A number of interpersonal skills are necessary for instituting a collaborative relationship with supervisees, most of which have already been discussed in other chapters. These include brainstorming, process comments, open-ended questions, probing, solution-focused questions, empathetic responding, and self-disclosure. Rapid Reference 9.2 contains a summary of collaborative skills.

One skill that is truly essential for the advanced stage of supervision is the use of process comments or process questions. Process comments are any how, what, where, and when statements that focus attention on the here-and-now relationship between supervisor and supervisee. The purpose of process comments is to improve relationships so they have a natural place in supervision. When used correctly, they come across like remarks that would be made by colleagues. For example, when a supervisor says to a supervisee “I am feeling stuck right now with you. How are you feeling now with me?” he or she is inviting supervisees to speak as an equal. If a supervisor says to a supervisee, “I notice we seem to be spending a great deal of time talking about…. Is that what you want?” this process comment establishes the peerlike quality of the relationship.

Rapid Reference 9.3 lists some other consultation-style questions for supervisors.

Another task of the advanced stage is to encourage self-evaluation and self-monitoring by supervisees. The simplest suggestion to encourage self-evaluation by supervisees is to insert a scaling question during the review of a client case. For example, ask supervisees to rate on a scale of 1 to 10 how they feel they are doing with a particular client (or goal or solving a problem). Then ask them to identify one thing they need to do differently to move just 1 point up the scale.

Another means to encourage self-evaluation is for supervisors to comment on changes they have observed in a supervisee. “I notice a change in the type of questions you are asking now in supervision. Six months ago, you would be asking me to tell you what my take is on this client and what I would do with him or her. Now you come into supervision telling me what you perceive the issues are and how you plan to proceed. To me, this indicates major growth on your part. How do you see it?”

To be a considered a team, team members must actively participate in decisions concerning the setting of shared team goals, planning, and problem solving. There needs to be a commitment by all members to the team goals and an interdependence and accountability among these members as they work toward these goals. In other words, people in a team may have separate assignments but depend on each other to get the work done successfully.

Lots of lip service is given to teamwork in organizations. Expressions such as “We are all a team here,” and “We all need to pull together,” and “Everyone is equal” have become standard management clichés. Hiring outside consultants to come in for team-building workshops and sending supervisors to team-building trainings has almost become mandatory. But how many organizations actually support and reward real teamwork is questionable, and younger employees soon become jaded as they learn quickly the difference between the teamwork talk and the teamwork walk.

Organizational climate and environmental factors are crucial to the success of any team-building efforts on the part of clinical supervisors. For example, in toxic environments, where staff members don’t feel safe because they are constantly fending off criticism and blame, building collaboration and a teamwork model is almost impossible (Rubin, 2000). However, there are a large number of situations in which team building could be a success and add immeasurably to the effectiveness of clinical supervision.

There are a number of suggested strategies that can be employed by clinical supervisors to build an authentic work team. First, in order to create a sense of interdependence among team members and a shared commitment to mutual goals, supervisors have to be facilitators and encouragers—not directors—of group process, and use whatever authority they have to promote a win-win situation for all team members. Second, individuals have to understand the interconnectedness of their work to others on the team and see the rewards for working collaboratively. If the team is to be made up of supervisees from a number of different organizations, identifying a common goal for the team is absolutely essential to success but might require considerable effort to keep everyone on target.

For example, in a school setting, depending on the size of the district, the team might be made up of a psychologist, one or two counselors, the school nurse, a social worker if available, and other ancillary staff such as diagnosticians or special education support staff. The identified common goal for the team might be helping students, and each team member’s job could be viewed as a part of that greater goal. Through sharing of information and open dialogue, new ideas could be generated that could benefit everyone.

To get everyone onto the same page, supervisors should start their team-building efforts with an open discussion on a number of topics, such as identifying team goals and what benefits each person will receive from a collaborative teamwork model. To facilitate understanding and personal accountability, supervisors might wish to emphasize the shared aspect of each team member’s work, what factors are in team members’ control and which are not, and how each person’s effort fits into the larger picture. Supervisors should also inquire of each team member what gives meaning to his or her work, how he or she likes to make decisions, and what motivates him or her to do a better job. Through the process of collecting such material, group consensus could be reached on how to use this information to build the team structure. Rapid Reference 9.4 lists six steps to build teamwork.

