Peer Supervision for Licensed Supervisors: An Emotion and Supervisor Focused - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Peer Supervision for Licensed Supervisors: An Emotion and Supervisor Focused Model

Natasha

Maynard-Pemba

,

Ph.D.

University of FloridaSlide2

Overview

Format and Informed Consent

Rationale

and Process

The model and its origins

Demonstration

Reactions

Results of Sup of Sup SurveySlide3

How

do you feel about being here

now?Slide4

What

do you want to get out of being

here?Slide5

Why a different model?

1.

To address dissatisfaction

with typical case conference model: lack of depth, too much information, intellectual, competitive, etc

.

“A

problem that frequently arises when using a group setting to conduct supervision stems from the

abundance of information

that can flow from the group to the presenting member in a short period of time. In fact, the presenter can become nearly

overwhelmed with the profusion of information and opinions offered

. This is not unusual in group supervisory work, since it is often not difficult for group members to

interpret

psychodynamically

given a modest amount of clinical information. Further, in a field in which much is hypothesized and little proven and in which many differing theoretical viewpoints hold sway,

possibilities for challenging and criticizing are abundant.

Before such judgments of his or her peers,

the presenter can experience feelings of inadequacy and shame

(Alonso &

Rutan

, 1988

).”

Altfeld

& Bernard,

1999Slide6

2. To create a space for supervisor focused work

The supervisor also needs attention and time

(Self-care)Slide7

The importance of supervisory reactions:

Supervisors experience powerful emotional reactions

They can be informative about the

supervisory

relationship or the supervisor

“Supervisors need self-awareness in order to identify their own contribution to their affective responses in supervision.” (

Counselman

&

Abernathy, 2011)

Unrecognized emotional reactions/conflicts in the supervisor ultimately prevents effective treatment of clients by the therapist/supervisee. Slide8

The importance of

Supervisory

Countertransference

(all

reactions the supervisor experiences during or in relation to the

supervision)

Examples:

Supervisor

Over-Identification

Sexual Attraction in the Supervisory Relationship

Supervisory Anxiety (being overly protective or critical)

Transparency among a community of supervisors can be the “antidote to supervisory shame”

Supervisory Anger

Ethnocultual

Countertransference

Interethnic,

intraethnic

,

religio

-cultural, professional discipline transference and countertransference

Supervisor Reactions to Difficult Materials

Supervisor Shame

Supervisor idealizationSlide9

Working through reactions

Supervisor Decision Tree

Awareness of reaction

Identification of its source

Relevance to the current supervision

Appropriate use of the reaction in the current supervision

Counselman & Abernathy (2011)Slide10

Counselman, Abernathy,

Altfeld

, and Bernard indicate that the best way to work through supervisory emotional reactions is within a group of supervisors:

“The

goal of the group is to help the supervisor

work through what they have not worked through on their own

. “

We construe it as

working along with one's colleague

instead of only empathizing and sharing ideas… this collaboration,… releases creative energy that allows the presenter to

move from the initial difficult place

to an entirely different one emotionally by the end of the session

.” (

Altfeld

& Bernard, 1999)Slide11

History of the model

Experiential

group supervision

model by

Altfeld

and Bernard

“The guiding spirit of this new format is

experiential rather than cognitive

:

the group is asked to respond to clinical material

personally rather than intellectually

.

The group is told that a member will present a case, and other members are instructed to respond in the following way: they are asked to take note of whatever images, fantasies, feelings, associations, and bodily sensations they experience while the case material is being presented and to report these "inner" data to the group

.”Slide12

Easier said than

done:

Supervisors tend to lean toward interpreting, intellectualizing,

advising, focusing externally, etc.

The facilitator is often in the position of gently redirecting members to share what feelings or internal experiences they

had with regard to the emotional reactions.

The process can feel ambiguous.Slide13

Moore & Rice (2007) modified the model as they worked to supervise trauma therapists in Northern Ireland.

The model needed to be adapted so that sharing content would not put

therapists’

lives in danger (Protestant vs Catholic civil war).

Example

How do we do this on a less extreme basis?Slide14

Counselman and

Hubbs

Ulman

modified the model

further, by placing content

at the end and

affect at the beginning.

