Supervision
Supervision may prioritise managerial compliance over opportunities for reflection, support and improving wellbeing. You should avoid supervision that is concentrated on case management and bureaucratic performance measures.
Use supervision as an opportunity for reflection on practice
Tight budgets and a culture of compliance can result in prioritising managerial and administrative tasks over the quality of supervision. Organisational constraints, such as limited resources and time, may reduce the effectiveness of supervision.
The demands of policies and administrative tasks may overshadow the need for quality supervision that supports practitioners in their professional development.
When senior leaders view supervision primarily as a performance management tool, the attention can shift towards meeting targets. This could neglect the opportunity for reflection, learning and wellbeing.
Promote a work culture where practitioners feel safe
Organisations that prioritise managerial aspects over reflection and learning can prevent growth and collaboration, threatening employee wellbeing.
When social workers and supervisors see an organisation as risk-averse and prone to blame cultures, they may be reluctant to admit mistakes. This can stifle open communication and limit learning. It will also impact employee wellbeing.
Organisational cultures that promote learning create a safe space for individuals to voice opinions without fear of embarrassment. When supervisors feel pressured and lack support, there is a risk of slipping into a blame culture.
Supervisors, like their supervisees, benefit from high-quality, regular supervision. This helps supervisors manage work pressures and ask for guidance. It will also help them develop the tools to support performance positively.
It’s crucial to recognise and address complex and emotionally-charged challenges practitioners may encounter. These can include:
- negative emotions
- experiences of harassment or racism
- fear of disclosing difficult experiences
- fear of their capability being judged
Organisations should:
- ensure that reflective spaces create a sense of security
- acknowledge stress and burnout as legitimate concerns
- discuss racism and other discrimination, including microaggressions
- discuss mental health and wellbeing
- encourage a culture where seeking support is a sign of strength
It’s important to provide development opportunities to help supervisors and leaders identify signs of struggling practitioners, including embitterment, cynicism and dehumanising behaviours.
Early intervention supports practitioner wellbeing
‘Toxic positivity’ (Cannon in References) should be recognised during organisational change, particularly when introducing new priorities. This can emerge when there’s an emphasis on projecting positive emotions while suppressing negative ones.
This can result in practitioners hiding their fears and anxieties, increasing the risk of stress and burnout. This may also stop them from expressing concerns.
Leaders can help to encourage a positive environment by modelling authentic emotionally literate behaviours. This will encourage practitioners to express their emotions.
Use evidence-informed supervision frameworks
Holding reflective conversations with practitioners is essential in providing ongoing development for supervisors. Use evidence-informed supervision frameworks to assess supervision. Then identify areas for further support and development. Include peer-to-peer observations of supervision sessions. This will let supervisors learn from each other, share promising practices and give constructive feedback.
Managing demanding work cultures
Social work environments can be demanding. There is constant pressure to respond to crises and meet immediate needs. This pressure can limit reflection and thoughtful planning.
Supervisors may prioritise a quick response to crises rather than ensuring that sufficient time and space is given for reflection and development. Try to avoid a culture where ‘doing’ rather than ‘thinking’ dominates. It can be easy to prioritise action-only planning at the expense of thinking and feeling.
To address this you should build awareness about the potential challenges of getting caught in a cycle of crisis response. Encourage curiosity about the underlying reasons for this pattern and its impact on employee wellbeing and the quality of services.
References
This is the list of research and evidence sources used to produce this section. Publicly available links are included.
Burke, R. (2001). Workaholism in organizations: The role of organizational values. Personnel Review, 30(6), 637–645
Cannon, J. (2022). Toxic cultures at work: The eight drivers of a toxic culture and a process for change. Routledge
Dempsey, M., Murphy, M., & Halton, C. (2008). Introducing tools of reflective learning into peer supervision groups in a social work agency. The Journal of Practice Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 25–43
Earle, F., Fox, J., Webb, C., & Bowyer, S. (2017). Reflective supervision: Resource pack. Research in Practice
Ferguson, H. (2018). How social workers reflect in action and when and why they don’t: The possibilities and limits to reflective practice in social work. Social Work Education, 37(4), 415–427
Peach, J., & Horner, N. (2007). Using supervision: Support or surveillance. In Lymbery, M., &
Postle, K. (Eds.), Social work: A companion for learning. Sage
Pitt, C., Addis, S., & Wilkins, D. (2021). What is supervision? The views of child and family social workers and supervisors in England. Practice, 34(3), 1–18
Ravalier, J., Wegrzynek, P., Mitchell, A., McGowan, J., McFadden, P., & Bald, C. (2023). A rapid review of reflective supervision in social work. The British Journal of Social Work, 53(4), 1945–1962
Next page: Tools and resources
The resources have been developed by
Research in Practice
in collaboration with
DfE.
Published: 30 October 2024
Last updated: 30 October 2024
Published: 30 October 2024
Last updated: 30 October 2024