7 Approaches to working with communities

Ushvinder Kaur Popli

Content outline

Ø  Learning outcomes

Ø  Introduction

Ø  Approaches of community work

Ø  Conclusion

Learning outcomes

After studying this module, you shall be able to

·         Understand basics of community work

·         Understand the approaches of working with communities

·         Evaluate the importance of  community work in present scenario

Introduction

Community has been a central focus of social work practice since its inception. One of the hallmarks of social work is its recognition that people grow and mature in social context. Communities are one of the many social systems that touch people’s lives and shape their individual and group identities. Infant first encounter their immediate family, then extended family and friends, and then the local community. As people grow and mature, they learn about, form perception of social structures, and develop individual and group identities through associations that connect them to lifelong community experiences (Newman, 2005). Communities come in an infinite number of size, shapes, social arrangements, population compositions and locations. Communities are composed of social relationships that form the basis of communal life. Shared perceptions, and common interest of its members are the glue that bonds the community in to a coherent unit. Moreover, these social relationships and shared perceptions transcend time, structure, and location. Some communities are relational in nature and based on shared beliefs, values, or interests. Such communities are not tied to a single location or physical structure.

Community is the context and setting for social work at all levels of intervention. For social workers engaged in direct practice at micro level, it is critical that they understand the macro environment where their clients live and work, the resources available to them, and how community dynamics influence individual behaviour. Community is also the target or vehicle for change where interventions are designed to address broader social problems that affect a large group of people (Fellin, 2001). The approaches of working with communities are a medium through which community workers are looking at the ground realities. It serves as a reference for the work to be undertaken and gives a clearer understanding of what could be expected in community work. The academicians, practitioners and educators in social work inter-changeably use the term ‘approaches and models’ in the community organization or community work texts.

Approaches of community work

A number of authors, practitioners have proposed approaches or models for changing community systems. Each of these requires that the social worker assumes different professional roles, which require somewhat specialized professional skill sets. There is some overlap in the approaches or models. Some of them are presented here that have been widely used in social work practice.

• 1) Murray. G. Ross (1955) chosen to use the term ‘approach’. He identified three main approaches to community organization or work. These are:

I)   The General Content Approach: The focus of this approach is coordinated and orderly development of services in the community in a particular area of interest. Thus the welfare council may seek to coordinate existing services (i.e., relate present services and prevent overlapping); to extend present services, and to initiate new services to meet welfare needs in the community. This approach incorporates mainly two sub-approaches (a) the strengthening of the existing services and (b) initiating new services. The primary goal of this approach is to create pressure for reform and development in a particular area of community life, such as the welfare field and a secondary goal is development of an interested and informed group of citizens with conviction of the need for community movement in the welfare field.

II)  The Specific Content Approach: Here an individual, an agency, or an organization becomes concerned about some needed reform in the community and launches a program to secure this reform. The focus of the group is a specific reform or objective. Usually time is an important element, for the group seeks to secure this goal as quickly and simply as possible. The success of this process tends to be measured, primarily, in terms of the degree to which the reform, goal, or objective is secured. Thus, this approach involves specific issue oriented organization of services.

III)  The Process Approach: Here the objective is not content, i.e., facilities or services of some kind, but initiation and nourishment of a process in which all the people of a community are involved, through their representatives, in identifying and taking action in respect to their own problems. The emphasis is on cooperative and collaborative work among the various groups in the community (be it functional or geographic) to the end that they may develop capacity to work together in dealing with problems which arise in their community. The four factors are more important in this approach;

• (1) Self determination of the community (2) Indigenous plans (3) People’s willingness to change and (4) Community pace.
• 2) Hanna & Robinson (1994) identified three basic models or approaches of “Community Empowerment.”

I)    Traditional Social change approach is based on the change flowing out of “traditional” electoral politics. The formal political party is central to this model; it is called traditional because the authors believe it signifies the status quo. That is, they believe interest group politics and political liberalism will yield little by way of benefits to marginalized social groups. While it is undeniable that increased participation of minorities and women in elected office is a positive step toward diminishing race and gender and caste discrimination, the critics have argued that electoral politics does not bring large numbers of people to a sense of their own power to effect change in their daily lives.

