¡27
Supervision: a necessary
contribution to the quality
of professional
performance, illustrated by
the concept of supervision
used in the Netherlands
Supervizija, neobhodni
prispevek h kvaliteti
poklicnega dela: prikaz
razumevanja supervizije,
kakor se uporablja na
Nizozemskem
Louis van KesseV
'Louis
van Kessel, MA,
Boeslaari 19,
NL-6703 EN
Wageningen,
The
Netherlands.
Abstract
This article sketches the main points of the "Dutch concept
of supervision". It differs from supervision-concepts gene-
rally used in English speaking countries, because it stresses
the educational function ofsupei^ision as a method of pro-
fessional training and continuing professional training, ex-
cluding the administrative component. A description is gi-
ven of the development of supervision in the Netherlands
28
s o C I Л L N A P !<: D Л G O G У K A
against its American ancestry' and of existent differences
with Anglo-Saxon concepts. Several aspects of the concept
of supervision now common are described in more detail
and are illustrated by examples of supervisory teaching and
training.
Key words: supervision, history of supervision, the Dutch
concept of supervision.
Povzetek
Prispevek zarisuje osnovne značilnosti "Nizozemskega mo-
dela supervizije". Ta se razlikuje od modelov supervizije,
ki jih v glavnem uporabljajo v angleško govorečih deže-
lah, ker poudarja edukativno funkcijo supervizije kot meto-
de temeljnega in nadaljevalnega poklicnega usposabljanja,
izključuje pa administrativno funkcijo. Prikazan je razvoj
supervizije na Nizozemskem v primerjavi z izhodiščnimi
značilnostmi "ameriške" supervizije, ter tudi drugačnimi
današnjimi značilnostmi anglosaksonskih konceptov. Pri-
spevek bolj podrobno obravnava nekatere vidike - danes
običajne - supervizije ter te ilustrira s primeri usposablja-
nja za supervizijsko delo.
Ključne besede: supervizija, zgodovina supervizije. Nizo-
zemski model supervizije.
Introduction
In this paper, I present a sketch of the "Dutch concept of supervision". After
looking at its origin and the first stage of development against the background
of the American supervisory tradition, 1 describe in broad outlines some impor-
tant differences between current concepts in the Enghsh speaking countries
and the Dutch concept. Subsequently, important characteristics of the latter are
described in more detail and illustrated with some examples.
Origin and development of supervision in the
Netherlands
Within the framework of an innovation of European луе^аге work, supervi-
sion was introduced in the Netherlands from the United States in the early fifti-
es as part of the educational component of Marshall Aid. Dutch supervisors in
turn contributed to the introduction and further development of supervision in
a number of other European countries: Germany (Oberhoff, 1986, p. 57; We-
igand, 1990, p. 45;Belardi, 1992, p. 61), Sлvitzerland (Hubschmid et al., 1986, p.
<S o C ¡ALNA P l<: I) Л G O G / K Л
29
33; Zeller, 1990, pp. 190-192), Austria (Gotthardt-Lorenz, 1986, p. 44), Belgium
and also in the last five years in Slovenia and Hungary (Van Ressel/Sárváry,
1996).
At the time of its introduction, supervision was coupled with the teaching
and learning of social casework (De Jongh, 1953), a method which was new in
Europe at that time and in which strong emphasis was put on the use of a "per-
sonal relationship" between the social worker and the client. From our present
conceptual point of view we would call this supervision practice a "method ori-
ented student supervision".
Consequently, supervision initially appeared in particular as a training met-
hod within the curricula of the professional schools for social and social peda-
gogical work (then called "sociale academic"). Supervision \vas not introduced
to university courses like child and adult education theory and pastoral chnical
education (Andriessen, 1975) until the late sixties. In the seventies and eighties
it spread to other professional fields and courses, such as teaching (Griffioen,
1980), general practice (Alting von Geusau & Runia, 1991), physiotherapy, nur-
sing and psychotherapy (Van Praag & Van Asperen, 1993). Also in this decades, it
has been extended to other professions and functions, such as supervision for
managers.
Training activities for supervisors started as early as 1951 (De Jongh, 1953).
Specific supervision training courses have been in existence in the Netherlands
since 1968. They played an important part in the development of what may ])e
called the Dutch concept of supervision (Van Ressel/Haan, 1993). Pioneering work
in this field has been carried out by the publications of Zier (1967; 1988), Andri-
essen (1975) and Siegers/Haan (1983; 1988). Nowadays, this generic concept of
supervision is accepted by the Dutch Professional Organization of Supervisors
(LVSB, 1992; 1996) as the guiding principle for the development of the practice
and theory of supervision, and as a standard for the training of supervisors.
Supervision in the Enghsh-speaking world
The concept of supervision as it was introduced in the Netherlands, \vas part
of the tradition of the American theory and practice of supervision which had its
origin' in the American welfare work in the last two decades of the previous
century (Burns, 1965; Radushin, 1976, p. 4 ff; Rutzik, 1977, p. 29 ft). Over there,
until the 1920s supervision was "broadly conceived in management terms"
(Austin, 1957, p. 569), accentuating "'overseeing', watching the work of another
with responsibihty for its quality."(Austin, I960, p. 579).
Because the handhng of the relationship factors appeared to be influencing
the success of the work processes greatly (Waldfogel, 1983, p. 320), supervision
started to develop with an integrated educational component from 1900 omvards.
l-Iowever, itлvas not until 1920 that it was primarily accepted as an educational
process within the framework of managing the workers. A лàsion which is also
found in Virginia Robinson's (1936) "supervision in social casework", the first
book about supervision to be published ever.
As a sequel to this tradition, in the English speaking countries it's stih quite
prevailing to differentiate supervision in three functions: administrative/ma-
30
s o CIA L N Л P E D A G O G / K Л
nagerial; supportive/enabling/helping; educational/teaching (e.g. Young, 1967; Fet-
tes, 1979; Radushin, 1976; Raslow, 1977; Shulman, 1982; Munson, 1983; Hawkins/
Shohet, 1989). Supervisors must encompass these diverse functions: being partly
as counselor they give support; they are educator too; and in many situations they
are also a manager with responsibilities both for what the supervisee is doing
with and to the client and also to the organization within which both do their work
(Hawkins/Shohet, 37). Mostly, the supervisee is expected to be accountable to the
supervisor; and the supervisor (designated by an agency, organization, or statute
to supervise another person's practice) is a person with some official sanction to
direct and guide the supervisee's practice (Munson, 1983, p. 3).
