Working with Groups ● 91It is important to clarify that some work that occurs in groups is not actually
group work. Hartford (1978) summed this up well:
Another myth is that if a worker collects an aggregate, that is, gets people
together in the same place and responds to them individually in the presence of
each other, something significant and helpful will occur. It may and it may not.
It may be good and it may be harmful for individuals in a gathering to observe a
therapist responding to one and then another in sequence, but it is not working
with the group and it is not maximizing the full potential of having the group
begin to work for itself. (Hartford 1978, 9, also quoted in Kurland 2007, 16)This particular group process, otherwise known as “casework in a group”
(Kurland 2007, 16), pathologizes individuals. While group work is an effective
way of working with more than one individual over a given period, its essence
lies in acknowledging the strengths embodied both in individual group mem-
bers and in the group as a whole (Healy 2012). Group work recognizes group
members’ ability to be empathetic, understanding, and mutually support-
ive (Kurland 2007). Practiced competently, group work serves to “provide
education, reduce isolation, build support, or promote social action around a
common concern” (Healy 2012, 138).
Despite its potential for positive change, some individuals find group
work challenging, and the approach may not be suitable for every client.
Individual experiences and sensitivities are often the main challenges to people’s
involvement in group work. According to Healy (2012, 140), group work
may be unsuitable when “individuals are overwhelmed by their life circum-
stances in ways that limit their capacity to engage in the learning and
support needs of others... An individual has had negative previous group
experiences... [Or when] significant confidentiality issues exist.” These
challenges can be addressed through support of these individuals outside of
group work settings (Healy 2012). If the individuals return to group work
environments, their challenging experiences can be addressed through effective
group work processes and facilitation.
Group Work Processes
Regardless of the purpose of any group, its structure and processes appear
to be nearly universal. Tuckman and Jensen (1977) offered one of the most
widely acknowledged descriptions of the stages of group development. They
labeled these “forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning”
(Tuckman and Jensen 1977, 426). The latter stage is more commonly known
as termination. Garrett (2004) referred to three group phases: beginning,
middle, and final phases. The five stages identified by Tuckman and Jensen