Benefits of working in a group

Most interesting ideas arise in groups. An individual, performing any work individually, can find the right decision. At the same time, he is unlikely to be able to take into account all aspects of the problem being solved. The more people there are, the more opinions can be expressed during the discussion of the problem. At the same time, it is also important that when working together, people try not to lose face, but to work more actively and productively, satisfying their need for success and recognition. In addition, any new proposals or ideas may arise during a group discussion of the problem and on the basis of associative thinking (brainstorming method).

Group work stimulates mutual trust, confidence in colleagues, especially if they had to overcome difficulties when solving complex problems together. Group members develop a “feeling of comradeship.” The feeling that they are part of something larger than each of them individually. They rely on the support and approval of their colleagues.

The Group strives to increase flexibility, efficiency, and the quality of decisions made. This happens due to:

· Providing an integrated approach as a result of involving specialists from various fields in the group;

· Increasing motivation to make the most promising decision;

· Collective experience and greater awareness of group members;

· High employee involvement in the group process; at the same time, the time for implementing a collectively developed solution is reduced and responsibility for its results increases.

Finally, the use of group forms of work contributes to individual development of group members.

Individual development group members happens due to:

· Training in the process of joint problem solving, analysis of alternatives, constructive discussion and testing;

More efficient use creative potential employees as a result of the “social promotion phenomenon”; Social facilitation suggests that group members are eager to contribute to solving a problem simply because they work with other people;

· Formation of a sense of self-esteem among employees as a result of creating a system of supportive relationships in the group.

Thus, groups have significant advantages over individual work. However, groups also have a number of significant potential disadvantages. And if they are not recognized and neutralized in time, this can lead to failures in achieving group and organizational goals. Managers must be extremely alert to potential hazards.

Disadvantages of working in a group

Striving for private goals. The group lives its own life. The goals of the group become paramount for it, while the goals of the organization fade into the background, are ignored and often forgotten.

Excessive costs. Group decision-making incurs more costs than single-person decision-making.

Waste of time. Decision-making in a group involves discussion of problems by all its members, consideration of different points of view, therefore more time is spent on group decision-making than on individual decision-making. According to experts, in groups more time is spent on questions that are understandable to all members than on more complex ones.

Dominance of one of the group members. The influence of some group members on others may increase, which does not contribute to effective group work: people accept the point of view “imposed” on them, are afraid to express their own opinion, etc.

Escalation of participation. Perseverance a certain proposal by some members of the group may lead to acceptance by the entire group, requiring an investment of resources, although the proposed solution may turn out to be incorrect.

Division of Responsibility – avoidance of responsibility, dilution of responsibility. On the one hand, awareness of shared responsibility for completing tasks is a positive aspect in the activities of groups. However, at the same time, sharing common responsibility equally by all group members can lead to the opposite effect—a departure from individual responsibility. Some workers may have a desire to hide behind their colleagues, in the “crowd,” which allows them to avoid reproach. General responsibility turns into irresponsibility.

There is also a drawback associated with the division of responsibility, such as “ social idleness." The condition for its appearance is the impossibility or absence of a clear assessment of the contribution of each employee to the results of the group’s work. In this case, some employees may sharply worsen their performance. Social idleness occurs if the employee believes that:

· The distribution of work in the group is unfair;

· Colleagues do not put as much effort as he does into completing tasks.

Decrease in the level of motivation of highly qualified employees associated with the two previous shortcomings. Team rewards can result in workers' contributions, and therefore their pay, being averaged out. In this case, highly qualified employees believe that they do not need to give their full effort in completing group tasks.

Group polarization. This is an alternative to group consensus, when the group includes individuals with strong views (positive or negative) on an issue. Working in a group, they attract other participants to their side, and aggressive confrontation and conflict may arise.

In addition to those mentioned, we can also note such problems associated with the formation and functioning of groups as:

· Difficulty in introducing new people into the group;

· It is difficult to reorient a group to a new direction; a cohesive group does not have the same flexibility as disparate employees;

· No group can exist forever.

Group like-mindedness. The main disadvantage in group work is group unanimity and stereotyped thinking.

Group like-mindedness- pressure exerted on employees to conform to group norms and induce consensus.

