Comparativegroup work analysis
Comparativegroup work analysis
Groupmeetings are normally quite important given the fact that theynormally offer the opportunity for people in the given set-up todiscuss on a given topic and achieve their agenda. In most cases, thesuccess of the activities conducted by such groups normally lies inthe willingness of group members to contribute actively to thediscussion. They also do require strong leadership practices by thegroup facilitator who could go a long way to influence the kind ofapproach that the members may have towards the discussion. Such anindividual may also be able to motivate the different personsinvolved in forum. Therefore, the personality of the individualnormally comes into play and needs to be one that has a highpotential of creating the desired effect in the long run. The paperaims to report on an analysis of two groups that I attended AL-ANONand a staff meeting with the view of outlining various elements thattouch on them and the level of influence that they both have ingeneral.
TheAL-ANON offers support to families of alcoholics. The purpose of thegroup is to help address some level of suffering that such personsmay be going though, given the fact that they also share in the woesthat the alcoholics normally go through. The goal of the group liesin making members practice the 12 steps of dealing with alcoholics ina bid to enable members to gain the right attitude into assistingtheir loved ones (Cohen, Pathak, Ramierz, & Vahia, 2009). Iattended the group once and got to learn various perspectivesregarding the group and the entire case of its organization. Themembers were quite welcoming and made one have the feeling and wishto go back and be able to share with them on some of the challengesthat he may be experiencing. Given the fact that it is an open group,it offers one the confidence that he is part of the family and theperson will, therefore, feel quite at ease while interacting with thegroup members. They are quite keen on giving a person time to presentthe situation that he could be going through with the aim ofestablishing ways through which such an individual could be assistedso as to overcome the problems in the noblest fashion.
Ialso had the opportunity to attend a fatherhood staff meeting once.The aim of the meeting is for staff to join to discuss various issuesthat touch on the job that they are doing. In such a case, they areable to come up with ways that will ensure that their practices arein line with the mandate that the organization aims to further(Burghardt, 2013). The major purpose of the organization lies inassisting young fathers. In most cases, these people normally feeloverwhelmed, especially given the fact that they may never have takencare of children before. The organization, therefore, gains theopportunity to lead the young fathers towards the right direction. Insuch a situation. The young fathers are normally able to understandthe expectation that is put on them now that they are taking care ofchildren. It also provides them with the capacity to put in the rightactions in their duty in a bid to ensure that they further the bestoutcomes in the long run. Members of the group were quite categoricalin the meeting as they aimed to discuss the milestones that they hadtaken in carrying out their duties and the gaps that did exist in thesame. The group is generally a closed one as the only staff of theorganization are allowed to be part of the quorum.
Inthe AL ANON group, I was a member. The case, therefore, gave me theopportunity to share with other members regarding the challenges thatI have personally had, knowing one member of my family who is analcoholic. It enabled me to acquire the views that other members hadregarding the same issues. Some of the members were quite helpful asthey provided me with the same situation that they normallyexperience. In such a situation, it went a long way to show me thatthe issues I go through are not mere isolated but other people alsoget to experience them. The said individuals were also quitecategorical in showing me the kind of actions that I may need to putin place in order to achieve the high levels of outcomes with regardsto dealing with family members who are alcoholics (Cummings, 2009).For instance, the one element that the members stressed on was theimportance of being fully aware that the importance of joining thegroup is so as to acquire the necessary skills to assist people whoare generally alcoholics. The purpose shifts from the personalperspectives of a given individual to the outcomes that joining thegroup shall have in a given group of people who are actually the oneswho are suffering more in general.
Inthe fatherhood, staff meeting, my role was that of an observer. Iwas, therefore, not able to take part in active discussions regardingsome of the topics that they dealt with. Such a position was quiteimportant to me given the fact that it offered me the opportunity tolook at issues from a perspective that I would not have been able to,had I been a member. For instance, I was able to establish the factthat the group was highly organized (Burghardt, 2013). The groupmembers listened to one another quite intently with the aim ofknowing the views of other members regarding some of the issues thatwere under discussion. Members were given time to articulate theirissues clearly. Points of clarification were sought from time totime. The respective members who were required to provide them wereopen in providing the explanations that were sought. Another aspectconcerning the group is the fact that the meeting was quitesystematic, a factor that gave one the opportunity to follow thediscussion with the aim of drawing out the desirable outcomes thatwould be important in having the best effect in the end.
TheAL ANON group is in the level A of group development. This is thestorming stage. It is characterized by a state where members are juststarting to come together towards addressing a given topic that isbefore them. In such a situation, the members tend to be quiteuncertain and anxious. As much as they will be willing to share onthe issues that they experience, they run the real problem of lackingthe capacity to believe that the group will be in a position to helpthem address some of the problems that they may be going through.Such persons also tend to be cautious of being judged by othermembers of the group (Hardcastle, Powers, & Wenocur, 2011). Theyare, therefore, very careful and selective about the information thatthey choose to pass on to other group members and the one that theychose to guard. The situation presents a big problem as some of themembers will find it hard sharing on their personal issues. Given thefact that the group is solely formed to deal with the said personalissues, it, therefore, offers a real challenge in that other memberswill find it hard to have an active session with the rest of memberswho fail to be forthcoming.
