Solutions in Supervision to Enhance the Experience

By Alan S. Wolkenstein, MSW

The process of supervision is a mainstay of social work, but there are too many “in the shadows” components that negatively affect the supervisor. Take supervision “out of the shadows” to reveal it enough to hopefully make it a more enhanced educational experience for both the supervisor and the supervisee. Too many supervisors throw up their hands and describe it as an unpleasant and unrewarding use of their time, and too many talk about it being anxiety provoking, neither rewarding nor appealing, and not contributing to their education and practice skills as a social worker, either as a student or in practice.

Let us explore some of the conflicts in supervision that can result in burnout and impairment for either the supervisor or the learner. Are situations resulting in burnout (no longer caring for those who come for care) and impairment (an inability to learn by the one being supervised) extreme but possible consequences resulting from chronic dysfunctional supervisory experiences?

I have supervised social work graduate students, BSWs, undergraduates in social work, primary care physicians in training and practice, medical students, and allied health professionals. Each presents special needs and offers special gifts. Each can be fruitful or unrewarding in that we function in a highly interdependent manner. Since all of us learn in different ways and manners, are we flexible enough to modify our supervisory skills to meet the learning styles of those who come to us for supervision?

The unrewarding encounters in supervision may be due in large part to regimented and prescribed methods of supervision. We may fail others by overintellectualized and highly verbalized methods that simply leave no room for learner self-awareness, insight, and growth.

What special skills are needed to be a supervisor, and how can it be effectively processed to become a mainstay of social work? Since both our work environment and client-centered care (and supervision) will often be intense and highly emotional, adult education, reflection, and experiential education can diffuse the anxiety of emotionality to allow effective supervision to occur.

Consider some of the unique ethical components of the supervisory dynamics and learn “critical incidents” of several of these experiences (Kushner, Mayhew, Rogers, & Herman, 1982). The chances for ethical dilemmas can occur. Dual relationships, violations of propriety, lack of professional boundaries, and downright unfairness are not unusual. These can occur through clinical naiveté about conflicts between supervisor and learner, improper delegation of work assignments, and misuse of supervisory time for personal issues. There may be an overemphasis on productivity and blind adherence to work structure and policies. The work environment many social workers practice in may not be in their professional best interests and can contribute to additional stress and dissatisfaction. There simply are too many difficulties that can arise as a result of chronic dysfunctional supervisory experiences (Dewane, 2007).

There are times when supervision is primarily directed toward agency/site policies and procedures. Other times it focuses on social work philosophy and best practices. Sometimes, but not always, it includes an emphasis on enhanced self-awareness, psychological depth, and development of individual insight as meaningful goals of supervision. Should there be a goal of helping the learner or practitioner work to their best level of excellence? We can divide supervision into administrative, educational, psychotherapeutic, and supportive modes (Kadushin & Harkness, 2002; Dawson, 1926).

It is important to appreciate that all of us have “two interdependent worlds” within us that should command a role in the supervisory experience (Wolkenstein & Butler, 1993). There is the learner’s inner world of thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and beliefs, and the outer world of experiences and interpersonal encounters. These two worlds interact and should support each other. They can be empathetic to each other and mindful of the person’s tasks and responsibilities. They can also be out of sync and cause anxiety and turmoil.

It is relevant that the two worlds of the learner be a part of their supervision. Examples include the following:

Inner world: “How does that session with your client resonate with your own beliefs?”
Outer world: “Can you sense how best to help your client struggle with their conflicts?”

Sharing with the supervisee the concept of two worlds can enhance their skills and abilities as well as provide a conceptual structure for them for self-assessment and professional self-awareness.

I am reminded of the Jungian values of possessing a nonanxious presence, assuming nonpossessive warmth with our learners, and demonstrating the genuineness of our intentions as a supervisor. My experience has been that such “guideposts” facilitate quality time in supervision.

There are always tactical questions to be considered. How will sessions be conducted? How will topics be chosen? Will records be kept? Will supervision be part of performance evaluations? Will feedback be given to the supervisor (a necessary component of adult education)? How much supervision is needed or required? What “rights” can both supervisor and learner expect?

Additional Variables
Which rules and tactics apply when the supervisor is not a social worker but rather is from a field that may not embrace the biopsychosocial model of care and treatment? How do we work within that frame of supervision, and what skills are needed to reframe social work values, beliefs, methods, and ethics?

Some of us may also be supervised by others who share similar core beliefs but are not social workers. What can be expected in these situations? I have been supervised by individuals from other professions who embraced our core values. I have also been supervised by others who did not believe in our values and guidelines. There were also some supervisees who refused to let me into their professional space. As a result, I was unable to supervise.

Consider a reflective learning methodology to assess and build tough and complicated experiences (Wolkenstein & Wolkenstein, 2009). This method can be used by newly minted supervisors as well as grizzled veterans, students, those in supervision as part of their work experience, and those interested in how we succeed or fail as we grapple with the dynamics of supervision.

Supervision is about using our best interpersonal skills with those entrusted to us to supervise. We can facilitate a deeper and more emotional level to drive the supervisory experience. I believe that this deeper and more emotional level (where learning and synthesis is more likely to occur) can be assessed, nurtured, and promoted so that our most effective knowledge and skills will be passed on.

Learning Objectives

Share definitions of supervision in a multitude of settings and experiences.
Examine the skills, attitudes, and behaviors necessary for supervision and in being supervised.
Explore examples of successful and failed supervisory experiences as part of experiential education to seek more definitive skills, attitudes, and behaviors.
Make reflection a necessary component of any supervisory experience.
Discuss various ethical components that appear in supervision, whether acknowledged or not.
Define why the components of critical incidents must be a part of any supervisory history.
Share techniques of how to avoid burnout and impairment in the interdependency of supervision.
Teach the “two worlds” process for learner self-awareness and supervisory skill building.
Consider principles of adult education to enhance supervisory experiences.
Assess the reality of those who just shouldn’t supervise and those who are unable to learn how to use supervision.
Clarify to whom is the moral duty owed.

Supervision is a necessary component of our profession. It must be nurtured and protected as such even though there are inherent obstacles and built-in “shadows” that inhibit and reduce its effectiveness. It is the most effective teaching methodology to explore the essentials of the work environment and the reflection skills. Supervision also helps us to seek enhanced self-awareness (mindfulness) and value psychological depth (being in the moment with clients).

— Alan S. Wolkenstein, MSW, is a clinical professor of family medicine (ret.) at University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health and senior educator and consultant at Wolkenstein and Associates, LLC. Wolkenstein is a 40-year veteran of teaching, researching, and publishing about the education of primary care physicians in the biopsychosocial model of health care.

References
Dawson, J. B. (1926). The case work supervisor in a family agency. Family, 6.

Dewane, C. J. (2007). Supervisor, beware: Ethical dangers in supervision. Social Work Today, 7(4), 34.

Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2002). Supervision in social work. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kushner, K., Mayhew, H., Rogers, L., & Herman, R. (1982). Critical issues in family practice. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Wolkenstein, A. S., & Butler, D. J. (1993). Quality of life among the elderly: Self perspectives of some healthy elderly. Gerontology and Geriatrics Education, 12(4).

Wolkenstein, A. S., & Wolkenstein, M. E. (2009). Using reflective learning in graduate medical education and practice. Medical Encounter, 23(3).