For the supervisor as well as for the supervisee the three functions do not
always fit comfortably together. The dual role of supervision (management and
teaching/support) can cause several problems (Radushin, 1976, p. 445). Already
since the twenties attempts have been made in the USA to establish a conceptu-
al difference and an actual separation of learning from authoritative control
(Robinson, 1936, p. xi; p. 53; Radushin, 1976, pp. 116-117; Rutzik, 1977, p. 49;
Pettes, 1979, p. 3; Morton & Rurtz, 1980; Rich, 1993). But as far as we can see
there is in the Enghsh-speaking world up tih now a general preference for a
combination of administrative and educational supervision of (student) profes-
sionals. This not only in (clinical) social work (Poertner & Rapp, 1983; Waldfo-
gel, 1983, pp. 321-323; Brown/Bourne, 1996, p. 9;), but also in the field of social
pedagogy (Hudson, 1994), and in psychotherapy supervision (Goguen, 1986, pp.
71-72) or the helping professions in general (Hawkins & Shohet, 1989, p. 5). As a
consequence, supervision is mostly seen as part of a managerial function within
an agency or organization (e.g. Shulman, 1982) which Hudson (1994) calls "the
line management focus" (p. 48). One of the few authors who appears to make
an exception for this combination is Holloway (1995, p. 3), who detaches "clini-
cal supervision" and "administrative supervision", although she restricts super-
vision only to a dyadic situation taking place within an organization.
The Dutch concept
During the first two decades of its existence, supervision in the Netherlands
witnessed the same mixture of supervisory functions that we have described for
the Enghsh-speaking countries. But particularly since the end of the sixties (Zi-
er, 1967), in contrast to the views described above, the Dutch concept of super-
vision excludes the administrative/managerial component. This function is con-
ceived as part of what has been called in Dutch "werkbegeleiding" performed
by the "werkbegeleider-", a functionary of the agency. He is responsible and
accountable to the administration for the methods and results of the services
performed by the workers in relation to the policy of the agency, and who also in
the end selects the "cases" for the student or (junior)professional (Van Ressel,
1992).
The Dutch concept of supervision thus focuses on the learning process by the
supervisee. This means:
• The supervisor helps the supervisee(s) - either student-practitioners or gra-
duated professionals, лvorkers in direct care as well as employees in secon-
dary functions - to learn (better) from their own experiences during the re-
.s o CIA L N A P E D A G O G ! K A
31
alization of their professional tasks in order to improve professional perfor-
mance in the future.
•	The supervisor does not assign the cases and has no managerial oversight of
the supervisee's clients: he is therefore not responsible for the co-ordination
and direction of the (student) worker's present job performance to ensure
the fulfillment of the agency's purpose of serving chents; he does not carry
any direct responsibility for the welfare of the clients with whom the super-
visee is working; neither does supervision provide the quality-control func-
tion to ensure that the standards of the agency in which the work is being
done are upheld.
•	The supervisor, however, does have a professional responsibility to develop
or to further the professional quality/competence of the supervisee, by me-
ans of fostering and facihtating the exploration of and reflection on the im-
plementation of the several professional tasks: Avith clients, colleagues, wit-
hin the team and the organization.
•	For the last mentioned reason it is to be preferred that the supervisor, in the
case of student supervision as wefl as of postgraduate supervision, assumes
a position that is as independent as possible from the agency or the place
where the (student) professional carries out his fleldwork assignment. This
enables the (aspiring) professional to develop independently a professional
competence which is not interwoven with the immediate interests of the
agency where he has to work.
•	In this concept, the supervisor is seen as a representative of professional com-
petence, but he is not accountable for seeing that the job gets done by the
supervisee; in case of student supervision he represents the aims of the edu-
cational institution too.
•	The supervisor is only responsible for the process of teaching and learning
from professional experiences and their results as a contribution to professi-
onal competence, and he has to evaluate and grade these results. Such a
distant and external position creates a better opportunity for the supervisee
to investigate personal strengths, possibilities and personal reactions which
reveal no particular idiosyncratic personality problems, but must be dealt
with in order to function effectively in this profession, or those which may
stem from painful experiences and troubles the supervisee has had in the
realization of his work tasks.
In short: In the Netherlands the supervisees do not function in the setting
under supervision, but learn to function professionally with the help o/supervi-
sion. Following Haan (1974, pp. 46-57), we might see the difference between the
dominant Anglo-Saxon concepts and the Dutch concept in terms of "exclusive
supervision" (no other goals than learning/teaching goals) versus "inclusive su-
pervision" (a complementary combination of administrative, supportive/ena-
bling and educational goals). In terms of a distinction made by Munson (1981),
лve could also refer to the "competence" model as against the "sanction" model.
The concept in outhne
In the Netherlands, supervision is seen as a specific method of guidance as

.s o C I A L N A PEDA G O G I K A
part of training and continuous training of both practising workers and mana-
gement (Van Ressel, 1985, p. 5; Siegers/Haan, 1988, p. 37; Siegers, 1995). The
pretension of supervision is general: it is not committed to a particular professi-
on, method or field, although elements and techniques from various workmet-
hods can be used. However, this can only ])e the case when they functionally
contribute to the goals of supervision. They also have to fit in with the frame-
work of supervision.
