violated. We become less sure of ourselves when traditional ways of doing things are not followed. In the encounter group, the leader usually does not act like a leader. He or she frequently starts with a brief statement encour- aging the group members to participate, to be open and honest, and to expect things to be different. Group members may begin by taking off their shoes, sitting in a circle on the floor, and holding hands with their eyes closed. The leader then encourages them to feel intensely the sensations they are experiencing, the size and texture of the hands they are holding, and so forth. Other structured exercises or experiences may be planned to help the group focus on the "here-and-now" experience. Pairs may go for "trust walks" in which each person alternately is led around with eyes closed. Sitting face to face and conducting a hand dialogue or a silent facial mirroring often helps to break the initial barriers to change. Other techniques may involve the "pass around" in which a person in the center of a tight circle relaxes and is physically passed around the circle. Those who have trouble feeling a part of the group are encouraged to break into or out of the circle of people whose hands are tightly held. With these experiences, most participants begin to feel more open to conversation about what they have experienced. This sharing of experiences or self-disclosure about the here and now provides more data for the group to discuss.18 The second phase of the process involves making changes in attitudes and behavior patterns, which are usually facilitated by spontaneous feedback as to how a person "comes across" to others. In everyday interaction, spontaneous feedback seldom occurs, so ineffective interaction patterns are repeated. In sensitivity groups, feedback is strongly encouraged, as the following interaction illustrates: Carl: All right (in a sharp tone), let's get this trust walk over with and stop dillydally- ing around. I'll lead the first person around—who wants to be blindfolded first? Judy: I feel uncomfortable about your statement. I feel you are saying this group is a waste of your time. Also, this appears to be your third attempt this evening to "boss" us around. Jim: I also feel like you are trying to tell us peons what to do. Even the tone of your voice is autocratic and suggests some disgust with this group. Carl: I'm sorry. I didn't mean it to sound like that. I wonder if I do that outside the group too?

Focus

Focus groups are closely related to task groups and problem-solving and decision-making groups. They may be formed for a variety of purposes, including (1) to identify needs or issues, (2) to generate proposals that resolve an identified issue, and (3) to test reactions to alternative approaches to an issue. A focus group is a group convened to discuss a specific issue or single topic, often with the aid of questionnaires, and a moderator who actively keeps the conversation oriented to that topic. Such groups are often established to acquire information and generate ideas that would not be as accessible through individual interviews. Two examples of a focus group are a nominal group (described in Chapter 4) and a brainstorming session (described in Chapter 6). A representative group is another version of a focus group. Its strength is that its members have been selected specifically to represent different perspectives and points of view in a community. At best, the representative group is a focus group that reflects the cleavages in the community and seeks to bring diverse views to the table; at worst, it is a front group for people who seek to make the community think it has been involved.

Group cohesion

Forsyth (2006: 13) makes the point that 'Groups are not merely sets of aggregated, independent individuals; instead they are unified social entities. Groups cannot be reduced down to the level of the individual without losing information about the group unit, as a whole'. The notion of group cohesion - the forces or bonds that bind individuals to the collectivity - is fundamental to an appreciation of groups. In some groups the power of the bonds, the feelings that group members have for each other and the extent to which they are prepared to cooperate to achieve their goals will be slight. In others these may be seen as strong. Here the word 'seen' is significant - for it may well be that a group is not experienced by its members as particularly co-operative, for example, but they, and those looking on, may believe it to be a social entity, a whole.

Conclusion

From this brief overview we can see the significance of groups and why it may be important to intervene in them - both to strengthen their potential as sites of mutual aid and communal well-being, and to help them become more fulfilling to their individual members. They are a fundamental part of human experience and play a crucial role both in terms of shaping and influencing individual lives and society itself. Humans are small group beings. We always have been and we always will be. The obsequiousness of groups and the inevitability of being in them makes groups one of the most important factors in our lives. As the effectiveness of our groups goes, so goes the quality of our lives. Those skills - and the attitudes, orientations and ideas associated with them - are learnt, predominantly, through experiencing group life. They can also be enhanced by the intervention of skilled leaders and facilitators - but that is another story