Classical analysis The process of group unanimity was first carried out by the American social psychologist I. Janis (15), he identified the main symptoms of group unanimity. These include:

The illusion of invulnerability - the belief that every group decision made leads to high results.

The illusion of morality - justification of a decision by higher group values.

Rationalization – abstraction from negative consequences or decision risks.

Negative attitude towards “outsiders” - a negative attitude towards opponents or doubting colleagues, which allows you to ignore even fair criticism.

Self-censorship – suppression of justifiable doubts under the pretext of group loyalty.

Direct pressure - sharp criticism by colleagues or managers of proposals that contradict the group’s guidelines.

Opinion filtering – ignoring inconvenient facts or opinions that are simply not brought up for discussion.

The illusion of unanimity - an environment in which silence is perceived as consent.

Reasons for group unanimity can be:

· The group's inability to rationally analyze alternatives or consequences of a decision;

· The desire of individual group members to be perceived as “team players”;

· The joining of individual members of the group to the point of view of its most influential members, who enjoy authority, trust, and stubbornly defend their position.

Conflicts in the group

Conflict (from Latin “clash”) is a collision of opposing goals, interests, positions, opinions or views of opponents or subjects of interaction.

Features of the conflict:

· differences in volumes social systems. In comparison with society, an organization is a more local and simpler system; it is a system of coordinated behavior, where rules, regulators, standard procedures, etc., are just mechanisms of coordinated behavior. This allows us to talk about controllability, the ability to predict conflict situations;

· role structure of organizations. An important fact is that people, in the process of joining an organization, sacrifice part of their freedom and do this in order to achieve personal and organizational goals, i.e. come to the fore professional quality and official position, as well as a certain “lack of freedom” in fulfilling their roles. An employee's role in an organization is a set of expected behavioral patterns associated with performing a specific job. These expectations depend primarily on the position occupied by the individual, rather than on his personal characteristics, and will be the same for all individuals occupying that position. Understanding roles gives us the opportunity to learn about how people understand what they should do in a particular role. situations. These roles have several characteristics. First, work roles are independent, they are performed by everyone who occupies a particular social position. Second, they are directly related to task-related work behavior. Third, work roles may not be compatible with each other. The problem is determining who determines what is expected of whom. Finally, roles are learned quickly and can have a significant impact on both social positions, and on the labor behavior of workers. Much of what we think and do is determined by our roles.

He identifies five main factors (causes) of conflicts:

1) The information factor is information that is acceptable to one side and unacceptable to the other. This may be: incomplete, inaccurate information from one of the parties; unwanted disclosure; underestimation of facts when solving controversial problems; misinformation, rumors, etc.

2) Structural factor - formal and informal characteristics of the group (specifics of legal authority and legislation, status, rights of men and women, their age, the role of traditions, various social norms, etc.). B. Myers adds: “available resources, decision-making procedures.”

3) Value factor - those principles that are proclaimed or rejected; which all group members will follow. They bring a sense of order and purpose to the group. These are values ​​such as:

Personal belief systems and behavior (prejudices, preferences, etc.);

Group systems of beliefs and behavior;

Belief systems and behavior of society;

The values ​​of all humanity;

Professional values;

Religious, cultural, regional, local and political values.

4) Attitude factor - satisfaction from the interaction of two or more parties or the lack thereof. These are aspects such as:

Basis of relationship (voluntary or forced);

The essence of relationships (independent, dependent, interdependent);

Expectations from relationships;

The importance of relationships;

The value of relationships;

Duration of relationship;

Compatibility of people in the process of relationships;

Contribution of the parties to the relationship, etc.

5) Behavioral factor is a behavior strategy in conflict situation: avoidance, adaptation, competition, compromise, cooperation.

Control:

Conflict Management -- this is a targeted impact on eliminating (minimizing) the causes that gave rise to the conflict, or on correcting the behavior of the participants in the conflict and ensuring the solution of socially significant problems.

Conflict management includes:

Conflict forecasting;

Warning some and at the same time stimulating others;

Ending and suppressing conflict;

Regulation and permission.