Supervision is particularly functional in professions and functions in which
the handling of relationships is important. It is oriented towards the develop-
ment of a "highly integrated and competent professional" (Stoltenberg/Delworth,
1987, quoted in: Rich, 1993, p. 157). This goal of supervision can be seen as the
promotion 0Î a. two-dimensional integration (Van Ressel, 1990b; Van Ressel/Ha-
an, 1993); on the one hand of the requirements demanded for practising a speci-
fic profession or function {the professional dimension), and on the other hand of
the dispositions and skills of he person лvho practices the profession/function,
as a developing person {the personal dimension). This process of integration can
be seen as a permanent task a professional is faced with. This integration re-
sults in a "professional person" (Towle, 1954, p. 3): a (ne\v) identity with accom-
panying professionalism^
The intended integration of profession or function on the one hand, and per-
son on the other, are in the case of professional functioning inextricably inter-
woven since the profession is practiced by means of self-handling of the person.
Nevertheless, functioning in a personal way, alone, is not enough for functio-
ning professionally. This requires an integration of a number of specific aspects
of both dimensions described above. This will be illustrated by means of a pictu-
re which resembles a kaleidoscope, with which 1 also want to emphasize the
necessary movements of the parts in relation to each other (figure 1).
Figure 1: Aspects of integrative professional functioning, seen as a kaleidoscopic prism.
.s o C ¡ALNA P E D A G U G I K A
33
In order to do his work well, a "Professional Person" should be able to func-
tion both integrated and integrating. For realizing this a competence is required
which exists of a deliberate mutual gearing to:
•	his own action capacities and objectives, so that лvhat he is aiming at corre-
sponds to his capacities;
•	his own feelings and preferences, and is able to cope with them adequately;
•	his own norms and values and how they affect his actions and strivings.
When it comes to handling situations of life in a generally human way, inte-
gration from the pole "person" is sufficient. For professionally handling profes-
sional tasks, integration from this pole is necessary, but it is not sufficient. It also
changes meaning. The personal dimension now finds expression through the
professional dimension: certain requirements are made on the personal way
the person (re)acts. In the case of a professional performance, the professional
may be expected to be able to work with his clients and co-operate лvith his
colleagues in a methodical way (in figure 1 the pole: "method"). The person and
his dispositions and way of reacting to situations, tasks and fellow human be-
ings, is involved in this. Apart from that, methodical handling should be in ac-
cordance with the sort of profession and the requirements demanded by that
profession (pole: "profession") exercised by the person concerned. This requ-
ires an integration of the poles "person", "profession" and "method". In addition
to this, in the integration of these three poles, the aspects of "thinking", "feelin-
g", "willing" and "acting" should be involved in their mutual interaction.
Concentrating on and reflecting on aspects of the personal dimension is al-
\vays done in supervision as part of and as contribution to the development of
the supervisee as a "Professional Person", and on that which he needs in order
to develop or improve his functioning. This means that a supervisee learns to
reflect better on the following aspects of his professional handling:
•	What he aims for in regard to a concrete work task in a concrete situation;
how he realizes this goal in a methodical лvay; how goal and method of wor-
king accord with that which may be expected of him from the point of view
of hoAv a profession should be practised.
•	If and how he is conscious of this in its realization; if and how he is conscious
of his own handling compentence and limitations; if and hoAv he is able to
deal with this in a methodical way.
•	If and hoAv he is conscious of his personal feelings, preferences, limitations
and traps; if and hoAv he is able to deal with this in a methodically adequate
way.
•	If and hoлv he is conscious of the influence of his олла! i)ersonal norms and
values and hoлv these have a favourable or unfavourable effect on his pro-
fessional actions and targets. If and how he is alile to deal лvith this in the
given situation in a methodically adequate Avay.
Furthermore, a profession is practised in a concrete institutional setting лvith
speciflc chents and their themes, methodical assignments, circumstances, col-
leagues, policy of the organization, etcetera. All these are part of the contextual
system which affects both professionalism and the professional. In order to be
34
s o CIA L N A P iL I) A G O G I K A
able to deal Avith this professionally, he has to be continuously aware of this and
determine his relation to these. This tuning, too, confronts him continuously
with questions of integration.
The kaleidoscopic model as aid
The kaleidoscopic model is an aid in supervision with the help of which the
supervisee can work out the working- and learning themes proceeding from the
aspects mentioned above. The supervisee can introduce work issues to all poles
and facets to discuss in supervision, from which learning themes can be develo-
ped. Thus, contributed practical experiences, for example, can refer to:
•	lack of particular methodical knowledge;
•	difficulty in handling methodical principles in a personal and creative way;
•	some lack of insight into or difficulties in coping wi\h personal values, norms
and opinions in relation to those of the chent systems or work situation;
•	the tendency to overemphasize personal involvement (emotions) and to re-
late this insufficiently to the professional function which he is performing;
•	difficulty in functioning in the work situation (organizational functioning);
•	all kinds of blind spots in relation to his own functioning, etc.
During the supervision it is impossible to direct the same attention to all
various poles and facets of the kaleidoscopic model at every moment. It may be
necessary for the supervisee concerned to concentrate more emphatically on
some of them, ])ecause he might learn from them and regarding them. More-
over, it is important that supervisor and supervisee do not lose sight of the rela-
tionship between the various poles and facets. If that is the case, supervision
could become more like "administrative supervision" (exclusive orientation to
the pole of the performance of the function) or "method training" (exclusive
orientation on the pole "method").
On the basis of the specific needs and development of this supervisee or of
the requirements of the profession, the aspects differentiated in the kaleidosco-
pe mentioned above can be more or less accentuated during the supervision.
This approach from several perspectives is necessary in the process of working
through, as will become apparent from the fohowing vignette.
Vignette 1
During a supervision session a supervisee (social worker) reports the follo-
wing professional experience:
"I had a conversation with a chent, which actually got out of hand. The client
was extremely difficult and impatient. I would like to know how to deal лvith
such clients in a better Avay".
Comment
Under the surface of this practice-experience there is much more than me-
ets the eye. During the reconstruction, which could take place with the help of
.s o C ¡ALNA l> E I) л G O G I K A
3S
the supervisor, the following can come up as "second narrative", a term intro-
duced by Zier (1983; 1988).
