Power Relations in Supervision: Preferred Practices According to Social Workers

Hair, H.

doi:10.1606/1044-3894.2014.95.14

Cited by 32 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Within these reflective supervisory approaches, supervisors are required to be transparent about their position and to adopt critical thinking in mutual conversations with supervisees relating to organisational procedures, power, authority and privilege within practice (Hair, 2014). These conversations between the supervisor and supervisee contribute to the development of anti-oppressive, culturally sensitive and strengths-based practice (Baines, 2017;Hair & O'Donoghue, 2009).…”

Section: Refl Ective Supervisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the connections: A practice model for reflective supervision

Rankine

2017

ANZSWJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Over several decades, social work in Aotearoa New Zealand has undergone major alterations in service delivery in response to the management of risk and surveillance of practice within the neoliberal government agenda. Working in such an environment, social workers struggle to critically explore their position and professionally develop their practice. To support current professional practice in social work, reflective supervision has become a necessity for analysing and amplifying positive practice outcomes that benefit practitioners and service users. METHOD:A four-layered practice model of reflective supervision has been developed by the researcher from a theoretical analysis of a study involving key informant and supervisory dyads. The purpose of the reflective supervision model is to support the agenda, task and process in the supervisory relationship towards critical reflection of practice. FINDINGS:The four-layered practice model highlights the interrelationship between the social worker, the organisation, relationships with others, and the systemic contexts where practice occurs. The supervisee and supervisor have vital roles in order for reflection to occur in each supervision session. CONCLUSIONS:Reflective supervision is seen as a co-constructed partnership between the supervisor and supervisee and the four-layered practice model assists in providing a structure for the session. The four-layered model supports critical thinking in the socio-political and socio-cultural environment, promotes social justice strategies and has versatility within a number of practice settings.

show abstract

Section: Refl Ective Supervisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the connections: A practice model for reflective supervision

Rankine

2017

ANZSWJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The location of supervision as an agencyspecific process, commonly linked to line management roles, has long been a feature of social work supervision (Bogo & McKnight, 2006;Hair, 2014). O'Donoghue and Tsui (2012) argue that, at the end of the 1980s, with the rise of managerialism, this link to management further increased an organisations' influence on social work supervision.…”

Section: Social Work Supervisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interprofessional supervision: a matter of difference

Davys

2017

ANZSWJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:With its origins grounded in the apprenticeship tradition it is perhaps not surprising that social work adheres to a model of supervision where both supervisor and supervisee are social workers and where it is common for social workers to be supervised by their line manager. Interprofessional supervision, where the participants do not share the same profession, and which is frequently external to the social worker's organisation, therefore presents a challenge to traditional social work supervision practice. METHODS:Expert stakeholders were interviewed to explore their experiences of interprofessional supervision. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and topdown analysis employed to identify themes. The views of nine supervisees and nine supervisors are reported. FINDINGS:The participants represented a range of professions but the data collected revealed common themes. Participants highlighted the importance of being able to choose a supervision partner and to establish a contract where lines of accountability were explicit. Knowledge about supervision was considered vital and supervision competence was expected of the supervisor. The key benefits were a greater understanding of one's own profession and an appreciation and respect for difference. Lack of clinical accountability was considered a limitation but not an obstacle. CONCLUSION:The reports of these participants indicate a shift from supervision as an in-house process to one which is chosen, negotiated and collaborative. Through their awareness of the need for professional development and accountability, the participants demonstrated a depth of professional responsibility and an ability to stand alongside their profession in the presence of 'other'.

show abstract

“…Også her kommer det fram at det finnes forholdsvis lite forskning på veiledning i sosialt arbeid. Selv om det finnes lite forskning, viser den forskningen som foreligger, at veiledning kan øke kvaliteten på tjenestene, bidra til å utvikle ferdigheter, øke jobbtilfredshet og hindre turnover (Hair, 2014;Mor Barak m.fl., 2009). …”

Section: Uklare Betydninger Av Begrepet Veiledning (Undertittel)unclassified

“…Veiledning bør vaere et sted hvor sosialarbeidere får en mulighet til å utforske «den beste praksisen», kritisk tenkning om praksis og samprodusere ny kunnskap (Hair, 2014). Hair, som har forsket på veiledning i sosialt arbeid i Canada, er kritisk til at veilederen blir en ekspert, og gjennom den rollen blir en dommer og kontrollør.…”

Section: Noen Utfordringer I Veiledningsarbeidet (Undertittel)unclassified