|
Article Excerpt
This article presents an empirical study that identified agency supervisees' perceptions of clinical supervision and its influence on work satisfaction and work-related stress in professional settings. Because there is a paucity of literature addressing supervision of professional counselors, there is a need to better understand what influence supervision has beyond academic settings. Participants were 71 members of the American Mental Health Counseling Association who were selected using a criterion-based random sample methodology. The methodology pulls together a unique combination of variables and instruments for exploration with professional mental health counselors. Results revealed relationships between work setting, supervisees' perceptions of the supervisory working alliance, work satisfaction, and work-related stress variables. Implications for practice, training, and research are discussed.
**********
Clinical supervision has become increasingly important to the development of supervisees (Getz, 1999) and the advancement of the counseling profession. Although the practice of supervision originated in the 1920s as part of psychoanalytic training (Feltham, 2000; Fleming & Benedek, 1966), supervision as a specialty area has only emerged in the past two decades (Dye & Borders, 1990). While there is an extensive body of work on many facets of counselor supervision, there is very little that explores the supervisory working alliance (SWA) in professional counseling settings. Further, most of the supervision research has been conducted with trainees, not professional counselors. This study expands our understanding of the SWA by investigating how professional mental health counselors perceive the supervision relationship and how this relationship influences work satisfaction and work-related stress.
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SWA
A central component of the clinical supervision process is the SWA, which Ladany, Ellis, and Friedlander (1999) identified as "potentially one of the most important common factors in the change process of supervision" (p. 447). The SWA model consists of three characteristics drawn from the therapeutic working alliance model: (a) mutual agreement on supervision goals, (b) specific tasks related to supervision goals, and (c) the development of bonds between supervisor and supervisee (Bordin, 1983). These three components of the therapeutic working alliance form the foundation for the SWA, which based on Bordin's model is defined as the relational bond that develops between supervisor and supervisee when they work together to achieve mutual goals through clearly identified tasks.
It is important to note several distinctions between the SWA and the supervisory relationship. The SWA focuses on establishing the relational bond within the supervision dyad in order to serve as a change agent. It differs from the supervisory relationship in that the focus is on the supervisee's goals (Bordin, 1983) rather than the supervisor's. Aspects of supervisory relationships that are not specifically captured in the SWA include the evaluative component that is central to the supervisory relationship, feedback to ensure that supervisees maintain client welfare and monitor client care, and the supervisor's role as gatekeeper (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004).
Quality of the SWA
Goals, tasks, and relational bonds define the SWA, but the degree to which change occurs depends on the strength of the collaboration between supervisor and supervisee (Bordin, 1983). The quality of the SWA is a distinctive characteristic reflective of the strength of the relationship and refers to the supervisee's perceived experience within the supervision dyad (cf. Worthington, 1984). The quality of the SWA was typically viewed as ranging from positive (high quality) to negative (low quality). A high-quality SWA in the current study was equivalent to a strong supervisory relationship and a low-quality SWA as a weak supervisory relationship.
Supervisor characteristics typically associated with a positive SWA were being nonjudgmental, providing validation, supporting exploration, imparting an empathic attitude, normalizing anxiety and tension, and strengthening the SWA (Worthen & McNeill, 1996). Numerous researchers (cf. Gray, Ladany, Walker, & Ancis, 2001; Nelson & Friedlander, 2001; Ramos-Sanchez et al., 2002) identified supervisor characteristics that led to negative experiences in supervision, including being rigid, overly critical, or untrustworthy; displaying a lack of respect; lacking openness; being unsupportive; limiting direct feedback; conveying little empathy; not respecting differences; lacking encouragement and praise; and being inattentive. (For further discussion on creating a strong SWA, see Worthen and McNeill, 1996, and Carifio and Hess, 1987).
SWA, WORK SATISFACTION, AND WORK-RELATED STRESS
There is an extensive business and general service literature that explores the relationship between supervision and work satisfaction (e.g., Eklund & Hallberg, 2000; Hyrkas, 2005; Trant, Larsen, & Feimer, 2000; Uys, Minnaar, Simpson, & Reid, 2005) and supervision and work-related stress (e.g., O'Driscoll & Beehr, 1994; Seltzer & Numerof, 1988), but not SWA, work satisfaction, and work-related stress simultaneously. Fincham and Rhodes (2005) defined work satisfaction as "the feelings or 'affective response' someone experiences in a job role" (p. 9). Gabriel and Liimatainen (2000) defined work-related stress as "the harmful physical and emotional response that occurs when the requirements of the job do not match the capabilities, resources, or needs of the worker" (p. 11). Even though these variables have been well defined, as have relations among various combinations of variables, it is unclear whether findings from other disciplines are comparable when exploring the role, dimensions, and philosophy of supervision in professional counseling settings. Understanding the influence that the SWA has on these work constructs is significant not only because of their impact on supervisees' ability to function effectively and productively in counseling but also because of the potential implications for the therapeutic working alliance and client treatment outcomes.
Several researchers have posited that work satisfaction is a function of how supervisees perceive the SWA, assuming that supervisees' perceptions of it might influence not only how they function in the workplace but also their professional development (Ramos-Sanchez et al., 2002; Worthen & McNeill, 1996). Ramos-Sanchez and colleagues contended that as supervisees begin to question their career decisions, they might experience discouragement or despair and a sense of failure or loss of confidence in their ability to work in the profession. Holloway and Neufeldt...
|