Management becomes possible with some necessary conditions. These include:

Objective understanding of the conflict as reality;

Recognition of the possibility of active influence on the conflict;

There are various methods of conflict management:

1) Negotiations are a joint discussion between conflicting parties with the possible involvement of a mediator of controversial issues in order to reach agreement. They act as a continuation of the conflict and at the same time serve as a means of overcoming it. When the emphasis is on negotiations as part of a conflict, they are sought to be conducted from a position of strength, with the goal of achieving a one-sided victory. Naturally, this nature of negotiations usually leads to a temporary, partial resolution of the conflict, and negotiations serve only as an addition to the struggle for victory over the enemy. If negotiations are understood in terms of property as a method of conflict resolution, then they take the form of honest, open debates, designed for mutual concessions and mutual satisfaction of a certain part of the interests of the parties.

2) Compromise - means an agreement based on mutual concessions. There are forced and voluntary compromises. The first are inevitably imposed by prevailing circumstances. The second ones are concluded on the basis of an agreement on certain issues and correspond to some part of the interests of all mutual active forces. In the case of a voluntary compromise, there is a commonality of basic views, principles, and norms facing the interacting subjects of practical tasks. If the compromise is of a forced nature, then it may consist of: mutual concessions on certain issues in the name of ensuring a balance of private interests and goals; in uniting the efforts of all conflicting parties to resolve some fundamental issues related to their survival. The choice of compromise is justified when the problem is relatively simple and clear; you don’t have much time to resolve the conflict or you want to resolve it as quickly as possible; it would be better to reach an interim agreement and then return to this problem and re-analyze it hidden reasons; the problem and its solution are not too important for both parties; failed to achieve a solution using cooperation or failed to get one's way using power.

3) Consensus is a form of expressing agreement with the opponent’s arguments in a dispute. The essential elements of this form are: analysis of the range of social interests and organizations expressing them; objective coincidence and contradiction of the priority values ​​and goals of the current forces; justification of common values ​​and priority goals on the basis of which agreement is possible. Positive results of building consensus: a stronger sense of equality and ownership of the problem; promotes the exchange of views; the emergence of common ground among members of the organization; uses collective knowledge; responsibility, especially when making decisions, extends to all team members; considers the importance of personal contribution and group membership; individual participants can “save face”; Negative outcomes of consensus building: The process may take too long and be incomplete; in a critical situation it may be too difficult to bring all parties to an agreement; the process may cause inconvenience, as you will have to coordinate all schedules and plans; the process may threaten authority, position and status; It may be difficult to maintain a sense of confidence in the group when necessary.

Leadership and Guidance

At the moment, there are two points of view in the interpretation of the concepts of “leadership” and “management”. The first is the separation of these two concepts according to several criteria (in domestic psychology), the second point of view is that these concepts are practically identical to each other (in foreign psychology).

Krichevsky R. L believes that any enterprise or institution can be considered in two ways: as formal and informal organization. According to these two organizational structures he also talks about two inherent types of human relationships: formal and informal. The first type of relationship is official, functional; relationships of the second type are psychological, emotional. So, leadership, in his opinion, is a phenomenon that takes place in a system of formal relations, and leadership is a phenomenon generated by a system of informal relations. Moreover, the role of the manager is predetermined in the organization, the range of functions of the person implementing it is specified. The role of a leader arises spontaneously; it is not included in the staffing table of an institution or enterprise.

The manager is appointed externally by higher management, receives appropriate authority, and has the right to apply sanctions. The leader emerges from among the people around him, who are essentially equal to him in status. At the same time, R. L. Krichevsky says that the leader can resort to sanctions against one of the partners, but these sanctions are not formal in nature, the right to use them is not officially recorded anywhere.

But perhaps the most complete differences between these two concepts are reflected in the work of B. D. Parygin. He cites a whole series differences between leadership and management.

1. The leader is mainly called upon to regulate interpersonal relationships in the group, while the leader organizes the formal relations of the group as a social organization.

2. Leadership can be stated in a microenvironment (this is a small group). Leadership is an element of the macroenvironment, that is, it is associated with the system of social relations.

3. Leadership arises spontaneously, the leader of any real social group either appointed or elected.

4. The phenomenon of leadership is less stable, the promotion of a leader depends to a greater extent on the mood in the group, while the leader is a more stable phenomenon.

5. Management of subordinates, in contrast to leadership, has a much more specific system of various sanctions that are not in the hands of the leader.