GROUP COHESION

Group cohesion is the sum of all the variables influencing members to stay in a group. It occurs when the positive attractions of a group outweigh the negative implications a member might encounter. The word cohesion is derived from Latin and can be translated literally as the "act of sticking together." A group's level of cohesion is constantly changing as events alter each member's feelings and attitudes about the group. The extent of a member's attraction to and involvement in a group can be measured by his or her perceptions of the payoffs and costs. They are infinite because they vary from individual to individual, but the following lists offer a brief indication of possibilities PAYOFFS companionship attaining person1al goals prestige enjoyment emotional support COSTS being with people one dislikes expending time and effort criticism distasteful tasks boring meetings

Group development

Groups change over time. There is a real sense in which they are living things. They emerge, they exist, and they die. This phenomenon has led to the formulation of a wide range of theoretical models concerning developmental processes. Most commentators assume that groups go through a number of phases or stages if they exist for an extended period. It is clear, for example, that people tend to want to know something about the other members; have to develop a degree of interdependence in order that the group or team may achieve its tasks and be satisfying to its members; and has to learn at some level to deal with conflict if it is to survive. The most influential model of the developmental process - certainly in terms of its impact upon texts aimed at practitioners - has been that of Bruce W. Tuckman (1965). While there are various differences concerning the number of stages and their names - many have adopted a version of Tuckman's model - forming, storming, norming and performing.

Relationship. We also must recognize that the relations linking members of groups are not of one type.

In families, for example, the relationships are based on kinship, but in the workplace, they are based on task-related interdependencies. In some groups, members are friends, but in others, the members are linked by common interests or experiences

Breaking the ice

In most newly formed groups, the leader has the initial responsibility of seeking to create an atmosphere in which members feel comfortable. Members of a new group are apt to have a number of concerns: "Will I be respected and accepted?" "Will this group be worth my time and effort?" "Will I feel embarrassed or inferior?" "Will I be able to form new friendships?" "Are the other members the kind of people I will like?" "What will my roles and responsibilities be—and will I like them?" "Will I have a leadership role?" "Will others expect more of me than I am capable of giving?" "Will my personal goals or expectations be realized?" "If I find I do not like or enjoy this group, is there a nice way to get out?"

why are so many definition of a group?

In part differences in definition occur because writers often select those things that are of special importance in their work and then posit 'these as the criteria for group existence' (Benson 2001: 5).

how other writers define groups

Others have stressed how people categorize themselves as members of something (Turner 1987) or share identity (Brown 1988) (see Exhibit 1). Others might look to communication and face-to-face encounters (Homans 1950), purpose (Mills 1967), structure and so on.

Group structure

Most commentators on group process and group dynamics discuss group structure - but just what they include under this heading differs. Here we are going to follow Forsyth (2016) and define group structure as the '[n]orms, roles and stable patterns of relationship among the members of the group'.

Group norms

Norms are basically rules of conduct that indicate what attitudes and behaviour might be expected or demanded in particular social situations and contexts. They are shared expectations of behaviour that set up what is desirable and appropriate in a particular setting or group. However, as soon as we talk about expected behaviour there is room for confusion. Here the norm is not referring to what is likely to occur, but what we think should occur. For example, we can expect a certain level of violence in town centers as the bars and clubs close, but most people would probably say that it shouldn't be happening. Socially established 'and shared beliefs regarding what is normal, correct, true, moral and good generally have powerful effects on the thoughts and actions of group members' (Baron et. al. 2003: 6). Group norms develop in groups often because they are necessary for the group to survive and/or to achieve its ends. Group life is dependent upon trust and a certain amount of loyalty, for example. Furthermore, as Baron et al have commented, norms provide codes of behaviour that render social life more predictable and efficient' (op. cit.). They also act to reduce uncertainty in difficult situations. They provide a way forward for interaction.

As a student, you have probably observed that each class has a unique personality. ( ice breaker )

Norms are established in their first few sessions, for example, as to whether students will share and discuss their opinions and beliefs. If a norm of "silence" is established, the instructor generally ends up doing practically all the talking. Such a class becomes a "chore"for the instructor and for the students. Many of the ingredients that go into determining whether a class will establish a norm of "talking" or of "silence" are unknown. Certainly, a norm of talking is facilitated by ice breakers. Ice-breaking exercises can also accomplish specific objectives, such as obtaining information on the members' expectations for the group. One such ice breaker is described at the end of this

This definition has the merit of bringing together three elements: the number of individuals involved; connection, and relationship.