The worker became angry ("feeling") because he did not find the chent's
behaviour adequate ("thinking": view, norm). He became so angry that he wal-
ked away without properly winding up the consultation ("acting"). He does not
feel happy about the incident because he is of the opinion ("thinking") that he
should l)e able to deal with such a consultation in a professional way ("metho-
d"). This opinion is not of a personal nature, but a view which is acquired during
the course of the professional socialization. Through his personal reaction he
shows what it means to him instinctively, when he is not successful. This speci-
fically personal reaction has possibly also got its roots in his socialization. When
it appears that certain patterns in his professional handling are connected to
this, it could be worked on during the course of the supervision.
He would like to change this behaviour ("willing"), but does not know how.
This has possil3ly got to do with a lack of capability of methodical acting or of
methodical knowledge, or of self-handling in connection with these. Unfortuna-
tely, he is not able to discuss these experiences properly in the team of which he
is a member (context). As it is, everyone is responsible for his own work beca-
use of the high work pressure (organization/society). When there is time, he
notices again and again that the conversation remains superficial. He cannot
put his finger on the problem.
This example shows that the supervisee's report of his practice-experience
can be taken as a "first narrative" which can Јзе adapted to a "second narrative"
with the help of the supervisor. The latter in itself can lead to further adaptati-
ons. With the help of the supervisor, the supervisee can, through the act of re-
flection, change the meaning and imphcations of his personal professional ex-
periences. In this way, the experience is being de- and reconstructed through
which new insights and actions are developed. These, again, can generate new
insights and actions, particularly when the "self-directing capacity"(Van Ressel,
1996) of the supervisee reaches maturity.
With the help of the kaleidoscopic model presented a])ove, the supervisor
hstens to the supervisee's narrative of his professional experiences which he
presents as learning material in the supervision. On the basis of this the super-
visor helps the supervisee to reflect on the experiences he got in reahzing his
professional tasks. The supervisor and supervisee together can determine the
primary orientations of the supervisee in his experiencing and reflecting, and
determine which particular dimensions the supervisee should integrate more.
The supervisor herel^y also supports the supervisee in learning to examine the-
se aspects himself, to work on them thematically and develop certain facets in
an integrated way.
Discrepancies
The supervisor adjusts his interventions to the various facets of the kaleidos-
copic model. The supervisee thereby becomes conscious of the mutual discre-
pancies between the facets. Such discrepancies may Јзесоте apparent>-om what
36
s o C I Л L N /I /' /i I) /I G O G / K Л
Ihe supervisee presents in supervision as content-material from his Avork prac-
tice (vignette 2) and the way of how he presents the material (vignette 3).
Vignette 2
During one of the following sessions the supervisee tehs he had an intervieлv
^vith another client.
Supervisee's narrative
The client couldn't stop talking, he
had to get a whole story off his chest.
Although I started asking questions
after some time, I did not succeed in
keeping him to his story.'
'I then made the decision to act as a
sounding board for that moment.
This WRS quite convenient as I felt
terril)ly insecure to begin with.'
'However, I was not satisfied to act as
a sounding board because I felt that
this was not a social work interview.'
'On the other hand, for me it was
safe: 1 was able to ol)serve him.
'From my point of view, in this way it
had nothing to do with social work.
Yet, I felt that he had to žunload'
because he clearly needed to do so at
that moment. 1 clearly felt the
discrepancy between my own work
goal and his needs.
Comment
Apparently, the supervisee wants to
deal with this professional task in a
methodical way. He feels not able,
yet, to realize this sufficiently.
Apparently, dealing with this in a
methodical way is determined by
personal consideration rather than
by professional demands or
principles.
The discrepancy between actually
dealing with this in a methodical
way (ability to handle) on the one
hand, and method-view/professional
Yiew (thinking/) and what he wanted
to live up to (willing) on the other
hand, has consequences on feeling
(as a reaction on the way of handling
things).
Personal feelings in relation to a
personal handling (a reaction
mechanism) which apparently suits
him/her well.
Discrepancy bet%veen views on the
work task (view on desired
methodical handling in this
situation) and personally and
instinctively perceiving the client's
needs. This personal observation is
not related to a realization of an
universal vieAv on the desired
methodical way of acting and
methodical handling in this
particular situation at this particular
moment Avith this particular client
with his particular needs.
cS o CIA L N Л r !<: D Л G O G / K Л
37
The worker in this example displays a l)ehaviour Avhieh personally suits him/
her well, and with which his chent appears to feel comfortable. However, it se-
ems to be лvrong to the worker when looking upon this behaviour from the point
of view of the professional task and its methodical transformation. Also, he is
not a]}le to place his actions within a methodical framework.
This supervisee clearly has a number of integrational prolilems which requ-
ire a working on before he is able to develop his own methodical way of acting
as a worker.By investigating the various aspects of the dimensions during the
supervision, the discrepancies Јзесате clear to the supervisee. On the i)asis of
this, certain integration tasks originated лvhich acted as "learning themes" in
the supervision. As it happened, during the course of the supervision this super-
visee appeared to ])e wrestling with such integrational problems.
Vignette 3
During the course of a numl)er of sessions, the supervisor notices that in his
reporting of his work-experiences, the supervisee-social лvorker constantly re-
lates the way he feels or has felt. He hardly describes what ha])pened, in what
context things hajipened, what he intended to do, лvhat he actually did and from
what view he defined the professional task. Moreover, the su])ervisee describes
the experience more as a })ersonal one than as a ])rofessional one лvhich, acting
from a method, he accjuired in a concrete луогк situation.
Comment
In this example we can recognize discrei)ancies betAveen the personal di-
mension and the professional dimension, and lietween feeling on the one hand,
and acting and thinking on the other. Also, for the supervisee the method and
context do not seem to be points of orientation for the action.
Reflection and Reflectivity
Integrated functioning and the cajiacity for integration are not acquired on-
ce and for all. They need to ])e sul)stantiated: redefined continuously. Reflection
and reflectivity play a central part in this. The extent to which a professional is
a])le to act professionally on his own and to keej) u]) the standards of his own
professionalism, лу111 strongly depend on the extent to which he has learned to
reflect independently on the professional experiences acquired and has develo-
ped an "observing sell" (Bowen, 1974, in: Boeckhorst, 1989, p. 17). If this reflec-
tion does not take place, the worker gets stuck in natural reaction j)atterns, which
often evolve out of ])revious experiences of life. These affect the methodical
approach. By learning to observe and reflect on these reaction ])atterns, the su-
pervisee is able to distance himself from them and integrate them in the desired
professional acting. At the same time, the луогкег learns hoAv to reflect.