6. The leader's decision-making process is more complex and mediated by many different circumstances, while the leader makes more direct decisions regarding group activities

7. The leader’s sphere of activity is mainly a small group, where he is the leader; the leader’s sphere of activity is wider, since he represents small group in the wider social system.

But, despite the significant differences, both B. D. Parygin and R. L. Krichevsky see something in leadership and guidance general.

1. Management and leadership are means of coordinating the relations of members of a social group.

2. Both phenomena implement processes of social influence in a team.

3. Management, like leadership, is characterized by a certain subordination of relationships. In the first case, the relationship is clearly defined and secured job descriptions, and in the second, the relationships are not delineated in any way.

Another position in understanding leadership and management belongs to foreign authors. Here, most often, these two concepts are not separated, since it is believed that the head of an organization is a person who, along with having a formal status, is a leader and effectively manages his subordinates. By influencing people, he forces them to do the assigned work.

The very concept of “leadership” implies a type of management interaction based on the most effective combination of various sources of power for a given situation and aimed at encouraging people to achieve common goals.

Power is the ability to influence people's behavior. Influence is behavior individual, which can make changes in the behavior, attitudes, feelings and the like of another person. For leadership and influence to be effective, leaders exercise power. The manager has the opportunity to punish the subordinate. A leader has influence through his subordinates' belief in his competence. The leader is a standard, an example for subordinates who want to become just like him. Managers have the authority to manage other people. The staff obeys the manager because they believe that he has the right to give orders.

A leader becomes attractive to followers due to the ability to see what will ultimately be achieved as a result of his and the followers' efforts. However, this is not any goal or any state of the organization in the future. It's more about what followers want or can have. In addition, a vision becomes attractive if it is larger or better than the existing reality, that is, to a certain extent, idealization of the future state is allowed. The vision captures the imagination of followers and motivates them to commit themselves to realizing it to the extent that they share the leader's vision. A vision that inspires strength in followers, makes them believe in the success of the business.

Free webinars

Show page menu ▼

In a group or individually? What is more effective?

Advantage 1. Expanding your horizons

Group classes are a real source of information for those who want to gain new knowledge and expand their horizons. Thanks to visual material, interesting examples, questions, and discussion topics, you will learn to perceive faces in detail, and not as a general blur, as is customary in society. You will receive a lot of new information, information, and will be able to look at your body from a new point of view.

Advantage 2. Formation of a new “vision” of a person

Through group training you can learn to read faces, how to open book, and first of all, your own. We will teach you to look at it without hackneyed cliches and stereotypes. This new vision will be formed by the correct practice of “seeing” a face, which the coach will teach you using the examples of your desk mates. Having mastered this universal “vision”, you will receive the key to the doors behind which your youth lies.

Benefit 3. Conscious execution of exercises

Thanks to questions, clarifications and real examples, you will be able to better grasp the subtleties of exercises that you simply would not pay attention to yourself due to the lack of minimal experience.

Classes are conducted in small groups (no more than 6 people) in a cozy classroom, the trainer-myologist has the opportunity to devote individual attention every student. While the coach is going through the technique with your “deskmate,” you have a great opportunity to observe the process from the side, test yourself again, “get better at it,” and practice the nuances of performing the exercise. But practice is the main component of our classes; motor memory here sometimes works better than visual or auditory memory.

Advantage 4. Communication with like-minded people

Very often, friendships and useful acquaintances are formed during classes, which then continue beyond the walls of the school. We never cease to be amazed at how interesting the groups are chosen - as if people are specially brought together who can help and develop each other in different areas of life - from health to creativity.

Specific features and differences between individual and group psychological work– what are they? Often you have to face doubts about what is better to choose: a psychologist or a group. Perhaps this article will help you decide and consciously choose what will be most relevant at this stage of your life. We will look at how these differences manifest themselves at key points in our work, as well as in the dynamics of the processes taking place.

What to choose – a psychologist or a group?

Often a person is at a loss as to what to prefer: individual work with a psychologist or participation in a psychological group. The generally accepted view on this issue is that individual work is preferable when solving personal problems and internal conflicts, and group work is more effective when working with interpersonal problems, communication problems, relationship building, and in resolving conflicts related to relationships.

