In examining this triad of learning difficulties, I begin with the following foundational assumptions:
Anxiety and Demoralization Attendant to the Development of Supervisory Mindedness
Models of supervisor development acknowledge that becoming a supervisor can be an experience fraught with anxiety. It is a new role for which supervisor trainees typically have no blueprint, other than having observed how their own psychotherapy supervisors operated (cf. Hess, 1986; Rodenhauser, 1997; Scechter, 1990). And as research and commentary thus far suggest, some of the past supervision experiences upon which a fair number of us have to draw are not all that favorable (Ellis, 2001, 2012; Ellis, Siembor, Swords, Morere, & Blanco, 2008; Ladany, 2004). While not eliminating trainee anxiety, supervision coursework and seminars provide a conceptual map and are means by which beginning supervisors’ anxiety can be lessened (Inman & Soheilian, 2010).
I would like to propose that beginning supervisors can also often feel the pangs of demoralization early on in their learning process. While this experience has been recognized as part of the beginning psychotherapist learning experience (Watkins, 1996, 2012a), and while self-doubt, internal conflict, and turmoil have been typically recognized as part of beginning supervisor’s early growth (e.g., Alonso, 1983, 1985), demoralization itself has not specifically been included in any supervisor development conceptualizations. Drawing on Frank and Frank (1991), supervisory demoralization can be defined as: “to deprive . . . [the beginning supervisor] of spirit, courage, to dishearten, bewilder, to throw into disorder or confusion” (p. 35). I contend demoralization can also readily emerge in the supervisor development experience and merits consideration as a normative, yet potentially problematic, aspect of that growth process.
As beginning supervisors struggle with adapting to their new role, confront the frustrations of that adaptation process and the failures that attend it, they may believe that they have failed to live up to expectations. They feel frustrated, discouraged, and at a loss about how to remedy matters and, consequently, find their sense of morale and hope diminished. Much like the learning regression through which new therapists pass (Alonso & Ruttan, 1988), beginning supervisors can also be expected to pass through their own type of learning regression. Furthermore, just as beginning therapists often agonize over the question, “Am I truly cut out to be a psychotherapist?” (Tsuman-Caspi, 2012), beginning supervisors can also wonder the same about themselves and accordingly ask: “Do I really have what it takes to be a supervisor?” Again, supervision course-work, seminars, and the supervision of the supervision provide a conceptual map, much needed support, and constructive feedback by which demoralization may be alleviated. Absent such training experiences, the beginning supervisor is left to struggle alone. Unfortunately, when that is the case, the process of becoming a supervisor can sometimes lead to such an uncomfortable emotional level that meaningful learning is compromised, growth is stunted, and potential supervisees and their patients end up suffering.
But that is a scenario that can easily be contained if not avoided altogether by means of training and supervision. From my perspective, a simple yet helpful way to begin assisting new supervisors/supervisor trainees in coping with their experience of anxiety and demoralization is to acknowledge these as a normative part of the supervisor development process itself. For example, an explanation such as the following (which can also address identity development concerns) can be used for that purpose.
I know that you’ve expressed some frustrations and concerns about your being able to learn to supervise well. Let me share a few thoughts that might be helpful about what you’ve been and are feeling now. Just as becoming a psychotherapist is a process that takes time, ongoing practice, and ongoing self-reflection, becoming a supervisor is no different. Understandably, you want the supervision learning process to go far more quickly than it often does. Development over time is required to grow as supervisors. And just as becoming a therapist is a developmental process of growth that occurs in stages, new supervisors also proceed through developmental growth processes. I realize that that may not ease your pain, but I assure you that you are not alone in what you are feeling now. It is part of this process and indicates that you are progressing. Confusion, anxiety, doubt, and wondering “Can I really do this?” are quite common as we learn to do supervision and become a supervisor. What you’re experiencing is very much in line with what other beginning supervisors go through at this stage. Other beginning supervisors can attest to that. And though it’s been a long time since I sat where you’re sitting, I definitely remember having felt what you are feeling. You’re working, as do all beginning supervisors do, to establish a supervisory identity. It’s not an easily achieved developmental accomplishment; it involves some struggle of self-definition and self-discovery, and we don’t have a blueprint to follow. All that you’ve been doing is absolutely what you need to be doing to establish a sense of supervisory identity. In my opinion, supervision training and supervision of supervision can be immensely facilitative and is the crucial catalyst in forming supervisory identity. I promise to do all that I can to help you on your way to being and becoming a supervisor. By working together, we can move you closer to where you want to be. I’ve had the pleasure of working with many new supervisors like yourself over the years. They’ve had questions and doubts nearly identical to yours. I have seen the supervision training/supervision of supervision process enormously benefit them in proceeding developmentally and in putting in place a more solid sense of who they are as a supervisor.
