Narrative Philosophy of Supervision: Isomorphic Journey of Discovery and Identity

Purpose and Goals for Supervision

Supervision is a parallel process, isomorphic to therapy. Lee and Nelson (2014) state that as supervisors, we must be accountable to our trainees and adhere to a sense of responsibility for our actions and outcomes just as therapists are accountable to scaffold their clients through treatment plans or goals. As a supervisor, we must be aware of our way of being in training, our influence regarding power imbalance, as well as holding space for the family system that the trainee brings. With a narrative lens, we support trainees in this through mentoring, written evaluation, modeling practice to focus on the process- not just the content and fostering reflective practice that includes teaching the “tuning the ear” map. To be influential during this unfolding process, it is essential to give space for trainee's personal reflection to negotiate and integrate these perspectives within their own way of therapeutic being and ask them to create a map to track their goals for therapeutic skill growth.

Supervision is also concerted on building therapist aptitude and simultaneously exploring self-of-the-therapist competence. Lee and Nelson (2014) highlight the following:

Goals should be construed in a larger context of the self-of-the-therapist, his (her) philosophy or worldview in general, and the values that the therapist-trainee holds dear. These ideas about reality and their trainee’s developing orientation toward therapy must be in harmony for optimal professional development (p. 31).

As I visualize the harmony that I hope to support in the supervision process, I have four guiding goals. My initial goal is to get to know who my trainees believe they are as a therapist, then set ground rules collaboratively and explain expectations. In doing so, I map the tone of supervision by setting rules of confidentiality through a supervisory contract, attempt to attune my ear through respectful listening bringing a sense of alertness to microaggressions through reflection, and permit trainees a right to not participate or respond as well. I also strive to acknowledge their therapeutic models, contextual factors, culture, language, gender, and/or faith, and many other layers of themselves that they deem integral pieces of our journey together (Carey et al., 2009). Intentional time to bring this forth in my supervision sessions are guided through a supervision genogram activity to learn more about their family system, academic journey, and supervisory experiences (Aten et al., 2008). After a period of getting to know each other's narrative, my second goal for supervision is to establish a safe environment through a working alliance where trainees feel comfortable bringing up difficult parts of the process such as misspoken words, duty to warn, or reporting abuse. Supervision under my leadership is a grounding atmosphere aimed at trainees feeling safe to explore ideas, take risks, and question what they are doing. My third goal is to demonstrate and teach the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) core competencies, supervisor responsibilities, and code of ethics. This is integrated throughout the course of supervision in assigned readings as well as case and video reviews. Lastly, my fourth goal is to be mindful to have space to cogenerate ongoing goals with my trainee to meet and observe what they identify as areas of need. This view from Lee and Nelson (2014) supports the trainee's growth so they may flourish as informed and flexible observers of themselves and of themselves within the clinical training settings (p. 32).

Supervisory Roles and Relationships

In my work, I choose to lead, support, and create safe spaces consciously and consistently. I serve as a facilitator by helping trainee's organize and make sense of the clinical picture, then connect to goals and outcomes (Lee & Nelson, 2014). This begins as shared above with a working alliance. A working alliance maintains a trustworthy and responsive relationship with trainees by listening carefully, validating concerns, coaching on new techniques or through difficult cases, teaching and mentorship (Lee & Nelson, 2014, p. 36). This includes what Lee and Nelson (2014) share as having an articulated approach, which guides how the trainee and supervisor conceptualizes clinical decisions, evaluates therapy, and/or amplifies the trainee's repertoire of the theory or techniques (p 32). When the supervisor and trainee have a mutual working alliance or relationship with common goals and meet consistently, it supports trainee's growth and may decrease harm to clients. As supervisors, we oversee the treatment process so that trainees learn the craft of therapy and client families are well served. We carry out these tasks in an administrative role focused on the needs of the institution, organization, or agency. As a gatekeeper, we support professionals in the field to ensure our clients and community are protected from harm. Overall, our role as a supervisor cultivates the groundwork for trainees to explore, question, learn, discover, and determine their identity as a therapist.