It is also generally accepted that individual work requires greater thoroughness, thoroughness, depth of immersion and elaboration of the patient’s conflicts. Participation in a group implies greater intensity, expression, dynamics, there is more variety of experience to explore, more uncertainty that we learn to withstand.

In general, we can agree with this. But modern approach in psychology, it still assumes that intrapersonal problems and problems of interpersonal interaction have the same source and are so connected that we cannot clearly distinguish between them. Although, indeed, in individual work we focus on internal problems person, but at the same time assuming that these problems manifest themselves precisely in communication with other people. And in fact, the basis of any request to a psychologist, as a rule, lies precisely in unmet needs in relationships.

Also in a group - when a participant shows problems in interactions with others, of course, we are talking, first of all, about intrapersonal unresolved conflicts. Those. in this aspect, we can talk, rather, not about cardinal and fundamental differences, but about a change in the main accents and focus of consideration of human problems, or, as they say in Gestalt psychology, the figure changes to the background and vice versa.

But, despite some vagueness in the generalized goals of working individually and in a group, we can identify important, tangible differences between them that can significantly affect the results of our work.

Free association and group discussion - from monologue to discourse

In individual psychological work, free association is used - you talk about what is important to you, relevant at the current moment, and the psychologist follows you, giving you the opportunity to express yourself as much as possible, to express the most painful things, and exactly from the angle as you see it. This is a situation of monologue, occasionally interspersed with dialogue. The patient, especially in the initial stages of work, speaks exclusively in monologues. This is a conversation and relationship between two people.

In a group, the analogue of free association is a group discussion, i.e. We find ourselves in a rather difficult situation of discourse for many people. You can imagine the feeling when you speak exclusively for one listener (a psychologist), and he listens to you attentively, his attention belongs only to you. And now compare this to a group meeting. The Group in this regard creates more difficult situation, it sets a movement from monologue not just to dialogue, but even to discussion, when several people express their opinions and attitudes.

You are immediately faced with the fact that what you say may not meet with a reaction, but may be picked up by other participants, used and deployed in a completely unexpected, seemingly unintended and unforeseen direction. But who knows... This is precisely where the focus of the group’s work lies – in such “sort of misunderstandings.”

The polyphony of a group conversation creates a situation of multiplicity and much greater uncertainty than a one-on-one conversation with a psychologist. The group sets a powerful vector of development towards other people, towards interaction, communication and relationships, developing the ability for dialogue and discourse, for greater stability and flexibility in a situation of plurality, polyphony of views, opinions, and various kinds of relationships. Individual work, of course, is inferior to group work in this aspect.

From interpretation to group metaphor – from precision to richness of possibilities

(In the context of this article, the concept of “interpretation” is used in a broad sense, we are talking about the statements of a psychologist).

For general theoretical foundations forms of interaction and approaches to studying problems in individual and group work differ significantly. In both cases we are dealing with interpretations, but with very characteristic differences.

In an individual session, we can talk about interpretation aimed at revealing and understanding a person’s personal drama. It's about a unique life experience. In a group session, everything is completely different - we are dealing with the story of several people, often completely different from each other, sometimes conflicting, competing. Since we are dealing with a collective of people, therefore, group interpretation is aimed at expanding the individual to the group (but still, one perspective does not exclude the other). We can say that group interpretation allows you to see more, but at a lower resolution.

In individual work, interpretations may turn out to be more subtle and accurate, because they are addressed to the only person whose life experience and inner world placed at the center of consideration. In a group, the focus of the study is the group situation, the group history, which is revealed in multiple perspectives, because there are several participants. In a group setting, interpretation sheds light on aspects that exist in the group, and we can talk less about interpretation and more about creating an effective group metaphor.

With all its merits, it should still be noted that personal interpretation has a chance to turn out to be static for the patient, to become something unshakable and difficult to shift. Group interpretation gives us the opportunity to discover multiple perspectives of vision and interpretation, because we are not so strongly conditioned by a person's particular history.

So, in terms of interpretative influences, both individual and group sessions have their own specific advantages. They can be briefly described as follows: individual session - the desire for accuracy and clarity of interpretation, consistency, certainty, with much less opportunity for variability, changing perspectives, exploring different contexts of problems and relationships. Group metaphor - less precision, but more meaning, play, diversity and mobility, creating a wealth of possibilities for us, giving flexibility to our behavior and our consciousness.