Numbers: When people talk about groups they often are describing collectivities with two members (a dyad) or three members (a triad). For example, a work team or study group will often comprise two or three people. However, groups can be very large collectivities of people such a crowd or religious congregation or gathering. As might be expected, there are differences in some aspects of behaviour between small and larger groupings (see below), yet there remain significant commonalities Connection: Most definitions of 'group' highlight the presence of a link between members. This goes beyond some surface similarity such as height or eye colour. In groups we expect members to be connected in some meaningful way (Forsyth 2017: 4). As Forsyth (op. cit.) puts it, 'A family is a group because the members are connected, not just by blood but also by social and emotional relationships'.

the study of groups has had a direct impact on practice in a number of areas of life

Perhaps the most obvious is work - and the contexts and practices of teams. But it has also acted as a spur to development in those fields of education, therapy, social care and social action that use groups to foster change.

Planned groups

Planned groups are specifically formed for some purpose - either by their members, or by some external individual, group or organization.

Process Groups

Process groups are often used in inpatient, residential, and other settings where group members spend significant amounts of time together. They are also used in other settings when one group participant has a major issue to resolve that would be beneficial and rel- evant for all members to discuss. Sometimes these groups are prescheduled, such as a daily reflection group at a group home or inpatient facility. Other times a group session may be called spontaneously to resolve a major conflict or problem within the milieu. The specific issue is brought to the attention of the group, and participants are encouraged to process through their thoughts and feelings, provide each other with feedback and support, and collaboratively problem-solve as a group. Sometimes group members may be confronta- tional and challenging, which can be a healthy process when facilitated properly. In some settings, this group is used to help participants process thoughts and feelings about a major life event, such as the death of a loved one or a suicide attempt by a group member. Participants are assisted with managing feelings, reframing unhealthy thought patterns, and integrating life's challenges.

Psychoeducational Groups

Psychoeducational groups are becoming increasingly common in many community-based agencies and institutional settings. These groups are designed to educate and empower clients, families, caregivers, and support systems to be able to better manage a client's psy- chiatric symptoms, mental illness, or behavioral health problems. They often center on a specific diagnosis, such as depression, anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance dependence, or obsessive-compulsive disorder. The primary goal is to educate and improve understanding about common symptoms; recognize early warning signs; improve symptom management; and enhance relapse prevention, effective intervention, coping skills, and effective supports. An additional goal is to improve insight, which enhances recovery, reduces inpatient hospi- talizations, and improves family stress levels and well-being. Sometimes psychoeducational groups are specifically geared toward family members and client support systems. Often these are facilitated self-help groups that emphasize peer support and encouragement. For example, an ADHD parents group would focus on educating parents on symptoms to improve their ability to distinguish true symptoms from other oppositional, defiant, or age- appropriate behaviors. Parents also benefit from hearing about others' struggles and may subsequently feel less self-blame and alienation. They can provide each other encourage- ment and support and share successful parenting skills and behavior interventions

Recreation/Skill Building

Recreational groups may be categorized as informal recreational groups or skill-building recreational groups. A recreational group service agency (such as the YMCA, YWCA, or neighborhood center) may offer little more than physical space and the use of some equipment to provide activities for enjoyment and exercise. Often activities such as playground games and informal athletics are spontaneous, and the groups are practically leaderless. Some agencies claim that recreation and interaction with others help build character and prevent delinquency among youths by providing an alternative to street life. In contrast to informal recreational groups, a skill-building recreational group has an increased focus on tasks and is guided by an adviser, coach, or instructor. The objective is to improve a set of skills in an enjoyable way. Examples of activities include arts and crafts and sports such as golf, basketball, and swimming, which may develop into competitive team sports with leagues. These groups are frequently led by professionals with recreational training rather than social work training, and the agencies involved include the YMCA, YWCA, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, neighborhood centers, and school recreational departments.