Person of the Supervisor

My experiences empower and inspire me to model a holistic, inclusive supervisor who is grounded in cultural humility. Cultural humility, coined by Trevalon & Murray-Garcia in 1998, is a lifelong journey of self-reflection and discovery putting family therapists in a collaborative position focused on relationships, whether serving as a supervisor or trainee (Lee & Nelson, 2014). With the understanding of cultural humility, I practice using reflective supervision to interrupt personal patterns of assumption or biases regarding minority and dominant cultural narratives. This includes assessing blind spots in boundaries and shaping the working alliance or relationship with trainees different from my personal and theoretical background in order to provide a context for trainees to cultivate their own therapeutic identity that is culturally responsive (Aponte & Carlsen, 2009). I have discovered that my personal biases and perspectives are interconnected through my religion, race, and gender as a Christian, African American woman. These are an essential part of my story as a person, therapist, and supervisor because they inform my values, choices, and way of being. Moreover, my faith and upbringing influences how I view narratives of morality, fairness, and justice. Nonetheless, I am mindful that my contextual factors are not the life standard for the trainees and families that I serve. This view of who I am aligns with the isomorphic process of therapy in that it ignites “how I am”, as a therapist, mental health advocate, and supervisor in being present and tuning my ear when building relationships with my trainees. I utilize Hibel and Polanco’s (2010) “tuning the ear” narrative approach to listening and encourage trainee's therapeutic identity development by creating spaces for them to reflect on their own values, beliefs, history in connection with their clinical skills and choices. All in all, as a part of my practice, I endeavor to determine the intersection of my background to decenter and determine what mindful action may be necessary in supervision as I lead and learn from trainees and clients in the therapeutic process.

Supervision Model or Practices

Supervisors and trainees may use several maps within supervision to think about the routes they want to take, the factors that influence those routes, the best kinds of “vehicles” for those routes, and even other aspects of the journey that are not well represented on the maps (Lee & Nelson, 2014). My map draws upon the postmodern understanding of not being the expert, but entering a “space of being” to bear witness of trainees growth in alignment with narrative ideals. Narrative ideas in relationship with supervision recognize process over performance to scaffold the trainee in becoming the therapist they prefer to be (Hibel & Polanco, 2010) and in parallel, this begins with supervisors discovering the supervisor they prefer to be. I practice this journey in varying forms such as a coach to motivate, teacher to educate, administrator to manage, and mentor to support. I also serve as an advocator and/or gatekeeper to protect my trainee, the clients we serve, and the progression of the field. Lastly, I co-create this process with my trainees using Hibel and Polanco’s (2010) “tuning the ear” map:

4. Action: Exploration of the effects of this process on the further development of the practices of the therapist as a professional and in their larger (personal) life.

In my experience, this process helps trainees make sense of the clinical picture by rebalancing what is heard- to focus on the relationship, goals and outcomes. This strengthens their therapeutic skills linking to the discovery of their professional identity.

Attending to Contextual Factors

Supervisors have a responsibility to cultivate and understand the complex collective as well as individualistic diversity variables of their trainees. Supporting a trainee's way of being, understanding of cultural intersections, and self-of-the-therapist awareness all contribute to the navigation of pathways on what I describe as our trainee's cultural map. Culture is integral to the supervision process because it emanates in all of our narratives. Cultures are ever evolving and illuminate layers of dominant and marginalized views. Considering these varying factors or views, the care for trainees must be centered holistically to bring forth their identity as a therapist with respect to their culture and awareness of their contextual factors. Additionally, practice must be flexible to adjust and transform above privilege and fragility (Todd & Storm, 2014). I expound on this process in supervision by using a both/and approach to focus on the relationship and have constructive conversations to challenge structures, remove silence regarding race, addressing the complexity of classism, and other needs of the moment explicitly (Todd & Storm, 2014). I encourage trainees to deepen this sensitive approach through reflection on contextual factors by journaling. In trainee journals, I require them to identify their process for understanding contextual factors, dominant narratives, their blind spots, subjugated experiences, limitations, biases, and prejudices (Tohidian & Quek, 2017).

