Supervision: A force for change? Three stories told

Abstract

Drawing on research, we contextualize social work and describe the role of supervisors in child welfare settings in South Africa, England and Sweden. Exploratory frameworks and models of supervision illustrate how it has been influenced by principles of New Public Management and the concluding discussion proposes an agenda for change.

Social Work Supervision Policies and Frameworks: Playing Notes or Making Music?

“…This also underlines the fact that a simple tick-box exercise about meeting standards and norms of a supervision framework and policy would not be successful in responding to the concerns of the beforementioned newly qualified social worker and seasoned supervisee in need of debriefing. Furthermore, Bourn and Hafford-Letchfield (2011) affirm that stress levels amongst managers may be higher than those of practitioners, supporting research done by Bradley et al (2010) in England, Sweden and South Africa. These supervisors may detract from quality practice owing to the potential neglect of their core functions.…”

“…Similar tendencies may also be observed on a global scale (Engelbrecht, 2012). As elsewhere in the world (Bradley, Engelbrecht & Höjer, 2010), this robust standardisation of supervision can be ascribed to social workers' performance management outputs as part of the South African government's transformational agenda for good-quality service delivery, and the belief that quality assurance of supervision has the potential to have a far-reaching influence on practice (DSD, 2006a). In addition, South African social workers, like their counterparts in other countries, increasingly identify with their agencies rather than with their profession (compare O'Donoghue & Tsui, 2012;Engelbrecht, 2010b).…”

“…These tendencies furthermore result in an excessive emphasis on the administrative function of supervision (Engelbrecht, 2010a) to the detriment of educational and supportive functions in order to adhere to organisational performance management and national accountability systems and statutory requirements. The implication of these neoliberal tendencies for South Africa as for other countries (Bradley et al, 2010;O'Donoghue & Tsui, 2012) is that despite the marketisation of social service delivery and care as a commodity, the South African Department of Social Development is still enforcing a range of managerial measures (DSD, 2006b;DSD, 2012) in order to maintain control over national standards, of which the supervision framework is one example.…”

“…supervision offered by external and/or internal supervisors; see Bradley et al, 2010) and their impact on social service delivery. Additional research findings on the content of reflective supervision, how to conduct high-quality supervision sessions and the impact that supervision has on service users can likewise add value to supervision policies, frameworks and practice.…”

Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow: Is Social Work Supervision in South Africa Keeping Up?

“…However, the way in which these functions are depicted tends to consider supervisees (and supervisors) to be in deficit. Recent inter-country research between South Africa, England and Sweden (Bradley, Engelbrecht & Höjer, 2010) raises the issue of supervisor stress and suggests the creation of a safe culture and environment in which supervisors can deal with uncertainty and stressors, and where they can discuss their weaknesses and failings, as an important element of supervision. In the same vein, contemporary commentators such as Coleman (2003) argue against a deficit orientation in the operationalising of supervision functions and agitate for an orientation that emphasises a concern for fostering an environment in which workers can take responsibility for their own actions and where supervisors do not slip into acting on behalf of supervisees.…”