Such comments, while by no means curative (and which may have to be revisited from time to time), can help to normalize, sooth, and defuse the sting of initial anxiety and demoralization, meaningfully place those experiences in developmental context, and provide beginning supervisors with the encouragement and support that they might need to ease their questioning and doubts.
As the growth process continues to unfold and (ideally) proceeds in favorable fashion, the development of supervisory mindedness is a special achievement. Just as psychotherapists are best when they possess, hone, and are able to effectively implement a high degree of psychological mindedness (cf. Chessick, 1971), supervisors are best when they develop, hone, and are able to effectively implement a high degree of supervisory mindedness. Supervisory mindedness, for our purposes, can be defined as:
(a)
informed understanding about and insight into the multiple layers of the supervision field (i.e., the triad of patient-supervisee-supervisor and therapy-in-supervision/supervision-in-therapy interface; (Filho, Pires, Berlim, Hartke, & Lewkowicz, 2007; Hess, 1987); and
(b)
the ability to effectively utilize that understanding and insight to inform the supervisory process and potentially stimulate supervisee and patient growth.
Because of the complexity of the supervisory situation, which can involve top-down and bottom-up parallel processes and cross-relational identifications and disidentifications (Gediman & Wolkenfeld, 1980; Tracey, Bludworth, & Glidden-Tracey, 2012), the development of supervisory mindedness can be a particularly challenging psychological acquisition. Anxiety and demoralization, while not necessarily preventing supervisory mindedness, can prove to be potent obstacles to its development. Supervisory mindedness has a far greater chance of being cultivated in a safe, facilitative atmosphere where beginning supervisors are liberated to learn, anxiety and demoralization are minimized, and unfettered exploration and reflection on supervisory practice are encouraged.
To summarize, in extrapolating Chessick’s triad of psychotherapy learning difficulties to supervision, I propose that: (a) new supervisors, in their journey to become skilled at supervision, not only experience anxiety but also demoralization; (b) supervisory mindedness is a crucial development that supervisors must achieve to be optimally effective; (c) if anxiety and demoralization become unduly burdening, they can seriously interfere with the new supervisor’s learning process and delay or derail it; (d) undue anxiety and demoralization can prove particularly pernicious to the acquisition of supervisory mindedness; and (e) to best create a place where the development of supervisory mindedness is stimulated, a safe, open, encouraging, affirming learning atmosphere, where new supervisors’ anxiety and demoralization are minimized and opportunities for self-exploration and self-reflection are maximized is optimal.
Development of Supervisory Identity
Identity is not the easiest of terms to define (Erikson, 1968) and defining supervisory identity is no exception. From reading supervisor development theory (e.g., Hess, 1987; Rodenhauser, 1997) we are left with the crisp, clear idea that supervisory identity matters greatly and is sine qua non in the process of being and becoming a supervisor. But what is actually meant by supervisor identity has typically never been precisely defined if defined at all. Might we at least begin to define that term in such a way that it serves to better inform and instruct our efforts at supervisor education?
To begin to answer that question, let us first consider the matter of perspective shift. There now appears to be general agreement: Functioning as a supervisor requires a shift in perspective that is different from functioning as psychotherapist (Borders, 1992; Borders & Brown, 2005). This vision shift of the supervisor, as I like to think of it, has been judged to involve developmental and conceptual dimensions (e.g., conceiving in terms of supervisor role and functions; Inman & Soheilian, 2010; Ladany & Inman, 2012). Such a shift might also be thought of as being perceptual, cognitive, affective, and behavioral in scope. It involves not only coming to see oneself as a supervisor but consistently thinking, feeling, and acting in according fashion. These changes can be used to inform our thinking about supervisor identity and its definition. Perhaps we could tentatively define supervisor identity as the highly constructive, established (to varying degrees) felt sense and vision of oneself as being (or on the way to becoming) a psychotherapy supervisor. This identity is (a) adaptive and adaptable in function, (b) provides guidance and direction for supervisory action and reflection, (c) has continuity and durability across time, and (d) affects and informs cognitive, affective, and behavioral domains of supervisory practice. While that is by no means an unimpeachable definition, it provides a reasonable point for beginning to think about some of the crucial elements reflective of supervisor identity. It gives substance to the profundity of the construct, and accentuates its supervisor identity’s uniqueness and distinctiveness (cf. Bernard & Goodyear, in press [2014]; Falender & Shafranske, 2004; Hess, Hess, & Hess, 2008; Watkins, 1997).
