Checking Your Approach Does It Reflect Systemic/Relational Supervision?

Transcription

1 Checking Your Approach Does It Reflect Systemic/Relational Supervision? Cheryl L. Storm and Thomas C. Todd In this resource, we suggest an encompassing framework for supervision that highlights the unique aspects of relational/systemic supervision. We encourage supervisors to use this framework to develop an initial supervision approach, or to expand, fine-tune, or change an existing approach. When supervisors use this framework, they can check their personal approach to supervision for its overall congruence and reflection of systemic/relational supervision. To help supervisors utilize the framework with this purpose in mind, we suggest questions that supervisors can use to stimulate their thinking, examine their practices, and indicate additional considerations. The Need for a Broad Framework for Relational/Systemic Supervision Systemic/relational supervision has always had at its center the development of a highly personal philosophy of supervision, typically isomorphic to the supervisor s therapy model (AAMFT, 2013). Historically, this made sense; systemic/relational supervision, like systemic/relational therapy, was new, evolving, and limited in scope. Supervisors were often introducing supervisees to the basics of relational/ systemic therapy and frequently embedding training within the supervision process. Today s supervisors are increasingly supervising therapists (including interns) who have a solid foundation in systemic therapy, especially where systemic The Complete Systemic Supervisor: Context, Philosophy, and Pragmatics, Second Edition. Edited by Thomas C. Todd and Cheryl L. Storm John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

2 2 therapy programs are embedded in universities such as in the United States and Canada. Although every supervisor must still wrestle with developing and articulating a personal philosophy of supervision, we argue that contemporary systemic/ relational supervision has become far more sophisticated and complex, encompassing much more than ever before. Supervisors no longer have the luxury of basing their supervision solely on their preferred therapy models, their favorite methods for supervision, the type of supervision relationships they are most comfortable with having, or their personal style (among others). Rather, supervisors must broaden their supervision to encompass a host of critical aspects of supervision required of all supervisors regardless of their personal philosophy of supervision. What are the critical aspects that can easily be overlooked if supervisors focus narrowly on their preferences? Some of the critical aspects are relevant research evidence, common factors of effective therapy and supervision, client and supervisee needs in various contexts, and emphases required by stakeholders such as regulators and accreditors to name a few. The framework in the Section A Brief Introduction to a Relational/Systemic Framework for Supervision encourages supervisors to consider aspects such as these. A Brief Introduction to a Relational/Systemic Framework for Supervision In the relational/systemic framework, there are four important aspects of supervision represented by these overarching questions: Do you account for the context within your approach? Does your supervisory change process have a consistently systemic foundation? Do you embrace supervisor accountability for making pragmatic, everyday choices that contribute directly to supervisee development, the supervision relationship, and safeguarding clients? Do you continuously monitor the complex web of intersecting therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships and respond to them? (Figure 1A.1). Although these aspects of supervision contextualizing supervision, interrelated relationships, supervisory accountability, and a systemic foundation are uniquely expressed in each supervisor s practice of supervision, there are elements of each aspect that are important to all relational/systemic supervision. For example, supervisors vary widely in their expression of power from benevolently hierarchical to highly collaborative relationships, yet it is critical for all supervisors to attend to the power associated with diversity and inherent within the supervision relationship. In another example, supervisors vary widely in the degree to which they use transcripts, tapes, or live supervision, but some method of accessing what is happening in therapy is important to ensure the safety of clients. (For a more comprehensive description of the relational/systemic supervision framework, see Chapter 1 in the accompanying book.)

3 3 Inviting multiple views and considering complexity Contextualization of supervision Interrelated relationships Responding to effects of therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships Supervisory accountability Balancing supervisee development, the relationship and safeguarding of clients Systemic foundation Focusing on relational change process Figure 1A.1 A framework for systemic/relational supervision diagram. Questions for Systematic Reflection about Your Supervision Approach The questions in Checking for a Relational/Systemic Supervision Perspective Questions, based on our systemic/relational framework for supervision, are intended as guides for systematic reflection about your approach to supervision: Does it fully reflect a systemic/relational supervision? These questions can be used for self-reflection and also can help to stimulate a deeper conversation with others about your supervision, including supervisees concerning their perspectives. All elements of supervision can receive similar scrutiny using these questions supervision contracts and forms, supervision philosophy statements, and supervision practices and content and can become indicators of a relational/systemic approach. Table 1A.1 lists some distinct indicators of relational/systemic approaches to supervision that are well developed and encompass critical aspects of supervision. The suggested questions and examples of indicators are only a starting point. The questions can be used as a mechanism for an individual supervisor s selfsupervision or as a stimulus for discussion within supervisor training courses and supervisor mentoring groups. Whatever the case, we believe other equally useful questions will emerge, with accompanying illuminating indicators. We look forward to adding these additions to the exercise of checking for a systemic/relational supervision perspective.

