Effects of Supervisors' Sex, Focus, and Experience on Preferences for Interpersonal Power Bases

Abstract

The authors examined the effects that supervisor's sex, amount of supervisory experience, and supervisory focus had on preferences for the referent, expert, and legitimate power bases. Supervisors from seven counseling center training programs (20 women, 36 men) rated the utility of responses reflecting each power base in enhancing the professional development of a female trainee. Results indicated that men preferred the referent power base to a greater extent than did women and that supervisors with relatively little experience preferred the referent power base to a greater extent than did supervisors with more experience. Supervisors who focused on trainee self‐awareness preferred the expert power base to a greater extent than did supervisors who focused on the trainees' conceptualization skills. Significant differences were not found in the preferences for the legitimate power base. Results were discussed in terms of differences between counseling and supervisory‐relationships and the characteristics of each power base.

A Pragmatic Agenda for Developmental Supervision Research

“…Few researchers, however, have investigated actual supervisor behaviors at various supervisee experience levels (e.g., Raphael, 1982). In addition, supervisors' perceptions of their behaviors may be influenced by their theoretical orientation to counseling (e.g., Friedlander & Ward, 1984;Goodyear, Abadie, & Efros, 1984), gender (e.g., Robyak, Goodyear, & Prange, 1987;Stenack & Dye, 1983), or other individual traits. To clarify what supervisors actually do during supervision, direct observation of their verbal and nonverbal behaviors with supervisees at different developmental stages is needed.…”

The relationship of supervisor and trainee gender match and gender attitude match to supervisory style and the supervisory working alliance

“…Furthermore, socially and culturally defined gender roles and expectations are brought into supervision (Ancis & Ladany, 2010;Brodsky, 1980;Holloway & Wolleat, 1994;Inman & Ladany, in press;Munson, 1997;Stevens-Smith, 1995). Several authors have described theoretical models (Munson, 1997;Nelson, 1997) or have made recommendations regarding gender issues in supervision (Ancis & Ladany, 2010;Bernstein, 1993;Brodsky, 1980;Nadelson, Belitsky, Seeman, & Ablow, 1994;Stevens-Smith, 1995;Twohey & Volker, 1993); however, only a few have examined gender issues empirically (Baker, 1991;Budd, 1994;Claridge, 1994;Gullotta-Gsell, 1984;Horwitz, 1990;Johnson, 1997;Nelson & Holloway, 1990;Robyak, Goodyear, & Prange, 1987;Schiavone & Jessell, 1988;Schwartz, 1994;Walker, Ladany, & Pate-Carolan, 2007;Worthington & Stern, 1985). These studies are extremely varied in design and focus, and perhaps as a result, their findings are inconsistent and inconclusive (Holloway & Wolleat, 1994;Munson, 1997).…”

Relationships Between Dimensions of Supervisors' Influence and Counselor Trainees' Performance

“…Friedlander and Snyder (1983) studied trainee expectations of supervisors and found that, regardless of their experience level, trainees expected supervisors to be more trustworthy than expert and more expert than attractive. Robyak, Goodyear, and Prange (1987) studied the relationship between sex, preferred focus, and level of experience and supervisors' preferences for use of expert, referent, or legitimate power bases (related to preferences for establishing one's expertness, attractiveness, or trustworthiness, respectively). They found that supervisors who preferred to focus on trainee self-awareness showed a preference for using an expert power base.…”

“…There is some evidence that these factors operate to promote a good supervisory relationship (Heppner & Handley,198 1) and some indication that trustworthiness may be more important in supervisory relationships in comparison to counseling relationships (Heppner & Handley, 1982). There are indications that both trainees and supervisors have preferences for the presence and use of particular credibility factors in supervision (Friedlander 8c Snyder, 1983;Robyak, Goodyear, & Prange, 1987). The one study reporting significant relationships between supervisor credibility and trainee performance gains, however, was not designed to determine whether one factor was more important, or to examine possible differential effects of expertness, attractiveness, and trustworthiness.…”