Recently I was reminded of the stark contrast between my experience of supervision when I worked in a professional organisation to that now, as a psychotherapist.
For my safety, development and to maintain professional registration I must undertake supervision with a registered and qualified clinical supervisor. This week I was challenged on an approach and had a deep and honest conversation about many aspects of working as a therapist.
It highlighted for me the contrasts in approaches to relationships and honesty. Both settings, corporate and therapeutic, necessitate a level of transparency and trust, but the context, purpose and depth of these interactions have differed significantly for me.
In a conventional professional workplace, the relationship between a line manager and a subordinate is hierarchical and performance-oriented. The line manager’s primary responsibility is to ensure that the subordinate is meeting job expectations, achieving goals, and contributing to the organisation’s success. Conversations I have had in the past primarily focussed on tasks, performance metrics, career development – if I was lucky – and operational issues. Honesty in this context was usually centred around performance feedback. It was direct, sometimes critical, and aimed to enhance productivity. Rarely did I feel it enhanced my professional growth. The inherent power dynamic places challenges on the subordinate. I have absolutely experienced hesitance to disclose issues or admit mistakes for fear of repercussions, such as negative evaluations, limited career advancement, or even job loss. While I genuine believe in many workplaces honesty is valued, it is often tempered by self-preservation and strategic omission of fact.
Conversely, the relationship between a therapist and their clinical supervisor is inherently more supportive and developmental. Clinical supervision is a crucial aspect of my professional growth, focusing on enhancing clinical skills, ensuring ethical practice, and providing emotional support. This relationship is very much about mutual professional development. Honesty in this setting is deeply rooted in self-reflection and openness. Therapists are encouraged to discuss their challenges, uncertainties, and even their failures with no fear of judgment. The supervisor’s role is to provide a safe space for this exploration, offering guidance, feedback, and support to facilitate the therapist’s growth and well-being.
In clinical supervision, the emphasis on honesty is profound and multifaceted. It includes a commitment to self-awareness, ethical practice, and continuous improvement. The therapeutic nature of the relationship means that the supervisor often delves into the personal aspects of the therapist’s experiences, including their emotional responses and personal biases, which can impact their professional practice. This level of honesty requires vulnerability and trust; the goal is not just to correct but to nurture and develop the therapist’s competencies and well-being. I find it the most rewarding and powerful experience to allow myself to be so open.
Another critical difference lies in the nature of feedback and its reception. In managerial supervision, feedback is often perceived as evaluative or corrective. Subordinates might accept this feedback with varying degrees of receptiveness, influenced by their perception of fairness, the relationship quality, and the feedback’s potential impact on their career. In clinical supervision, feedback is more bidirectional and collaborative. Supervisors provide feedback, but they also seek the therapist’s input on their supervisory practices. This reciprocal nature encourages a more honest and open dialogue, reinforcing the therapeutic alliance and the mutual goal of enhancing clinical practice. I don’t believe I have ever been asked to provide feedback on any manager other than when I had to submit a grievance, by then any relationship I’d had, no longer existed.
Another consideration is the consequences of dishonesty. In the workplace, dishonesty or lack of transparency can lead to tangible repercussions, such as decreased productivity, misunderstandings, and strained relationships. In clinical supervision, dishonesty can have profound implications for the therapist’s professional development and client care. If a therapist is not forthcoming about their challenges, it can impede their growth and potentially impact their clients’ well-being.
I felt this contrast was worthwhile sharing because I wonder truly and honestly if the professional corporate world could learn a lot from the supervisory practices of therapists. Hope you have!
Kirsty
