Group Social Work

Group social work is a method of social work in which a small number of persons sharing similar interests or problems meet regularly and devote themselves to activities aimed at achieving chosen goals with the support, accompaniment or facilitation of a social worker. From a historical perspective it belongs among the classical methods of this profession and scholarly discipline. In Slovakia, group social work is an integral part of the education of social work students at several universities. The present contribution has the ambition to encompass and summarise the basic information about this method of social work and to encourage social workers and social work students to make more abundant use of it in direct work with the client.

1.1 The group as understood by various disciplines

From a qualitative point of view, a group is understood in the broadest sense as a grouping of persons in space or on the basis of a certain shared characteristic (e.g. sex, interests, problems, etc.). If this shared characteristic is a kinship relationship, the family too belongs among groups. From a quantitative point of view, a group denotes more than one individual. It is formed by at least two (some authors distinguish a dyad here) or three people. The maximum number for small social groups is given as 30–40 individuals (cf. e.g. Boroš, 2001). Therapeutic and training groups, however, tend to be smaller (5–12 persons). From a sociological point of view, the social group is one of the social formations, one of the forms into which people associate. In contrast to society or organisation, however, it is not a social construct. It is a set of living actors who perceive themselves and others, are in interaction together and mutually influence one another (Novotná, 2010, p. 7). From the aspect of social psychology, "a social group denotes any grouping of people which, in the consciousness of these people, creates a consciousness of belonging together. In essence it is an aggregate of two or more persons who are mutually connected by reciprocal psychological bonds, have certain common goals, acknowledge common norms of behaviour, act upon one another and are, in their mutual behaviour and conduct, in a certain respect dependent on one another" (Gáborová, Ľ. – Gáborová, Z., 2008, p. 137). Small social groups are formed by persons who know one another, communicate with one another and are formally or informally integrated by some common goal. In contrast to them are large groups, sets of persons with some common demographic characteristic, e.g. pensioners, soldiers, physicians (Nakonečný, 2004, p. 215). In the helping professions, including social work, work is carried out above all with small social groups. Instead of large social groups, the concept and term of community is preferred. K. Lewin (1959), the author of the term group dynamics, understands the group as irreducible to the individuals of which it is composed; as a system of mutual dependence which, together with its surroundings, forms a dynamic social field. This field encompasses the members of the group, subgroups, means of communication, the distribution of roles, goals, norms, etc. (Besnard In Boudon et al., 2004, p. 185). According to Novotná (2010, pp. 9–10), social groups were not an object of interest for classical European sociology of the 19th century. American sociologists began to devote attention to them from the 1930s within the framework of the so-called "sociology of everyday life". From the outset, small social groups were studied purposefully, with the effort to capitalise on the knowledge about them in work with them. This trend has in the present day acquired new dimensions – not only do we analyse spontaneously arising social groups and provide them with counselling, but we likewise create social groups as a tool for helping them and their members. In this context, group work is also used as a method of social work. The aim of group work is to improve the quality of life of the whole group and to support the individual needs of the group's members, e.g. inducing a change of behaviour, developing social skills, strengthening self-confidence, etc. (cf. Matoušek, 2008, p. 190), whereby the expected change is to occur in the social functioning of the group or in the everyday life of each participant. The German social pedagogue Schilling (1999, p. 207) states as the aim of group social work to secure, by means of the group experiences of its individual members, certainty, support and help, to mediate to them values and norms and to offer them possibilities for solving problems.

1.2 The origin and development of group social work

The origin and development of group work can be perceived along two lines. One is the development of "settlements"(1) (nowadays facilities of social services resemble them), where work was carried out with a specific target group, and the other is organisations working with youth groups (scouting, YMCA). Both currents have their roots already in the 19th century, but initially they had no elaborated theoretical concepts, and therefore in this early period we perceive them rather as practical activities. Whereas casework very quickly became synonymous with social work, group work was initially far more varied. Social Group Work was not, until the 1930s, connected with social casework, that is, it was not even a part of practical social work and education. The pioneer of social work Jane ADDAMS (1860 – 1935) is known as the co-founder of the house for immigrants Hull House in Chicago, together with Ellen G. Starr(2) in 1889. In it she lived and worked until her death. According to Brieland (1994), Addams did not accept the identity of a social worker when she called herself "resident head" or "settlement worker". Like Hull House, other "settlement houses", the YMCA, scouting or the Salvation Army too had the character of an establishment and work was carried out in them above all with groups of people. Many caseworkers considered group workers to be people who play with children, teach dancing, go camping or teach arts and crafts. Until 1937 group workers were not admitted to the AASW (Brieland, In Edwards et al., 2004, p. 2252). In comparison with caseworkers, group workers were far more varied in their views; they identified themselves with various fields of activity such as education, recreation, camping, mental hygiene, etc. (Schwartz, 2005). Grace COYLE (1892 – 1962) developed methods of social work by making use of John Dewey's(3) ideas on progressive education and his definition of structure, and of her own experiences from work in "settlement houses" and the YWCA. Coyle understood social work with the group as a kind of formative process carried out in interest groups, in the participants' free time, with the involvement of a leader. In 1923 she began to teach the first social work courses focused on group social work at Western Reserve University in Cleveland. In 1930 her work Social Process in Organized Groups was published. Work with the group began to be more accepted when group work services were added in hospitals and clinics. At the American National Conference of Social Workers in 1935, Neva BOYD (1876 – 1963) described the first use of group work with mentally ill persons at Chicago State Hospital. This involved various exercises, dance and games (Brieland, In Edwards et al., 2004, p. 2253). An influence on group social workers was exerted by the research of the American psychologist of German origin Kurt LEWIN (1890 - 1947) and his colleagues (1939), who indicated that democratic leadership assists group activities. Group activities began to emphasise more the interactions of individual members than directive leadership and focused rather on projects of cooperation than on competition (Brieland, In Edwards et al., 2004, p. 2253). In 1935 the first and to date most widespread self-help group in the world, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), came into being.

In 1936 the National Association for the Study of Group Work (American Association for the Study of Group Work) began to operate, where not only many professional experts – workers with the group in various fields – but also academics and scholars were organised. In 1946 it changed its name to the American Association of Group Workers (abbreviated AAGW). In presenting the historically significant types of group work from a multidisciplinary point of view, we draw on the works of the authors Ruth Murray and Marilyn Huelskoetter (1983, In Hargašová, 2009, cf. Hupková, 2011, pp. 24–25):

1912 A type of therapy in which a person expresses their feelings through role-playing on a stage, together with other actors. Spectators may freely enter the stage, alternate roles, comment and interpret. || Trigant Burrow (1875 - 1950) USA Siegfried H. Foulkes (1898–1976)Ger, GB | Group psychoanalysis 1930s | A type of group approach in which the principles of psychoanalysis are applied. Emphasis is placed on resolving transference and resistance. | | Maxwell Jones (1907-1990) USA | Therapeutic community 1950s | A type of group approach which takes into account individual needs in relation to group needs and, as a means of treatment, makes use of a healthy supportive environment. By environment is meant the whole complex of the hospital, treatment facilities, their equipment, administration, emotional atmosphere, relations between staff and patients. | | Martin Buber (1878-1965) Ger | Existential groups 1960s | A type of group in which lonely, alienated, socially isolated people meet and search for the meaning of their lives. Both group members and therapists jointly participate in the group process, becoming more spontaneous, more perceptive towards themselves and towards others. | | Wilfred Bion (1897-1979) GB | Tavistock seminars 1960s | An approach developed in the course of the Second World War, which concentrates on discussion of common problems typical of certain situations and for a larger number of people (e.g. hopelessness, uncertainty, distrust, rejection, addictions). | | Fritz Perls (1893-1970) Ger | Gestalt group | 1970s In it a therapeutic approach based on Gestalt therapy is applied. This approach concentrates on the individual in the currently ongoing time "here and now", from a diagnostic and therapeutic point of view. It makes use of Gestalt experiments to unmask, to discover new aspects of the Self and to search for solutions. || Eric Berne (1910-1970) USA | Transactional analysis 1970s | The members of the group concentrate on understanding how, in their behaviour, feeling and thinking, archaic ego states are applied. They mutually help one another with the nature of interactions and strengthen the adult ego state. | | Carl Rogers (1902-1987) USA | Encounter group | 1970s They separated out from T-groups by the fact that the clinical aspect and an increased concentration on the individual were accentuated in them. It is a type of group approach oriented towards evoking intense emotions, experiences "here and now". It places emphasis on personal growth and the development of the individual's self-awareness, their self-realisation, awareness of others, and at the same time on the development of interpersonal communication and relationships through an experiential process. In doing so it places accent more on the process than on the techniques. |Table No. 1 Source: Murray – Huelskoetter, 1983, In Hargašová, 2009 (adapted)

