![]()
1
Introduction to The Heart of Coaching Supervision1
Eve Turner and Stephen Palmer
Introduction
The stance of this book is that supervision can be a positive benefit and an activity that is re-sourcing and profoundly beneficial for coaches, mentors and more widely for anyone in a helping profession or leadership position. Its impact extends beyond those receiving it to others in the wider system(s) â all our clients, both individual and organisational, for others within organisational systems such as our peers and direct reports, for other systems such as our families and friends, for our sectors, our profession and for the world at large. This wide-ranging claim is not, as yet, backed up by substantial research, although this is slowly changing (Hawkins and Turner, 2017; de Haan, 2017; Palmer, 2017; Sheppard, 2017).
In writing this book we are starting with the need for self-awareness for ourselves as supervising practitioners, the need to provide ourselves with space and opportunities for reflection and learning. In Chapter 8 (p161) Kline says she learned from her first employer, a Quaker head teacher, Thornton Brown, that âstudents are learning youâ (Kline, 1999: 68â69). We are the role models, and if we are dealing with one of our own âhot buttonsâ, for example, how do we manage this and retain our ability to be the compassionate observer, to hold what Hawkins describes as wide-angled empathy and compassion (Chapter 4, p74)? This is combined with an understanding of the complexity that supervisors, coaches, mentors and leaders face, day to day, the challenges that brings, the intense emotions that may be surfaced (see case study). The authors wish we had been given a pound, Euro or dollar (we are not fussy!) for every time someone has mentioned a lack of time as a factor for not being able to do something; that also applies to reflection and self-care. In this book, alongside a depth and breadth of reflective practice, there are also practical ways to support ourselves that need only take one minute, many of which we can do alone. There are also approaches we can choose to do alone and with others, and also those that will encourage us to work with others collaboratively in partnership (Chapters 8 and 9).
This book sets out to explore who we are as supervisors, but the exploration and the exercises associated with it, are equally suitable for coaches, mentors, leaders; in fact, anyone could benefit from the content. The emphasis is on growing our self-awareness, developing our understanding of how we are in relation to ourselves and others, and then building our relationships with others and wider systems. When we do this, as entertainer and mental health advocate Ruby Wax (2016: 232) concludes having studied and practised mindfulness: âI still have the same hot emotional triggers â I donât think they ever go â but theyâre fainter; I can watch them coming down the pipeline and remember that theyâre just triggers, not facts.â
What is supervision?
There are many definitions of supervision. What they have in common suggests that supervision:
In point 1. (providing fresh perspectives), we are not limiting this to the idea of review (of sessions, recordings, conversations, agreements etc.). Hawkins (2017) argues that supervision can be dominated by the car rear-view window, looking back at what has happened, and he asks: âHow do we rebalance reflection with preflection, building our capacity for the challenges of the future world?â We cannot predict the future, and indeed trying to do so could be both time-consuming and frustrating. It is also widely accepted that the strength of the supervision room and of coaching is in our ability to be present in the moment, in the here and now. But without being alert to the future we may miss opportunities and challenges and the chance to grow our ability to deal with them.
Some quotes from writers in the field describing supervision illustrate the six common themes. Hawkins and Schwenk (2006: 4) talk of
Hay (2007: 4â5) says:
Carroll and Shaw (2013: 255) see
They talk of looking beyond our comfort zones, taking many stances âbeyond, beside, beneath, above, below, against forâ and ask: âwhat would happen if I looked at myself, my client, our relationship, the organisation in another way?â (Carroll and Shaw, 2013: 255).
Murdoch believes (2013: xxvii) that
Over the years, as supervision has developed across the helping professions, from social work (Kadushin) to counselling (Proctor) and then coaching (Hawkins and Smith) three main functions have been identified but described variously, illustrated in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1 The three functions of supervision
(adapted from Hawkins and Smith, 2013: 173)
At the start of Chapter 4 Hawkins describes his reason for describing the third leg as resourcing rather than restorative or supportive. He argues that each of us needs to find ongoing ways of being and staying âtopped upâ, of being re-sourced constantly. This will ensure we do not get depleted and rely, in the worst extreme, on supervisor input to be âwholeâ again, to be restored.