II)   Direct Action Social change approach is characterized by active resistance or protest to existing conditions. People may join together in temporary mass mobilizations during a broad based national crisis such as happens in the civil rights or anti-war movements. Or, they may come together in small-scale movements that focus on localized issues. Resistance and opposition are based on private values and interests that are openly articulated on a collective basis, coupled with public action.

• III) Transformative Social change approach is based on an adult model of learning which requires strict adherence to the rules of democracy. It is characterized by a small-group orientation, which emphasizes self-directed learning, interpersonal bonds, linking personal oppression to social structural oppression, and a collective approach to group awareness, decision making, and social action. It believes people cannot act on their own unless they are aware of the conditions that affect them. Therefore, learning is a process of consciousness rising for social action.

• 3) Rothman (1995) identified three models of community organization or work for macro social work practice. Originally developed in 1970, Rothman’s three models of community practice have probably been one of the most influential conceptualizations of macro social work practice. These are:

I)    Locality Development model has bottom-up approach because it is self-help, participatory model of change and based on the premise that for change to occur, it is necessary to include the broadest possible participation of community citizens. It places a great deal of emphasis on self-determination and democratic process. Professionals cannot change the community for the people, they must do that themselves. Professionals can provide encouragement, support, expert knowledge, and other resources. They can treat the members of the community with respect and dignity. They can work side-by-side with the residents to create the conditions that make change and empowerment possible. They can help the residents to develop knowledge, skills, and self-confidence needed to challenge the status quo. However, the people themselves must define the problem and develop a plan for dealing with it. In a sense, it is an extension of the group work model. Considerable attention is given to group dynamics and in some cases the process through which the community defines its problems and develops strategies to resolve them is more important than the change itself. That is, theprocess of getting people together to discuss their common concerns and to plan for resolving specific problems is critical for effective community development. This model places great emphasis on such things such as consensus, cooperation, democratic process, participation, and self-help.

II)  Social Planning model is in some ways the opposite of locality development model. It as a top-down model of community change and emphasizes the technical aspects of solving problems. It assumes that most social problems, especially in large industrial societies are too complex for the average citizen to understand. Therefore, professionals who have specialized expertise must guide and control the change process with the use of technical skills. Participation on the part of the citizens can vary greatly, but this model often provides little opportunity for citizen input into the planning process. Some have criticized it as an “elitist” model of social change. When we talk about social planning, it’s worth distinguishing between social planning and physical planning. Social planning is concerned with the provision of goods and services to members of the community. Physical planning is concerned with land use management, zoning ordinances, and the structure of physical facilities. They are generally treated as separate and distinct. However, they are closely related. The way we plan and structure our physical environment can have a tremendous impact on our social environment. Two important contemporary constraints impacting this mode, according to Rothman are: (1) Planning becomes highly interactive and diverse interest groups rightfully go into the defining of goals and setting the community agenda; and (2) Impact of reduced governmental spending on social programmes, due to economic constraints, leading to a lower reliance on the elaborate, data driven planning approach.

III)    Social Action model assumes that one segment of the community is being overlooked or by-passed. The focus of this model is on organizing segments of the community to stand-up for their rights, to demand that their needs and concerns be addressed. The emphasis is on bringing about basic change in major social institutions or community practices, and to redistribute power, resources, and decision-making processes in the community. This is an inside-out model because it starts with a committed core of people who work to develop a collective consciousness among all people who are affected by the conditions. It is a model, which tries to challenge the status-quo through a wide range of disruptive, confrontational, and often conflictive tactics. It brings issues of social justice, equity, oppression, and discrimination to the forefront of the community’s consciousness.