1.3 Typology of group work

Group work is used in several helping professions, above all in (social) psychology, social pedagogy, psychotherapy, andragogy and social work. Several typologies of groups by various authors exist. For the needs of social work we draw on the adapted classification of Michael PRESTON-SHOOT and his work Effective Groupwork (1987, 2007) and divide group work into:

• Group psychotherapies

– these are various models of therapies where the group too is a healing instrument. Within it, one intervenes more deeply in the analysis of a person's mechanisms and processes. Even though it takes place in a group, it is oriented more towards the person. A social worker may carry it out only after completing psychotherapeutic training and appears in the role of a therapist.- Group counselling – in contrast to individual counselling, group counselling makes more economical use of time and finances, works effectively with group dynamics, makes use of the experiences, knowledge and mutual counselling of people who have similar problems (e.g. unemployment); situations are better illustrated and modelled, and the client, in the process, can choose from several opinions (Schavel – Oláh, 2010, p. 42). The social worker here appears in the role of a counsellor. A specific form of social counselling of mutual help is peer counselling (from the English peer to peer), which is usually carried out in a group. This may be oriented collegially (problems at work) or peer-wise (problems of children and youth). It is justified by the fact that a professional counsellor cannot understand their problems as well as a colleague or a peer (Gabura, 2005, p. 49).- Group supervision – this is an effective form of increasing the professional competences of helping professionals, which makes use of the "power" of the group and its significant characteristics (Vaska, 2012, p. 42) under the guidance of a professional supervisor. - Educational groups – their aim is the development above all of the knowledge base of the group's members. The social worker may be in the role of a lecturer or facilitator. - Training groups – a group focused on ensuring that its members, through the analysis of what took place in it ("here and now"), work their way towards such changes of social behaviour as would enable them to be more successful in social situations (Hermochová, 1988, p. 20). Training represents systematic and expert guidance of an exercise, schooling for the acquisition of some competence or improvement in it (Baštecká et al., 2003). Belonging here are above all socio-psychological trainings (SPV), sensitivity training groups. Into this category we may also include group coaching, which according to Giertlová (2004, 129), in contrast to SPV, does not concern itself with the analysis and explanation of people's behaviour in the group, but is primarily oriented towards solving practical work and life situations in the achievement of goals. The role of the social worker is the position of trainer, coach or facilitator. - Recreational and interest groups – their aim is to assist the meaningful spending of free time (e.g. for children, youth, seniors) and the development of the varied interests of the group's individual members. The social worker is in the role of an animator or facilitator. - Discussion groups – their aim is to support the exchange of opinions and experiences of the participants of the group meetings, while respecting the rules of ethically sensitive communication and the culture of the word. Especially beneficial are thematic discussions led on existentially important topics (see below, Tavistock seminars). The role of the social worker here may be: moderator, lecturer, animator or facilitator. - Social action groups – belonging here are those groups whose aim is public-benefit activity, whether on the basis of voluntariness (volunteer groups), charity or the meaningfulness of practical activity (work groups). The social worker usually appears as a coordinator. - Self-help groups – a group of people who mutually support one another and solve their problems without the necessary participation of an expert. Barker (2003, p. 388) defines self-help groups as voluntary associations of non-professionals who share common needs or problems and meet regularly with the aim of mutually supporting one another, exchanging information about activities and resources that may be useful to them in solving their problems. These groups usually meet without being led by a professional worker (In Mátel – Schvael, 2011, p. 72). The social worker may be invited into the group as a counsellor.

According to Sagarin (1969, In Hartl, 1997, p. 166) there are two main types of self-help groups: 1. those striving to mitigate their own inappropriate (deviant) behaviour (e.g. AA); 2. those striving to change the definition of deviant behaviour and to change the attitudes of the surroundings towards it (e.g. civil rights movements). All groups are united by the self-help ethos, which means gaining help from the fact that they help one another. In the group no one has to conceal, e.g., that they are a drug addict; they share it with the others and everyone helps everyone. The main key to their success is the ability to accept each person, to draw them into the interior of the process and to have a deep understanding for what previously was the hidden problem of each of the group's members. Sharing, equality and cohesion of the group's members are what give the groups strength. With regard to self-help groups, the task of social workers lies in providing "tools and consultations" with the aim of helping people to begin, or to rally again, when they come up against problems which they cannot solve on their own (Hartl, 1997, pp. 166, 177–178).

1.4 The significance and specifics of group work

In psychology, in recent decades increased attention has been devoted to the significance of small social groups in self-awareness, the development of a person's personality, and the treatment of nervous disorders and neuroses. In them it is a matter not only of imparting knowledge, but also of helping people in their personal development and of a better knowledge of oneself and others, of the release of the creative forces that are in each of us, as well as of the mending of interpersonal relationships. The advantage of the small group is a greater possibility of mutual interpersonal contacts, understanding and self-expression of each participant. In a small group each person can feel that attention is being devoted to them. Among the basic features of small social groups are (cf. Janoušek, 2008; Nakonečný, 2004; Gáborová, Ľ. – Gáborová, Z., 2008):

• the existence and pursuit of common goals;
• interaction – mutual action, influencing, cooperation among its members, which is created by the psychological relationships between them;
• the individuals' awareness of themselves as a group, respectively a consciousness of cohesion and belonging together ("we"), a consciousness of mutual psychological relationships, of mutual dependence in achieving common goals and in satisfying the individual needs of the group's members, and a legitimate expectation of the group's members in this direction;
• the existence of common values, opinions and norms – these regulate their mutual interaction and conduct at least in certain areas;
• they are spatially and/or temporally separated from the other individuals of the wider surroundings; the frequency of social contacts in the group.
• a certain organisation – the group's members have a certain place, functions, standing.

Already at the National Conference of Social Work in 1935 the goals of social work with the group were adopted, which to date do not lose their validity (cf. Levická, 2008, p. 172); we present them in current terminology and with slight adaptation:

• to help the group's members towards active participation in the life of the group, so that through it they develop their own competences, strengthen their civic responsibility and increase their interest in social happenings in society;
• through the development of the group, to contribute to the development of the individual potentials of its individual members and to increasing the quality of their lives;
• to ensure the natural growth and development of the psycho-social functioning of the group's members;
• to prevent social dysfunction of the group's members;
• to provide help and support to individuals who live in dysfunctional social relationships, or to those who need it with regard to their social situation.

Levická (2008, p. 173) states that, despite the fact that the group forms a "whole", the social worker must not forget the individual manifestations and needs of its individual members. The name social work with the group may create the impression that all activities are to be oriented for the benefit of the group. The group, however, in this case is not the goal but the means acting in the direction of the expected changes and in the direction of increasing the individual quality of its individual members. The main goal of social work with the group is achieving a change in the area of the social functioning of its members through their participation in the group. Selected principles of work with the group The essence of work with the group is not the presentation of ready-made material but the encouragement of the participants to active participation in the meeting. It is presupposed that the participants have already themselves acquired information and experiences and there has arisen in them a need to share them and to bring in their own ideas. The holistic approach in group work means the use of various means of communication. Besides the spoken word, it is possible to work through activating methods and techniques such as writing, movement activities, drawing, sketching, the use of games, sounds. These means serve, among other things, to encourage and maintain the attention of the participants, etc. In a similar spirit Rogers, too, required that the whole person be present in the group (In Gabura, 1997, pp. 129–130). By this he meant that the group's members should bring into the group all of their knowledge and also their feelings, so that the facilitator could help them to express themselves and to grow both on the level of thoughts and on the level of feelings. The principles of encouragement and emboldening are achieved through various techniques (e.g. positive feedback) in which one can express oneself freely. Belonging here is also the consistent avoidance of criticism of the statements of others, or discussion in small groups. Individualisation is founded on the fact that the individual does not become lost or extinguished in the group. On the contrary, the individual awakens in the group, through it perceives their own individuality, and learns to understand themselves. The aim of social work with the group is to help the group's members in achieving a greater degree of independence and the development of their individual capacity for self-help (Kaiser, In Levická, 2008, pp. 176–177). The constructivist approach in work with the group means that one approaches it with deliberation; the individuals and the group are perceived equally seriously. The methods of work with the group are varied and reflect, among other things, the personality traits of the social worker, the chosen programme, the group interaction as well as the reflection of individual members on what is happening in the group (Kaiser, In Levická, 2008, p. 177).

