Setting Up your professional supervision is not a tick box
One of the most common questions I get asked, during initial chats with potential supervisees, is about the fuss over setting up Professional supervision. “Isn’t it just about finding someone, ticking the box for our organisation, and getting on with the work?”
I hear this a lot, and while I understand the sentiment – we’re all busy, and sometimes compliance feels like another hurdle – I want to share why meticulously setting up your supervision, especially with a well-negotiated agreement, isn’t just important, it’s absolutely crucial for your growth, your well-being, and ultimately, for the quality of service you provide to your clients.
The foundation of a professional relationship
For over a decade as a registered social worker here in Aotearoa, I’ve seen firsthand the profound difference a well-established supervisory relationship makes. It’s the difference between merely surviving in a demanding role and truly thriving, innovating, and feeling supported. When we talk about “setting up supervision,” we’re really delving into the foundation of a professional relationship that will be a cornerstone of your practice. It’s about creating a safe, collaborative, and productive space where you can genuinely explore your work, your challenges, and your triumphs.
Pros and Cons of standardised contraction
Many organisations now provide standardised supervision contracts, which is a positive step in recognising supervision as a serious professional activity with clear expectations. This is certainly better than nothing, and it helps clarify organisational requirements, reporting lines, and basic ground rules.
However, my experience, and indeed the observations of others in the field, suggests that these standard contracts, while valuable, are often used to replace rather than supplement a deeper, individually negotiated agreement between the supervisor and supervisee. And that, my friends, is where we often miss a vital opportunity.
(See Morrell, 2008, for a discussion on how organisational contracts may inadvertently discourage meaningful negotiation.)
The initial setup of your professional supervision is about more than just formality; it’s about laying the groundwork for a truly collaborative and empowering partnership. It’s about ensuring that the relationship isn’t just about accountability, but also about growth, reflection, and mutual understanding. So, let’s unpack why this initial phase is so incredibly important.
The Dual Purpose of Supervision Contracts: Beyond the ‘Business’
Supervision literature consistently highlights two main purposes for a supervision contract: establishing ground rules and clear boundaries (the ‘business’ or ‘explicit’ section), and laying strong foundations for a collaborative, safe, and productive relationship (the ‘process’ or ‘psychological’ section).
The ‘Business’ Section: Essential Foundations
The ‘business’ or ‘explicit’ section covers the practicalities that ensure the professional supervision runs smoothly. Think of it as the logistical framework. This includes things like:
- Frequency, Length, and Venue: How often will you meet? For how long? Where? While an organisational contract might state “one hour,” it’s crucial to discuss what that really means. Does it include wind-down time? Are supervisors rigid or flexible with the timeframe? Without this discussion, mismatched expectations can lead to frustration and resentment.
- Punctuality and Cancellations: What are the expectations around being on time, or cancelling a session? Topics to be Discussed and Goals: What are the broad areas of focus for your supervision, and what are your professional goals?
- Lines of Accountability and Confidentiality: Who is accountable to whom? What are the limits of confidentiality, especially when ethical concerns or safety issues arise? This is a deeply nuanced area. A standard clause like “Matters discussed in supervision will be kept confidential unless issues of concern arise in relation to the supervisee’s safety or ethical practice, in which case the supervisor will, with the supervisee’s knowledge, contact the supervisee’s manager” can be interpreted in many ways. If left unexplored, it can lead to supervisees being unwilling to disclose marginal practice or temptations, fearing being reported. We need to discuss the “grey areas” , explore ethical standpoints, and create a climate where human responses and ethical dilemmas can be openly explored without fear. This is especially critical in line-management supervision, where the line between supervision and performance appraisal can easily blur.
- Supervisor’s Evaluative Role and Stakeholder Responsibilities: Is your supervisor also involved in your performance appraisal? What responsibilities do both you and your supervisor have to other stakeholders, like your agency or a training institution?
- Preparation for Sessions: While an organisational contract might state “come prepared,” what does that actually entail for both of you? As supervisors, we convey our commitment to the process by being prepared ourselves – clearing our desks, turning off phones, reflecting on how we need to be with this supervisee. These explicit elements are the backbone of any professional relationship. Without clear agreements on these points, confusion and misunderstandings are inevitable. It’s like trying to build a whare without a solid foundation; eventually, it will crumble under pressure.
The ‘Process’ Section: Building a Collaborative Relationship
This is where the magic truly happens, and it’s often the part that standard organisational contracts miss. The ‘process’ or ‘psychological’ section is about exploring your hopes, expectations, wishes, and goals for the supervision, and what all of this indicates about the best way for you and your supervisor to work together. It’s not just about what is discussed, but how it’s discussed.
True negotiation of each clause in this section lays the groundwork for a collaborative partnership – a fundamental characteristic of successful supervision. This negotiation promotes a climate of openness where the processes of supervision are openly discussed and agreed upon, rather than happening by accident (Morrell, 2008, p. 23–24).
Here are some key aspects of the ‘process’ section:
- Hopes, Fears, Anxieties, and Expectations: We all come to new relationships with a baggage of hopes and fears, shaped by our past experiences. These could be about intimacy, authority, power, scrutiny, or learning. It’s vital to acknowledge these at the very beginning to prevent them from becoming “underground saboteurs” of the work. As a supervisee, what do you hope to gain from supervision? What are you anxious about? What misconceptions might you have? As a supervisor, understanding these early on helps us tailor our approach and build trust.
- Learning Styles: How do you learn best? Are you an activist who learns by doing, a theorist who needs to understand the concepts, a pragmatist who needs to apply learning, or a reflector who needs time to observe and think? Discussing your preferred learning style and your supervisor’s facilitating style can prevent misunderstandings and ensure the supervision is truly beneficial.