• 4) Checkoway (1995) identifies six distinct approaches of community change:

I)   Mass mobilization seeks to bring about change by organizing and massing large numbers of individuals around issues. It assumes that visible public actions can generate power and compel concessions from targets. From this perspective, the issue is the critical focus of the change effort. Therefore, issue selection is very important. Issues must be selected that will appeal to a large number of people. This strategy is often used as a response to existing conditions but rather as an independent force for change.

II)   Social Action: The goal of social action is to build powerful organizations at the community level in order to bring improvements in people’s lives, make people more aware of their own power, and alter the existing power relationships in the community. It is similar to the social action model defined by Rothman and the direct action model by Hanna and Robinson.

III)    Citizen Participation tries to involve citizens in policy planning and program implementation undertaken by governmental agencies. This strategy takes seriously the statement “government by the people, for the people.” It assumes that people should actively participate in their government and that agencies of the government should involve them in matters that affect them. It is based on the premise that participation has significant benefits for both government and citizens.

IV) Public Advocacy is the process of representing the interests of constituents and interest groups in legislative, administrative, or other established institutional arenas.

The foundation of this model is the belief that all groups within the community should have representation regardless of their wealth and power.

1. V) Popular Education aims to create change by raising critical consciousness about common human need. It assumes that people are able to participate but are temporarily unwilling to do so because they lack competence, confidence, or a common consciousness. Popular education is a form of praxis in which people reflect critically on their objective reality and act on that reflection to “transform the world.” Transformation cannot and will not occur unless people’s level of consciousness is raised regarding the problems they confront. Paulo Friere used this method in squatter settlements in Brazil.
2. VI) Local Service Development is a process by which people provide their own services at the community level. It assumes that problems in communities have local solutions and that residents can take local initiatives to help themselves. It is not a form of outside advocacy for local groups (public advocacy), nor a mandated participation in plans originating someplace else (citizen participation).

• 5) Siddiqui H. Y(1997) suggested three models or approaches for community work. They are,

I)   Neighbourhood Development Model: The common assumption of this model is that people living in a community (neighbourhood) have the basic and inherent capacity of meeting their needs/ problems through their own initiative and resources. The emphasis is to encourage thinking on the part of people themselves, to adopt progressive attitudes, rather than doing things for them or helping. The experience of community work in India has shown that a complete withdrawal of workers/agency in neighbourhood model is not possible and it required long term involvement in the part of worker or agency. The specific steps involved in this model are:

1. II) System Change Model: There exist various arrangements in society that cater to the basic needs of education, health, housing, employment etc. These are the independent systems and comprised of sub systems. The ultimate aim for the existence of these systems is social production and social consumption. These systems may be dysfunctional because of various factors. The system either may become dysfunctional because what it is producing is not relevant for people, or because many people do not have access to what is being produced. To tackle this, first the system and its sub systems need to be understood in order to arrive at a useful framework for understanding what one finds at the grass roots level. The specific tasks associated with this model are;

   v  Collecting relevant facts about the specific deficiencies in the system

v  Sharing of the findings within the community/ communities

v  Selecting an appropriate strategy to influence decision making bodies or to focus attention on the issue

v  Mobilising community and outside support to put the plan into action

v  Developing an organization in the community and linking it to similar organizations in other communities and other agencies, which can help them in demanding change.

III)   Structural Change Model: This model visualizes the community as a small cell within the larger body of society and the relationship between different sections of the population. In the structural change model, the worker analyses the link between the macro structuring of social relationships and the micro-reality (the problem of unemployment in the community, or lack of access of large sections of the people to education or health facilities or credit/other resources). The worker tries to mobilize the community to participate in the radical alteration of the macro structure which will impact the micro reality. The specific tasks involved in the model are;

v  To develop an understanding of the link between micro and macro social realities

v  To make a conscious decision about an alternative political ideology

• v To share this understanding with the community and to enable them to make its own decisions
• v To help the community identify a plan of action to pursue its goal by locating specific issues and consequent action to launch a long struggle
• v To help the community sustain its interest, enthusiasm and capacity to meet the strain which is likely to arise out of an inevitable conflict with the existing power structures or structures

.