In training and supervising new supervisors, how might we best stimulate their budding supervisor identity development? More than half a century ago, Ekstein and Wallerstein (1958) stated that professional identity originates in the training process. Supervisor identity would appear to be no different. Ideally it would entail being (a) nurtured by training that promotes learning through didactic and practical experiences and (b) facilitated through being surrounded with like-minded individuals also in the process of learning to supervise. Such training would increase the likelihood of preparing beginning supervisors for their supervision role by initiating the process of thinking like a supervisor, and instigating identity development.
If psychotherapy supervision can be characterized as a place where a space for thinking is ideally created for therapy supervisees (Mollon, 1989), then the supervision of supervision experience might be most meaningfully conceptualized as a process where we as supervisors strive to create a space for thinking about how to create a space for thinking. We wish to create for our new supervisors a place where they can freely, openly, and with impunity think about how they can create such a safe space for their own therapy supervisees. Much like the supreme importance of the alliance between therapy supervisor and supervisee (Inman & Ladany, 2008; Ladany & Inman, 2012), the development and establishment of a solid alliance between supervisor and beginning supervisor/supervisor trainee can be considered the primary means by which a constructive and productive space for thinking is actuated. Furthermore, through modeling a relationally rich, consistently liberating yet appropriately containing supervisory interaction, supervisors are able to powerfully communicate some pivotal supervision behaviors and attitudes (e.g., empathic attunement, authenticity, holding) that supervisor trainees may incorporate and then take into the psychotherapy supervision that they themselves are providing.
In supervising beginning supervisors, the interventions that can be used are basically much the same as those used in psychotherapy supervision. In addition to the alliance, some other supervisor interventions include: reviewing supervision tapes and/or process notes during supervision of supervision, engaging in Socratic dialogue, encouraging case conceptualization, asking stimulus questions, teaching skills when required, modeling desired behaviors, providing corrective feedback, remoralizing when needed, encouraging mental practice, offering tentative interpretations, and providing corrective cognitive, affective, and behavioral experiences, for example, working with beginning supervisors to remove potentially problematic cognitions about their role (cf. Bernard, 2012; Bernard & Goodyear, in press [2014]; Milne, 2010; Milne & Westerman, 2001; Neufeldt, 2007; Watkins & Scaturo, 2013). Such interventions can be quite useful in stimulating and advancing the new supervisor’s identity development and are integral to that process. Extrapolating again from Chessick (1971) with regard to learning difficulties, the supervisor might best ask:
How can I most effectively create a learning atmosphere that will fully open up my beginning supervisor trainee to identity development?
What interventions can I implement that will best cultivate identity development in my trainee at this time?
Those questions are perpetual guides for supervisors trying to assist their supervisor trainees to navigate through the sometimes turbulent waters of the early supervisor development process.
Developing Conviction about the Meaningfulness of Psychotherapy Supervision
Just as psychotherapists must come to believe truly and deeply in the power of psychotherapy (Chessick, 1971), I contend that supervisors, to be optimally effective, must come to truly and deeply believe in the power of supervision. Achieving conviction about the meaningfulness and value of psychotherapy supervision is integral to successful supervisor development and functioning. While the development of such conviction is abetted by many possible experiences, two in my view are pivotal developmentally for beginning supervisors: (a) having ample opportunities to engage in supervision practice, ideally accompanied by supervision of supervision; and (b) having ample opportunities to learn from supervisors who are deeply convicted about the power and value of psychotherapy supervision.
