Counselling Supervision in the 1990s

Abstract

It would by easy, and indeed convenient, to assume we all agree on what constitutes counselling supervision. There is no doubt that general definitions have lots in common. And yet a sweep of the literature throws up 19 theories of supervision ranging from the usual schools, e.g. psychodynamic (DeBell, 1963), person centred (Patterson, 1982), etc., to a descrimination model (Bernard, 1979), a social influence model (Dixon and Claibom, 1987) and a multimodal model (Ponterotlo and Zander, 1984). This does not include developmental models (Holloway, 1987). There are at least eight forms of supervision, e.g. managerial, consultative, training, etc.; even more methods of supervision (individual, group, peer, team, etc.); a wide variety of styles (insight-oriented, didactic, etc.); a range of supervisee modes of presentation, and not a few areas of focus for supervision (Hawkins and Shohet, 1989, outline six). Obviously, not all these are in opposition: they exist in easy partnership. There are integrative and eclectic approaches to supervision as to counselling and psychotherapy. It is not bad being spoiled for choice, yet sometimes the vastness of the menu creates its own problems with uncertainty about the meaning of supervision itself.