Self-Help and Mutual Aid

Self-help groups are increasingly popular and often successful in helping individuals overcome social or personal problems. Katz and Bender provide a comprehensive definition : Self-help groups are voluntary, small group structures . . . usually formed by peers who have come together for mutual assistance in satisfying a common need, overcoming a common handicap or life-disrupting problem, and bringing about desired social and/or personal change. The initiators and members of such groups perceive that their needs are not, or cannot be, met by or through existing social institutions. . . . They often provide material assistance as well as emotional support, they are frequently "cause"-oriented, and promulgate an ideology or [set of] values through which members may attain an enhanced sense of personal identity. Alcoholics Anonymous, developed by two recovering alcoholics, was the first self help group to demonstrate substantial success. In Self-Help Organizations and Professional Practice, Powell describes numerous self help groups that are now active. Closely related to self help groups are mutual aid groups, and the terms are sometimes interchangeable. Mutual aid groups are informal or formal associations of people who share certain problems and meet regularly in small groups with professional leaders to provide emotional support, information, assistance in problem solving, and other help for each other. Many self-help groups use individual confession and testimony techniques. Each member explains his or her problem and recounts related experiences and plans for handling the problem. When a member encounters a crisis (for example, an abusive parent having an urge to abuse a child), he or she is encouraged to call another group member, who helps the person cope. Having experienced the misery and consequences of the problem, group members are highly dedicated to helping themselves and then fellow sufferers. The participants also benefit from the "helper therapy" principle; that is, the helper gains psychological rewards. Helping others makes a person feel worthwhile, enabling the person to put his or her own problems into perspective. Most self-help groups are "direct service" in that they help members with individual problems. Other self-help groups work on community-wide issues and tend to be more social action oriented. Some direct service self-help groups attempt to change legislation and policy in public and private institutions. Others (parents of children with a cognitive disability, for example) also raise funds and operate community programs. However, many people with personal problems use self help groups in the same way others use social agencies. An additional advantage of self help groups is that they generally operate with a minimal budget.

Social Conversation

Social conversation is often employed to determine what kind of relationship might develop with people we do not know very well. Because talk is often loose and tends to drift aimlessly, there is usually no formal agenda for social conversations. If the topic of conversation is dull, the subject can simply be changed. Although individuals may have a goal (perhaps only to establish an acquaintanceship), such goals need not become the agenda for the entire group. In social work, social conversation with other professionals is frequent, but groups involving clients generally have objectives other than conversation, such as resolving personal problems.

Social Skills Groups

Social skills groups focus on improving the participant's interpersonal effectiveness skills. Topics often include improving assertiveness, problem solving, conflict resolution, building healthy relationships, boundaries, manners, making friends, empathy, and building natural supports. Participants may be challenged to improve their self-awareness of problematic and unhealthy behaviors. Role-play is frequently used to practice new skills and improve the client's ability to self-manage relationships. At times participants may process specific problems expressed by group members and discuss potential changes that group members might make. Group members are encouraged to provide positive and negative feedback, which enhances participants' understanding of others' perception of them

COMMON TYPES OF TREATMENT GROUPS

Social workers are likely to encounter treatment groups in a wide variety of settings, such as outpatient mental health clinics, community-based social service agencies, inpatient psychiatric units, intensive outpatient programs, substance abuse programs, residential programs, domestic violence programs, special education programs, therapeutic day schools, veterans' programs, day treatment programs, correctional institutions, juvenile justice programs, and other institutional programs. Most treatment groups in these settings are based upon a recovery model emphasizing that clients can achieve long-term recov- ery from serious mental illness, developmental and social problems, and behavioral health issues. This recovery is facilitated and achieved through skill building and psychosocial rehabilitation, which improves clients' abilities to self-manage symptoms and problems in their current environment. These groups are often called psychosocial rehabilitation or community support groups and focus on changing behavior, skill building, and increasing natural supports. Groups are frequently structured using cognitive and behavioral therapy approaches (see modules at the end of the text), and facilitators are often given substantial latitude as to the content and structure of specific group sessions. Next we'll look at some of the more common treatment groups social workers may encounter and be asked to facili- tate. The types of groups an agency provides and the group names used will vary depending on agency, mission, population, and client needs.

