2001
DOI: 10.1080/03124070108414325
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Operationalising professional supervision in this age of accountabilities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Meeting the dual functions of task and process in supervision, accountability and support, presents individual supervisors and the organizations in which they work with a critical challenge (Hughes & Pengelly 1997). The increasing trend towards bureaucratized practice has often resulted in supervision becoming skewed towards policy and procedural imperatives, rather than towards reflection and professional development (Clare 2001; Gibbs 2001c; Jones & Gallop 2003; Ruch 2007; Gibbs, La Trobe University, Albury‐Wodonga, unpublished data). The importance of organizations finding ways to redress this balance between action‐orientated and thinking‐orientated supervision is confirmed by the growing body of evidence that there is a clear link between client outcomes and supervisory behaviour, such as their style in supervision (Poertner 2006; J. Wonnacott, University of Sussex, Brighton, unpublished results), and client outcomes and the organization's social context (Glisson & Hemmelgarn 1998; Hemmelgarn et al .…”
Section: The Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meeting the dual functions of task and process in supervision, accountability and support, presents individual supervisors and the organizations in which they work with a critical challenge (Hughes & Pengelly 1997). The increasing trend towards bureaucratized practice has often resulted in supervision becoming skewed towards policy and procedural imperatives, rather than towards reflection and professional development (Clare 2001; Gibbs 2001c; Jones & Gallop 2003; Ruch 2007; Gibbs, La Trobe University, Albury‐Wodonga, unpublished data). The importance of organizations finding ways to redress this balance between action‐orientated and thinking‐orientated supervision is confirmed by the growing body of evidence that there is a clear link between client outcomes and supervisory behaviour, such as their style in supervision (Poertner 2006; J. Wonnacott, University of Sussex, Brighton, unpublished results), and client outcomes and the organization's social context (Glisson & Hemmelgarn 1998; Hemmelgarn et al .…”
Section: The Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…All of the Service Managers and 85 per cent of the Probation Offi cers identifi ed professional supervision as the primary process through which practice-focused leadership was provided, and evidenced strong support for arguments advanced by Clare (2001) andO'Donoghue (1999). Insights into the importance of receiving (and the risk associated with not receiving) supervision that affi rmed practice and ensured practitioner accountability are clearly demonstrated in the following quotations: Supervision .…”
Section: Practice Focusmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The provision of professional supervision was seen as an obligation on an organisation that supported the work of professional staff (ibid.). A relationship with a professional supervisor has been seen as one of the important supportive relationships that nurture a social work professional (Clare 2001) and thus is seen to act as a protective factor for burnout. In addition to providing administrative supervision, the process of professional supervision was expected to allow the review of professional decision-making and provide a RESILIENCE AMONG SOCIAL WORKERS 271 venue for the surfacing of practice wisdom and tacit knowledge and a consolidation of the norms that underpin it.…”
Section: Supervision and The Role Of Informal Learning In Resiliencementioning
confidence: 98%