Publications from ODSW Social Work Supervsion | Page 19

Day 1 Keynote 2: Research and Knowledge Building on Social Work Supervision

support functions, which subsequently developed into Kadushin’s functional model of
supervision (Kadushin, 1976).
Another influential study was Carlton Munson’s (1975) doctoral dissertation on the uses of
structural, authority and teaching models in social work supervision. Munson (1975)
surveyed 65 workers, by way of individual interview and 60 supervisors by selfadministered postal questionnaire. He found that the teaching style and structure of
supervision had little effect on workers perceived satisfaction. Authority, however, did to
the extent that supervisors who were perceived to operate from a competence model had
a greater influence and a more positive affect upon their supervisees, than those who used
a sanctioned or role-based model. Munson (1975) also recommended that an analysis of
the interactional processes involved in supervision be applied to address issues pertaining
to conflict and authority in supervision regardless of the structure used. He also
commented that the dual model whereby the two roles of “administrative supervision and
clinical consultation” were clearly distinguished deserved further consideration, particularly
when these roles were vested in different individuals (Munson, 1975, p.237).
The third influential study was that of Shulman, Robinson and Luckyj (1981). This study
involved a sample of 780 respondents (109 supervisors and 671 supervisees) and
concerned the content, context and skills of supervision in social work, nursing and
residential settings across Canada. From this study, Shulman et al. (1981) developed a
scale of supervisory skills, which Shulman (1982, 1993, 2005, 2010) later applied in a further
study to test an interactional model of social work supervision and from which he also
determined that parallel process was part of social work supervision.
The research of Kadushin, Munson, and Shulman resulted in the development of their
supervision specific models and approaches which were published in their respective books
(Kadushin, 1976, 1985, 1992a; Kadushin and Harkness, 2002, 2014; Munson, 1983; 1993,
2002; Shulman, 1982, 1993, 2010). These three authors’ texts are the most highly cited
publications on social work supervision and often referred to by others as the starting point
from which they developed their supervision approaches (O’Donoghue, 2010). The further
development of supervision specific models was discussed by Bruce and Austin’s (2000) in
their review of seven major North American social work supervision texts, which were:
3 Supervision in social work (Kadushin, 1976, 1992a);
3 Supervisory management for the human services (Austin, 1981);
3 Competent supervision: Making imaginative judgements (Middleman and Rhodes,
1985);
3 Supervision and performance: Managing professional work in human service
organizations (Bunker and Wijnberg, 1988);
3 Supervising in human services: The politics of practice (Holloway and Brager, 1989);
3 Clinical social work supervision (Munson, 1993);
3 Interactional supervision (Shulman, 1993).
According to Bruce and Austin (2000 , p. 99), these texts provided the basis for “an
evolving framework of supervisory practice” across the macro-micro multidimensional
nature of social work supervision. The texts, also clearly illustrated that a shift had taken
place in social work supervision literature from practice theory based approaches towards
supervision specific models.

17