Dyadic space and group environment - problems of languages

The space of relationships in which we find ourselves and in which we become participants, in an individual session or in a group, is very different.

Let's imagine an individual session - we have two participants in the events. The psychologist is the only person to whom the patient’s speech is addressed. Thanks to this, we can deeply explore the patient’s associations and achieve maximum proximity to his subjective experience. In the context of a dyadic relationship, it is easier for us to understand it life situation, discover what is happening in the session, find a common language and understanding of what is happening.

But in an individual session there are two stumbling blocks inherent in dyadic relationships: opposition and fusion. And if, for one reason or another, a symbolic third does not appear in this space, allowing both the patient and the psychologist, i.e. For this couple to cope together with emerging tensions, contradictions, difficult sections of the path - then one of the stumbling blocks will definitely make itself known, which can destroy the work process. This destructive influence can manifest itself either in a feeling of insurmountable stagnation in work, or in its premature interruption.

Now let’s mentally plunge into the group environment. This is a completely different type of communication, the symbolic third here is set initially, present in the very structure of the group - the leader, each participant and the group as a whole. Therefore, joining a group is more difficult for us than establishing contact with a psychologist in a one-on-one setting. And the larger the group, the more difficult this experience.

What is special about the group process? This type of communication requires us to collaborate in a completely different way than working individually. Each of the participants has their own story, life experience, ideas, their own reactions to what is happening. In this space, perspectives and rhythms are constantly changing, here what is well known to you, one might even say unshakable, can appear in completely unexpected contexts.

And we are trying, despite all the difficulties, to stay afloat on the canvas of communication and to catch connections in all this often quite motley and contradictory diversity. We feel like we're in a kind of labyrinth different languages, thoughts, feelings, experiences, stories of many people. Finding a common language here is much more difficult than in an individual setting, so we can rather talk about the formation of a new language for this group in order to understand each other. Let us remember the myth about the construction of the Tower of Babel, when people built something without having common language, - this is similar to the first steps of a group when it is just starting to work.

At its core, each participant is driven by two needs - to express their experiences, to free themselves from negative and difficult feelings, to share emotional experiences and difficulties with others so that it becomes easier. On the other hand, everyone wants, as they say, to look good - to be socially pleasant, accepted, adequate, reasonable, competent, knowledgeable. These two needs, as a rule, are in a rather conflicting relationship in every person, which makes life very difficult. But the group process is designed to help resolve this contradiction. And it is the group in maximum degree may help resolve this dilemma.

The two stumbling blocks - fusion and oppositionality, which we talked about when discussing one-on-one relationships, manifest themselves and act differently here, since the symbolic third is initially embedded in the very structure of the group, but is sometimes ignored by the participants.

These stumbling blocks of any psychological work, giving rise to group tension and conflicts, have enormous potential value, because can enrich the experience of each group member. Merger has a chance to degenerate into a sense of community, when participants are able to share traumatic experiences, difficult feelings, and what an individual participant experiences becomes an experience for the entire group as a whole. This enriches us with feelings of empathy and support.

And oppositionality sets group dynamics, makes it possible to get out of the dyadic merger, gives us the opportunity for development and growth, sets the vector from monologue towards dialogue and discussion with others. Where previously dialogue seemed unthinkable, it becomes entirely possible.

Specific problems that can only be explored in groups

There are also specific problems that can only be explored in groups.

Resolution of the dilemma - narcissism and sociality - being yourself and being with others
I have already mentioned two fundamental human needs - self-expression and relationship, and how they can conflict with each other. Out of a desire to preserve relationships, people often hesitate to express their opinions, feelings, experiences, hiding their reactions, which may underlie feelings of dissatisfaction with the relationship. We can explore and resolve this contradiction precisely in group interaction.

The ability to accept variability, difference, multiple perspectives, to be in uncertainty
In a group, a person acquires a psychological space greater than his own. And this is due to interaction with other group members in an atmosphere where an emotional space is created for everyone without exception. We come to the group, meeting the worlds of different participants. We learn to open our world among people, we learn to leave our world, allowing ourselves to explore the worlds of others. What happens during these interactions? Participants can discover the same unknown worlds within themselves, different ways understanding, vision, behavior, communication.