Nor are the relationships linking members equally strong or enduring

Some relationships, like the links between members of a family or a clique of close friends, are tenacious, for they have developed over time and are based on a long history of mutual influence and exchange

Defining 'group

Some social psychologists looked at working in the presence of others tend to raise performance (Allport 1924) Others looked at different aspects of group process. Kurt Lewin (1948), for example, found that nearly all groups were based on interdependence among their members - and this applied whether the group was large or small, formally structured or loose, or focused on this activity or that. In a famous piece Lewin wrote: 'it is not similarity or dissimilarity of individuals that constitutes a group, but interdependence of fate' (op. cit.: 165). In other words, groups come about in a psychological sense because people realize they are 'in the same boat' (Brown 1988: 28). However, even more significant than this for group process, Lewin argued, is some interdependence in the goals of group members. To get something done it is often necessary to cooperate with others.

Specialty Groups

Specialty groups address specific topics or problems that are unique to certain client popu- lations and settings. The focus of the group and topics discussed will vary depending on client needs. For example, substance abuse programs have a number of different groups geared specifically toward alcohol and drug addiction recovery. Different groups may focus on drug and alcohol education, relapse prevention, recovery and lifestyle changes, or 12-step programs. Other examples would include eating disorder program groups, grief counseling and support groups, veteran PTSD recovery groups, domestic violence recovery groups, and healthcare-focused groups for psychological challenges related to patients with cancer, heart disease, or other major illnesses. (Treatment groups are discussed more fully in Chapter 12.) In summary, to be a competent group therapist, the professional should have superb interviewing and counseling skills, a working knowledge of the principles of group dynam- ics (described in Chapters 1 through 6 of this text), and a working knowledge of contem- porary therapy approaches, three of which are described in the Group Treatment Theories Resource Manual, located at the end of this text. Group treatment has several advantages over one-on-one therapy. The "helper" ther- apy principle generally is operative. Members at times interchange roles and become the helper for someone else, receiving psychological rewards and putting their own problems into perspective in the process. Group treatment also allows members with interaction problems to test new approaches. In addition, research has shown it is generally easier to change the attitudes of an individual in a group than one on one.15 Group treatment permits a social worker to treat more than one person at a time and represents a substantial savings of professional time.

Stress Management Groups

Stress management groups focus on learning healthier and more effective strategies for dealing with stress. Participants may be encouraged to make lifestyle changes and take a more proactive role in reducing stress before it happens. Group facilitators often instruct on a variety of relaxation techniques and lead participants in practice exercises. Breathing exercises, guided meditation, yoga, positive imagery, and healthy living are common themes. Participants are encouraged to practice relaxation techniques at home, which will improve their ability to use the skills at times of increased stress. Skill development, such as time management, problem solving, or assertiveness training, may also be a topic for specific sessions. The group process may also be used to challenge and change thinking patterns and beliefs that contribute to stress. Psychoeducation may be used to assist partici- pants to recognize how stress contributes to their disorders. Other areas of discussion could include exercise, healthy eating, and avoiding substance use. (A stress management group is sometimes also called an educational group. See Chapter 11 for a detailed discussion of stress management groups.)

To help members become comfortable, the leader might use an ice breaker exercise.

Such exercises are designed to help members become acquainted with one another, introduce themselves, reduce anxieties, and facilitate communication. Each group has a unique personality. In most social work groups, the leader attempts to create an atmosphere in which the members trust one another and want to share their thoughts and ideas. Ice breakers are an important step in establishing such an atmosphere.

Symptom Management Groups

Symptom management groups focus on helping individuals cope with specific types of disorders. These groups are structured for people who struggle with specific diagnoses, such as depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, obsessive-compulsive disor- der, borderline personality, ADHD, or addictions. For example, a depression group would focus on specific symptoms and issues that are unique to people who struggle with depres- sion. Often they include a significant psychoeducational segment and then focus on skill improvement. Skill instruction is tailored to the unique needs of the group. These groups frequently focus on improving the use of coping skills and strategies to manage feelings, control impulses, reduce problematic thinking patterns, and effectively solve interpersonal problems. The group process is used to help empower participants to make meaningful changes, view problems in perspective, and enhance their overall well-being. Managing symptoms is viewed as an important action step in the recovery process.

Task

Task groups are formed to achieve a specific set of tasks or objectives. The following examples are types of task groups that social workers are apt to interact with or become involved in. A board of directors is an administrative group charged with responsibility for setting the policy governing agency programs. A task force is a group established for a special purpose and is usually disbanded after the task is completed. A committee of an agency or organization is a group that is formed to deal with specific tasks or matters. An ad hoc committee, like a task force, is set up for one purpose and usually ceases functioning after completion of its task.