1.5 Leading the group

For the functioning of the group, the leadership of the group and the leadership style that prevails in it are of great significance. According to Nakonečný (2004, p. 232), a leader is considered to be a person who controls the activities of the group, contributes substantially to its cohesion, represents the group, and plays a significant dominant role in the group connected with the activity of the group and its goals. The leader has a strong position in the group, respectively a high sociometric status, and as such has a considerable influence on the group's members and their activity. Hemphill (1948, In Nakonečný, 2004, p. 233) states the following features of leadership: the leader 1. initiates planning and action; 2. has informal contacts with the group; 3. represents the group; 4. integrates the group; 5. organises the group; 6. dominates the group; 7. receives and provides information; 8. expresses agreement or disagreement with the group's members, praises or reproves them; 9. influences the work in the group and its results. Usually a certain syndrome of the leader is formed out of the stated features, and its central feature is dominance. The most frequent types of leaders, according to Ward, Adams and Levermore (1997, p. 98), following on from Lewin's work, are autocratic, authoritative, democratic and liberal. Autocratic leadership – is characterised by an effort to control others; the leader decides on the group's goals; a leader of this type is despotic and dictatorial. He proceeds on the basis of commands, maintains low communication in the group, and thereby hampers the formation of relationships in the group and reduces group cohesion. Because the members of the social group fear him, they will do everything they were told. For the group this kind of leadership is not suitable. Brown (In Kollárik, 1993, p. 156) distinguishes within it further the strict leader, the benevolent leader and the incompetent autocrat. Authoritative leadership – the leader of such a group has things firmly in hand, has their own plans, but is also open to other ideas. He asks questions and listens to the answers, is open to the suggestions of the group's members, but may also reject them. According to Řezníček (1994) this style is suitable in crisis situations, when a vigorous and unequivocal approach is needed, and it is likewise suitable in an environment of people suffering from uncertainty. Democratic leadership – the leader is less directive, takes into account the feelings and opinions of others. He divides his authority among several people, does not use coercive means. He enables communication in the group and thereby forms positive relationships. Řezníček (1994), regarding this style, states that it requires a great deal of time in obtaining consensus in decision-making, but is often successful, because it awakens strong motivation for cooperation and enables the effective use of the abilities of all the group's members. Brown (In Kollárik, 1993, p. 156) distinguishes within it further the true democratic type and the pseudo-democrat. Liberal leadership, respectively the "free style" (French laissez-faire) – this is a type of passive leader. He controls the group minimally and leads it by the motto "let us be carried along by the current". He gives the group no firm form and is seldom successful. Lippitt (In Kollárik, 1993, p. 156) also distinguished a further type of leadership: Let-act, where this is a type who in essence does not stimulate and does not fulfil the functions of a leader. One of the group's members takes on the role of leader so that the group can be effective and satisfy its members. Argyle (In Kollárik, 1993, p. 156) compares leadership styles according to success and effectiveness. The more democratic style is more effective than the autocratic; it sets human aspects against the autocratic use of formal power. Leaders are more effective when they notice the needs of the group's members. The leader should genuinely lead and should not do what the group's members would manage successfully on their own. It cannot be said which of the above-mentioned ways of leading is the most suitable. These leadership styles should be some kind of continuum among one another. Leadership should change on the basis of the needs of the groups and their members. Each of us is an individuality to whom something different is suited.

The person who leads group work may be in various roles depending on the goals and nature of the group itself. Kratochvíl (2002, In Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, pp. 77–78; Hupková, 2011, pp. 81–82) states five roles:

• the role of the active leader – is characterised by activity, directing what is happening, explaining, managing and teaching on the part of the leader. It is used in groups where information is imparted, conflicts and problem situations are resolved and social competences are practised. This role we may also name the role of teacher, protector, director, initiator or instructor in the group;
• the role of the commentator – is oriented towards the group process. He leaves the group happenings a free course, does not actively manage or direct them. At more or less regular intervals he comments on and summarises what is happening in the group. It is suitable, e.g., in training groups which are oriented towards training in interpersonal sensitivity;
• the role of the moderator and expert – the leader does not take over responsibility for what is happening in the group, occasionally intervenes and directs the happenings so that they head towards the desired goal. He follows and coordinates the discussion, provides rather impulses, but does not impose his own opinions.
• the role of the authentic person – the leader manifests himself as one of the group's members, expresses his own feelings and becomes a model for imitation, shows the members what benefit they can have from the group;
• the role of the analyst – is typical for leading psychoanalytic groups. The group-work leader leaves the group happenings a free course and provides interpretations oriented towards uncovering unconscious motives of conduct and transference.

At present, besides these roles, the role of the facilitator is often mentioned, and out of the above-mentioned roles the closest to it is the role of the moderator. The group leader above all eases and directs the communication, interaction and happenings in the group with regard to the chosen goals. Rogers (1971) characterised the non-directive role of the facilitator as follows: "I trust the group, that, given a facilitative atmosphere, it will develop its own potential and the potential of its members." Gabura (2005, p. 171) draws attention to the risk of this leadership style, which lies in the fact that the leader may, in the eyes of the group, find himself in the role of an indecisive or uncertain "parent"; he should therefore not "merely float on the waves of group interaction". The art of the group leader is to "read the group situation" and, with regard to it, to apply an appropriate leadership style. The individual roles and leadership styles need not be understood rigidly, but the leader may flexibly change them according to the current situation in the group. More authoritative leadership styles are, according to Gabura (2005, p. 172), indicated when the task is highly structured, in an acute crisis, when there is a lack of time, when ethical norms are being violated and stress appears in the group. This author further states that theoretical knowledge and practical experience confirm that it is more useful when a group is led by two counsellors, because they can divide the roles among themselves (one notices the process, the other the dynamics; one is more active, the other more passive; one is critical, the other caring). Two group leaders can capture and make use of far more of the presented material. They should, however, have clearly divided competences, an agreement on the rules, they should not compete in front of the group, and they should be compatible. Among the main principles in the effective leadership of a youth group, Smik (1994, p. 24) includes the following attributes:

• the group leader transfers responsibility and decision-making onto the group, while he himself respects these decisions (of course leadership depends on whether one works with 12–15-year-old youth or 16–18-year-old youth);
• he accepts the individual independence and personal responsibility of the group's members in forming their own attitudes and processing information;
• the lecturer, in leading, appears in the role of an expert, because he must comment eruditely on events in the group, provide information and explanations;
• he prepares the programme and content of the group sessions, determines their structure and leads them;
• he actively intervenes in the individual group activities, provides information, support and help to the group's individual members in expressing their feelings and formulating opinions;
• he takes an intense interest in the group, ensures that all its members are given space to express their opinions, feelings, attitudes, so that everyone in the group feels safe;
• he corrects destructive aggression towards the weaker;
• he supports the development of a constructive group atmosphere, group cohesion, the feeling of "we";
• the lecturer is aware that he too is a member of the group, experiences feelings of group identity;
• he maintains positive tension in the group, creates space for open expression of disagreement, problems and conflicts of individual members, and actively helps in resolving them, so that emotional injuring of individuals does not occur.

1.5.1 The social worker / facilitator working with the group

The basic qualification prerequisite of a social worker in Slovakia is completed university education at the bachelor's or master's degree level in the field of study social work. For work with the group, however, knowledge is not sufficient for a social worker (which holds true above all in the external forms of study), but they also need appropriate training in group work. This is usually carried out on a basic footing as socio-psychological training (SPV), respectively training of social competences. The experience of one's own training should be, for group social work, a conditio sine qua non. A further important prerequisite for social work with the group is its practical realisation and the ability to "learn in the group and together with the group". The most important instrument in building group relationships is, according to Kaiser (In Levická, 2008, p. 177), the personality of the social worker himself. Among his qualities should belong discipline, the ability to manifest feelings, interest in the other person, empathy, congruence, spontaneity, flexibility, creativity, acceptance, etc. Important too is the ability to work in a team. As regards acceptance, the social worker is to accept all members of the group, but need not accept every behaviour. The social worker working with the group helps the group's members towards self-awareness of their own SELF on the basis of communication and feedback among the other members in the community. Levická (2008, p. 178) accentuates that the social worker does not work for the client, but with the client. Group work is understood as a living system founded on the relationship client – worker. Hartl (1997, pp. 118–120) states that the individual is born into a certain culture, subculture, which reflects communal, social and ethnic standing. The social worker must therefore realise that he too is a bearer of a value system and it may differ from that which holds within the group. If the social worker consciously observes the values in which he was raised, or rebels against them, or tries to identify with the values of the group, he must still work on himself through conscious self-reflection and supervision, which should be a part of every establishment where work with a human being is carried out. Živný (2006) defines the mature facilitator as a person who has built up his individual value system, from which follow demands on his practical behaviour. The social worker, however, is not and must not be a judge; his value system should not serve him as a measure for pronouncing judgements about others. The attitudes and life philosophy of the facilitator play an important role in how he leads the group. The facilitator should trust the group, that it will create its own potential and the potential of its individual members. Connected with this is also trust in the group process. The group leader should recognise the uniqueness of each group and understand that no two groups begin or end in the same way. Some groups begin by resisting the manifestation of feelings and will therefore progress very slowly. Others may be more expressive right from the start and move forward quickly. In the group there is a great deal of varied behaviour in which the facilitator engages so that the group can progress. This is a matter of empathic listening, of uncovering feelings. The professional image of the facilitator for peer groups (for leading a peer anti-drug group within a peer programme) is formed by:

• suitable qualification (education – social work, psychology, pedagogy);
• good awareness of how to work with youth; experience with drug addicts is also suitable;
• discretion;
• not succumbing to personal feelings and prejudices;
• the ability to respect others;
• a clearly defined value system (not indulging in a consumerist way of life);
• suitable appearance and conduct (appearance – clothing befitting work with youth);
• not providing expert advice in areas in which he does not have sufficient qualification (he recommends / turns to an expert in the given area);
• the ability to react positively;
• respecting confidential information (if a peer turns to him with a problem, the information must not get into the group);
• the ability to respect an unwillingness to open up; an unwillingness to open up need not mean a lack of interest in cooperating, it may be an introverted member of the group).

