Probation staff supervision: Valuing ‘me time’ within congested spaces

Abstract

Probation staff supervision is an established professional practice tool, documented historically through the lens of the Probation Journal. This article charts Journal discussions surrounding staff supervision and places them alongside a recent research study examining current practice. Study findings indicate that staff value dedicated time and space for structured supervision that contains significant elements of a more clinical approach. Nevertheless, supervision functions within congested spaces in which managerial aspects of staff engagement encroach. Finding an accommodation between differing approaches appears challenging. More broadly, competing views resound within a landscape of looming professional registration and associated requirements of continuous professional development.

‘Pushed from above and pushed from below’: Emotional labour and dual identities amongst senior probation officers in England and Wales

“…The congested space which SPOs occupy means they are caught in the middle of organisational demands and staff pressures (Coley et al, 2020). This requires SPOs to 'control' their own emotions and the emotions of those they supervise.…”

“…SPOs continue then to find themselves ‘between a rock and a hard place’ (Coley, 2020: 238) when trying to fulfil demands of this complex middle-manager role. SPOs face pressure from senior management above expecting organisational policies to be fulfilled with limited staff resource, as well as practitioner and risk management demands from below.…”

Probation and the ethics of care

“…Training (both for newly appointed staff and as part of continuing development) is important here, as are a reflective orientation to practice and a transparent approach to decision making. Practitioners benefit from opportunities to share practice dilemmas with colleagues and staff supervision arrangements that allow space for reflection alongside the management tasks of monitoring performance and adherence to targets (Coley, 2020).…”

“…The distinction between these approaches to exploring right actions may be familiar to those who have considered the ethics of punishment . Punishment, including community sanctions (Durnescu, 2011; Hayes, 2015; McNeill, 2018), involves hard treatment - the imposition of pains, burdens and deprivations - and this appears to call for justification. The usual beginning to this inquiry is to distinguish between retributive and reductive accounts – respectively deontological and consequentialist justifications.…”

‘What does professional curiosity mean to you?’: an exploration of professional curiosity in probation

“…Using professional curiosity to develop the therapeutic alliance relies on reflective supervision allowing the practitioner to cope with the uncertainty that results from such an approach but also discourages exploitative practice because it encourages the sharing of experiences (confidentially) between practitioners as a form of accountability (Bond, 2015). This is particularly relevant in probation where supervision has, in recent years, become increasingly managerial in focus (Coley, 2020).…”