Supervisees’ Perspectives of Inadequate, Harmful, and Exceptional Clinical Supervision

Are We Listening

Bibliographic Data

ID8912569
AuthorsHeidi Hutman (0000-0002-3968-6332, Temple University, corresponding author), Michael V Ellis (University at Albany, State University of New York), Jacob A Moore (0000-0002-6468-9930, University at Albany, State University of New York), Katheryn Roberson (0000-0003-2629-066X, University at Albany, State University of New York), Katheryn L Roberson (University at Albany, State University of New York), Mackenzie L McNamara (0000-0002-4707-124X, University at Albany, State University of New York), Lawrence P Peterson (University at Albany, State University of New York), Englann J Taylor (0000-0002-3976-3748, University at Albany, State University of New York), Shangyun Zhou (University at Albany, State University of New York)
Year2023
Volume51
Issue5
Pages719-755
Publication date2023-05-12
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Counseling Psychologist (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0011-0000 • E-ISSN: 1552-3861
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/00110000231172504
OpenAlexW4376269388
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited27

Supervisees’ experiences in supervision vary remarkably. To capture such variability, Ellis and colleagues offered a framework for understanding and assessing inadequate, harmful, and exceptional supervision. Although their framework was supported, it did not offer a nuanced understanding of these supervision experiences. Using consensual qualitative research–modified, this study sought to obtain a rich description of inadequate, harmful, and exceptional supervision. Participants ( N = 135) were presented with definitions and provided responses ( n = 156) to open-ended questions describing their inadequate ( n = 63), harmful ( n = 30), and/or exceptional ( n = 63) supervision experiences. Supervisees reporting harmful experiences described supervisors as neglectful and callous, whereas inadequate supervision reflected inappropriate feedback, unavailability, and unresponsiveness. Conversely, exceptional supervision involved safety, clinical paradigm shifts, and modeling specific techniques or theories. Implications for supervision research, theory, and practice are discussed

Active listening · Clinical supervision · Engineering ethics · Psychotherapist · Qualitative research · Sociology · Unavailability · Counseling Practices and Supervision · Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics · Psychology · Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Tools

Open DOI