The tasks of the social worker who leads a peer group are the following:

• he organises and coordinates the group activity;
• he provides basic information about the (drug) issue;
• he influences attitudes, opinions, corrects prejudices in relation to drugs, is an identification pattern and model of behaviour and reacting (he himself observes what he says);
• he to a significant degree influences the relationships in the group and the group dynamics so that the group saturates the needs of the adolescents and supports the creation of healthy personal attitudes and a value system in relation to drugs.

According to Rogers (In Gabura, 1997, p. 130) the role of the facilitator in the group is to contain the following elements:

• Creating the climate – the ways in which group leaders proceed create an emotional climate which is decisive. By being transparent, i.e. by sharing their own feelings and thoughts with the group and trying to remain flexible, perceptive and relaxed, they express to the group's members that it is right to feel free and to be oneself. Further, the facilitator tries to express to the group's members that each person is important and that what the individual wants to say is significant.
• Acceptance of the group – acceptance of the group by the facilitator means that he genuinely trusts the group. He does not place demands on the group, he facilitates the members to experience the freedom of being open and expressive.
• Acceptance of the individual – acceptance of the individual is the way in which the facilitator manifests his own readiness to accept the members as they are, without hidden expectations. The members thereby feel free to engage in the group at whatever emotional level they themselves choose.
• Empathic understanding – is the most important and most frequently used; by it the facilitator tries to grasp the specific meaning of what a group member says, and thereby facilitates understanding among the group's members.
• Work with feelings or self-disclosure – in order for the facilitator to achieve the goal of helping the participants develop the wholeness of their personality, he can, by means of modelling, demonstrate the way to manifest one's feelings and how to trust them. The facilitator should react to both negative and positive affective states which exist in them. In such behaviour is contained spontaneity, immediacy, which helps the group to move towards the level of psychological and emotional intimacy. In the group there is trust, and therefore the group accepts a member who manifests their feelings.
• Confrontation and feedback – helps the group's members to learn something about themselves. It must not be an attack on the personality of the group member. Feedback is information about how a participant's behaviour acts upon the other members of the group and how it communicates their own conception of themselves.
• Avoiding planning – the group is to develop naturally and the facilitative process is to arise spontaneously. Activities planned in advance are a way out of an emergency. If some technique (role-playing, psychodrama) is used in the group, then it is the wish of the group and this technique is oriented towards satisfying the needs of the group's members. It goes without saying that techniques which are spontaneous in one group need not be such in another group.

1.5.2 Communication in work with the group

For the effective leadership of the group, mastery of the principles of interpersonal communication is an indispensable condition, and therefore it is necessary that the group leader continually improve his communication skills in work with the group and the individual. Smik (1994, pp. 25–26) states the following principles of optimal communication in group work with youth:

1. principle – communicate clearly and openly, formulate one's own feelings, thoughts, opinions, questions comprehensibly. It is necessary to speak in a way that adolescents understand, not to use words they do not know. It is important that the facilitator express himself directly and not in riddles, speak for himself and not use too often the phrase "one should".
2. principle – whenever it is a matter of one's own opinion, feeling, experience, use "I" formulations /my feeling, I have a feeling, I think, my experience, my opinion/.
3. principle – minimise evaluative statements and the assessment of judgements, express rather one's own impressions, experiences, opinions.
4. principle – actively perceive both verbal and non-verbal manifestations.
5. principle – maintain eye contact with one's partner, remove communication barriers from the space; the most suitable arrangement of seating for the group is sitting in a circle /equal communication conditions/.
6. principle – consistently avoid communication traps – "maybe, but".
7. principle – say "I don't know" when it is a matter of something about which the facilitator does not have sufficient information.
8. principle – the use of open questions, e.g. "What is your opinion on this?"

Language is a very important instrument not only for the counsellor but also for the group facilitator. The facilitator should speak and express himself comprehensibly, should respect the client's ability to grasp the spoken word. It is therefore necessary to follow the non-verbal manifestations of the group's members and to learn to read from them understanding, respectively lack of understanding, of what has been said. Since the facilitator works with a group of young people who often use slang, it is useful for him to have command of their special vocabulary and gradually to add to it (Gabura, 1995, p. 31).

1.6 Group dynamics

Group dynamics is the aggregate of all the processes and changes (internal as well as external) which take place during the existence and work of the group. It is one of the basic characteristics by which group work differs from work with the individual. According to Havrdová (cf. Kratochvíl, 1979) it is the aggregate of norms and interactions encompassing what proceeds within the group and what comes from outside. Belonging to group dynamics are:

• the goals of the group;
• the rules (norms) of the group;
• leadership and the leading of the group;
• roles in the group;
• the creation of subgroups;
• the relationships of individuals and the group;
• cohesion and tension;
• the group atmosphere;
• the projection of past experiences and relationships into the current interaction;
• the development of the group over time.

THE GOALS of the group are important to formulate already in the preparatory phase. When the group is created and led by the social worker, it is necessary that he have the main (formal) goal of the group evident and clearly formulated. It is important, however, that the group itself participate in the creation, or at least the verbalisation, of the goals. Into the happenings then enter the personal goals of the group's individual members and the common goals, which may but need not be identical. According to Flešková (2007) it is the task of the group facilitator to motivate and influence its members so that they internalise these formal goals and also satisfy the individual needs of the group's members. Havrdová (2008, p. 159), among the goals of the group, dependent on the orientation and composition of the group, states for example "mutual support, the provision of information, personal growth, the removal of pathological (socio-pathological) symptoms, preparation for the return to ordinary life". Popelková and Zaťková (2009, p. 48) add to them a deepening of self-knowledge and self-regulation, a change of undesirable stereotypes and inappropriate patterns of behaviour, the acquisition of empathy, acceptance, congruence and the gaining of the competence to resolve interpersonal conflicts effectively. THE NORMS OF THE GROUP derive from the group's goals and ensure as smooth as possible a course of the common activities in the group and the non-conflictual functioning of interpersonal relationships. They concern the internal group life, regulate the behaviour of the group's members towards one another within the group, as well as their behaviour outwardly (Hupková, 2011, p. 58). According to Havrdová (2008, p. 159) these are usually unwritten rules expressing what is, from the group's point of view, right and desirable and what, conversely, is not. These have an influence on the attitudes and behaviour of the members. The group requires the observance of these norms and pushes its members towards respecting them. This is a matter, for example, of regular attendance at the group, timely arrivals. A member who repeatedly violates these rules gets into the role of a deviant. To such a member the group at first devotes greater attention. When, however, they do not react with a change of behaviour, they get to the margin of the group and may even be excluded. According to Hupková (2011) it is recommended to formulate the rules through a guided discussion. It is the task of the facilitator to ensure that such rules are formulated as will support the activity of the group and the effective fulfilment of its goals. Some rules may also be proposed by the facilitator, while respecting the wishes and suggestions of the group. For effective work in the group the following rules have proven their worth (cf. Hupková, 2011, pp. 51–53):

• Time limits – the setting and observance of time limits is important from the point of view of effective work in the group. Belonging here is the setting of an exact time of the beginning and length of the meeting, its observance, the necessity of timely arrivals, etc.
• Confidentiality of information – the foundation of work in the group is trust; every member should feel safe in the group. This is assisted by the rule "not to carry out of the group" information and statements that were spoken within the group.
• The STOP rule – gives every member the right not to enter into a selected technique or statement which does not seem suitable for them (without necessary explanation). Similar is the rule to say no at any time, so that no one is forced to say or do something that they themselves do not want. By applying these rules, the feeling of psychological safety in the group is increased.
• Active participation – it has proven worthwhile to encourage (but not force) the group's members towards active participation in what is happening in the group, in the sense of the saying "the more you put into it, the more you can take away".
• The use of I statements – the personal statements of the group's members are to be made in the 1st person singular, that is, not in the form "we", "one should", "it is", "you should"... This rule supports the group member's own responsibility for himself, his behaviour and what is happening in the group. Each member communicates for himself, not for others. I statements also lead the group's members to avoid generalisations, that is, generalising one's own view into universally valid rules or general truths, by which other members may feel threatened.
• Tolerance, respect for the feelings, experiencing and opinions of others – everyone has the right to "feel what they feel", to "experience what they experience" and to "think as they think". Each member of the group is autonomous and responsible exclusively for their own feelings, experiencing and opinions. A group member cannot transfer their feelings, thoughts and opinions onto others, and above all cannot remake others into their own image.
• Responsibility for oneself and the other members of the group – this rule expresses the requirement that each member of the group realise their autonomy, but also their responsibility for others. Belonging to this are not only timely arrivals at the meeting, but also attentive listening to others, acceptance of differences, perception of their non-verbal signals, etc.
• Interaction is more important than performance – this rule follows from the experience that the group is capable of fulfilling tasks only when too great a tension does not prevail in it. If a disruption of interpersonal relationships occurs in the group, it is suitable first to devote attention to the disrupted relationships and only then to complete the begun task.