4 4 Checking for a relational/systemic supervision perspective Seeing the supervision context in a complex, multi-faceted manner What perspectives of participants and stakeholders have I considered? What others should I consider? How do I help supervisees keep these perspectives in mind? What factors impact the context of supervision and therapy? (Include examples such as professional setting, current social and economic conditions, etc.) Are there important qualities of myself as supervisor and of my supervisees that shape the supervision context? What outside systems are important parts of the supervision and therapy contexts? (These can include licensing regulations, education and training contexts, agency mission and clientele, etc.) Incorporating interrelated therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships Do I consider the effects of my supervision on the network of intersecting therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships? Are there relationships I tend to overlook? (e.g., other supervisors) How do I acknowledge issues of power in the supervision relationship, particularly around evaluation? How do I incorporate diversity issues in the supervision relationship and similar considerations in my supervisees therapy? How do I stay focused on these interrelated relationships in my self-reflections as a supervisor? Balancing multiple elements of supervisory accountability How do I ensure supervisee learning and skill development and general professional functioning of supervisees? Do I have an authentic supervision relationship? What steps do I take to ensure adequate therapy and client safety? How do I hold myself responsible in all these areas? If I tend to over-emphasize or under-emphasize any areas, which would they be? What evidence of my accountability would be obvious to supervisees? To clients and other professionals? Placing my approach on a sound systemic foundation Do I explicitly incorporate systemic concepts in my supervision? Are systemic concepts used in a way that is clear to supervisees? How do I conceptualize and describe relational dimensions in supervision? Is my philosophy of supervision clearly systemic/relational in focus? Have I used my ideas about therapy as a basis for my supervision? Am I clear about the limitations of therapy ideas for supervision? Does my approach allow me to supervise therapists who have a different approach to therapy than mine, or am I limited to only supervising those who share my ideas about therapy? Are there ways that I can broaden my approach so that I can provide supervision to a wider range of supervisees?

5 5 Table 1A.1 Indicators of a relational/systemic supervision approach Seeing the supervision context in a complex, multi-faceted manner Regular informal and formal evaluation of supervision. Regular communication with others (e.g., professionals, relevant parties) in the therapy and supervision setting/context. Demonstrated understanding of the perspective of outside systems relevant to therapy and supervision. Incorporating interrelated therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships Formal agreements between supervisors and therapy/supervision settings. Supervision agreements with written contracts. Evidence of self-of-the therapist and self-of-the supervisor mechanisms. Placing my approach on a sound systemic foundation A written articulation of a philosophy of supervision addressing supervisee development and learning; goals for supervision; supervisory responsibilities including those regarding evaluation and preferred relational/systemic therapy and supervision theoretical ideas and assumptions; and supervision methods, structures, and practices. a A clear statement of a scope of supervision practice. Inclusion of contemporary supervision scholarship and research, including established common factors of therapy and supervision. Balancing multiple elements of supervisory accountability An agreed-upon professional code of conduct, such as a specific ethical code. Fulfilling of any regulatory, credentialing, or accrediting requirements for supervision and therapy. Informal and formal evaluation processes, including formative and summative assessment. Access to recordkeeping and case management documentation and processes. Access to observable/raw data of therapy. Explicit rationale for pragmatic choices of supervision methods and practices. Transparency of supervision occurring, including awareness of supervision by clients. a The Theory Building Questions offered by Piercy and Sprenkle (2002) and the chapter 13 on Articulating Your Personal Model for Supervision in Lee and Nelson (2014) are additional resources for supervisors to use in developing and articulating a philosophy of supervision. The Importance of Checking Oneself As systemic/relational supervisors practicing alongside supervisors in many contexts, we are aware of the importance of respecting other supervisory viewpoints, incorporating the many innovations of other supervisors into our

6 6 work, and recognizing important influences from other sources on supervision. However, it can be all too easy to slip into practicing supervision as if it is a generic professional endeavor with a common orientation that is applied similarly by all supervisors with all supervisees and within all contexts. We have found that using this framework to periodically check ourselves insures that we are maintaining a systemic/relational supervisor perspective: a paradigm we have been highly committed and passionate about throughout our professional careers. The steps described here assist us in determining what changes we wish to make in our ever-evolving supervision approach additions, fine-tunings, alterations, or deletions. Most importantly, it helps us employ a systemic/relational supervision approach congruent with our commitment and passion as we strive to expand the practice of systemic/relational therapy through supervision. References AAMFT. (2013). AAMFT approved supervisor designation: Standards and res ponsibilities handbook. Alexandria, VA: Author. Lee, R. E., & Nelson, T. S. (2014). The contemporary relational supervisor. New York: Routledge. Piercy, F. P., & Sprenkle, D. H. (2002). Family therapy theory-building questions. In T. Todd & C. Storm (Eds.), The Complete systemic supervisor: Context, philosophy, & pragmatics (pp ). Lincoln, NE: Authors Choice Publishing. (Original work published in 1997).