In psychotherapy supervision, nothing is more deadening to new supervisee learning than being supervised by someone who has no interest in or does not like supervision (cf. Ellis, 2012; Ladany, Mori, & Mehr, 2012). In the supervision of supervision, I assert the same holds true (though admittedly no comparable research on supervision of supervision has thus far been conducted):
Beginning supervisors are most apt to learn the wonder of supervision when trained and supervised by seasoned supervisors who are imbued with the wonder of supervision. We cannot honestly transmit what we do not genuinely feel. If we are to communicate and model deep conviction about supervision to our beginning supervisor trainees, then such conviction needs to be a firmly entrenched, ineradicable part of who we are as supervisors.
The following quote from Lewis (2001), though originally focused on the psychotherapy supervisor-supervisee relationship, can be adapted to convey some of the attitude that would also seem needed in supervising beginning supervisors.
The successful supervisor will be able to allay the anxiety of the [beginning supervisor trainee]. . . . .Here you are not anonymous or abstinent. Here you are a real person. Here you show your warmth and openness and acceptance. Here you praise, support, encourage, and advise. Here you show your empathy to the vulnerability of a learner. Here you share your own experiences, your own mistakes. Here you share your own doubts and anxieties as a learner (pp. 76-77).
To that, I would add: Further show your passion for supervising, your deep respect for and joy in performing the activity, and your abiding belief in its power and potential. Through such “showing,” supervisors model and live out the spirit of conviction for their supervisor trainees to see and experience.
Developing conviction about the meaningfulness of supervision also results from having ample opportunities to provide supervision over time and observing the benefits that therapists accrue from having received psychotherapy supervision. While supervisor trainees can readily identify that some of their psychotherapy supervision experiences were instructive, that does not necessarily translate into their having deep conviction about supervision’s meaningfulness. Two particular practice-based experiences seem to have considerable impact on new supervisors’ process of developing conviction: (a) beginning to make the perceptual-cognitive-affective-behavioral shift to becoming a supervisor; and (b) seeing simultaneously and repeatedly how the supervision process helps one’s psychotherapy supervisees and, in turn, helps patients receiving treatment. Through repeatedly seeing the impacts of supervision and such an emerging “vision shift,” a special, deep appreciation for supervision’s promise, power, and possibility can take form, be resonantly experienced in a way not felt before, and ultimately become a vital and vitalizing part of the new supervisor’s sense of identity.
In conjunction with our own consistent modeling of the passion that we have for and abiding belief that we have in supervision, how else might we help beginning supervisors acquire supervision conviction? In supervision of supervision, I believe that it can also be quite instructive to identify for beginning supervisors the ways in which their efforts appear to be having or could have impact. For instance, some illustrative examples are:
‘Your supervisee has really settled down and seems much more at ease in session. I believe that has a lot to do with the supportive, non-threatening atmosphere that you have created in your supervision.’ ‘“Your supervisee is thinking and discussing matters so much more now with you in supervision. She seems to have really opened up in a whole new way. To me that means that within the supervision you have created a safe space for her thinking, and she is thriving as a result.’
’It really seems the case conceptualization with which you helped your supervisee has worked. He has used it to guide what he and the patient have been doing in treatment, and their work together has benefited.’
‘Let’s stop a moment, take a look at where you and your supervisee are now in your work together, and compare it with where you were two months ago. If you would, please reflect on that briefly. I will be glad to share with you the differences that I see. But first, let me ask you: compared to two months ago, when you started supervising, what do you see or feel that might be different for you as a new supervisor? And what possible impacts, large or small, might you think your work has had on your supervisee thus far?’
As complement to modeling and validating practice experiences, such comments and questions can help to focus the new supervisor on the progressively unfolding trajectory of the supervisor development process, chart progress in that regard, and provide solid grounds upon which to base ever-evolving conviction about the meaningfulness of supervision.
The Developing Supervisor in Training and Supervision
Regardless of supervisor development model, these three learning challenges—managing anxiety and demoralization, establishing supervisor identity, and having conviction about supervision’s meaningfulness—have a central place in the conceptualization and facilitation of the growth and development process of the psychotherapy supervisor. While other problematic issues can emerge during the training and supervision of beginning supervisors/supervisor trainees (e.g., supervisor resistance to learning), those three challenges provide a framework within which much that arises in supervisor training is instructively located.