Summary
Group dynamics is one of the major factors that influence the success of a team. Gençer (2019) defines group dynamics as “changes that may occur in any part of the group and bring out actions and reactions in the group structure that affect group members” (p. 223). In this regard, a group can be perceived to be a dynamic and powerful being which can influence individuals and communities. This report revises an in-person public meeting convened to discuss how to manage the issue of homelessness in the United States.
Description of the Meeting
The public meeting involved a town hall discussion where various stakeholders were invited to share their views on homeless encampment management. The virtual meeting was held on Monday, June 22, 2020 on Zoom at 6 p.m. The purpose of the public deliberations was to help the City Council make more informed decisions about how homeless encampments should be serviced and managed in the future. It was hosted by the Councilmember Loren Taylor and Vice Mayor. Several stakeholder groups were represented at this virtual event, including local community leaders, government workers (and the agencies they represent), homelessness professionals, and East Oakland neighbor residents. The key panelists included:
- Loren Taylor – Councilmember, District 6.
- Peter Radu, Office of the Mayor Homelessness Policy Director.
- Daryel R. Dunston – City of Oakland Homelessness Administrator.
- Lara Tannenbaum – Oakland City Community Housing Services Manager.
Power
Power and influence are some of the group dynamics that affected the behavior of individual members during the meeting. In agreement with Gençer (2019), each of the panelists behaved during the group discussion differently than being alone. This pattern was evident in the varied ways and kinds of power exercised during the deliberations. Two bases of power can be depicted in the way several members behaved.
First, legitimate power is one of the frequently used patterns throughout the town hall discussion. This kind of power is synonymous with authority as it is based on the official position people hold in a social setting, rather than on their relation with others. Hofmann et al. (2017) explain that this type of influence originates from how followers perceive the leader’s right to influence. In the case of the town hall meeting, for instance, Councilmember Loren Taylor and Vice Mayor Larry Reid exercise legitimate power by the virtue of their formal authority or status in the society.
Particularly, Councilmember Loren Taylor uses his authority as the host to lead the discussion, facilitate the flow of the discussion, help participants stay involved, and ensure that the town hall runs smoothly. For example, he introduces the panelists, maintains an appropriate pace, steers focus and activity, and triggers engagement and collaboration among members.
He also uses his influence to involve all participants by giving them an opportunity to make their contributions, asking them questions, soliciting responses to public concerns, or simply requesting them to share their views. By using his authority, the moderator ensures that the discussion works soundly, each participant provides their inputs, and the main agenda items are covered. Daryel Dunston, Lara Tannenbaum, and Peter Radu also use legitimate power due to the positions they hold in the Oakland City government.
Second, expert power is clearly demonstrated during the town hall meeting. This kind of power is linked to a person’s command of knowledge or expertise in a specific area of matter. It depends on how others view the level of superiority of the influencer’s knowledge (Hofmann et al., 2017). Daryel Dunston, Lara Tannenbaum, and Peter Radu best demonstrate expert influence during the deliberations. For instance, Dunston leverages his extensive knowledge and experience with homelessness to influence others and the overall flow of the discussion. His mastery of the prevalence, root cause, the hotspots of unhoused people, and homelessness trends in Oakland and other regions in the country gave him more power and credibility in this domain. Similarly, Tannenbaum demonstrates in-depth knowledge of community housing services. Overall, these government workers draw their power and influence from their mastery over their respective practice areas.
Outcomes
The event intended to find effective ways of managing homelessness escarpment. This objective was achieved to a large extent because of the diverse and valuable ideas and perspectives shared during the talk. Panelists and local community members offered nuanced insights into the needs the homeless families and sound interventions for addressing this persistent problem. This valuable information will help the Council make informed decisions about managing and servicing homelessness encampments in the future.
Role of a Social Worker
Before the meeting, social workers might act as planners and help in setting the agenda of the discussion and identifying key areas that need improvement. They may use their experience in handling homelessness to influence the outcome of the meeting. During the meeting, they might share expert knowledge about the special needs of this vulnerable population and help identify priority areas where resources should be focused on to achieve optimal impact. After the meeting, they may serve as connectors to facilitate access to homelessness resources. Social worker might play a critical role in preventing multiple exclusions by heightening access to vital social services. Their involvement might help in reducing the risks of homelessness and enhance victims’ capacity to survive adverse circumstances.
Other Aspects of Group Dynamics Noticed
The size of the town hall meeting influenced the effectiveness of the overall group. Having a manageable number of participants allowed the moderator to ensure active and meaningful participation. A large group might have proved difficult to manage in terms of deciding on processes and participation. Besides that, group cohesion helped immensely the success of the group. Participants exhibited little competition and a strong desire to contribute to the purpose of the debate.
References
Gençer, H. (2019). Group dynamics and behaviour. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(1), 223-229. Web.
Hofmann, E., Hartl, B., Gangl, K., Hartner-Tiefenthaler, M., & Kirchler, E. (2017). Authorities’ coercive and legitimate power: The impact on cognitions underlying cooperation. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 5. Web.