The Use of Groups in NonClinical Social Work Practice
Step Seven of the Decision Tree
Chapter 17
Policy, Advocacy, Management &
Community Practice: Group Dynamics
• Unlike clinical group work practice, where group
is one method choice among several clinical
method options, the use of groups is integral to
policy, advocacy, management and community
practice.
• Accountability depends on the practitioner’s
ability to manage group dynamics consistent with
the demands of each macro practice area.
• This chapter explores group dynamics in nonclinical areas of practice.
Non-Clinical Groups
Part of Professional Career
• Regardless of concentration (clinical or nonclinical), all social workers will lead or staff
groups throughout their professional career.
• As in clinical groups, constructive and
destructive forces co-exist in non-clinical groups.
• All social workers must be taught to manage the
“disastrous power of group associations and
intervene in the skilled misuse that could be
made of group dynamics” Konopka.
Non-Clinical Groups
Professional Career
• Social workers may chair or serve as a member of
a board, delegate council, coalition, committee,
deliberative meeting, task group, project team, or
activist group.
• Social work curricula includes little on managing
the dynamics of such non-clinical groups.
• Yet, as members of non-clinical groups, all social
workers share collective responsibility for the
group’s process and outcome.
Obligations of Social Workers
Non-Clinical Groups
All social workers need to be:
(1) knowledgeable about how groups work (causeeffect).
(2) be able to use moral reasoning and ethics to
assess group behavior and desired end goals.
(3) possess skills (theory-based) needed to manage
group dynamics specific to each area of nonclinical practice.
Non-Clinical Groups
Theories From Sociology
Five major theories from sociology provide
information on the dynamics of non-clinical groups:
(1) Structure-Functional theory: Socialization
to law and order; conformity to rules and norms;
social stratification; group pressure to go along
(2) Symbolic Interaction theory: Social and
reference group identity; cultural pluralism;
tolerance for difference; inter-group dynamics
the meaning of things.
Non-Clinical Groups
Theories from Sociology
(3) Power-Conflict theory: Rule, empowerment,
advocacy, social activism/organizing, challenge
and disruption to the status quo, use of group
power; dominance-submission, oppression
(4) Social Exchange Theory: Transactions
between individuals and between individuals
and organizations are regulated by threats of loss
or promises of gain between the parties.
Non-Clinical Groups
Theories from Sociology
(5) Management Theories: Scientific,
bureaucratic and human relations – such
theories guide agency administration and
workforce productivity and morale.
Non-Clinical Groups
Moral Philosophy: Theories
Five major perspectives from moral philosophy
provide value-based guidance to understanding
group dynamics:
(1) Common good/Public square vs. individual or
private morality and minority rights
(2) Deontological vs. Teleological reasoning
(3) Analysis of group purpose vs. consequences
(4) Analysis of group goals and means
(5) Theories of Social Justice: Egalitarianism,
Utilitarianism, Libertarianism, Contractarianism.
Non-Clinical Groups
Socio-Political Thought
Political theories on forms of governance also
guide practitioners in their work with nonclinical groups:
(1) Forms of governance: Totalitarianism,
anarchy, kingdom, monarchy, democracy,
socialism
(1) Political thought: Conservative, liberal,
socialist, other
Goals
Of Non-Clinical Groups
• Policy-Advocacy Practice: social goals; the use
of groups to bring about social reform.
• Management Practice: work goals; groups are
used to accomplish tasks within agencies.
• Advocacy Practice: social action goals: use of
small and large groups to bring about structural
societal change.
• Community Practice: Cohesion/tolerance:
practitioners intervene with inter-group dynamics
to promote tolerance and solidarity.
Historical Perspective
Non-Clinical Groups
Settlement House Roots:
(1) Settlement house workers engaged in activist
research and community advocacy to identify
and ensure that the needs of all members of the
community were met; subpopulation groups
(2) Settlement house workers responded to
population shifts, immigrant populations and
those groups that experienced discrimination and
poverty.
Historical Perspective
Continued
(3) Settlement house workers educated community
members in participatory democracy; citizen
groups.
(4) Settlement house workers provided opportunities
for skill acquisition and leisure pursuits to build
community; community groups
(5) Settlement house workers believed in the power
of small groups to problem-solve social issues
on the local level.
Large Groups
Social Goals - Social Action
• Social workers have been involved in major social
reform/social change efforts.
• Examples: civil rights movement, labor
movement, feminist movement, welfare rights
movement, gay rights movement and the
environmental movement.
• Social work has close ties to the Peace Corps,
Vista, Community Action Programs and the War
on Poverty.