Leadership style is another consideration. Logically, an authoritarian style of leadership would not be conducive to creating the kind of atmosphere of equality and collaboration required for teamwork. At the same time, supervisors, as team leaders, have ultimate responsibility for the team’s actions. This places supervisors in a delicate balancing act between managing whatever the current situation is with the team members’ current level of skills and at the same time attempting to inspire members to take risks, try out new things, and grow.

At the center of this leadership question is how decisions will be made in the team group. Supervisors who wish to work in the team-building model have to pay close attention to this detail. Traditionally with teams, decision making is regarded as a team task; therefore, supervisors should promote the use of consensus building and compromise along with brainstorming as primary problem-solving strategies. However, these methods all take time, and there may be many circumstances, such as a crisis, when a supervisor’s quick action is required, and there is no time for group input. In order to avoid any detrimental effects from this state of affairs on overall team morale, supervisors need to clearly delineate ahead of time to team members what these circumstances might be and then later ask for feedback from team members around any actions that were taken.

Additionally, consensus building and compromise only work when power between people on the team is equal (Kormanski, 1999). Otherwise, the team members may indicate agreement with the person in power but underneath harbor unexpressed concerns about the problem solution, which if not uncovered, can lead to subsequent difficulties.

As noted earlier, from the beginning of supervision, supervisors are responsible for creating a safe, respectful work environment. This means that supervisors apply all of their rapport-building skills, such as paraphrasing, empathic responding, self-disclosure, reflection of feelings, and open-ended questions, to build a safe environment for open discussion of problems and differences in the team.

Another equally important part of team building is motivation. Rewarding team members for efforts made on the team’s behalf is one of the best-known means to spur teamwork. For those in the helping professions where monetary rewards are seldom available, just publicly thanking team members for their hard work is an excellent incentive. In addition, many of today’s workforce would prefer time off or more autonomy on the job as rewards rather than the traditional one of money. As a consequence, supervisors might consider rewarding extra hard effort by team members with the gift of time—a day or a half day off, permission to come to work an hour late or go home early. Naturally, asking team members what type of team-member behavior should receive extra notice and what would be a suitable reward in their eyes for this effort will lay the groundwork for increasing motivation.

In the advanced stage, when working with supervision groups, the supervisor would definitely want to function more as a facilitator of the group process rather than group leader. In order to facilitate teamwork, supervisors will need to have genuine positive regard for everyone on the team. Supervisors need to be congruent and have consistency between what they say and what they do, both verbally and nonverbally. They model for the team through their behavior how to treat people with dignity and respect, no matter the circumstances. For example, if there is one person dominating the meeting, try redirecting the conversation to include others. “I wonder what the others of you think about what Sam is saying?” Or compliment the person for their input, and then move conversation back to whatever is the group task.

Also important to building safety in the team is how conflict and confrontation are to be managed. Again, just as with counseling and therapy groups, clinical supervisors model how conflict and problem member behaviors should be handled. Therefore, if any members of the team are in open conflict or if someone is irritable and aggressive, puts others down, or says nasty things, supervisors must quickly intervene. If they don’t, supervisees will not feel safe, and any team feelings will dissolve.

Another important area of professional growth that sometimes is not discussed at all in supervision (and may be controversial in some settings) is the role personal psychotherapy plays in professional development. Some graduate programs require students to engage in therapy as part of their program requirements, but many times, supervisors avoid the topic altogether or look upon psychotherapy as something only needed for situations of severe impairment. However, because ethical codes and standards strongly advise all practitioners to be continuously involved in self-monitoring and seek out therapy as a means to maintain clearness and objectivity, the topic should be integrated into supervision from a growth perspective, not just if deficits are uncovered. Certainly, in many ways, in order to minimize the risk of countertransference or their own personal problems negatively impacting clients, engaging in personal counseling or psychotherapy is an ethical strategy. Supervisors who believe in this standard and are involved in their own personal psychotherapy should share its benefits with their supervisees. (Note that it is not necessary to share the exact issues discussed with the therapist or insights gained, just the value of the activity in professional practice.)