Evolve June 2014 Resiliency Building Groups (Continued) For example, opening with a question, “ what have each of you done from the time when you first felt emotionally safe after the incident, up until this very moment here at work, that has helped you to begin to bounce back?” Each employee has found a way. The discussion generated by this ques- tion, begins an individualized, strength based discussion on resilience that is safe for all to participate. Hearing responses like: “contacting each oth- er”, “talking to spouses”, “praying”, “hugging children”, “long walks”, “staying within a routine”, “exercising”, statements of hope and optimism, etc., mark the beginning of resilient trajectories. For the EAP responder, this discussion introduces opportunities for teaching points on resiliency. Additionally, from this safe discussion, the group may move to new areas. Some may choose to retell their experience. This is completely their choice, not a formal process of the group. Their willingness to do so, demonstrates being psychologically ready to revisit their experience. They have made the determination that this group, in this environment (workplace), and with these colleagues, is safe for this level of disclosure . That is their decision not ours. Responders need to pay close attention to the potential physical reactions that a reactivated stress response can pro- duce. Remember this is crisis intervention not trauma therapy. Those who choose to share in the group, or at any other time for that matter, should never end their shared experience in the “victim” position, but with a plan to access their resilient attributes. Helping them shift from a “victim” self - appraisal, towards a “survivor” reappraisal can begin with timely, and compassionate suggestions. The group rounds itself out by normalizing post - stress reactions, post incident reintegration to work, and an overall summary. By EAP for EAP While many aspects of crisis inter- vention are universal among the various response agencies, i.e. ICISF, Nova, Red Cross, FEMA, etc., each require specific training in their own unique approach. This is because each response organization has a unique mission and a targeted population they serve. Just because one has been trained in one re- sponse model, say, Red Cross, does not mean they have met the training criteria to be responders in the ICISF, Nova or FEMA model. None of the major response agencies con- sider another’s training sufficient, by itself, to join their response teams. Why should EAP? Our mission and service population are unique. We have core technologies, a dual client focus, multiple EAP models, unique workplace cultures and variables. We attend to employees, managers, and human resource professionals. We respond to workplaces versus scenes. And more. With the latest research identifying the role organizational management and collegial relations have on resili- ent outcomes, EAPs are in a prime position to use their professional experience and EAP knowledge. We are responsible for our response approach and quite capable of creat- ing a research based application... By EAP for EAP. Learn more about these concepts and processes at our workshops or online training.