Thefatherhood staff meeting is in level B. This is known as theperforming level. In such a stage, the members are quite competitive.All of them are fully aware of the mandate that they are meant tofurther. In such a situation, they go a long way to try to show oneanother that they are fully aware of the requirements of their ownjobs and can, therefore, perform them to the best of their abilities.In such a situation, the discussions are normally marked with a highlevel of interactions among the group members who are quite willingto share the various issues that are under their reservations. Insuch a situation, there is a case where dominant members of the groupemerge (Burghardt, 2013). They are, therefore, able to quite openlyshow the kind and level of effect that they have on the group ingeneral. They are articulate and will not shy away from askingquestions on issues that they feel are not clear to them. It is alsoin the same situation that no member feels inferior. The position iswell outlined where the said members feel that their points are notovershadowed by those who are dominant in the groups. Such members donot suffer any insecurities that could be experienced therein. Insuch a case, they do not recline back to a state of insecurity wherethey feel that they need to defend their points constantly.
Thegroup processes in both AL ANON and fatherhood staff meeting sharesome similarities and differences. For instance, they both appear tobe quite organized. In both groups, the group leader appears tofacilitate the issues that would need to be discussed in a bid tocome to a given conclusion in the end. As a result, members are quiteorderly and will be quite willing to give time to one another to airsome of the views that they may be having, with the aim of achievingthe goals that are put across (Cummings, 2009). In such a situation,the said members normally step up to ensure that they show a lot ofrespect to other people who also act like their colleagues. They holdthe belief that such people are also of equal importance and,therefore, deserve to be listened to and heard in the mostappropriate manner. Another similarity also lies in the fact thatboth groups have a definite start and end time. In such a situation,the members are quite aware that they need to observe time to accordother members the opportunity to share on issues that they may behaving in order to achieve the best practices in the end.
Thereare also some differences that may be experienced in the saidprocesses. One of them is the fact that the fatherhood staff meetingis more formal. In such a situation, less personal issues arediscussed. The members tend to stay on course and focus more on theissue at hand as it relates to the problem that they aim to addressso as to serve the specific clients of the organization in the bestway possible (Hardcastle et al., 2011). The members are also quiteprecise and will, avoid a case of repetition, whereby they go throughthe same issue that they have already dealt with several times.Unlike the AL ANON, the members of the fatherhood staff meetingnormally have specific agendas that are in play at every meeting.Once the members have talked about a given topic and havesatisfactorily addressed it, they tend to move on to other matters,that they feel that they also need to address properly. The AL ANONgroup normally has the goal but could lack a specific agenda for theday that could help direct the issues that members may need todiscuss about.
TheAL ANON group accomplishes its goals through having a constantencouragement to members to put the issues that are discussed intopractice. The members are reminded from time to time through emailmessages on the need to practice the 12 steps of assisting peoplewith alcoholism (Cummings, 2009). In such a situation, it builds acase whereby the members will be willing to put the steps into actionfor the sole purpose of achieving the outcomes that are deemeddesirable. The fatherhood staff meeting, on the other hand, achievesits goals through assigning members specific roles that they may needto put into action. An accountability time is, thereafter, created,where the members provide full information regarding the actions thatthey have put in place in a bid to help achieve the specific goalsthat they need to.
Thefacilitation skills used by group leaders in both AL ANON andfatherhood staff meeting are quite impeccable. The leaders had greatinterpersonal and communication skills. They were quite forthcomingin providing information that would be crucial to determining theactions that they need to put in place to attain the level of successthat the said groups normally aim for in the long run (Burghardt,2013). The group leaders were also key on motivating the groupmembers to share any issues that they could be having for the solepurpose of ensuring that they can share as much information as wouldbe deemed possible.
Inconclusion, it is evident that both the AL ANON and fatherhood staffmeeting have various features that characterize them. In essence,they are aimed towards achieving varying goals. They are also atdifferent stages of group development and, therefore, experiencedifferent situations. The level of interaction of group members inboth establishments is quite different given the kind of orientationthat they have. The groups also appear to share some similaritiestoo. For instance, it is also clear that facilitators in both groupsare quite forthcoming on issues that relate to motivating membersshare openly on aspects that they believe are important.
Burghardt,S. (2013). Macro Practice in Social Work for the 21st Century:Bridging the Macro-Micro Divide: Bridging the Macro-Micro Divide.Sage Publications.
Cohen,C.I., Pathak, R., Ramierz, P.M., & Vahia, I. (2009). Outcomeamong community dwelling older adults with schizophrenia: resultsusing five conceptual models. Community Mental Health Journal, 45, 2,151-156.
Cummings,S.M. (2009). Treating older persons with severe mental illness in thecommunity: Impact of an interdisciplinary geriatric mental healthteam. J. of Gerontological Social Work, 52, 1, 17-31.
Hardcastle,D.A., Powers, P.R., & Wenocur, S. (2011). Community Practice:Theories and Skills for Social Workers (3rd Edition). NY: OxfordUniversity Press