Integrated functioning in the ])rofessional ])ractice - the ultimate and sub-
stantial goal of supervision - therefore, can only l)e learned l)y making the ])er-
sonal and concrete dealing with jirofessional tasks the subject of reflection. De-
ahng Avith professional tasks should be ([uestioned from the persjiective of the
38
s o CIA L N A l> !<: D A C O G I K A
professional requirements. On the basis of this, one's own handling of this can
be adjusted to meet the requirements of a good professional practice.
The extent to which the supervisee proves to be able to do this is also proof
of the extent to which he is capable of independent professional functioning
(the professional dimension). According to Towle (1954, p. 163), " ... one of the
measures of professional maturity is the extent to which learning has become
conscious." Reflectivity is an important quality of professionality. More and mo-
re attention is paid to this in the contemporary professional profiles (Schön,
1983; 1987).
Intermediate goals: reflectional skills and
integrational capacity
The ultimate goal of supervision is time and again being able to function as
an integrated "Professional Person" in a specific situation in the professional
practice. In the supervision this goal is only virtually present, as it is realized
outside and also still after the supervision-situation. Apart from that, integrated
functioning is not a permanent and static fact, it has to be realized again and
again. For the professional, the chents, the professional tasks and -situations
are continuously subject to changes. In order to attain this ultimate goal the
achievement of two intermediate goals is pursued in the supervision: reflectio-
nal skills and integrational capacity.
Applied to vignette 1
For the time being, at any rate, the supervisor does not advise the supervisee
of how to deal with these or similar clients. This can be done in the "werkbege-
leiding", which is more alike "fieldwork/administrative supervision". The su-
pervisor tries to get the supervisee to reflect on his own experience during the
performance of his professional tasks and on how he is handling this experien-
ce. At the same fime, by doing so, he tries to develop the reflectivity. The super-
visee can use this for dealing with his own professional experiences in future
(different) situations. The supervisor gets the supervisee to further concretize
the experience he described and look upon it from various points of view. Many
aspects appear to play a part. Also, various hesitations and obstacles are disco-
vered in order to change the familiar reaction-pattern. In this act of concretiza-
tion and problematization, the supervisee can work on one or more of the follo-
wing themes:
•	His own reaction pattern: his feelings, norms and values. Personal experien-
ces from his own hfe history \vhich unconsciously could influence his beha-
viour towards this chent (counter-transference).
•	His view of how he should practise his profession.
•	His methodical skills needed for such a consultation.
•	His perception of and being to the culture of his team or in his organization.
Possibly, attention will be paid to everything because all aspects are related
to and interwoven with each other. However, it cannot all be worked on at the
same time. Such a process of working on and through'^ wih in the long run lead
to a more integrated Avay of functioning in professional situations.
_^s o C I A I. N A I> IC I) A a a a i к A
39
Two objects of learning and guidance in
supervision
In order to let the supervisee work on the intended goals, the interventions
of the supervisor -and of ])ossi])le fellow-supervisee(s)- must be aimed at two
objects, namely: the professional dimension and the learning dimension. The
professional dimension can be looked upon as the primary object of supervision.
Hereupon, the supervisee contri])utes his own professional experiences. In ad-
dition, лvhat the supervisee ought to acquire in order to be al)le to function ade-
quately in his professional role, belongs to this. The criteria for this purpose are
determined i)y the professional group concerned. Both supervisees and super-
visors have to be guided ])y these.
Applied to vignette 1
Aspects which come up to work on in this respect are:
•	How should a capable social worker express communicatively and interac-
tionally the situation described above?
•	What behaviour, лvhat experience and what attribution of significance is de-
sired from a ])rofessional point of view?
•	What should this supervisee develop in particular concerning his personal
abihties in order to be a])le to deal with this professional task in a better way?
It is important to pay attention to the learning dimension needed to make the
adaptation of professional experiences successful for future professional acting.
A supervisor, therefore, has to aim his interventions at the manner in which and
the way of learning along which the supervisee learns the necessary professi-
onalism. This learning takes place within the supervision as well as within the
setting in which the profession is practiced. In order to be able to function suc-
cessfully in supervision, the supervisee has to be (and often to become'') capable
of realizing a way of learning which is necessary and desiral)le in supervision.
When the supervisee learns hoAv to deal with his professional experiences in a
supervisory way, he is also able to do so after the supervision and without the
help of the supervisor.
Applied to vignette 1
In his first contribution to the supervision, the supervisee descri])ed his cli-
ent's ])ehaviour. He did not mention his own behaviour and experiences. What
does the supervisee teU in meta-language? Does he not perceive his own fe-
elings? Is he not aware of the part he plays himself in the interaction, or is he of
the opinion that that is not imjiortant in supervision? He also does not describe
what reasons could ])ossibly play a part in his client's behaviour. By doing so,
лvhat does he tell about his \vay of working? Does he go deeply enough into this?
Is he sensitive enough on that score in his observations or does he express his
opinion too quickly? Finally, he \vrote that he would like to know how he could
deal wilh such a chent in a better way. What does he tell ])y лvriting thus? Does
he particularly лvant good advice?
From Avhat has been stated above, the folloлving provisional picture emer-
40
s o C I Л I. N A P п D A C, O G / K A
ges. The supervisor can discuss this with the supervisee little by little, which the
latter can examine hirther. Wliere his learning style is concerned (compare Roll),
1984; Van Ressel, 1990a), he gives the impression of being strongly directed to-
Avards concrete instructions. V^hen the right advice is given he is able to put that
into practice quickly. Perhaps that can also be found in his contact with chents
and colleagues. What are the implications of this for the practising of his profes-
sion?