Roles.

The bundle of expectations and attributes linked to a social position can be seen as a role. In groups, people expect certain sorts of behavior from those they see as the leader, for example. Various different ways of conceptualizing role have emerged in the study of groups e.g. 'information giver', 'harmonizer', 'recorder' and so on. Some of these schemes are helpful, some are not - but what cannot be disputed is the significance of role in groups. Different people play different roles - sometimes these are assigned (such as the in the membership of committees), sometimes they emerge through interaction. As Johnson and Johnson (2003: 24; 2016) have put it, 'Roles define the formal structure of the group and differentiate one position from another'. Crucially, different social roles are often linked to different degrees of status and power within the group.

Socialization

The primary objective of most socialization groups is to develop attitudes and behaviors in group members that are more socially acceptable. Developing social skills, increasing self confidence, and planning for the future are other focuses. Leadership roles in socialization groups are frequently filled by social workers who work with groups for predelinquent youths to curb delinquency; youths of diverse racial backgrounds to reduce racial tensions; and pregnant, unmarried young females to help them make plans for the future Older residents in nursing homes are often remotivated by socialization groups and become involved in various activities. Teenagers at correctional schools are helped to make plans for returning to their home community. Leadership of all the groups mentioned in this section requires considerable skills and knowledge to help the group to foster individual growth and change.

From this she suggests that groups are intended and organic. They are not some random experience and as a result they have three crucial characteristics:

There are parts • There is relationship between the parts • There is an organizing principle (op. cit.). To this we might also add, as both John C. Turner (1987) and Rupert Brown (1989) have pointed out, groups are not just systems or entities in their own right but exist in relation to other groups.

Types of groups

There are various ways of classifying groups, for example in terms of their purpose or structure, but two sets of categories have retained their usefulness for both practitioners and researchers. They involve the distinctions between: primary and secondary groups; and planned and emergent groups.

Some key dimensions of groups

Those engaged in the systematic exploration of group processes and dynamics have used different ways of observing group behavior and gaining insight into the experience of being part of groups. Some have tried for more of an 'insider' view using participant observation and conversation. Perhaps the best known example of this was William F. Whyte's (1943) study of street corner society. Others have used more covert forms of observation, or looked to structured and overt observation and interviews. A classic example of the sort of scheme that has been used when looking at groups in more structured ways is Robert Freed Bales' (1950) IPA system (Interaction Process Analysis) with its 12 different ways of coding group behaviour e.g. 'shows solidarity', 'agrees', 'asks for opinion' and so on.

Group interaction

Those involved with researching and working with groups have often come at interaction - the way in which people engage with and influence each other - from contrasting perspectives. As we have already seen, Bales (1950, 1999) looked at categorizing social interventions in terms of the ways in which they appear to impact on group process - and in particular the extent to which they looked to 'getting on with the job' or 'having regard for others' (Brown 1988: 19). This distinction has turned out to be one of the most enduring features of much that has been written about groupwork. Task interaction can be seen as including 'all group behaviour that is focussed principally on the group's work, projects, plans and goals' (Forsyth 2006: 10). Relationship interaction (or socio-emotional interaction) is centred around the social and interpersonal aspects of group life. This distinction has found its way into different aspects of practice - for example when thinking about leadership in groups (whether leaders focus on structure and task actions, or on the feelings and needs of the group members) (see, in particular, Hersey and Blanchard 1977). Thus actions can be categorized into whether they are concerned with task or maintenance (sometimes also described respectively as instrumental or expressive interventions) (Brown 1994: 71).

formed and emergent groups has been further developed by asking whether the group is formed by internal or external forces.

Thus, Arrow et. al (2000) have split planned groups into 'concocted' (planned by people and organizations outside the group) and 'founded' (planned by a person or people who are in the group). They also divided emergent groups into 'circumstantial' (unplanned and often temporary groups that develop when external forces bring people together e.g. people in a bus queue) and 'self-organizing' (where people gradually cooperate and engage with each other around some task or interest).

