Assessing Group Dynamics

.docx

School

Walden University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

6121

Subject

Sociology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

4

Uploaded by UltraCapybaraMaster919

Report
Assessing Group Dynamics In assessing group dynamics, social workers may look at the impact of the group dynamics on individual members and the group entity, future group functioning, and how individual members’ unique backgrounds impact group dynamics (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). The worker may evaluate communication, interaction patterns, group cohesion, social integration, and influence. The worker can assess how group members use language and symbols to share thoughts, feelings, their reasons for communication, and the patterns that may emerge in sending and receiving messages. The social worker should also assess how well group members can see and hear each other, as interference with hearing and visibility can negatively impact communication (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). The worker can assess whether interactions are leader-centered or group-centered (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). It is essential to explore the cues and feedback present in exchanges, the physical arrangement of the group, power and status relationships, subgroups, and emotional bonds between members (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). Assessing group cohesion, social integration, and influence also represent specific aspects of group interactions and feelings. For instance, the worker can explore how well members appear to like each other and the group as a whole and the levels of community and teamwork in the group by observing how much feelings are shared, how well members use feedback, and how willing they are to listen (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). Workers can consider when and why deviations from group norms occur to make beneficial changes that promote the group’s growth and well-being (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). There are also formal assessment tools that measure engagement (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). Workers can examine the group’s norms, roles, and status hierarchies and observe levels of conformity and compliance to evaluate social integration and influence (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). For instance, the social worker might see if some members are uncomfortable contributing or physically remove themselves from the group somehow. Subgroups can also form and impact the group differently (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). Evaluating Group Dynamics from the Video
Communication. In the video, both verbal and nonverbal communication were observable (Group, 2020). At times, members used facial expressions to show that they were paying attention or to show support, confusion, disbelief, irritation, or agreement. As one gentleman became more adamant about what he was saying, he used his hands to communicate. There was also an example of how messages may be interpreted differently than intended when one member read an implication in another's message (Group, 2020; Toseland & Rivas, 2017). The sender then clarified, and the discussion continued. At one point, a group member questioned another member's reasons for speaking. He believed that she was asking questions because she was enjoying the situation on some level. It was also noticeable that some members were more vocal while others observed before asking questions or making statements. Cohesion. The group seemed to have a good level of cohesion because most members seemed comfortable sharing their feelings about the situation (Group, 2020; Toseland & Rivas, 2017). No one pulled their chair out of the circle or sat behind another member. Most members appeared comfortable giving and receiving feedback and appeared to listen to one another even if they did not wholly agree. The group demonstrated cohesion when Pam first said she thought she should leave. No one wanted to lose a group member (Group, 2020). Though members disagreed about whether either Pam or Henry should leave, they were willing to dialogue and include Pam and Henry's viewpoints (Group, 2020). Social integration . Considering conformity or deviation from group norms can help evaluate social integration (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). Most members sat in chairs with their feet on the floor and their arms near their bodies, but one member often had their feet in the chair and their arms draped across the back of the chair (Group, 2020). Her posture could be body language that communicates openness or confidence, but it could also be a deviation from group norms. More experience with the group would help interpret this difference. Henry's presence in the group was a deviation from the group's norms because they had not previously had two members with a past relationship (Group, 2020). One member asked about the group's formal rules but did not seem satisfied with the answers. One lady seemed to take a leadership position, asking questions, trying to focus the group, and supporting Pam.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help