The observational and reflectional skills of the superAdsee are not suffici-
ently developed. Also, he is not yet able to ask him-herself \vhat sides there are
to his client's behaAdour and what his o^vn reaction is to this. This theme does
not only play an important part in the "professional dimension", but also in the
"learning dimension", for it complicates learning during the supervision. For,
supervision appeals to the reflectivity of the supervisee.
Where the guidance of the supervisor to the supervisee is concerned, the
above-mentioned implies that the supervisor has to strongly curb the supervi-
see's tendency to progress. He has to make the supervisee look back continu-
ously, in order to discover other aspects of himself as well as of his client's and
from the view])oint of his profession.
By learning to reflect on the ex])erience gained in a purposive, conscious
and systematic луау, the inner dialogue of the su])ervisee is stimulated and he
becomes his олуп critical opponent and interlocutor. As a result, the supemsee
becomes more skilled in (Van Ressel, 1989, p. 66):
•	reflecting on his олтп professional experiences with the intention of keeping
his олуп ])rofessional handling at the required standard or to develop further;
•	handhng professional tasks more consciously during the execution of his
work, because he is capal)le of looking at his олуп dealing from the dual
perspective of the observing and participating self (\Soç.c\ù\oys\., 1989, p. 16).
He becomes an observing participant (Shepard, 1964, p. 579), ^ reflective prac-
titioner (Schön, 1987), who is capable of reflection-in-his-action.
Nature of the learning material
For the benefit of his learning process, the su])ervisee needs to contri])ute
learning material to the supervision. Experiences from his ол¥п "professional"
dealing form the prime source for this material. In it the supervisee realizes in
his own personal way the performing of his professional tasks. These concern
clients, coheagues and the institution. Usually, these experiences are contribu-
ted in witing, Avhether or not backed u]) by a passage from an audio- or video
recording. This written contribution serves as ])reparation for an oral explanati-
on. The supervisee's behaviour in the here and полу of the supervision offers a
secondary source, it offers supplementary learning material. This can be used
as "parallel process" (EksteinAVallerstein, 1959, ]). 177-196) or as "mirroring"
(Searles, 1955; Rutter, 1990).
Applied to vignette 1
The supervisee ex])ected ad^dce from his super^dsor in his attitude. This appe-
^S o C I Л L N A P /<: I) A a 0 G / K A
41
are cl to be analogous to his tendency to instruct his clients, instead of asking
them questions empathically and patiently, and listening to them carefully. This
theme was discovered after the supervisor had told the supervisee: "I expect
you would like me to advise you on how to deal with this client." After the super-
visee had confirmed this, the supervisor asked: "And do your clients ahvays ex-
pect this of you, too? Is that what they really expect? And what does your advice
mean to them?"
Every supervisee deals with learning- and work tasks in his олуп луау, corre-
S})onding to his own personality: the individual learning style (Roll), 1984; Van
Ressel, 1990a). What the supervisee in this respect shows in the supervision can
be used as a third source. The learning style can show parallels лvith aspects of
the work style of the supervisee.
Applied to vignette 1
It was not easy for the supervisee to perceive his own ex])eriences. He had
difficulties dwelling on them, for he was easily of the opinion that the work
would become unnecessarily complicated in case you did. He appeared to have
obtained this work- and learning attitude in his socialization. During his child-
hood, his ])arents used to have a small business and their family motto used to
be: "Set to луогк as there is always something that can be done".
Necessary basic conditions
For an intensive and individualized learning process, which is the intended
purpose of supervision, a number of necessary basic conditions are required.
When these are not sufficiently present, one can speak of an activity that at best
resembles sujiervision. The following conditions are necessary:
•	Parallel to the supervision sessions, the supervisee must work continuously
and to a large extent independently in his profession. In case of supervision
to students who are in training one can speak of a future profession.
•	The current experiences in exercising the profession offer the most impor-
tant learning material. In the supervision, the supervisee works on this pri-
marily by reflection. Therefore, a direct connection and interaction ])etween
professional ex})eriences and insights into the supervision as a learning situ-
ation is necessary, as a result of which more and more can be learned both in
and from the work.
•	In order to be able to realize this connection and interaction, il is necessary
for the supervision sessions to take place on a regular basis. Moreover,
each session has to be of limited and fixed duration. This amounts to a
frequency of once a fortnight/three weeks, and a total number of fifteen
sessions at the least, and thirty at the most, each lasting one hour per su-
pervisee.
•	Supervision which is so intensive and geared to the individual ])rofessional
worker requires a limited number of participants. A maximum of three or
four supervisees, лvho, independent of one another, practise their profession
in a work situation. Also, they are not part of each other's lives.
42
s o CIA L N A P E D A G O G I K A
Forms
Supervision can t)e given in one of the following forms:
•	with one supervisee: individual or dyadic supervision;
•	with two supervisees: triadic supervision;
•	with three or four supervisees: group supervision.
Conclusion
Supervision is a value-oriented and process-oriented activity, in which the
supervisee's work themes are transformed into learning themes. The latter are
placed within the framework and perspective of what the supervisee ought to
learn and develop in order to arrive at adequate professional and/or functional
practice. The primary method of training is the supervisee's self-reflection on
his own professional experiences. The improvement and development of the
supervisee's own reflectivity is a central goal. Apart from methods of working
and interventions which promote reflection, other means can be used as wefl.
In the end, these ought to contribute to the intended reflection.
Supervision is action-oriented as well. The supervisee has to transpose the
insights which are obtained through reflection into handling his own professi-
onal tasks, if necessary, with the help of the supervisor.
Although the personal experiences gathered in his professional practice are
the basis of the process, supervision is not aimed at solving practical problems.
Not the practical experiences and problems, but the supervisee's learning the-
mes, which crystalhze out of this, form the leitmotiv of the supervision process.
The learningmethod which is promoted in supervision, has the character of
selfdiscovered searching rules, also called "heuristics" (Van Ressel, 1989, p. 60).
Notes
1.	A second, historically later, root of supervision, and which is methodically
less clearly documented, hes according to Fleming/Benedek (1996,p.7 ff) in
the supervised analyses in the framework of the psycho-analytic associati-
ons. According to Blanton (1971,p.48), Freud put the relevance of this as fol-
lows: "I do not believe that one can give the method of technique through
papers. It must be done by personal teaching. Of course, beginners probably
need something to start with. Othenvise they Avould have nothing to go on.