As one factor in achieving this, Hawkins (2017) tells a story of a colleague, a Sufi teacher who encourages us to âfocus on life as a generous teacher, developing capacity around us, through us and within usâ. In this, Hawkins advocates a move from dialogue to generative trialogue where âlifeâ in all its forms, including the more than human world, provides us with learning that we bring to supervision, to coaching and beyond. Within the book there are many places where we can take stock and allow this to happen.
What does research tell us?
Corrie with Lane and Watts (2016: 7) sum up the current situation when it comes to evidencing the impact of supervision: âenthusiasm for supervision currently outstrips the evidence base, including the evidence that attests to its impact on practice.â Corrie and associates also talk of the relatively little attention that has been paid to the development of supervisors, as opposed to supervisees. In a review of coaching supervision Tkach and DiGirolamo (2017: 56) note that there are currently âno universally accepted guidelines or best practicesâ. They advocate the âdevelopment and agreement amongst researchers of standardised measuresâ to move the industry forward in its understanding of what takes place in coaching supervision (2017: 59).
We do know that the growth in coaching supervision has been relatively rapid since 2006, at least among those coaches who are able to be reached, for example through membership of professional bodies and forums. In 2006 âonly 44% of UK coaches received continuous and regular supervisionâ (Hawkins and Schwenk, 2006: 4). This compared to 88% of organisers of coaching and 86% of coaches believing they should have it. By 2014, in a survey carried out by Hawkins and Turner, with 428 coaches completing the supervision section responding via professional bodies (in particular the AC, EMCC and ICF) and with Coaching at Work magazine, there had been a âmassive increase in coaches having coaching supervision, a rise from 44% to 93.3% in the UK, and 83.2% globally. North America is significantly lagging behind other regions; however, it is roughly where the UK was in 2006â (Hawkins and Turner, 2017: 106).
The motivation for supervision was described positively. For the vast majority, 92.6%, their motivation was as âpart of my commitment to good practiceâ (2017: 107). For 51.6% it was considered as part of their CPD. When it came to having supervision âas a requirementâ, the figures were relatively low: 33.9% for membership of a professional body, 25.6% for accreditation by a professional body, 19.2% to work in an organisation as an external coach and the lowest, 14.7%, to work as an internal coach. Where coaches didnât receive supervision, fewer cited difficulties in finding a supervisor, the main reason in 2006. Instead it was because coaches chose to access peer networks or use their own reflective practice or their own coach (2017: 107).
The variety in practice is clear from the research that does exist. In Grantâs 2012 study of Australian coaches â50% of those who provided formal supervision had received some training in supervisionâ and a âmajor issue raised by many participants was the difficulty of finding training in coach supervision and being assured of the quality of any such trainingâ (Grant, 2012: 28). While 82.7% of coaches were having some form of supervision, 30% reported having had a negative experience (2012: 17). Research published soon after, with 33 executive coaches from Australia/New Zealand, and 29 purchasing clients, found that
(Lawrence and Whyte, 2014: 39)
While the majority said they would use supervision if stuck,
(Lawrence and Whyte, 2014: 43)
The French organisation, the Professional Supervisors Federation (2014), had 269 respondents to a survey looking at the state of supervision in France of which 148 were coaches and 89 described themselves as supervisors. The supervisors were highly experienced, and the vast majority, 94%, themselves had supervision. However, 80% had not been trained as supervisors, and only 36% of those not trained, planned to do so (2014: 22â25). When it came to the dangers of supervision the main fears expressed were of dependence and amateurism for both supervisors and coaches and the benefits were mainly seen as sharing methods and standing back (2014: 35). Interestingly, 40% of respondents did not know if their supervisors were supervised themselves. This mirrors a finding with coachees where almost half, 48.3%, did not know if their coaches were supervised (Turner and Hawkins, 2016: 34).
DeFilippo (2015: 12) did a qualitative project with ânine supervisory dyads which includes coaches and coach supervisorsâ and found results that included âincreased confidence and objectivity for coaches, as well as satisfaction and learning for coach supervisorsâ. In a unique study, to date, Moral (2015: 126) examines whether there is a âspecific personality profile of supervisors, or of coaches who want to become supervisorsâ. In looking at whether they have a s...
