Modeling a Technique in Group Work

Concept Addressed: Modeling

A technique employed by the group leader to counter reluctance of members to the group process. Group leaders model behaviors they wish to elicit from group participants, often effective in groups where attendance is non-voluntary.

Response

Corey & Corey view modeling as a technique that is useful to counter resistance to the group experience by members. Often this is very helpful in non-voluntary groups such as parole or abuser groups; however I think modeling can be useful in many settings. Modeling behaviors is not only the domain of the group leader but also can be done by participants within a group. I would suggest that when group members model behaviors that reinforce the group norms for example a member states “ I thought we wouldn’t be smoking in this group” as another member brings out a cigarette, may have more impact than if feedback had come from the leader. I also believe that modeling can be even more powerful in the realm of non-verbal communication and empathy. At times it is difficult for members of the group to pick up on subtle changes within the group. As a leader of a group it is important to notice the emotional status of the members. If a leader models empathy by perhaps looking concerned and intently at a member that is appears to be distressed, the non-verbal cues and behavior are modeled as appropriate behavior within the group. Likewise if the leader shows inadequate response to distress , members may get the messages such as “it is inappropriate to express distress here” or “My feelings don’t matter.” Thus modeling behavior is an important way to not only reinforce the established group norms but can be key in increasing sensitivity within a group to non-verbal communication and emotions.

Additionally my response to Modeling as a technique is that it is not always beneficial, that is, modeling does not always mean modeling appropriate behaviors. Sometimes , especially in response to conflict within a group negative models maybe used by both members and leaders of groups. I am thinking primarily of the leader who believes that silencing members who are arguing is a good example of de-escalation. Perhaps instead of quieting the argument, it would be healthy to lower ones voice and direct ones attention to both members and say “ It seems like you guys are disagreeing here, why don’t we let one of you talk and explore their side of the issue, and then the other and see what we might learn here.” This type of modeling encourages each person to recognize they have a valid voice, but that other points of view are equally valuable.

Reflections

What I am learning about myself in terms of modeling is that although it is easy to say “I am not a role-model” in reality children, peers and educators are aware of behaviors both verbal and non-verbal; learning to refine how I experience and express is an opportunity to educate others on what different styles exist. Secondly, I am also becoming aware of how behaviors and norms are connected. When we say someone is behaving abnormally we are also saying they are violating some rule of conduct. Sometimes these rules are widely known and accepted but often they are not. This I believe is why some people view a person as odd or dysfunctional and others show no concern. What behaviors we choose to model and adopt have a lot to do with what norms we accept. In terms of what I am learning about group is that conflicts can arise when leaders’ expectation of participation is not actually modeled by the leader. If group members are unsure of how to be in group, the leader is in a position to be a model, but often leaders are unaware of this opportunity and feel defeated when members idle.