But if they fono\v the directions conscientiously, they wih soon find themsel-
ves in trouble. Then they must learn to develop their own technique".
Following this tradition, August Aichhorn and Anna Freud also employed a
kind of supervision approach in their "Erzieherkurse", which took place in
Vienna in the thirties (Gotthardt-Lorenz, 1986,p.43). Also the Bahnt- groups
\vhich were developed about 1950 in London by the Hungarian psycho-analyst
Michael Balint (1964) belong to this tradition.
2.	In case of a practice placement, this function is called "praktijkbegeleiding",
delivered by the "praktijkbegeleider", лvhich corresponds >vith the function
of "practice teacher" or "fleldwork supervisor".
.s o CIA L N A P li D A G O G / K A
43
3.	Following Robinson (1936,p.25), Reynolds (1953,p.253) speaks of a "profes-
sional self.
4.	For a more elaborate description of the way in which the supervisee can be
guided during the supervision, the reader is referred to Van Ressel (1989;
1996).
5.	This is usually the case in a first training supervision.
References
Al ting von Geusau,W.A.M. & Runia,E.(1991): De prijs van het aardig zijn.
Supervisie als scholingsmethode voor huisartsen. Utrecht: Nederlands Huisart-
sen Genootschap.
Andriessen,H.C.l.(1975): Leren aan ervaring en supervisie. Nijmegen: Dek-
ker en Van de Vegt. Diss. Univ. Nijmegen.
Austin,L.N.(1957): Supervision in Social Work. In: R.H. Rurtz (Ed.), Social
Work Yearbook. Vol. 13. New York: National Association of Social Workers.
Austin, L.N.(1960): Supervision in Social Work. In: R.H. Rurtz (Ed.), Social
Work Yearbook. Vol.14. New York: National Association of Social Workers.
Balint, M. (1964): The Doctor, his Patient and the Illness. London: Pitman Me-
dical Pubhshing Co. Ltd.
Belardi, N.(1992): Supervision. Von der Praxisberatung zur Organisationsent-
wicklung. Paderborn: .lunfermann.
Blanton, S.(1971): Diary of my analysis with Sigmund Freud. N.Y.: Hawthor-
ne Books.
Boeckhorst, F.(1989): Het dubbele perspectief. Over supervisie in systemisc-
he (gezins)therapie. Supervisie in opleiding en beroep, 6/1, 6-20.
Bowen, M.(1974): Towards the Differentiation of Self in one's Family of Ori-
gin. In: F. Andres and ,1. Lorio (eds), Georgetown Family Symposia, vol.1 (1971-
1972), Washington D.C.
Brown A. & Bourne 1.(1996): The social work supervisor: supervision in com-
munity, day care, and residential settings. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Burns, M.E.(1965): Supervision in Social Work. In: H.L. Lurie (Ed.), Enc}'clo-
pedia of Social Work. (15th issue.) New York.
Ekstein R.& Waherstein, R.S.(1958): The teaching and learning of psychothe-
rapy. N.Y.: Basic Books, Inc.
Fleming, .1. and Th.Benedek (1966): Psychoanalytic Supervision. New York:
Grune.
Goguen, T.(1986): Psychotherapy supervision: Clarifying a complex task. The
Clinical Supervisor, Vol.4/4, pp. 69-76.
Gotthardt-Lorenz, A.(1986): Fin Versuch, Supervision in Österreich, ihre Ent-
stehung und heutige Situation zu entschlüsseln. Supervision, 10, 43-56.
Griffioen, ,1.(1980): Supervisie voor beginnende leraren. Groningen, Wolters-
Noordhoff. Diss. Rijksuniv. Groningen.
Haan, P. M.(1974): Ä study of the activity of the supervisor of groupwork stu-
44
s o CIA L N A P /i D A G O G I K A
dents in the first year of advanced social work education in the Netherlands Ann
Arl)or, Michigan, University of Pennsylvania, D.S.W.
Hawkins, P. /Shohet, R.(1989): Supervision in the helping Professions. An indi-
vidual, group and organizational approach. Milton Keynes: Open University
Press.
Holloway, E.L.(1995): Clinical supervision: a systems approach. Thousand
Oaks: SAGE Pu]}lications, Inc.
Hubschmid, M., .1. Schönholzer, M. Senn-Lüthi, & W. Vontobel (1986): Ent-
wicklung der Supervision in der Schweiz. Supervision, 10, 33-41.
Hudson, ,1.R.(1994): Supervision: A UR Perspective. The School Field, Vol. V,
No. 1/2,15-54.
Jongh, ,I.F. de (1950): Casework-scholing. TMW, Tijdschriftvoor maatschap-
pelijk werk, 4/17, 282-283.
.longh, ,1.F. de,(1953): A European Experiment in Casework Teaching. Social
Casework,No\. 34/1,, 9-17.
Kadushin, A.,(1976): Supervision in Social Work. N.Y./London: Columbia Uni-
versity Press.
Raslow, F.W. & Associates (1977): Supervision, consultation, and staff training
in the helping professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Ressel, L. van (1985): Bevoegdheid voor supervisie. Een gordiaanse knoop.
Supervisie in Opleiding en Beroep, 2/1, 5-21.
Ressel, L. van (1990a): Roll)s typologie van leerstijlen. Een hulpmiddel voor
begeleiding van het leren van supervisanten. Supervisie in Opleiding en Beroep,
7/2, 26-44.
Ressel, L. van (1990''^: Supervisie als methode van indirecte agogische arl)eid,
gericht op begeleiden van leren in het kader van opleiden en
deskundigheids])evordering tot agogische arbeid. In: Merkies, Q.,(Red.)(1990):
Supervisie samenspraak: zoekend ter^ugzien voor straks, pp. 18-36. Culemborg:
Phaedon.