Familiarity with Modes of Supervision

I conduct live case consultation and utilize technology-assisted services for supervision. Learning opportunities are also crafted in viewing cases via video and online resources. Along with individual supervision (for trainees who are registered interns and/ or students), I provide group supervision to promote “tuning the ear” to views and ideas from their peers. My group supervision is structured as a time to share and train students on particular topics such as narrative or family play therapy techniques. I prefer onsite or online supervision as it provides a real-time reflective experience where I promote time to link stories of the trainees’ growth. In contrast, while having the ability to play back live sessions via a video recording and observe therapeutic sessions provides an outlet for trainees to overcome performance anxiety or explore self-of-the-therapist, if the quality of the video is defective, then it may be difficult to garner a learning experience. In closing, considering multiple platforms and technologies, I require trainees to research therapist-client privilege and licensing statues to protect their clients and themselves from potential violations that may be a criminal offense or lead to civil litigation. I also adhere to and teach appropriate procedures and requirements within AAMFT's (2012a) most recent code of ethics regarding the use of technology.

Ethics and Legal Factors of Supervision

Lee and Nelson (2014) encourage the Golden Rule of Supervision that, “supervisors and trainees should relate to each other in the way that they would have trainees relate to clients” (p. 74). I incorporate this concept in my supervision leadership to ground my way of being and model choices connecting in relationship with my trainees with the same standard of care, integrity, and excellence that I would provide clients. I begin with an open inquiry to my trainees on what a responsible standard of practice looks like to them, and then I require them to research licensing and certification laws of their state as well as the policies and regulations highlighted by the AAMFT Code of Ethics. I also facilitate communal discussions and nurture thinking through ethical blind spots that may arise such as power differentials, supervision and multiple relationships, dual relationships, exploitation, intimidation, and boundary violation. Furthermore, I aspire to expand the space for collective wisdom through garnering what forecasting blind spots regarding family and personal dynamics as well as microagressions may look like in assigned journal writings and peer sharing. Other ethical and legal factors of supervision that I incorporate in teaching reviews confidentiality, duty to report/ duty to warn or protect, minors in therapy, subpoenas, record keeping, and the health insurance privacy and accountability act (HIPPA). One in particular that I highlight is the authorization for release of information which notes that trainees must obtain written permission from everyone and anyone who attended any sessions of a case based on the family system, not the individual client (p. 143) in alignment with our system thinking and lens.

Systemic Thinking

What meaning will you lead with and incorporate into your understanding? Does nothing have meaning until we make sense of it? I wonder this as I ponder my supervision philosophy around what I decipher as self-of-the-therapist and self-of-the-supervisor. Lee and Nelson (2014) state person-of-the-therapist is the interactive nature of personal growth or awareness and skill development. Moreover, they postulate that it is “in perceiving things, the needs, wants, and experiences of individuals (that) cause them to be attuned to certain data over others, to make meaning of what they perceive, and then to experience emotions connected to that meaning.” In relational terms, individuals construct meaning then “make sense of something” (Lee & Nelson, 2014). This meaning making to me is a circular dance in the present case, throughout the training system, and then back into the trainee's meaning-making of similar situations and the clinical room. This leads me to wonder what self-of-the-therapist may include such as how might barriers to therapy be discussed and who determines what is the “best” way to address it. Is it only regarded if a sensitivity has occurred that we take this mindset or thinking into practice, or is it morally ever-present? Attitudes and biases, sensitivities and insensitivities exist and are facilitated by the entire ecosystem in which these other systems are involved development (Lee & Nelson, 2014). Thus, awareness of self, supervision, and/or self-of-the-therapist can begin in clinical cases through utilizations of (cultural) genograms, debriefing clients about their therapeutic experiences, and self-exploration questions processed in a group. Watching video recordings may an aide in this process and is another avenue to understand person-of-the-therapist. For my philosophy, I empower trainees and support them in building their own awareness by viewing recordings, encouraging them to reflect on their thinking, emotions, and behaviors, while creating a safe supervisory environment for our team.

Effective relational supervisors and their training system engage themselves in interpersonal consciousness raising (Lee & Nelson, 2014). This means purposefully connecting and elevating the relationship. This includes being intentional in building attentive and responsive spaces for helping trainees to be more effective with their clients and supervisors with their trainees. It also requires supervisors to make time for ideas and perspectives other than their own, while at the same time, intentionally analyzing their own and others’ view. Overall, it is important to not negate the trainee's experience or meanings, but simply to explore them. When rooted in a narrative philosophy of supervision, the process and practice is isomorphic and coconstructed through tuning one's ear and the tenets of cultural humility. This gives balance to the exploration of self-of-the-therapist and self-of-the-supervisor. This way of being becomes a life-long journey of learning that embraces the therapeutic process and tuning one's ear as a supervisor and therapist.