Publications from ODSW Social Work Supervsion | Página 27

Dialogue Session: Dilemmas in Social Work Supervision and the Way Forward

Open-ended responses from the survey were grouped into 5 key areas – (1) training, (2)
the need for more creative platforms for sharing about supervision, (3) the definition of
social work supervision, (4) working with organisations, and (5) standards.
(1) Training
Respondents felt that there needed to be more training for supervisors. Some examples
include having more tiered and certified training. Some also indicated that training should
be mandatory and called for supervisors to be accredited.
(2) Need for more creative platforms
REspondents felt that there needed to be an increase in the number of creative platforms
to share about supervision. Many applauded the organisation of the seminar as an
additional platform where social work supervisors could get together. There were also
interests in informal cross-sector sharing, supervision workshops, and communities of
practice to provide more opportunities to share and learn about supervision.
(3) Definition
Respondents indicated that they would also like more clarity regarding the definition of
supervision, the types of supervision and what constitutes supervision (eg. Would
mentoring and coaching be considered as supervision?)
(4) Working with organisations
There was a concern with regards to how one could communicate the importance of
supervision to the organisations that they work for. They also wanted to know how to
create a culture of supervision in their agencies and how to move towards more time and
recognition for supervision such that supervision is seen as a valid part of one’s workload
rather than an additional responsibility.
(5) Standards for Supervision
Lastly, respondents indicated interest in increasing the standards of supervision. Some
areas mentioned included understanding how much supervision is needed, what qualities
are needed in supervisors, what constitutes tiered supervision, what are some key
supervision competencies and research into the best practices in the field.
Panellist Discussions
Quality of and Satisfaction with Supervision Sessions
The panellists shared some of their thoughts from the results of the survey and elaborated
on some aspects which captured their attention. A key discussion point revolved around
the idea of quality and satisfaction in supervision. The survey results revealed that although
about half of the respondents indicated that they were satisfied with the supervision they
were receiving, many did not believe that they were receiving quality supervision.
A/P Kieran commented that there was a distinction between satisfaction and quality and
suggested that one needs to understand what constitutes ‘quality supervision’. Some
issues that he suggested could be explored in this area include the extent that supervision
supports supervisees in their learning, the extent to which the interactional process is
constructive, and how it contributes to improved practice with clients. He added that
certain components add to supervisee’s satisfaction in supervision while other components
add to quality supervision.

25