Ressel, L. van (1992): Werkbegeleiding als kwaliteitsmanagement van de
uitvoerende functie. Balanceren tussen beheersen en ondersteunen. Supervisie
in opleiding en beroep. Tijdschrifi voor professioneel begeleiden, 9/1,, pp. 19-24.
Ressel, L. van & D. Haan, D. (1993"): The dutch concept of supervision. Its
essential characteristics as a conce])tual framework. The Clinical Supervisor,
Vol. 11/1,5-27.
Ressel, L. van & Haan, D.(1993''): The intended way of learning in supervision
seen as a model. The Clinical Supervisor, 11/1, pp. 29-44.
Ressel, L. van (1996): Sturing van leerprocessen in supervisie. Supervisie in
opleiding en ber-oep, 13/3,111-125.
Ressel, L. van (1996): Bevezetés. In: Ressel, L. van, Sárvári G. (Szerk), A
szupervízió konceptionális kérdései, pp. 5-14. Budapest (1996): Supervisio
Hungarica Fiizetek. Tanulmányok a szupervízió kôrél)ôl II.
Roll), D.A. (1984): Experiential learning. Experience as the source of learning
and development. EngleAvoods Chffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Rutter, P. (1990): Das direkte und indirekte Spiegelphänomen. In: Pühl,
.s o C / /1 N Л P H I) Л G O G / K A
45
Handbuch der Supervision. Beratung und Reflexion in Ausbildung, Beruf
und Organisation, pp. 291-301. Berlin: Ed. Marhold.
Rutzik, A.J.(1977): The social work field. In: Raslow, F.W. and Associates
(1977): Supervision, consultation and staff training in the helping professions, pp.
25-60. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
LVSB (1992): LVSB-Registratie Supervisoren 1992. Regelgeving betreffende
registrane van supervisoren en opleiders en betreffende erkenning van
opleidingsonderdelen. Den Haag: Landelijke Vereniging voor Supervisie en
andere Begeleidingsvormen.
LVSB (1996): LVSB-Registratie Supervisoren 1996. Regelgeving betreffende
registrane van supervisoren en opleiders en betreffende erkenning van
opleidingsonderdelen. Herziene Editie. Den Haag: Landelijke Vereniging voor
Supervisie en andere Begeleidingsvormen.
Morton, T.D. & Rurtz, P. D. (1980): Educational supervision: A learning theory
approach. Social Casework, 1980, April, pp. 240-246.
Munson C.(1981): Style and structure in supervision. Journal of Education
for Social Work, Vol.17/1, 65-72.
Munson, C.E. (1983): Лтг introduction to clinical social work supervision. New
York: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Oberhoff, B.(1986): Über Supervision, Identität und Sich-Erinnern. Gedanken
eines deutschen Supervisors. Supervision, 10, 57-63.
Pettes, D.E.(1979): Staff and student supervision. A task-centred approach.
London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd.
Poertner, ,1. & C. Rapp (1983): Wlrat is social л¥огк supervision? The Clinical
Supervisor, 1/2, pp. 53-65.
Praag-van Asperen, H.M. van & Van Praag, Ph.H.(1993): ^a7гí^öoß/£ supervisie
en intervisie in de psychothérapie. Utrecht: De Tijdstroom.
Reynolds, B.C.(1953): Learning and Teaching in the Practice of Social Work.
New York: Farrar and Rinehart.
Rich, Ph. (1993): The Form, Function,and Content of Chnical Supervision: An
integrated Model. The Clinical Supervisor, Vol.11/1, pp. 137-178.
Robinson, VP. (1936): Supervision in Social Casework. Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina Press.
Schön, D.A.(1983): The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D.A.(1987): Educating the reflectiveprrictitioner. San Francisco: .lossey-
Bass.
Searles, H.F.(1955): The Informational Value of the Supervisor's Emotional
Experiences. УЛsyc/гшíA;}-, 18, pp. 135-146.
Shephard, H.A.(1964): Explorations in observant participation. In: Bradford,
L.P., J.R. Gibb, R.D. Benne (1964): T-group Theory and Laborator}-Method, pp.
379-394. N.Y.: John Wiley
Shulman, L.(1982): Skills of Supervision and Staff management. Itasca, 111:
EE. Peacock Pubhshers.
Siegers, F.(l 995): Instellingssupervisie. Leren over werk in de context van leiden
- begeleiden - en (samen)wer-ken. Houten/Diegem: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum.
46
s o C I Л L N A P E D A G O G [KA
Siegers, F.& Haan, D. (1983; 1986; 1988): Handboek supervisie. Alphen a/d
Rijn: Samsom.
Stoltenberg, C.D. & Delworth,U.(1987): Supervising counselors and therapists.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Towle, C.(1954): The learner in education for the professions. As seen in
education for social work. Chicago, 111.: The University of Chicago Press.
Waldfogel, D.(1983): Supervision of students and practitioners. In: Rosenblatt,
A, & Waldfogel, D.(gen. editors). Handbook of clinical social work, pp. 319-
344. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey Bass.
Weigand, W.(1990): Zur Rezeptionsgeschichte der Supervision in
Deutschland. In: Supervision, 18,Dezember, pp. 43-58.
Young, P. (1967): The student and supervision in social work education. London:
Routledge and Regan Paul, Ltd.
Zeller, D. (1990): Supervision nach dem Verfahren Urteils-bildung. In: Fatzer,
G. and C.D. Eck (Eds.), Supervision und Beratung, pp. 181-192. Röln: Ed.
Humanist.Psychologie.
Zier, Ii. J.(1967): Leren werken door middel van supervisie. De Schalin, 24/6,
pp. 375-390.
Zier, H.J.(1968): Discussie over supervisie. Volksopvoeding, 17/3, pp. 135-
152. Ibidem in: Siegers, F.M.J.(red.)(1972): Supervisie, pp. 15-33. Alphen aan
den Rijn: Samsom. (Deutsche Herausgabe: Siegers, F.M.J.(Hrsg)(1974):
Praxisberatung in der Diskussion. Formen - Ziele - Einsatzfelder. Freiburg: Alcor.)
Zier, H.(1983; 1988): Voor het eerst supervisie. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.