• 6) Peter Dreiver (1996) provided a typology for “Community Empowerment Strategies” and identified the following alternative directions or approaches. These are:

v  Community Organising: Mobilising people to fight common problems and to increase their voice and decisions that affect their lives and communities

v  Community Based Development: Neighbourhood based efforts to improve a locality’s physical and financial condition such as new construction of roads and other infrastructures etc.

v  Community-Based Service Provision: Involves neighbourhood-level efforts to deliver social services (childcare, vocational training, maternal and child health etc.) and it is called “building human capital”.

• 7) Robert Fisher (1994) identified three approaches to neighbourhood organizing. They are,

I. Social Work Approach: Society is a social organism and all efforts are oriented towards building a sense of community. The community organizer plays the role of an enabler, an advocate, a planner and a coordinator, who helps the community to identity a problem in the neighbourhood, attempts to procure the requisite resources by gathering the existing social services and by lobbying with those in power to meet the needs of the neighbourhood like Social Settlement Movements in US.

II. The Political Activist Approach: this approach used militant confrontation and heavy pressure on the power institutions of the society. Power sharing is a major goal of this approach. This method is based on advocacy, conflict and negotiation and is used by mass based organizations such as those initiated by Saul Alinsky, who is also considered to be the founder of this approach.

IIIThe Neighbourhood Maintenance Approach: This approach arose out of both the previous approaches. The method used may be peer group pressure, may be a civic association/ neighbourhood association. In the initial phase, peer group pressure may be used to convince the officials to deliver services to the community, but later it could assume the form of the political activists approach as they realize that goals can only be achieved through confrontation.

8)Saul Alinsky (1945) presented two distinct approaches or traditions to neighbourhood organizing. According to him, social change and community organization could be either primarily reformist or revolutionary, depending on how fundamental the changes are, which are sought.

I.        The Social Mobilisation Tradition: This is based on the assumption that pressure will make those in power comply with the demands that are made and contacting people and encouraging them to become socially and politically active. Social mobilization efforts are also labelled as “campaigns”, as they utilize collective power to create change.

II.         Social Production Tradition: In this tradition, the strategic goal is to acquire services, material goods and resources for the people in need and helping those in need with the problems they face. In order to achieve the core goal of acquiring goods/services for the target group/s or to attempt redistribution of resources/benefits, supporters of this tradition are more likely to work with those in power. People are encouraged to learn to participate in the political system and to manage relationships with agencies that provide services. The social production initiatives are usually labelled as “projects” as they are primarily endeavours to create services that benefit those in need.

Conclusion

A number of writers and practitioners of community organization or work have forwarded a number of approaches or models and strategies for community work. Varying between the more conservative and traditional models based on consensus, and the more radical and transformative approaches or models and strategies, these provide us with alternative options of engaging the community system for collective action. Having understood and analysed these you will become clear about the application of specific models/approaches in working with Communities.

References

   1.    Duffy, M. (2010). Introduction to Sociology. In Spring.

2.    Rubin, H.J., & Rubin, I.S. (2008). Community organization and development (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

3.       Checkoway, B. (1995). Six strategies of community change. Community development journal, 30 (1), 2-20.

4.    Fellin, P. (2001). The community and the social worker. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

5.    Rothman, J. (1995). Approaches to Community Intervention. In Rothman, J., Erlich, J.   L. & Tropman, J. E. (Eds.). Strategies of Community Intervention, Fifth Edition. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc., p. 26-63.

6.    Hanna, M. & Robinson, B. (1994). Strategies for community empowerment. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.

7.    Newman, T., Moseley, A., Tierney, S., & Ellis, A. (2005). Evidence-based social work: A  guide for the perplexed. Russell House.

8.    Siddiqui, H.Y. (1997). Working with Communities, Hira Publications, New Delhi.

9.    Ross, Murray. G. (1955). Community OrganisationTheory and Principles, Harper Bros, New York.

10. Fisher, R. (1994). Let the people decide: Neighborhood organizing in America. Twayne Pub.

11. Saul D. Alinsky, Reveille for Radicals (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1945)