In the process of transcribing the recordings and Post-Its from the day (Appendix 5.1c - Typed Post-Its from CG ALS1 Meeting 21st October 2011), what I was hearing and seeing prompted me to ask more questions and reflect on the day itself, what had worked, not worked, the data
gathering process we had used, supervision in terms of general thoughts and what I might attend to from the group’s input relevant to my own supervision practice and what I might do differently as a result of this.
Here below are some of the questions and reflections that emerged for me during this post-session period. I have deliberately left these items
unresolved. The impact of these thoughts and ideas about my practice and about supervision as a process to support coaches was to “stir me up” in terms of my thinking, noticing with curiosity what was happening in my day to day client work as well as themes to explore in the next cycle of inquiry.
i) Some participants raised a concern about what is appropriate content to bring to supervision, and especially whether the coach’s overall business practice is “appropriate” content or do they need a coach for this? So, we were holding what is appropriate to bring to supervision.
ii) Participants found that it was useful to prepare for and make notes after supervision sessions - including keeping a journal of incidents from one coaching session to another - which would add up to themes for supervision and this helped them to identify the recurring themes or patterns in their practice.
iii) Some shared that one of the things they take to supervision is the pressure they feel from the client system in which they work which can create tension and self-doubt in the coach, making them wonder if they are doing their best and whether their best is good enough. Sharing and dispelling the doubt of “am I good enough?” in
supervision enables the coach to return positively to the client system. This research group is highly experienced and skilled as coaches, and yet many mentioned the value of talking through their work as a way to reconnect with their confidence that they are doing the best job possible for their clients - while they may not have been doing a “poor job”. I was curious about the impact of carrying the doubt which resonated with my experience of doubt at different stages of the Research Project that I discussed in my conversations with “critical friends”.
iv) Again, linking what coaches pick up from the client system with what they bring into the supervision space, I wondered whether the coach can isolate and attend to this on their own or if this is one of the key values of the process of dialogue and thinking space in supervision where we can disentangle ourselves from the possible psychological phenomena such as indoctrination, contamination and collusion in the client system.
v) Supervision needs to meet the needs of the coach: so is there a “right way?” Addressing the needs in terms of allowing the coach to choose their content enables the coach to show up with confidence and
and techniques, other times we need morale-boosting and confidence/ reassurance. At other times we need to explore the bigger
philosophical themes that may impact on how we show up. One coach was holding anxiety about whether people are using
supervision “the way we are meant to” i.e. how it is being advocated by the professional associations.
vi) One person explored the question of whether you can have effective supervision as a coach with someone you don’t like. Or is the dislike about difference, which feels uncomfortable particularly at the
beginning? Maybe there needs to be compatibility around values of professionalism whilst not necessarily liking the other person - I wonder.
vii) What stops the supervisee challenging the relationship/supervisor to act professionally or meet the supervisee’s needs? Self doubt - others’ recommendations; reputation; need to check transference/ projection on the supervisor (de Haan 2012) - do we subsume ourselves as coaches?
viii) I was left holding the question about the information, knowledge and experience coaches need to make informed decisions about their choice of supervisor. This led me to consider that new supervisees may not know what to ask for and when they get what they get, they may feel compelled to stick with it out of self doubt or deference or compliance as “the supervisee” (Hawkins & Smith 2006). And if coaches are not used to reflecting on their practice, let alone with another, how can they make an informed decision? And if they don’t know how they learn, how do they know who will suit them as a supervisor and what to take to supervision? Some of the group were apologetic about being critical of the supervisor if their approach or style didn’t resonate, inspire, facilitate learning (my words). This prompted me to ask of myself as supervisor: what are my
responsibilities to provide a professional service that includes discussion around compatibility?
ix) The list of Post-Its on the “Changes to Practice” flip chart was the shortest, but maybe the changes don’t happen immediately, but rather over time, and how do we know whether to attribute this directly to supervision or not? Or maybe they didn’t actually make many changes to their practice?
x) During the day, I did not hear much about the actual supervision relationship and what was it about that which allows/enables coaches to open up and share angst, worries, fears, pleasures. As this is one of my beliefs, what was it about our relationship in this CG that was enabling disclosure? Does building the trust and safety for the coach to bring “all of themselves” to supervision perhaps mean that the issues may be resolved, calmed or “parked” so the coach can take themselves resourcefully back to their clients? The high levels of personal awareness amongst this group enabled them to declare what they took to supervision, without shame in front of the research group - what made that possible? The group? Me? The purpose? So, what would a stranger-to-supervision need to feel to enable them to discuss their practice while at the risk of being exposed.