Page 107 [107]
OCR
RISKS AND SIDE EFFECTS OF SUPERVISION WHAT DO SUPERVISORS THINK ABOUT RISKS IN SUPERVISION? Keiblinger?? conducted a focus group and interviews with experienced supervisors and training-supervisors about risks and unwanted effects in supervision. The data was interpreted along qualitative content analysis according to Mayring” and revealed the following categories: The highest risk results from the personality of the supervisor, if he/she is striving for power and has need for admiration, having an exaggerated opinion of him/herself and lacks esteem for the supervisees. Partiality, bonds and loyalties of the supervisor which obstructs his/her all-partiality can also pose a danger. An important topic in this regard is confidentiality (also of the supervisees). The lacking competence of the supervisor is an additional risk-factor— and competence means the overall competence in counselling as well as the special competence in the field of the supervisees. All these personality factors are risk-variables of structure. Setting factors which can bare risks are the duration of the supervision and the involvement of the management in a team’s supervision process. The process risk-variables are the order- and contracting-phase with the diagnosis and the selection of the setting: experts consider it as a mistake to accept each supervision request, without detailed validation of objectives and intentions. The neglecting of organisational dynamics while supervising a part of the system are also mentioned as a process risk. Supervisors’ interventions can be a source of risk, if they are placed at the wrong moment, if they are lacking or fall too short. Examples of ignoring group dynamics or feedbacks, which are getting out of hand or not stopping continuous moaning and complaining of the supervisees are also mentioned by the experts. The systematic metareflection of his/her professional acting should be obligatory for supervisors, according to the opinion of all experts. WHAT DO SUPERVISEES THINK ABOUT RISKS IN SUPERVISION? On this subject we have some detailed data emerging from qualitative research within our RISK-Cluster. Hinterwallner?’ asked social workers in interviews 25 Margareta Keiblinger, Supervision — ein Risiko? Supervisorinnen und Supervisoren über Risiken, Schäden und Nebenwirkungen von Supervision, 2012, http://webthesis.donau-uni. ac.at/thesen/91322.pdf, accessed 19 July 2015. 26 Philipp Mayring, Qualitative content analysis — research instrument or mode of interpretation? in Mechthild Kiegelmann (ed.), The role of the Researcher in qualitative psychology, Tiibingen, Verlag Ingeborg Huber, 2002, 139-148. ” Heidemarie Hinterwallner, (Un)Erwünschte Wirkungen von Supervision in der sozialen - 105 +