Use Of Groups For
Social Justice
• Social workers have engaged in social policy
advocacy and reform.
• Social workers have variously supported or
protested against armed conflict here and abroad.
• Social workers have raised consciousness about
issues of social justice.
• Social workers have challenged the status quo
and discriminatory institutional practices
Community Practice
Inter-group Dynamics
• Courses on inter-group dynamics became a
dominant part of the social work curriculum
targeting racism (and other isms) in the 1980s.
• CSWE made content on cultural diversity an
accreditation standard. Controversy exists to
date, on whether such courses should be taught
didactically or experientially.
• Schools and the workplace, including the military,
often require participation in sensitivity training
groups.
Management Practice
The Organization as a Group
• Groups (task, committees, project teams,
deliberative meetings) facilitate the work of
agencies.
• Organizations are, themselves, group
entities.
• Organizational dynamics are group
dynamics.
Typology of Groups in
Management Practice
Administrative functions are performed by:
1. Boards, cabinets
2. Deliberative meetings
3. The organization as an entity
Division of Labor
1. Task groups
2. Project teams
3. Committees
Boards and Cabinets
Composition
• Social exchange theory informs the creation and
use of boards and cabinets.
• Members are recruited and appointed to serve on
the basis of their:
a) political or social influence
b) ability to raise funds/contribute financially
c) representation of a constituent group
d) possession of needed expertise.
Boards and Cabinets
Tasks
• Provide agency with high profile support
• Make agencies attractive to potential donors
• Make agencies valuable in the exchange of social
and political influence.
• Provide administrative oversight to agency
executives and directors.
• Positive publicity adds to the prestige of board
members and agency alike (reciprocity of
exchange).
Management Practice
The Meeting
• Meetings are the most common form of group
used in all areas of social work practice
• Good meetings are rare. Conveners and attendees
alike may be suspicious of the process and
outcome of meetings.
• Two types of meetings: (1) Informational
(2) Deliberative- collective decision-making
Management Practice
Deliberative Meeting
• All organizations call meetings where some
members are expected to participate in
collective decision-making on actionable
items as part of legitimized shared
governance. Such meetings are referred to
as deliberative.
• Meetings go through group stages.
Deliberative Meetings
Beginnings
The beginning stage of a deliberative meeting:
(1) Requires a quorum to do business
(2) Robert’s Rules of Order- govern interactive
procedures and provide mechanism (majority
or 2/3rds vote) for validating group decisions.
(3) Chair calls meeting to order.; an agenda is
distributed and approved; minutes of the
previous meeting are read, amended, and
approved
Meetings-Beginnings
Continued
• Agenda items should be manageable within the
timeframe allowed.
• The first item on the agenda should not be
controversial.
• The beginning stage of a deliberative meeting can
be used to divert or delay the substantive work of
the group; Meetings can get stuck in the beginning
stage. Most work occurs in the middle stage.
• Any stage of a meeting can be manipulated for
personal or political gain.
Organizational Problem-Solving
Shared Governance
• The deliberative meeting is the forum of
shared governance.
• Often such meetings become the forum for
the enactment of organizational politics.
• If the group dynamics of deliberative
meetings are not properly managed,
procedural tactics can undermine
governance and disfranchise members.
Organizational Politics
The Deliberative Meetings
When organizational politics are at play:
• Discussion is scripted and votes for or against
action items have already been counted.
• The meeting is a “presentation” (Goffman)
of decisions reached outside the designated forum
for shared governance.
• Participants have aligned (social exchange theory)
with power bases seeking a pre-determined
outcome.
Collective Responsibility
The Deliberative Meeting
• Organizational politics, though effective,
undermines legitimate collective authority and
responsibility.
• Bad process may lead to poor outcome or
sabotaged implementation.
• Groups (leaders and followers) can choose to base
collective decision-making on empirical evidence,
open discourse, and value analysis.
The Deliberative Meeting
Common Good
• Groups can choose to use their collective power to
advance the common good over personal or
subgroup gain.
• Complete & undistorted facts are presented.
• Opposing views (ideology) are presented in wellargued position papers.
• When values guide desired end goals, moral
argument is used to advance a higher moral order.