Among the reactions to group norms, Nakonečný (1997, In Popelková and Zaťková, 2009, p. 50) states the following types of reactions:

1. internalisation – inner acceptance of the norm;
2. accommodation – adaptation to the norms, though not from an inner point of view; the member does not act disruptively in the group;
3. deviation – a departure from the norm, constant violation of the norm, non-observance of the rule, which acts disruptively;
4. non-acceptance of the norm – its open rejection;
5. change of the norm – a correction of the norm, into which a strong individual can draw the whole group;
6. leaving the group.

ROLES IN GROUPS Life in the group, the interweaving of mutual relationships and bonds of a formal and informal nature, contributes to the formation of the informal position of the group's members (Kollárik, 1993, p. 53). In it the relationships among the individual members, attitudes, the share in achieving the common goal are manifested. The level and character of the informal position is also an indicator of the social acceptance of the individual by the other members of the group and also an expression of their appreciation. The result may be a central position, the position of a rank-and-file member, or also the position of an outsider. According to Košta (1993, p. 47) the position, standing, place of an individual, set or group in the network of social relationships is denoted in sociology by the term status. Each individual has several statuses. Status is not an unchanging characteristic of individuals and groups. We distinguish between ascribed and achieved status. Ascribed status is gained by the individual without their own effort (age, sex, race). Achieved status is the result of their effort and expended energy. Role is defined in two meanings. On the one hand it denotes a set of expected behaviours, activities connected with a certain status. It is also understood as a task which is bound to a certain position. In the second meaning, role is defined as a set of actual behaviours, activities in the realisation of a certain status. Role behaviour a person must learn. Many of the roles a person realises in adulthood are learned already in childhood (Košta, 1993, p. 48). According to Novotná (2010, p. 38) the difference between group position and group role lies in the fact that position is connected with place and we can (short-term) picture it more or less statically, while the group role is connected with acting and is therefore always dynamic. The theory of groups says that individuals take on certain roles which they play in groups. Some people may play several roles or play different roles in different groups; as an example we state the following (Ward, Adams, Levermore, 1997, p. 91): A. The clown, jester, one who makes others laugh – such a person just drifts about, imitates others, makes jokes and makes everyone laugh. This role is very useful in the group, because it releases tension and eases demanding situations, but it may also act disruptively. B. The reconciler – a person who brings others together, that is, unites them and is unhappy about their disagreements. He is like a nurse who gives everyone plasters so that they feel better. C. The dominant type – this person conducts himself in such a way that "he already knows everything and has experienced everything". He launches into long monologues, cuts others off and does not let them finish speaking. D. The storyteller – people playing this role slow the group down, because they tell stories about themselves, about what they have experienced, stories that often have no connection with the given topic. E. The inventive type – such people propose new ways of solving problems, are able to see things from another angle; they are dynamic and creative people. F. Passive members of the group – these people do not get involved in anything, withdraw from the group by saying nothing, look bored. G. The scholars – they elevate topics to a higher level, try to drag every discussion onto an intellectual plane. H. The fighter / defender – this role is usually taken on by people who are aggressive, defensive personality types who feel restricted, or think that they are the ones who really care about the matter. I. The helper / facilitator – this kind of people is a living encouragement to the group; they draw others into what is happening, clarify problematic questions, maintain communication and create a pleasant climate in the group. The best-known division of roles is the division according to Moreno's sociometric classification (In Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, cf. Smik 1994, p. 18) and is as follows:

• the leader – takes on responsibility, decides, proposes solutions, represents the group, is active;
• the star – a socially attractive member, popular, cordial, witty, without conflicts with the others;
• the black sheep – a rejected member, socially unattractive, standing outside the group, indifferent to the others.

Another well-known division of standard roles is (Schindler, 1957, In Kratochvíl, 1995, Popelková – Zaťková, 2009):

• alpha – the informal leader, impresses the group, stimulates it to activity, supplies programme and courage;- beta – the expert, the knowledgeable one, to whom the group turns with a request for advice, judgement, opinion. He usually weighs the situation from various angles. His approach is rational, critical, neutral and unengaged.- gamma – the inconspicuous, passive members of the group, who adapt to the group's leadership (the alpha leader), try to remain in protective anonymity;- omega – the non-conforming member, who does not accept the leadership, is autonomous, for which the group often condemns, rejects and attacks them. Sometimes they identify with the role of the opponent as a symbolic representative of a hostile group, which provokes the group.

Role significantly influences the experiencing of the individual, their self-image, self-understanding, feeling of personal certainty. The task of group work may also be an expansion of the repertoire of roles, because in the group one may encounter individuals who are not aware of their inappropriate tendency, in various social groups, to unconsciously repeat various stereotypical, rigid and maladaptive behaviours. The aim is to acquire other forms of behaviour and to be able to take on other roles than those into which the individual has so far been getting (Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, pp. 52–53). The group structure in pubescent groups (12–15 years) is, according to Smik (1994, p. 21), formed specifically. A very high value is held by the role of the informal group leader – alpha. In the role of the black sheep, that is, the rejected members, is as a rule the weakest, most anxious, most timid individual, who is unable to defend themselves. They irritate the others, because they embody weaknesses which the others themselves want to get rid of and of which they themselves are afraid. Significant too is the role of the star – that is, the member who as it were embodies their longing to be socially accepted, successful, to be able to behave self-confidently and without the inner inhibitions from which most of them suffer. For the group structure in the period of adolescence (16–18 years) the role of the star still has great significance. Appreciated are individuals who conduct themselves self-confidently. There further appears the role of the expert, who is a respected member of the group for their knowledge, skills, or for abilities which are a significant value in the given group. Less clearly defined is the role of gamma. These individuals remain, it is true, inconspicuous, but they already enter into decision-making more actively, criticise, disagree, make suggestions, cease to adapt unconditionally. The role of the black sheep also finds itself in a different situation. These individuals are no longer the target of direct aggression, but they get into greater social isolation, and this may injure them even more (Smik, 1994, p. 23). It is good when the various roles complement one another. If strong dominant personalities occur in the group, conflicts and competitive struggles arise. In this case the facilitator must intervene immediately to set things right.

