A Group Support Proposal For Your Feedback!
Hello everyone,
Group Support is one of the significant parts of the community to provide support to the community. We are always striving to bring more quality and focused support to the community members. Today’s post is to discuss and have your inputs on some of the ideas to improve quality to ensure focused support.
Proposal 1
As you all know a group support leader can pick 3 rooms/ support teams / subcom to support the community. It will be applicable for both room supporter and moderator. So we were discussing it earlier and I realized how overwhelming it is for group leaders as well as members' constant feedback on not getting topic-based support regularly. To address it, I propose:
- A group leader can pick only two rooms to focus on to provide focused support to the community members.
- One room would be a regular room (either Support Room 24/7 or Member Community Room)
- The second room will be any focused topic room like Anxiety, Depression, Trauma, Eating Disorder, Relationship, etc.
On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate this proposal where 1 is “Nay” and 10 is “Yay”
Proposal 2
As you all know every support team runs support sessions and guided discussions to support the sub-community. Unfortunately, we do not have many discussion hosts to host these sessions. So to address it, I propose:
A community-centered mod of a sub-community would be required to host a 30 minutes support session/ guided discussion twice a month.
I am proposing a 30 minutes session as it seems easier to manage to host than an hour session. So, a moderator may be able to schedule in advance and run therapeutic sessions. As well as it will be a huge help to the Support Teams and the Community.
The reason to propose these changes is to ensure both the group leaders and community get all support. We strive to support our members, so our focus is always to give them the best support and experience. And, as our community leaders are so dedicated and hardworking. We understand how they trying their best to support the community through their efforts and contributions. They are important to us and we appreciate their efforts.
On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate this proposal where 1 is “Nay” and 10 is “Yay”
All thoughts and feedback on the above proposal are welcomed! We look forward to having your inputs. Thank you for being with us!!
Sure
Proposal 1:
I would give this a 10. I think making the roles more specialized in this way would facilitate less stress on the Mods and higher quality for the mentors, as the Mods can really focus their efforts on two objectives.
Proposal 2:
I am not a fan of role requirements in general because I feel they deter people from applying for leadership roles, resulting in lower gross productivity on the site as a whole
@ASilentObserver
not at this time
1) probably requires a lot of time online which is not for me right now
2) seems goiod to hve a 30 min talk :)
@ASilentObserver
Hiya, Hmm difficult to say, but proposal 1. Ima 5 I think there are some that can handle it easily, while others would have a harder time. 1 problem I foresee is filling the vacant positions left open by this.
2. Ina not sure about the requirements, me personally I never know if ima be on for 30 minutes or 3 hrs. I can't really schedule ahead of time as I don't have a schedule. So I'd say ima 4 on proposal 2.
@ASilentObserver
I would pick proposal 1
Yay to both proposals
Well proposal 1 seems like more or less what I would consider the best idea because it seems similar to what we have now. ( To my understanding) And proposal 2 also seems acceptable as you state it help the support teams and the community. But I would have to say number one simply because that's what I understand has a simpler layout
10 & 10, yay for both proposal 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Hi, I'm not in the position to be the moderator at this point but as a participant, I have noticed that since people who are leading the groups are volunteers, that there is a wide variation in the abilities of the supporters. This means to me that some persons would be able to handle three groups, and another person might really need to focus on one group at a time and for a limited time period, depending on their needs, abilties and schedule. This is just a thought I'm tossing out, is to leave the number of groups flexible, and let persons learn through experience what is "too much" or "too little" for them in particular and keep that individuality present in designation of responsibilities as well.