Abstract
The subject of effective supervision is ubiquitous within recent social work publications, in which a familiar narrative is offered: take individual responsibility for demanding excellent reflective supervision; insist that reductive focus on procedural and target-driven outcomes alone is insufficient; ensure that one’s developmental needs are met through training (Beddoe, 2010; Greer, 2016); and moderate expectations with a resignation that change on a macro level is beyond the remit of the supervision encounter (Manthorpe et al., 2015). Supervision as a panacea has been largely uncontested, with ‘restorative’ reflective supervision arguably presented as the ideal model (Kadushin and Harkness, 2002). The resurgence of interest in compassion fatigue (Figley, 1995), vicarious trauma (Bula Wise and Bussey, 2007: 308) and emotional labour (Hochschild, 1983) has arguably served to consolidate this further. This volume defies the narrative and dares to challenge this paradigm.
Starting with the premise that ‘ideologically entrenched neoliberal culture’ (p. 11) has created a dissonance between professional accountability and the contemporary focus on reflective practice, the authors observe that in human services, the ‘ascendancy of global capital, neoliberalism and welfare austerity’ (p. 41) has led supervision to mutate in order to fit this changed agenda. Though all the authors are social workers, the applicability of the critical supervision model they propose is widened out to encompass all who practise in what they term the ‘human services’. This in turn reflects their emphasis on the agency of collective action on a multi-disciplinary level. What follows is a sophisticated (and ambitious) strategy to re-align human services supervision with social justice.
Asserting that critical supervision requires an understanding of the wider contexts shaping the lives of both service users and practitioners, the authors offer a global perspective that deftly synopsises neoliberal globalisation, privatisation, corporatisation, welfare austerity, gross inequalities, the rise of ‘big business’, enterprise culture, service users as consumers, personalisation and service user participation (pp. 40–53). This chapter would be an excellent resource for student or newly qualified social workers and serves to set a firm foundation for the ensuing construction of the critical supervision model.
At the meso level the organisational and workplace contexts are considered in relation to factors shaping human service organisations, workplace culture, power relationships, leadership, management and supervision with a focus on the last. This is followed on a micro level by the professional practice context in which the contemporary shift from professional specialism to ‘generalist human services worker’ (p. 91) is a key element. It is suggested that ‘specialist professional expertise has become costly in cash-strained human service organisations’ (p. 91) and the constant pressure to adapt to evolving practice contexts and consequent breakdown of professional barriers has resulted in a ‘new hybrid’ of worker. The authors assert that this presents a significant challenge in values-based practice as working for ‘social justice and human wellbeing requires a clear moral compass and professional commitment to social change if support for human needs is compromised or reduced’ (p. 95). This echoes concerns raised in an emerging body of literature about a moral crisis in human services/social care (Bisman, 2004; Ferguson and Woodward, 2009).
Whilst the initial chapters provide a wide-ranging context to practice, subsequent chapters deal with the core concepts of a critical perspective, critical pedagogy, foundations of critical supervision and practice fundamentals. The authors’ link between critical supervision and critical pedagogy is well considered and their assertion that this is what ‘moves us from “the thinking” to “the doing”; from understanding issues to doing something about them’ (p. 148) is in many ways the crux of this volume.
Intended to be a practical resource that sits on the desk during supervision, this book’s final three chapters focus on the practical application of the critical model of supervision. A critical and narrative ‘toolbox’ is explored (p. 182) and the book contains useful visual aids that summarise key elements of the model for quick and easy access. Prompt questions and practice examples are a pertinent inclusion and these anchor discussion of wider structural power dynamics firmly within grassroots practice application. The suggested elements of critical practice in relation to mental health are particularly strong (pp. 230–234).
The architects of the proposed supervision model, ‘critical supervisors as transformative leaders’ (p. 151) are referred to as if they are fully aware of the model, poised and ready to engage with practitioners in innovative supervision. Time constraints, higher managerial approval of such a model, levels of supervisory expertise and the resources to ameliorate gaps in service provision are not fully considered. As such, there are significant limitations in the application of this model, taking as an example statutory social work in the UK.
With a third of UK social care practitioners reporting that they do not receive adequate supervision (McGregor, 2013) and the quality of supervision experienced by those that do being highly variable (Manthorpe et al., 2015), this book is certainly timely. Regrettably though, the moral distress (Bisman, 2004) experienced by many values-driven social workers practising in resource-starved statutory services is likely to be little assuaged by a flagship model of supervision that is unsupported on a wider organisational level. Although the authors contend that ‘supervision can facilitate practitioners’ critical engagement in an environment that is antithetical to human rights and social justice’ (p. 42), fundamentally, this environment needs to change before critical supervision can be meaningfully facilitated.