Ability to understand and find common language in group interactions
The problem of understanding each other in group interactions is worked out much more intensively. Since there are many participants, and we initially find ourselves in a more complex story - the story of the myth of the Tower of Babel, we are forced to turn to the roots of this misunderstanding, to its very origins, because of which relationships collapse. This is a joint search for new opportunities for understanding, the search and formation of a new language - the language of this group, which will allow us to be able to understand each other. We begin to trust more, devalue less, and value relationships without losing our sense of self-worth.

Developing the flexibility of our consciousness and our behavior
In individual work, the psychologist tunes in a certain way to the patient’s wavelength, and the success of the process largely depends on how successful he is (although this is a two-way movement, a lot depends on the patient himself). In the group, participants learn to catch these waves themselves, helping themselves and others. This is the healing potential of the group.

Achieving freedom in communication
In group work, the goal of achieving freedom in communication is twofold - on the one hand, everyone wants this in their hearts, on the other hand, without this we will not be able to get the maximum effect from group work. Those. we are placed in a situation where what we want becomes the condition for our existence in the group. Well, actually, this is how our abilities develop. In any case, there is a chance for this. A chance that doesn’t exist in individual work.

Restoring emotional connections with the world
And finally, it is in group interaction that we have the opportunity to find ourselves in the context of other people. Gradually, we develop the ability to be ourselves among others, trusting ourselves, our feelings, without fear of our own reactions and the reactions of other people.

In a group we get the opportunity to experience and express any feelings, and there are people nearby who experience similar experiences with us. Together with a sense of trust, we begin to allow contact with difficult experiences, with our own pain, suffering without a feeling of destruction and a sense of persecution. This is what we lacked in our previous relationships. And the group helps us survive, cope, and discover the meaning of this pain, which we constantly transfer into our lives today. And this is not only your pain, but also that of the entire group. The group works like this.

Good day to all!

To the organizers project activities Students sometimes have a dilemma: “Which type of project is more effective to use: individual or group?”

But in reality, which one is more effective?

Let's look at the advantages of each type of project.

Advantages of individual projects:

1) the project work plan can be built and tracked with maximum clarity;

2) the student fully develops a sense of responsibility, since the implementation of the project and its quality depend only on him;

3) the student gains experience at all stages of the project - from the birth of the idea to commercial reflection;

4) the student fully develops general educational skills (research, information, presentation, evaluation) and their formation turns out to be a completely manageable process.

Benefits of group projects:

1) participants in project activities develop cooperation skills, which is very important for life in modern society;

2) the project can be carried out in the most profound and versatile way;

3) each student, depending on his own strengths, is most actively involved in a certain stage of work, at which he can fully reveal himself as a person;

4) within the project group, subgroups can be formed that propose different ways to solve the problem, ideas, hypotheses, points of view; this competitive element increases the motivation of participants and has a positive effect on the quality of the project.

As you can see, each type of project has its positive and negative sides. Each teacher, depending on the characteristics of his class or his goals, can choose one or another project, or combine two types of projects during the school year.

There is no clear answer to the question posed above.

6 comments:

Natalia Sarazhinska comments...

Irina Valentinovna!
I follow your numerous publications with deep respect and gratitude! Thank you very much!!!
BUT today I don’t agree with you.
It seems to me that project activity, in its design, involves group ways of interaction between students. There are no individual educational PROJECTS. In groups, students agree on who will have what role, who will do what. And they often do it, of course, individually. One draws, the second writes a poem, the third learns unfamiliar words in the dictionary. The material is collected together, the appropriateness of each piece is discussed in the group, the unimportant is discarded, preparations for defense are underway....
If all this is reduced to individual work (only one does everything), then this is simply an in-depth study by the student or independent work on the topic... and that's all. My opinion is this - there are no individual EDUCATIONAL projects at school, and also a lesson project is “unprecedented”

Irina Valentinovna Zhakulina comments...

Dear Natalia! In project activities there can be individual and group projects. This is indicated in the concept of this technology. The child himself chooses which project he will complete: individual or group. And each type has its own “pros” and “cons”. Sincerely, Irina.