Positions and roles in the group can be observed and measured by means of sociometry. Its founder is the American psychotherapist Jacob L. MORENO (1892 – 1974). It is a method oriented towards ascertaining the socio-emotional relationships among the members of small groups (Nakonečný, 2004, p. 40). By it is meant the ascertainment and analysis of relationships in small groups through preferential choices, e.g. sympathy – antipathy, the ascertainment of dynamic relationships. Each member of the group chooses among the others whom they like most, whom they do not like, with whom they would go on a trip, etc. The choices also tell of the atmosphere in the group, which improves with the growth of mutual bonds, worsens with the formation of cliques, etc. (Hartl – Hartlová, 2009, p. 550). Sociometric positions are also related to the nature of the group, to the qualities of the personalities and to further variables (Nakonečný, 2004, p. 229). According to Havránková (2008, p. 161), in every therapeutic group there appear tendencies to create a SUBGROUP. Two, three or more members of the group begin to incline more towards one another, to support one another mutually, to avoid confrontation. This happens usually on the basis of mutual sympathy, common interests, or values. Attention devoted to the principles of the relationships on which the subgroup was formed may contribute to a deeper understanding of the motivation of the individual members and of the group dynamics. If, however, the existence of subgroups creates a breeding ground for the emergence of common secrets, and if a coalition arises in which the members of the subgroup resist the pressures of the group, the subgroup becomes an anti-therapeutic force. The disorder is not the very emergence of subgroups, but the secrets and insincerity which they may create. According to Popelková – Zaťková (2009, p. 55) the emergence of subgroups may be a signal drawing attention to problems in the life of the group, when the members in the subgroup seek the satisfaction of what they are not getting in the basic group. In them they then express their dissatisfaction, or get into opposition to the basic group. The existence of subgroups may have a positive significance for group work, when that which takes place in the subgroup becomes the object of group discussion. COHESION means the cohesiveness of the group. This determines the strength of the bonds among the individual members and acts upon the members in the direction of attractiveness, belonging together, so that they remain together in the group. Cohesion is related to the attractiveness of the group for its members. It is defined as the resultant of the forces which act upon the members so that they want to remain in the group and to keep the group together. Cohesiveness in the group is manifested above all by the expressed statement "we belong together" (Hupková, 2011, p. 61) or "to pull on the same rope". Cohesion is important for the performance and productivity of the group (Nakonečný, 2004, p. 226). The cohesiveness of the group and its degree influence several areas of the group's functioning, e.g. openness among the members, which enables the ventilation of negative attitudes and hostile feelings in a constructive way. A cohesive group can more easily manifest hostility even towards the group leaders (Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, p. 53). Cohesion is a stabilising factor, without which the group could not only not work, but not even exist. On the other hand, its excessiveness leads to a stagnation of the group's development, to unwarranted contentment, and creates the illusion that it is not necessary to strive for change (Havránková, 2008, p. 160). Contributing to cohesion in the group and supporting it are (Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, p. 53; Kratochvíl, 1995, In Hupková, 2011, pp. 61–62):

• acceptance, a friendly atmosphere;
• mutual sympathy among the group's members, their mutual attractiveness, similarity;
• the satisfaction of the personal needs of the group's members;
• the prestige of the group and its increase among the individual members;- competition with another group;
• clearly formulated group goals and rules;
• the attractiveness of the activities (interesting, entertaining and recreational activities heading towards jointly experienced emotions);
• the use of techniques directly oriented towards supporting cohesion, e.g. the creation of a circle where everyone holds one another by the shoulders and concentrates on the feeling of cohesion and closeness, jointly sing or dance in the circle, etc.;
• the mutual dependence of the group's members in cooperating on common tasks;
• external pressure, adversity or a critical, rejecting attitude of the surroundings, connected with feelings of a common wrong.

TENSION denotes the strain in the group. This naturally arises in the mutual interaction among the group's members. According to Popelková and Zaťková (2009, pp. 53–54) it is a matter of the inner tension of the individual in relation to the situation in the group. For the satisfaction of personal needs it is namely indispensable to take into account the needs of others. The tension springs from the differences among individuals, from their mutual rivalry, from the effort towards change. It may have the character of anxiety, fear, anger, antipathy, aggressiveness, hostility. Tension acts unpleasantly, evokes dissatisfaction. According to Kratochvíl (1995) the group's members have a tendency to react to it by suppressing it, ventilating it indirectly, or they will manifest it directly. According to Hupková (2011, p. 62) part of the tension may be a manifestation of protest against authority, if the leader directs the group happenings in a directive manner, as well as a manifestation of helplessness and uncertainty, if the leader refuses to take on an active leadership role. On the other hand, tension enables the group's members to become aware of their shortcomings, to gain insight into their sources and to carry out changes in themselves. An optimal level of tension leads to an increase in the productivity and action capability of the group (Oravcová, 2004). If tension were to prevail markedly in the group, the atmosphere in the group would give no space for mutual trust and considerateness. Wariness and aggressiveness would grow, and the space for the opening of personally important topics would vanish. Growing tension leads the group's members to efforts to escape from the group. The dynamic balance of cohesion and tension is of fundamental importance for the functioning of the group (Havránková, 2008, p. 160). Both act as forces acting against one another (cohesion centripetally and tension centrifugally), which should be in dynamic balance. According to Hupková (2011, p. 63) tension represents a dynamising factor, which leads to dissatisfaction and the effort towards change. Conversely, under the influence of cohesion the group's members feel support and safety. THE GROUP ATMOSPHERE is a consequence of the balance between the cohesion and tension of the group, as well as of further elements of group dynamics. It can be characterised as the social air (social climate) in the group, which expresses the level and quality of the internal group life. It is expressed by the prevailing mood in the group and its emotional tuning. It may be friendly, supportive, but also tense, resentful, even hostile (Hupková, 2011, p. 63). The group leader can create a good group atmosphere above all by being able to form a feeling of safety in the group and to handle the elements of group dynamics professionally (Popelková – Zaťková, 2009, p. 55).

1.7 Preparation and stages of group work

In creating groups it is suitable to make careful preparation. From the social worker it is usually expected that, at least initially, he will play the role of the leader and that he will also play a substantial part in the developmental process of the group. According to Řezníček (1994, p. 57) the formal leader of the group should above all establish the basic prerequisites for its creation and functioning. It is necessary to find the answer to the following questions:

For the social worker the basic question is who will form the group with regard to its goals. According to Redl (1951, In Navrátil, 2001, p. 127) the ideal balance of a beginning group lies in it being homogeneous enough to ensure its stability and heterogeneous enough to ensure its vitality. Among the important factors that are taken into account in forming the group are the age, value system, common problems, interests, intelligence, ability to accept authority, sex and self-confidence of its participants. With regard to the preparation of the group, the number of its members is very important, that is, the answer to the question: how many members will the group have? In the introductory chapter we stated that, from a quantitative point of view, a group denotes more than one individual. It is formed by at least two or three people. The maximum number for small social groups is given as 30–40 individuals. For example, Labáth et al. (2011), in the introductory chapters of intervention programmes for group work with children and youth, state that the group is a small community of clients, pupils, wards, that is, members, players, participants numbering around 8 persons. For younger age groups a number of around 6–8 members is recommended. In a group composed of adolescents aged 16–18 years the ideal number is around 8–10 members. According to Wójcik (1987) the quantity of mutual relationships in the group depends on its size, whereby the number of interactions decreases by leaps: The most interactions are in a 2–4-member group, the second leap ............in a 5–7-member group, the third leap .............. in an 8–12-member group. The number 12 is considered optimal for a small group. If there are more than 12 persons in the group, the number of mutual relationships markedly declines. According to Levická (2008, p. 179) the creation of a group – within group social work – can proceed in essentially several ways:

• an already existing group turns to the social worker with a request for help;
• the selection and creation of the group is done by the social worker;
• the social worker "takes over" a group, that is, the group was organised by someone else.

A further important question in preparation is how long the group meetings are to proceed, how many group meetings there are to be. This question is closely interconnected with the achievement of the set goals. Together with the number of meetings it is important to consider the question of the openness respectively closedness of the group and the length of the individual meetings. The social worker should, besides this, consider which methods and techniques it will be possible to use for achieving the set goals. Alongside the expert questions, the social worker usually also has to think about the organisational conditions. He must consider practical questions such as, for example, the place of the meeting, the transport of the members to this place (especially in the case of seniors and persons with health disabilities), refreshments, the necessary technical equipment, aids, etc. (Navrátil, 2001, p. 128). The group session According to Gabura (2005, p. 172) group sessions are organised in such a way that the participants usually sit in a circle so that they can all see one another and be in mutual contact. One group session has a length of from one and a half hours to three hours. Most groups need a longer time before they "warm up" to the level of personal communication and work their way to the core topic. In the group process it is demanding to achieve productive engagement of the participants in solving problems in a time shorter than 90 minutes. After three hours the productivity of the group declines sharply and states of dampening down appear.

1.7.1 The stages of group work

The functionality and effectiveness of groups is given, in the final analysis, by the degree to which they fulfil their goals. Every group has short-term and long-term goals. In every group its members have, besides common goals, also individual goals. It is important that between them there be a reasonable accord. If the group and individual goals are heterogeneous, it happens that some members may pursue hidden goals, which may be in conflict with the activity of the group and undermine it. Hidden goals, however, can be used for the achievement of the proclaimed goals (Řezníček, 1994, pp. 56–57). The most frequently used division of the individual time segments – stages of group work and its development – comes from Bruce W. TUCKMAN in the contribution Developmental Sequences in Small Groups (1965, 1977): 1. the stage of forming (forming) The first step of the group process is the joining together of its members. It is marked by a certain testing – trying out and committing several errors. Hupková (2011, p. 64) accentuates formal politeness among the members. Their behaviour is still uncertain, the individuals do not learn much about one another, for the time being they are only trying out and endeavouring to find their position. The key features of this stage are the internal evaluation of the group values and how the individual members have fitted into the group. Emotions such as anxiety, isolation, inadequacy and frustration appear. The central question is: "Do I belong to this group?" According to Navrátil (2001, p. 128), in this stage it is the task of the social worker to draw the group's members into the group happenings and to help create a group bond among them. The social worker in this stage may carry out the following acts:

• briefly introduce himself and ask the group's members too to introduce themselves;
• summarise the information given to the members before the group came into being;
• confirm the possibilities of initial uncertainties;
• give each member of the group the opportunity to express their expectations;
• summarise the questions that have arisen;
• establish norms that will support listening and tolerance;
• facilitate (support, ease) interaction;
• verbalise that which people might want to say, but are not ready to risk;
• show interest in each member; balance the answering of questions with sentences of the type: "Does anyone know the answer to this question?"