Primary groups

are clusters of people like families or close friendship circles where there is close, face-to-face and intimate interaction. There is also often a high level of interdependence between members. Primary groups are also the key means of socialization in society, the main place where attitudes, values and orientations are developed and sustained.

Secondary groups

are those in which members are rarely, if ever, all in direct contact. They are often large and usually formally organized. Trades unions and membership organizations such as the National Trust are examples of these. They are an important place for socialization, but secondary to primary groups.

Gustave Le Bon

argued that people changed as they joined groupings such as crowds.

In some cases, such as groups based on ethnicity, race, or gender, the connection linking members may

be more psychological than interpersonal.

Charles Horton Cooley (1909)

began to theorize groups more closely - and this was followed by others looking at particular aspects or types of group. Two well-known examples are Frederic Thrasher's (1927) exploration of gang life and Elton Mayo's (1933) research on the informal relationships between workers in teams. A further, critical, set of interventions came from Kurt Lewin (1948; 1951) who looked to the dynamic qualities of groups and established some important parameters with regard to the way they were to be studied.

Forsyth's (2006) definition the most helpful:

connections linking the individual members.... [M]embers are linked together in a web of interpersonal relationships. Thus, a group is defined as two or more individuals who are connected to one another by social relationships. Donelson R. Forsyth (2006: 2-3) [emphasis in original] Subsequently, Forsyth has amended this definition to 'two or more individuals who are connected to one another by and within social relationships'. Donelson R. Forsyth (2017: 3) [emphasis in original]

Émile Durkheim

established just how wrapped up individual identity was with group membership

Some benefits and dangers of groups

groups offer people the opportunity to work together on joint projects and tasks - they allow people to develop more complex and larger-scale activities. We have also seen that groups can be: • Significant sites of socialization and education - enabling people to develop a sense of identity and belonging, and to deepen knowledge, skills, and values and attitudes. • Places where relationships can form and grow, and where people can find help and support. • Settings where wisdom flourishes. As James Suriwiecki (2004) has argued, it is often the case that 'the many are smarter than the few'. However, there is a downside to all this. The socialization they offer might be highly constraining and oppressive for some of their members. They can also become environments that foster interpersonal conflict. Furthermore, the boundaries drawn around groups are part of a process of excluding certain people (sometimes to their detriment) and creating inter-group conflict. There is also evidence to show that groups can impact upon individuals in ways that warp their judgements and that lead to damaging decision making (what some commentators have talked about as 'groupthink').

main arenas for the exploration of groups, and for building theory about them

sociology, anthropology and social psychology - but they have been joined by contributions from biology, physics, management and organizational studies, and political science.

There is a growing literature around 'group entitativity'

the degree to which something appears to be a unified entity. Another way of thinking about this is as the 'groupness' of the people you might be observing in a particular situation (Brown 1999). It was Donald T. Campbell (1958) who first used the term entitativity. He argued that when groups become real they possess the characteristics of entities (Forsyth 2006: 15). Campbell based his analysis on explorations into how the mind works when deciding when something is to be approached as a whole (a gestalt or something that cannot be described as the sum of its parts) or 'a random collection of unrelated elements' (Forsyth 2006: 15). When looking at people together in particular places (what he calls the 'aggregate') Campbell concluded that we depend on three main cues to make judgements about entitativity: • Common fate - the extent to which individuals in the 'aggregate' seem to experience the same, or interrelated outcomes. • Similarity - the extent to which the individuals display the same behaviors or resemble one another. • Proximity - the distance among individuals in the 'aggregate' (or group). (described in Forsyth 2016: 16) We might look, thus, at people seated around a table in a café or bar - we look at the extent to which they join in things together e.g. laughing, discussing; whether they acting in a similar way or have something in common e.g. in the way they dress, the things they have with them; and how closely they are sitting together.

All this research, and the contrasting orientations informing it, has generated different ideas about what to look out for in groups and, in particular, the forces impacting upon group processes and dynamics. I want to highlight five:

• Group interaction • Group interdependence • Group structure • Group goals • Group cohesion (and entitativity) There are various ways of organizing and naming the significant qualities - but I have found this approach (taken from Donelson R. Forsyth 1990: 8-12; 2006: 10-16; 2016: 10-16) to be the most helpful way to start exploration.