Benchmarks
Collective Responsibility
Benchmarks of shared governance, collective
responsibility and collective decision-making
1. Respect for dissent
2. Compromise for the sake of consensus
3. Rational discourse-facts, argument, logic,
evidence
4. Moral analysis of value or ideological positions
5. No pre-determined outcome based on misuse of
power; avoidance of organizational politics;
Meeting Analysis
Power vs. Governance
Analysis of the following variables helps
determine whether power or governance is at
play:
1. Physical setting
2. Agenda
3. Procedural rules
4. Membership
Physical Setting
Meetings
Analysis of the physical setting examines where the
meeting is being held:
1. Regularly scheduled time and place within the
organization
2. At a retreat
2. Someone’s office
3. Outside of work; someone’s home
4. Over lunch, dinner, drinks
Is the setting designed to co-opt? to work?
Membership
Inclusion/Exclusion
• Is the meeting formal or informal?
• Who is included/excluded?
• When meetings are informal, is the lunch
group, exercise group, socialization group .
a “cover” to form and enforce a power
alliance?
Analysis of the Agenda
Analysis of the Agenda offers clues to power
vs. governance:
1. Who can place an item on the agenda?
2. Is the agenda confined to “safe” issues?
3. Who determines the order of items on the
agenda?
4. Are items “accidentally” left off?
Procedural Rules
Discourse
1. Are items discussed in principle with the
absence of details thereby allowing the
administrator freedom to do whatever s/he
wishes.
2. Are procedural rules used to prevent
sufficient time to deliberate the issues?
3. Are procedures used to defer decisions to
other bodies?
Procedural Rules
Discourse-Continued
4. If deferred, is committee membership
unbalanced favoring one position over another
e.g. composed to assure a pre-determined
outcome?
5. Are procedural rules used to block dissenting
viewpoints?
See chapter 7: Dynamics of leaders & followers
See discussion of the virtue of deliberation later in
this chapter under community practice.
Management & Work
Task Groups and Project Teams
• Small groups are used within organizations
to perform work.
• Organizations rely on project teams,
committees, and task groups to divide the
work load.
• A task may be an instruction, perceived
concern or perceived opportunity
Task Group
Product and Process
• Task performance requires a tangible product and
a process.
• To be productive, work needs to be structured and
follow a timeline.
• The goal of a project or task group leader is to
manage the socio-emotional needs of individuals
so that group members work cooperatively to
produce a quality product or service in a timely
manner.
Task Groups
Composition
• Most task groups, committees, and project teams
mirror top-down bureaucracy or political
alliances; such composition defeats their purpose.
• The premise underlying the use of such groups in
the workplace is to flatten bureaucracy, thereby
allowing diverse talent and leadership to emerge.
• Coverdale offers a systematic approach to
structuring the work of task groups.
Coverdale Model
Goals
Goals:
(1) facilitate cooperation
(2) maximize the use individual talent within
task groups
(3) ownership and by-in of the product or
service
Coverdale Model
Composition
Composition:
(1) Conceptualizers; big picture or idea peopleclarify task, set goals, determine standards,
envision final product
(2) Planners: attend to detail; determine who will
do what, when, and in what order, monitor
timeline
(3) Organizers: determine and secure needed
resources
(4) Workers: doers; perform the work
Coverdale
Composition Discord
• Potential discord is possible when task
group members are too similar or too
dissimilar.
• Members possessing the same skills often
compete with each other for power
• Members who are too dissimilar perceive
each other as liabilities to the process and
product of the group.
Dissimilarity
• Conceptualizers: find planners and organizers too
detailed
• Planners and organizers find conceptualizers too
abstract
• Workers (doers) complain that planners,
conceptualizers,and organizers are “all talk” and
no action.
• Planners, organizers, and conceptualizers find
that doers rush to action without a well-thought
out plan or needed resources.
Work Group Competency
• Social workers must possess the skill to
intervene in the dynamics of task groups so
that the diverse work talents of all members
can be utilized to benefit the organization as
a whole.
• Despite the prevalence of task groups, most
individuals are reluctant to work in groups
because of the risks it entails.
Work Groups
Risks
• If a group lacks diverse talents, the group is
unlikely to produce a quality product or service.
• If the project manager or team leader cannot
manage the dynamics of similarity and diversity
within the group, the process will fail and
members will decline to work together
cooperatively.
• Individuals are always at-risk when group
dynamics govern the behavior of members.
The Organization
A Group Entity
• An organization is a large group composed
of smaller subgroups.
• Organizations must engage in problemsolving deliberations and governance
related to the organizational environment.
• Organizations permit members to influence
its policies and procedures to some extent.
Organizational Dynamics
• It is critical to have a clear delineation of who has
the authority and power to develop or change
organizational policies.
• Hierarchical organizations (businesses) hand
down decisions made at the top with minimal
input (if any) from those lower in the chain of the
command.