The more content shared:

The more supervisors focus on the content

The easier it is for supervisors to say that the content of the situation does not warrant the supervisor’s reaction (whether thi

s is said

in a supportive or non-supportive way)

The purpose is for the supervisor to work through their affective reactions with the groupSlide15

Purpose

– Focus on

supervisor development

vs problem solving or total supervisee focus. The idea is that our emotions can often direct us to a clearer/truer path than our intellectual/cognitive selves. This format hopefully decreases our tendency to theorize about supervisee behavior, which may come across as judging of the supervisor and supervisee.

Format –

Focus on what your emotional reactions are to a supervisory situation.

Start with this before describing the situation.

Format -

Peers - Focus on what your emotional reactions are to your peer/supervisor. Pay attention to the emotional content.

Pay attention to

individual and cultural differences/biases

that come up

for you and the emotions behind/in front of them

. Pay attention to assumptions or guesses you may make about the supervisee. Slide16

Format Guidelines/Process –

A supervisor indicates if they would like to share their supervision

experience

The supervisor describes

emotions/imagery/sensations/

etc. that are present for them with relation to the situation with which they are struggling. (Note: the supervisor does not describe the content at this stage

).

The facilitator then encourages

peers

to respond with their emotions/imagery/sensations/etc. in response to what the supervisor shared

.

The

supervisor

then responds to any reactions their peers have shared.

At this point, the supervisor is invited to talk about the

content

of the situation they are struggling with and how the above process might help work through the issue.

A

facilitator

helps throughout the process to assist all sharing to stay affect/emotion focused.

Each week a different facilitator can direct the process.

 Slide17

Fishbowl Enactment

1-2 Volunteers

Who wish to bring a supervisory experience for which they would like

support/processSlide18

Reactions1.

Reactions from the group members

A. Emotional reactions

B. Thoughts/questions

2. Reactions

from the observers

A. Emotional reactions

B. Thoughts/questionsSlide19

Themes from the Sup of Sup Survey (16 respondents)Slide20

What have you liked specific to the model?

Connection

Support

Supervisor focused

Non-judging of supervisor or supervisee

Accessing biases

Supervisor development

Personal development

Affect focused

In-depth processing

Increased self-awareness

Vicarious learning

Vulnerability

Space to not know all the answersSlide21

What have you not liked?

Process can be slow

Exhausting

Focus on one supervisor

Not enough time

Fear of not following the model – breaking the rules, at times felt a little harshness around this

Did not like the modelSlide22

What could be improved?

More exposure to the model

Alternating weeks of emotion focused and case conference

Staying soft/reminders of what we are trying to do, inviting missteps and questions

Focus on interpersonal dynamics among supervisors in terms of group process

Intervention or theoretical focus at the end to help integrate new awareness.Slide23

Has sup of sup affected your effectiveness as a

supervisor

?

3

No

4

Maybe

9

YesSlide24

How has it improved it?

Increased

awareness

around being a

good enough

supervisor

Space to

work through supervisory issues

helped

enhance supervisory work

and

model growth for supervisee

.

Validation

of

my experience and

increased reassurance/confidence

Helped

me

identify blind spots

Helped

confirm feelings

of what might be going

on.

Provided

ways to

problem

solve

.

Learned

ways to

deepen

the experience for both

supervisor and supervisee.

Helped deepen

empathy

.

Increased

comfort in the discomfort

.

Learned to

trust

the process,

not

having to

fix

. Slide25

Additional Comments

Wished to be able to attend, but not able to due to time constraints

Wished to attend, but believed that they couldn’t.

Keep this format going

This format feels more appealing than previous format that primarily focused on checking in.

Slide26

What are your take-

aways

for your supervision?Slide27

References

Alonso, A. &

Rutan

, S. (1988). Shame and guilt in supervision.

Psychotherapy, 25

, 576-581.

Altfeld

, D.A

. & Bernard, H.S. (1999

). An experiential group model for psychotherapy supervision.

Group, 23,

1-17.

Counselman

, E.F. & Abernethy, A. D. (2011) Powerful supervisory reactions: An aspect of

supervision

.

International

Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 61,

197-216

.

Counselman

, E. &

Hubbs

Ulman

, K. (2015). Affect in supervision. Presented at the Annual American Group Psychotherapy Association: San Francisco, CA.

Moore

, R, & Rice, C.A. (2007). Group supervision for trauma therapists following civil war,

Group

31.4

,

251-263.

Rosenthal, L. (1999). Group supervision of groups: A modern psychoanalytic

perspective.

International

Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 49,

197-213

.