|
Article Excerpt
A study of 158 postdegree counselor supervisees showed that 49% had a clinical supervisor who was also their administrative supervisor. Supervisees reported overall satisfaction with clinical supervision, with no statistically significant differences between those whose supervisor served in both clinical and administrative roles and those receiving supervision from only a clinical supervisor. Furthermore. the majority of supervisees receiving clinical and administrative supervision from the same person did not view this dual supervisory role as problematic (82% of n = 70), and 72.5% reported specific benefits. Implications for research and practice are provided, with attention given to ethical considerations.
**********
Data show that approximately one half of practicing counselors received their clinical supervision from persons who were also their administrative supervisors (e.g., Evans, 1993; Kenfield, 1993), exemplifying a dual role that some (e.g., Association for Counselor Education and Supervision, 1993; Falvey, 1987; Kaiser, 1997) have regarded as a potential ethical challenge. Distinguishing between the roles of clinical supervision and administrative supervision has been difficult because there have been no uniform definitions of clinical supervision, administrative supervision, clinical supervisor, or administrative supervisor (Bernard & Goodyear, 2004). This has made supervision difficult to define operationally, presenting challenges in conducting quality supervision research (Stebnicki, Allen, & Janikowski, 1997).
For this article, we reviewed existing definitions of clinical supervision and administrative supervision and determined their distinct functions. The term clinical supervision means face-to-face supervision that promotes supervisee development, the maintenance of counseling or psychotherapy skills, or both, in the counseling relationship, client welfare, clinical assessment and intervention approaches, clinical skills, and prognosis (Ohio Counselor and Social Worker Board, 1997; Powell, 1993). Clinical supervision takes place in a face-to-face individual and/or group format and is facilitated by a clinical supervisor (i.e., an independently licensed mental health professional who is approved by and registered with a state's counselor licensure board to supervise postdegree counselors who are seeking independent licensure). The clinical supervisor is the person who reviews the counselor supervisee's case records and approves the supervisee's diagnostic assessments and individualized service plans (i.e., treatment plans).
Administrative supervision focuses on the promotion of clinical programs and coordination of clinical services and evaluation mechanisms (Kenfield, 1993) and is aimed at helping the supervisee function as an employee of an organization (Hart, 1982). The overall purpose of administrative supervision is to help the organization run smoothly (Powell, 1993). Administrative supervision addresses managerial tasks such as (a) overseeing case records; (b) implementing policies and procedures regarding the continuity of care, quality assurance, and accountability; (c) hiring, firing, and reprimanding clinical staff; and (d) completing employee performance evaluations. The administrative supervisor is the person whom the counselor supervisee considers her or his "boss" at the counseling site.
Ethical Considerations
The Association for Counselor Education and Supervision's (ACES; 1993) Ethical Guidelines for Counseling Supervisors states,
Supervisors who have multiple roles (e.g., teacher, clinical supervisor, administrative supervisor, etc.) with supervisees should minimize potential conflicts. Where possible, the roles should be divided among several supervisors. Where this is not possible, careful explanation should be conveyed to the supervisee as to the expectations and responsibilities associated with each supervisory role. (Guideline 2.09)
Any role conflict that arises from the dual role of clinical supervisor as administrative supervisor has the potential to inadvertently affect the ethical treatment of clients. Falvey (1987) stated that supervisors should not assume this dual role, suggesting that it compromises the the supervisory relationship. For instance, the supervisee may decide not to disclose problems she or he may have working with a client, fearing possible personal and/or professional consequences (e.g., not receiving a pay raise, being terminated from her or his job); however, avoiding the discussion of such a problem could be harmful to the client (Corey, Corey, & Callanan, 1998; Falvey, 1987). Ladany, Hill, Corbett, and Nutt's (1996) study on supervisee nondisclosures suggested that supervisees' nondisclosures were directly related to the supervisees' perceptions of the quality of supervision and the extent to which supervision fit their needs and facilitated their development as counselors. Thus, supervisee nondisclosures may have direct implications for client welfare because supervisees whose supervision needs are not met are presumed to have a more difficult time working with challenging client issues (Ladany et al., 1996).
Kaiser's (1997) model specifically addressed the dual role of the clinical and administrative supervisor, focusing on the inherent power differential that exists between supervisor and supervisee. Kaiser contended that the context also affects the type and the amount of power the supervisor exercises over the supervisee. Kaiser asserted, for example, that "the prominence of the supervisor's role" (p. 23) is directly linked...
|