• Organizations with shared governance (partners,
tenured faculty, senior management) make
decisions in accord with a participatory process.
Dissent Within
Organizations
• Those who disagree with management decisions in
a hierarchical organization have the option of
going along or moving along.
• Dissent in organizations with shared governance
and collective responsibility is more complex.
• Collective governance obligates the organization
and its members to approach problem solving with
an open mind (rational deliberation) and a
participatory process that is not corrupted by
organizational politics.
Sources of Organizational
Discontent
• Competing interests of actors within and outside
the organization
• Irreconcilable differences over positions and
prerogatives
• Differences over deeply held values and beliefs
related to organizational goals and programs.
• Polarization within the organization caused by
those who seek to exercise and enhance their own
power.
Solutions
Organizational Dynamics
• See chapter seven on leaders and followers.
• See Coverdale as a model to manage the
dynamics of work groups.
• Refer to management theories discussed
earlier in this chapter and in chapter seven.
Community Groups
Definition
• A community is a political entity and a social web
of moral values and shared meanings.
• A community is a large group composed of many
smaller groups.
• Group dynamics apply to the community as a
whole as well as to the relationship between
subgroups within the community and between
these subgroups and the community as a whole.
Community Functions
(Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2000)
All communities perform 5 functions:
1. Socialization-transmission of values, culture,
beliefs, & norms to members
2. Resource allocation-the distribution of goods
and services to community members
3. Social Control –enforcement of community
norms through laws, ordinances, and a police
force
4. Support-formal and informal sources of aid
Community Functions
(Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2000)
5. Socializing opportunities-opportunities to
participate in activities to enhance the
quality of community or group life.
• Psychology: All humans have a basic need
for group connectedness and shared values.
• Sociology: Communities are necessary for
survival of the individual.
7 Typologies of Communities
• Typology One
A. Geographical communities (Physical spaces)
B. Functional communities (professional
membership, religious affiliation, etc. )
C. Reference group communities (defined by
socio-demographics- race, gender, ethnicity)
• Typology Two
A. Homogeneous communities (Melting pot)
B. Heterogeneous communities (Pluralistic)
Typologies of Communities
Continued
• Typology Three (Fowler, 1995)
A. Communities of Ideas (formal documents or
emotion-based
B. Communities of Crisis (formed to overcome
social or ecological crises)
C. Communities of Memory (traditional values)
• Typology Four
A. Particularistic or Tribal communities
B. Universalistics or Global communities
Typologies of Communities
Continued
• Typology Five
A. Priority on the Common Good
B. Priority on Individual & Minority Rights
• Typology Six
A. Community as the Public Square
B. Community as Protector of the Right to Privacy
• Typology Seven
A. Community as State Laws and Regulations
B. Community as Protector of Civil Rights
Social Bonds
Relationship: Individual/Community
• The relationship between the individual and
the community is nuanced; both mutually
supportive and tensed (Etizioni, 1995).
• All communities face problems they must
solve; primary among which are:
1. Composition ( inclusion/exclusion)
2. Collective governance and decisionmaking
Human Nature and Society
Assumptions
• Some hold that humans are basically good and
reasonable and should determine the direction of
the collectivity- Consistent with liberal sociopolitical thought.Individual over the group
• Others perceive the individual as impulsive and
irrational and in need of social control through
laws and instilled community values. Group over
the individual.
Social Work
• Falck: takes exception to the idea that the
end-goal of client self-determination is
individual autonomy (independence); all
decisions are social in nature and have
consequences for everyone.
• Social workers walk the line between client
rights and the common good.
The Common Good
Etizioni
• Tension is inherent in the quest for
community (order/chaos)
• Tyrannical possibilities of community must
be weighed against the anarchical danger
of desiccation of community.
• As a communitarian Etizioni argues for
renewed commitment to public virtues and
social institutions
Determining Community Values
Moral Scrutiny
• Etizioni focuses on how communities determine
their value commitments.
• Etizioni prioritizes the common good over that of
the private good but tempers it with a call for
value scrutiny.
• Even if a community follows a consensus building
process, Etizioni holds that such values must to
scrutinized against a universalistic ethic.
Traditional Communities
A Universalistic Ethic
• Traditional, value-based communities may be
authoritarian and oppressive leading to
particularistic evils such as intolerance, group
egotism, and atavism.
• All community-values need to be scrutinized
against a universalistic ethic (core or overarching
values).
• Value scrutiny can occur only within a democracy
where normative value exploration is condoned.
Argument Against A
Universalistic Ethic: Rorty
• In contrast to Etizioni, Rorty, a postmodernist, argues that all communities are
locally constructed and non-privileged.