It is an advantage if the social worker can, in this stage, conduct himself pleasantly, with a dose of humour, which may lighten the initial tensions. He can support the group happenings, the engagement and cooperation of the group's members, with suitable relaxation and interactive techniques. 2. the stage of storming (storming) In this stage the members begin to confront one another with regard to the appearing roles and expectations. Various forms of dissatisfaction are manifested. Personal, intra- and extra-personal conflicts arise, not infrequently also anger and aggression. Smaller subgroups with various opinions and a sphere of influence over the others are formed. The central question is: "Do I have some influence here?" The tasks of the social worker in this stage are described by Navrátil (2001, p. 129; cf. Hupková, 2011, p. 64) as follows:

• support an environment of openness;
• do not suppress conflicts, but provide space for discussion;
• maintain calm in the event of member-member, member-leader conflicts;
• do not retaliate if the authority of the social worker is attacked;
• model acceptance and openly acknowledge that people are different;
• do not expose isolated or problematic members to attention;
• suitably time when to facilitate and when to be silent;
• begin to transfer responsibility onto the members.

3. the stage of norming (norming) During this phase the group begins to work more constructively with regard to formally identified as well as informal tasks. Group cohesiveness is formed, the members can express personal attitudes without threat. A consciousness of the group "we" is formed. Group norms are highly respected, rituals are formed. The group creates pressure on the less conforming members to become conforming. Navrátil (2001, p. 129) states the following tasks of the social worker in this stage:

• allow the members to help one another;
• step back from the managing role into the position of listening;
• ask the group about its opinions, offer one's own views;

• be aware rather of the process than of the content. The social worker must also see to it that appropriate pressure on the individual does not become oppression and coercion towards a certain behaviour. 4. the stage of optimal functioning (performing) In this stage it can be said of the group that it has transformed into a team. Effective functioning takes place in it. It is the phase of productivity, realisation and cooperation in achieving the goals. The energy of the group is oriented towards the fulfilment of the set goals and tasks (Hupková, 2011, p. 65). The group's members have a feeling of unity and safety, perceive the group as "their own". In the role of the facilitator the social worker may be replaced by a member of the group. His tasks are (Navrátil, 2001, p. 129):

• to observe how the group deals with its members and tasks;

• to provide ideas when he is asked for them.

5. the stage of adjourning (adjourning), respectively of mourning (mourning) The last stage of the group's development is its termination and dissolution, which is connected with the achievement of the group's goals. This stage was not a part of Tuckman's original work (1965), but it was added by his colleague Mary A. JENSEN (Tuckman – Jensen, 1977). The group's members in this stage may feel unhappy. Grief is a part of the parting and interruption of the intense relationships in the group. According to Navrátil (2001, p. 130) the tasks of the social worker in this stage are more active:

• to summarise the goals that the group set itself;
• to summarise the experiences, emphasising both the gains and the feelings of loss;
• to strengthen interests outside the group;
• to help the group return to the level of planning, if it wants to continue, but with a different goal;
• to evaluate the individual meetings and to ask for feedback.

The length of the individual stages tends to be different, but their order is, according to Tuckman, constant. An indispensable condition of passing into a higher stage is the completion of the previous stage. Exceptionally the group may slide back, but again in the stated order.

1.8 Techniques in group work

We consider techniques to be means, not the goal of work with the group. Corey et al. (2006) emphasise that one cannot hide behind techniques, nor can clients be forced to take part in them. For they are to serve the clients, not the group leaders. It is never possible to determine in advance what the nature of a newly forming group will be, and therefore at the same time it is not possible to write a manual according to which we could, in every situation, choose specific, previously prepared techniques.

Many techniques have the goal of engaging – activating the group's members towards active happenings in the group. Such activating techniques we can divide, according to the levels to which they relate, into:

• techniques supporting and easing understanding of the content of the topic, rousing to reflection and discussion;
• techniques touching upon the personal level – they help towards better self-knowledge, self-experiencing, awareness and the development of one's own possibilities, abilities and competences. They give courage to express one's opinions in the presence of other people;
• techniques touching upon the level of interpersonal relationships and interactions. They create an atmosphere of trust and not of competition. They help to bridge conflicts, crises and tensions.

