Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining whether you agree or disagree with their assessment of the group dynamics. Suggest a method for addressing

Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining whether you agree or disagree with their assessment of the group dynamics. Suggest a method for addressing a challenging dynamic your colleague identified, and/or suggest an additional practice principle that is relevant.

Use the Learning Resources to support your posts. Make sure to provide APA citations and a reference list.  

1-mason- 

A social worker assessing group dynamics attends to factors such as how members communicate with one another, the group’s level of cohesion, the degree of social integration and inclusion, and the overall influence exerted by both the leader and participants (Toseland & Rivas, 2017). For instance, effective communication patterns often include members using respectful, active listening and demonstrating empathy. In contrast, communication difficulties may be evident in frequent interruptions, members talking over each other, or withholding input. Cohesion can be observed through members’ willingness to openly share and support one another, while signs of low cohesion might include tension, exclusion, or subgroups forming within the larger group (Davies & Coe, 2019).

In the therapy group depicted in the video, there are moments of supportive dialogue but also instances of discomfort when certain behaviors or topics emerge. Some members appear more influential, guiding the conversation and establishing unspoken norms, whereas others seem hesitant to voice their thoughts. These dynamics likely shape treatment outcomes by affecting trust, member investment, and how comfortable individuals feel when disclosing sensitive information. Principles for practice, such as establishing clear group norms, encouraging equal participation, and facilitating empathy-building exercises, would help the group leader maintain a balanced environment. By mindfully managing communication, reinforcing inclusion, and clarifying boundaries, the social worker can foster more positive group dynamics and enhance the overall effectiveness of the therapeutic intervention (Toseland & Rivas, 2017).

References
Davies, P. T., & Coe, J. L. (2019). Family relationship dynamics: A developmental perspective. In B. H. Fiese, M. Celano, K. Deater-Deckard, E. N. Jouriles, & M. A. Whisman (Eds.), APA handbook of contemporary family psychology: Foundations, methods, and contemporary issues across the lifespan, Vol. 1 (pp. 165–185). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000099-010Links to an external site.

Group. (2020, May 1). S1, Ep 5: Is this allowed in group? [Video]. YouTube.

2-jessica- 

Explain how a social worker assesses group dynamics.

Social workers assess group dynamics by observation of interactions between group members/communication patterns/group cohesion, considering the group’s goals, norms, procedures, etc., and evaluating the group’s capacity to meet individual group member needs. According to Toseland (2017), “group workers should be familiar with the four dimensions of group dynamics (1) communication and interaction patterns; (2) the cohesion of the group and its attraction for its members; (3) social controls, such as norms, roles, and status; and (4) the group’s culture, (p. 96).”

Then, evaluate the dynamics (communication, cohesion, social integration, influence) of the therapy group shown in the Group video. Explain how this group’s dynamics may influence treatment.

The group dynamics in the video were quite cohesive in the members that had obviously been meeting for quite some time and that was shown when the new man entered the picture (Henry). We saw another male group member defend Pam immediately in believing Henry should go and not be allowed to stay for example. I commend the facilitator for smoothly keeping both Pam and Henry present and participating in the group even though emotions were high. Henry coming in stimulated the group in a way that they had likely not experienced since all of them (or most of them) were new to the group itself. Each member allowed Pam and Henry their space to communicate, but also contributed to the discussion when they had something worthy to add which speaks to the cohesion and healthy group norms that have clearly been pre-established, (Group, 2020). According to Toseland (2017), the group’s dynamics may influence treatment in a few ways such as the new influence that Henry brings may upset the group stage they are in and the overall group cohesion and integration they had prior to Henry coming in. This may have occurred to some degree even if Henry had not had prior involvement with another group member, but certainly adds concerns considering the prior issues between Pam and himself. For example, Pam may decide to leave the group altogether and distance herself from Henry and those feelings like she originally did in the past. She could decide to stay and both Henry and Pam could grow from their pasts and help the group grow as well after persevering through this situation.

What principles for practice might be helpful for the leader to know in dealing with this group?

According to Toseland (2017), “A culture that emphasizes values of self-determination, openness, fairness, and diversity of opinion can do much to facilitate the achievement of group and individual goals, (p. 91). I believe that the group facilitator in the video showed this principle well by getting both Pam and Henry to stay and work through their feelings and thoughts and it also helped the other group members who were also feeling stimulated (and even protective of Pam) work through their concerns and feelings. He also did well to remind all members of the group’s agreed upon rules during the session.

According to Toseland (2017), “The worker should facilitate norms, roles, and status hierarchies that give the group sufficient structure so that interaction does not become disorganized, chaotic, unsafe, or unduly anxiety producing, (p. 88). I believe the group facilitator showed this principle as he allowed for some initial chaos and outcry to happen providing grace as the meeting was unintentionally turned upside down with the revelation that the new group member (Henry) had a past association with an existing group member (Pam), however he also pulled everyone back to the purpose of the group while allowing for Pam to address her concerns and past association and for Henry to do the same, with other group members adding to the discussion here and there.

Overall, this was a good example of a seasoned group facilitator navigating realistic unexpected turmoil in a group setting.