• Where there is group consensus, he argues,
the values of the group are appropriately
moral.
• Etizioni takes sharp leave from this position
Value-Exploration
The Role of Democracy
• Understanding the role of democracy in value
exploration is fundamental to the study of
community values.
• Gutmann (1995): community values must not
violate two cardinal principles of democracy:
1. Non-discrimination- equal moral and political
standing of all
2. Non-repression – ensures civil liberties and
participatory deliberation
Constitutional Democracy
Individual and Minority Rights
• Under a constitutional democracy (compared to a
simple democracy) some rights (Bill of Rights)
are declared out of bounds for the rule of the
majority.
• Some matters are exempt from consensus
building.
• To safeguard against majoritarianism, the tilt in
America is toward a civil society rather than state
rule.
Democracy’s Three Virtues:
• To safeguard against majoritarianism, a
constitutional democracy relies on 3 virtues:
1. Deliberation
2. Non-repression
3. Non-discrimination
Deliberation
• All communities must engage in discourse to
create the common ground needed to solve social
problems
• To the extent that discourse is deliberative (leads
to action) the standard of reasonableness applies.
• Pluralistic composition requires that all citizens
be given the means of addressing & deciding
public issues even in the face of deep
disagreement.
Deliberation
Continued
• In dialectical fashion, deliberation generates such
virtues as honesty, tolerance, and non-violence.
• As a positive virtue, deliberation is complemented
by two other necessary virtues:
(1) non-repression
(2) non-discrimination.
• When the powerful “thwart” honest deliberation,
“soft despotism”crowds out alternative opinions
and subverts democratic participation in collective
governance.
Non-Repression
Active Liberty
• As a positive virtue, non-repression requires the
assurance and cultivation of the capacity for
political deliberation among community members.
• Citizens come together in a town meeting based
on the expectation that reasonable people will
deliberate to reach an agreed upon course of
action. (Breyer, 2005)
• The rights of citizens are balanced by their
obligation to responsibly shape and play a role in
their public institutions.
Non-Repression
Ordered Liberty
• Less optimistic about the capacity of humans to
engage in evidence-based and morally reasoned
decisions, Etizioni holds that social mores assist
emotionally-driven, impulsive, and self-interested
individuals arrive at a decisions; common good.
• The rule of law and socialization to community
values, guide community decision-making.
• Without such rules and social moorings,
individuals lose their capacity to reason or act
morally.
Inter-group Dynamics
Tavistock and Sensitivity Training
• The goal directed activity of social work
community practice is to increase tolerance for
the rights of all subgroups.
• Social workers are obligated to intervene in the
harmful dynamics of social groups.
• Tavistock is an experiential learning tool that
allows participants to learn about group dynamics
by studying their own group process.
• Sensitivity training is a group process designed to
combat “isms” by raising personal awareness.
Managing the Harmful Dynamics
of Social Groups
• Recognize that harmful group dynamics are
occurring
• Retain individual identity when a member of a
group
• Retain individual moral compass when in group;
evaluate morality of proposed actions; state
position; opt out if necessary.
• Hold the group collectivity responsible for its
actions by raising moral discourse.
Social Goals
Organizing
• Why: The purpose of organizing groups is to
build a better society and to empower the
disfranchised.
• How: Organizing seeks to alter the relations of
power though campaigns:
1. Election campaign
2. Educational campaign
3. Fund raising campaign
4. Issue campaign
Campaigns
Incremental Change
• A campaign refers to a series of organized events
such as photo opportunities, actions, public
hearings, accountability hearings, negotiations and
media events.
• Events are extended over a period of time and are
designed to achieve a specific outcome.
• Campaigns exercise power by exerting pressure
on administrators, bureaucrats, or regulators,; by
conducting boycotts or by pursuing legal or
regulatory processes to win.
Social Action Goals
Direct Action Organizing
• Unlike community practice where groups are used
to build tolerance and cohesion, the use of groups
in direct action organizing is to disrupt the
equilibrium of the status quo.
• Small and large groups are used tactically to
create instability and provoke conflict; polarizing.
• Organizing harnesses the power of groups
(strength-in-numbers) to bring about structural
change within an existing social order.
Group Power and Social Justice
• “Good” persons operating within a group context
can and do harm other “good” people.
• Group power may lead to a different social order
but does not, in and of itself, lead to a higher
moral order.
• Social workers must understand and control the
dynamics of social groups.
• Polarizing and demonizing (Us-Them) is neither
an explanation nor an intervention for bad group
process.