- Response to Challenge and Feedback: A successful supervisory relationship involves both support and appropriate challenge. However, challenge pitched at the wrong level can be destructive. Taking time to discuss how you respond to challenge and feedback is essential. This empowers you to ask for what you need, and it provides your supervisor with an invaluable roadmap for providing interventions.
- Theoretical Orientation and Developmental Stage: Understanding each other’s professional background, theoretical approaches, and developmental stages helps ensure that supervisory interventions are appropriate and that there’s a good “fit.”
- Boundaries of Personal Issues: While supervision provides a restorative function, allowing you to explore difficult feelings re-stimulated by your work, it’s crucial to clarify that the primary focus remains on the work, without blurring into counselling. Many supervisees have experienced inappropriate responses in this area, either being cut short or feeling forced to expose their personal lives. An open discussion about these boundaries is essential.
- Diversity and Difference: Actively discussing social and cultural differences between supervisor and supervisee, using frameworks like “Social GGRRAAACCEEESSS” (Gender, Geography, Race, Religion, Age, Ability, Appearance, Class, Culture, Ethnicity, Education, Employment, Sexuality, Sexual Orientation, and Spirituality), is crucial for maintaining an open forum and addressing potential biases or misunderstandings.
When supervisees simply read and sign a standard contract without this deeper negotiation, the opportunity to explore these nuances is missed. This can lead to supervisees feeling like passive recipients of an organisation- or supervisor-led process, eroding their power and potentially inhibiting their willingness to be honest about mistakes or weaknesses (Morrell, 2008)
The Power of Negotiation: Why the Process Matters Most
The true strength of supervision lies not in the final written contract, but in the conversations that shape it. It’s through this dialogue that a genuine, collaborative partnership begins to take form. This perspective is informed by Morrell’s (2008) work, which emphasises the importance of negotiation as a foundation for effective supervision.
I also strongly believe that this agreement should be co-developed right at the start of the supervisory relationship—ideally during a dedicated session following an initial meeting. While some suggest waiting until a few sessions have passed, I maintain that supervisees are fully capable of expressing their thoughts and feelings about supervision from the outset. To assume otherwise risks undermining their voice and agency.
This negotiation allows for:
- Empowerment of the Supervisee: When supervisees understand that they ‘own’ the supervision sessions and that the way they are run will be based on their needs, wishes, goals, and style, they are more likely to be open and receptive, and even seek challenge.
- Addressing the Power Imbalance: Supervision inherently involves a power differential. Without a foundation of partnership and open discussion about feedback, this differential can inhibit honesty. Negotiating the agreement upfront helps to mitigate this.
- Minimising Future Difficulties: When hopes, fears, and expectations remain unexplored, any mismatch can go unidentified, making it difficult to recover a supervisory relationship that runs into difficulties later on.
- Creating a ‘Living Document’: A truly negotiated agreement isn’t just signed and forgotten. It becomes a living document, periodically reviewed and altered as new information, preferences, and goals emerge. This shows a commitment to the ongoing development of the supervisory relationship.
Ideally, the supervisee should be the one to write up the negotiated agreement. This process in itself is empowering and fosters ownership of both the agreement and the supervision process. There’s a significant difference in ownership and engagement when a supervisee asks their supervisor to sign a document they have written, versus being asked to sign a document the supervisor has prepared.
The Dual System: The Recommended Best Practice
For best practice in professional supervision, I wholeheartedly recommend a dual system: an organisational contract, endorsed and held by management, alongside an individual, more private, negotiated agreement between the supervisor and supervisee—sometimes referred to as a ‘memorandum of understanding’ to distinguish it from formal organisational contracts and to emphasise its collaborative nature (Morrell, 2008, p. 31).
The organisational contract provides clarity on ground rules and accountability, ensuring compliance with agency requirements. However, when used alone, it risks disempowering supervisees and leaving crucial clauses unexplored (Morrell, 2008, p. 30). The individually negotiated agreement, on the other hand, is essential for fostering a climate of openness and collaboration within the relationship. Without it, even with an organisational contract, you run the risk of a superficial engagement that misses the profound developmental opportunities of good supervision (Morrell, 2008, pp. 30–31).
Think of it this way: the organisational contract is like the blueprint for the building, outlining the essential structural components. The individually negotiated agreement is the interior design – it’s where you bring your personality, your needs, and your unique style to create a space that is truly yours, a space where you can flourish.
Setting up professional supervision thoroughly might seem like an extra step, an investment of time upfront. But trust me, as someone who has navigated countless supervisory relationships both as a supervisee and a supervisor, this initial investment pays dividends throughout the life of your professional relationship. It sets the stage for a rich, productive, and truly transformative experience that will empower you in your practice and beyond.
Free Supervision Agreement Template
Carroll, M. (2014). Effective supervision for the helping professions. SAGE Publications, Limited. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cpit/detail.action?docID=5163950
Inskipp, F. M., Proctor, M. B., Henderson, P., Millar, A., & Holloway, J. (2014). Practical Supervision: How to Become a Supervisor for the Helping Professions. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Morrell, M. (2009). Supervision contracts revisited – Towards a negotiated agreement. 22-31(1), ANZASW Social Work Review, ANZASW
Nickson, A. M., Anne Carter, M.-, & Francis, A. P. (2020). Supervision and Professional Development in Social Work Practice. SAGE Publications India Pvt, Ltd. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cpit/detail.action?docID=5942868
About The Author