In the activating techniques various aids are usually also used, such as, e.g., posters, questionnaires, figurines, films, etc. These assist in the visualisation of the content and help to engage several of a person's sensory components in what is happening. In the selection of a specific technique it is necessary to take into account the goal and character of the group, the phase of its development, the atmosphere, the impulses from the members and a number of further factors to which an experienced group leader should be sensitive. According to Corey et al. (2006) the fundamental competence of the leader in work with the group lies in applying techniques and at the same time in correctly gauging whether the clients are willing and able to give up their defence mechanisms. Besides this, in the selection of techniques it is necessary to take into account the cultural background of the clients and their personality. The inappropriate use of a (previously prepared) technique may disrupt the natural development of the group and may deepen the tension in it. Before using a technique we invite the members to take part in it, but we carry it out only in the case when the clients give us at least tacit consent to it. From the number of techniques used in group work we select the following: Non-traditional introductions and "ice-breaking" – these are short activities that remove communication barriers and speed up mutual acquaintance and attunement. Their aim is relaxation, warming up and the inducing of an atmosphere of trust (Hargašová, 2009, p. 30). My name – a programme – each member of the group writes their name vertically on a slip of paper. To each letter they are to write an expression beginning with the same letter, which at the same time forms a kind of programme of their conduct, thinking, wishes, etc. (approx. 10 min). Then each participant shows their slip, while the others may ask them about something they do not understand, that interested them. Any criticism by the others is forbidden. Four corners – this is an activating technique in the form of a game, suitable for an introductory meeting of the group, for "ice-breaking", and it helps to orient oneself in the opinions and expectations of the group. The participants stand in the middle of the room, the facilitator says: The room has four corners. In the first corner is the colour green, in the second yellow, in the third red and in the fourth blue. Let everyone quickly stand in the corner whose colour they like the most. The participants go to the chosen corners and after a while return. One proceeds similarly with further questions, which the facilitator prepares in advance. In the questions we begin from more general topics and pass gradually to more essential ones. With the key questions, related to the goals of the group, a discussion may follow about why the participants chose the given alternative. Brainstorming – the technique consists in the gathering of spontaneous thoughts, ideas and conclusions which have a connection with the planned topic, project or question. In brainstorming, everything the participants say is collected, even if it might seem unrelated to the topic. The collected thoughts must be visible to all (e.g. written on a board). Any evaluation is not permitted, such as, e.g., laughter, humming, shrugging of the shoulders, "well, there you go!", etc. After the collection of the thoughts, these are read, sorted, evaluated and discussed. Modelling – the essence of this technique, used especially in SPV, lies in the demonstration of a social competence by means of a live or symbolic model. Subsequently the group's members practise the demonstrated social competence. The practising begins by our asking two volunteers to demonstrate the use of the given social competence. In this step feedback is important, which serves the purpose that the participants receive information about how they behave, what they do rightly and what wrongly, in what their greatest shortcomings lie, so that they can later correct and improve their behaviour (Hupková, 2011, p. 88). Role-playing (Rollenspiel) – the author of this technique is Jacob Moreno, who observed that children often, in their games, for example playing at daddy and mummy, imitate situations, experiences, or conflicts which they experienced at home. This technique enables the presentation and re-experiencing of various concrete or constructed life situations on the basis of a common game (Wójcik, 1987, p. 15). It is a technique similar to modelling. The difference, according to Gabura and Mydlíková (In Mydlíková, Gabura, Schavel, 2005, p. 41), is that in role-playing, situations from life or hypothetical situations that may occur in the near future are selected. In role-playing the client most often plays himself in interaction with a partner, or the other group members play the role of the partner. Useful for the clients tends to be also the exchange of roles. Behaviour rehearsal – the central component of social skills training is behaviour rehearsal. The participants, after instruction and demonstrated behaviour, act out short scenes which simulate real situations in their life (Hupková, 2011, p. 88). A number of further techniques for group work can be found in the publications Labáth – Smik – Matula Expoprogram (1991, 2011); Viers et al. Aktivity pro skupinovou psychoterapii (2007); Corey et al. Techniky a přístupy ve skupinové psychoterapii (2006). Authors: doc. PhDr. ThDr. Andrej Mátel, PhD. Fakulta sociálnej práce a sociálnych vied UKF Nitra PhDr. Andrea Vasilescu, PhD. Vysoká škola zdravotníctva a sociálnej práce sv. Alžbety v Bratislave References BARKER, R L. 2003. The Social Work Dictionary. 5th Ed. Washington, DC : NASW, 2003. 493 p. ISBN 0-87101-355-X. BAŠTECKÁ, B. et al. 2003. Klinická psychologie v praxi. Praha : Portál, 2003. 420 s. ISBN 80-7178-7353. BOROŠ, J. 2001. Základy sociálnej psychologie. Bratislava : Iris, 2001. 227 s. ISBN 80-89018-20-3. BOUDON, R. et al. 2004. Sociologický slovník. Olomouc : Univerzita Palackého, 2004. 253 s. ISBN 80-244-0735-3. COREY, G. et al. 2006. Techniky a přístupy ve skupinové psychoterapii. Praha : Portál, 2006. 246 s. ISBN 80-7367-160-3. EDWARDS, R. L. et al. 2004. Encyclopedia of Social Work. 19th Ed. Washington, DC : NASW, 2004. 2690 s. ISBN 0-87101-256-1. FLEŠKOVÁ, M. 2007. Sociálne skupiny. In VEREŠOVÁ, M. et al. Sociálna psychológia. Nitra : Enigma, 2007, s. 191-222. ISBN 80-89132-47-8. GÁBOROVÁ, Ľ. – GÁBOROVÁ, Z. 2008. Človek v sociálnom kontexte. Dubnica nad Váhom : DTI, 2008. 170 s. ISBN 978-80-8068-897-4. GABURA, J. 2005. Sociálne poradenstvo. Bratislava : Občianske združenie sociálna práca. 222 s. ISBN 80-89185-10-X. GABURA, J. – PRUŽINSKÁ J. 1995. Poradenský proces. Praha : Sociologické nakladatelství, 1995. 147 s. ISBN 80-85850-10-9. GIERTLOVÁ, K. 2004. Manažovať a koučovať systemicky? Banská Bystrica : Co / Man, 2004. 158 s. ISBN 80-89090-07-9. HARGAŠOVÁ, M. a kol. Skupinové poradenství. Praha : Grada, 2009. 264 s. ISBN 978-870-247-2642-7. HARTL, P. 1997. Komunita občanská a komunita terapeutická. Praha : SLON, 1997. 221 s. ISBN 80-85850-45-1 HARTL, P. 1997. Komunita občanská a komunita terapeutická. Praha : Sociologické nakladatelství, 1997. 221 s. ISBN 80-85850-45-1. HARTL, P. – HARTLOVÁ H., 2009. Psychologický slovník. Praha : Portál, 2009. 776 s. ISBN 978-80-7367-569-1. HAVRÁNKOVÁ, O. 2008. Skupinová práca. In Matoušek a kol. Metody a řízení sociální práce. 2. vyd. Praha : Portál, 2008, s. 153-168. ISBN 978-80-7367-502-8. HERMOCHOVÁ, S. 1988. Sociálně psychologický výcvik II. Praha : SPN, 1988. 138 s. HUPKOVÁ, M. 2011. Rozvíjanie sociálnych spôsobilostí v pomáhajúcich profesiách. Bratislava : iris, 2011. 334 s. ISBN 978-80-89256-61-7. KRATOCHVÍL, S. 1979. Terapeutická komunita. Praha : Academia, 1979. KRATOCHVÍL, S. 1995. Skupinová psychoterapie v praxi. Praha : Galén, 1995. 329 s. ISBN 80-85824-20-5. KOLLÁRIK, T. 1993. Sociálna psychológia. Bratislava : SPN, 1993. ISBN 80-08-01828-3. LABÁTH, V. – SMIK, J. – MATULA, Š. 2011. Expoprogram. Intervenčný program pre skupinovú prácu s deťmi a mládežou. Bratislava : Univerzita Komenského, 2011. 276 s. ISBN 978-80-223-2756-5. LEVICKÁ, J. a kol. 2008. Na ceste za klientom. Trnava : Oliva, 2008. 286 s. ISBN 978-80-89332-03-8. MATOUŠEK, O. et al. 2008. Slovník sociální práce. 2. vyd. Praha : Portál, 2008. 272 s. ISBN 978-80-7367-368-0. MÁTEL, A. – SCHAVEL, M. et al. 2011. Aplikovaná sociálna patológia v sociálnej práci. Bratislava : VŠ ZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2011. 442 s. ISBN 978-80-8132-009-5. MIZRAHI, T. – DAVIS, L. R. (ed.) 2008. Encyclopedia of Social work. 20th Ed. Washington, DC, New York : NASW Press, Oxford university Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-530661-3. MYDLÍKOVÁ, E. – GABURA, J. – SCHAVEL, M. 2005. Sociálne poradenstvo. Bratislava : ASSP, 2005. 68 s. ISBN 80-968713-1-5. MURRAY, R. B. – HUELSKOETTER, M. W. 1983. Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing: Giving Emotional Care. Englewood Cliffs : Prentice Hall, 1983. 780 p. ISBN 978-0137318513. NAKONEČNÝ, M. 2004. Sociální psychologie. Praha : Academia, 2004. 288 s. ISBN 80-200-0690-7. NAVRÁTIL, P. 2001. Teorie a metody sociální práce. Brno : Marek Zeman, 2001. 166 s. ISBN 80-903070-0-0. NAVRÁTIL, P. 2001. Teorie a metody sociální práce. Brno : Marek Zeman, 2001. 168 s. ISBN 978-80-9030-700-1. NOVOTNÁ, E. 2010. Sociologie sociálních skupin. Praha : Grada, 2010. 120 s. ISBN 978-80-247-2957-2. ORAVCOVÁ, J. 2004. Sociálna psychológia. Banská Bystrica : UMP, 2004. 314 s. ISBN 80-8055-980-5. POPELKOVÁ, M. – ZAŤKOVÁ, M. 2009. Podpora rozvoja osobnosti a intervenčné programy. Nitra : FSVaZ UKF Nitra, 2009. 210 s. ISBN 9778-80-8094-269-4. PRESTON-SHOOT, M. 2007. Effective Groupwork. 2nd Ed. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. 224 p. ISBN 978-1-4039-0552-9. ŘEZNÍČEK, I. 1994. Metody sociální práce. Praha : Sociologické nakladatelství, 1994. 80 s. ISBN 80-85850-00-1. SCHAVEL, M. – OLÁH, M. 2010. Sociálne poradenstvo a komunikácia. Bratislava : VŠ ZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2010. 218 s. ISBN 80-8068-487-1. SCHILLING, J. 1999. Sociálna práca. Hlavné smery vývoja sociálnej pedagogiky a sociálnej práce. Trnava : SAP, 1999. 272 s. ISBN 80-88908-54-X. SMIK, J. 1994. Drogy. Príručka pre lektorov pracujúcich s deťmi a dospievajúcimi v rámci Projektu primárnej prevencie drogových závislostí. Bratislava : Nadácia Alternatíva, 1994. TUCKMAN, B. 1965. Developmental sequence in small groups. In Psychological bulletin, 63, p. 384-399. TUCKMAN, B. W. – JENSEN, M. A. 1977. Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies . 1977, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 419-427. VASKA, L. 2012. Teoretické aspekty supervízie začínajúcich sociálnych pracovníkov. Bratislava : Iris, 2012. 176 s. ISBN 978-80-89238-70-5. WARD, P. – ADAMS, S. – LEVERMORE, J. 1997. Jak se připravovat na práci s mládeží. Praha : Portál, 1997. 143 s. ISBN 80-7178-044-8. WÓJCIK, E. 1987. Aktivizujúce metódy pre skupinovú prácu v dušpastierstve. Lódž : Národná delegatúra saleziánskej rodiny, 1987. 59 s.

(1) The first settlement was founded by Canon Barnett in London in 1884 and is called Toynbee Hall. American settlements arose according to the British model. The workers in them were volunteers from the middle and upper classes, who "settled" in the peripheral (immigrant) quarters of large cities where immigrants lived. Settlements had the character of a building and institutions which offered various social services and endeavoured to build bridges between the inhabitants of different social classes (cf. Addams, 1893, cited in Stuart In Mizrahi et al., 2008). (2) Ellen Gates Starr (1859 – 1940) is known, besides the founding of and activity in Hull House, also for her activities against child labour and for her emphasis on the aesthetic and spiritual values of life in industrial society (cf. Gilbert In Mizrahi et al., 2008). (3) John Dewey (1859 – 1952) – the American philosopher, psychologist and educator is considered one of the founders of the philosophy of pragmatism and of functional psychology. The article is also attached as a PDF: