One of my favourite writers in talking professions is the existential psychotherapist, Irvin Yalom. I’ve read all his works and loved them all.

Often, whilst reading his case studies, I would think to myself, “this is essentially coaching” (or maybe coaching is essentially existential psychotherapy) but then suddenly there will be a moment where he draws a conclusion based on everything he has been hearing.  He will ask the client for their own sense of what might be going on (his favourite phrase being the beautifully simple “what’s your hunch?”) but at some point, almost inevitably, he offers a form of existential diagnosis – “aha! this is a fear of death!” you can almost hear through his sentences.  And at each moment, I think, “ah! There’s that difference between Yalom’s therapy and coaching!”

I am in no way generalising from this about all therapy and the level of diagnosis in general but what it brought home to me time and again is the very clear position coaching takes on this.

We do not diagnose. We do not tell the client what’s what.

Or, at least…the position of the profession is that we do not diagnose.

Coaches are human though and can fall foul of the need to know, to make sense of, to define, to describe, to get clear, to pin down or otherwise to bring order to confusion by stepping into the expert role.

I recall a coach sharing with me that whenever she had a client with a complex issue, she would go off and read all the literature she could get her hands on to understand what might be causing the it and what the solution might be.  Whilst this may indeed be useful and it might provide a greater understanding of where to shine the light, the risk is that the coach becomes the diagnostic expert and the solutions provider.

This is more frequent that one might think and comes up a great deal in supervision.

The coach shares something that makes the supervisor’s ears prick up and the “diagnosis-warning” radar ping!

How is diagnosis problematic in coaching?

At one level, we could say that diagnosis – ie. the coach owning the process of labelling or naming what is going on and telling the client their interpretation as though it were a fact – is simply not coaching.

Coaching is an epistemological position that sees awareness and knowledge as relational and self-situated. So when the coach becomes the source of diagnosis and solution. they are no longer coaching in the truest sense (at least, in relation to current professional norms).

However, we don’t not diagnose simply because it’s against the rules of coaching (see my blog article here on that old chestnut) – we choose not to diagnose, if we’re a coach, because we truly believe in the importance of the client finding their own answers and we recognise our own inherent limitations and biases that make such diagnoses on our part speculative at best and plain wrong at worst.

So, let’s look at how this might be explored in supervision.

The supervisory function

A useful starting point is to understand what the diagnostic approach is a response to and thus the nature of the supervision required.

In other words, what is leading the coach to work in a diagnostic manner?

Is it a lack of knowledge and understanding that diagnosis is not typically part of coaching? If so, this might require a normative discussion.

Or perhaps there is a lack of confidence on the part of the coach resulting from their perception of poor outcomes from their coaching. If so, this might need a more restorative first step.

Or is there a lack of skill or competence in how to be facilitate a client to their own solutions? If so, this might lead to a formative discussion.

Each of these will direct the conversation down a different pathway – though perhaps the paths will converge further on.

Rushing headlong down the “wrong” pathway may prove counterproductive.  A coach whose diagnostic tendency is being prompted by a battered self-confidence might find their confidence dented further if the conversation took an immediately normative rather than restorative or formative direction.

Do the coach and supervisor even agree that this is a problem to be discussed?

Before any of this happens though the coach and supervisor need to be on the same page as to whether this is even something to be explored.

If the coach is oblivious to their diagnosing tendency or sees it as wholly unproblematic then it would be a fruitless discussion to try to immediately explore how it might change.

If the coach hasn’t raised their diagnostic habit themselves, the supervisor might share what they are noticing and offer it for discussion:

“I notice you’ve mentioned how you explain to the client what’s at the root of their challenge and I’m wondering if you often find yourself being the expert and diagnosing the issue?”

A reflection such as this will bring the issue to the surface and allow it to be addressed. Of course, there are many directions this could then go in including curiosity, deflection, agreement, justification, and so and each will lead to a different supervisory conversation.

The coach who is fully aware of what they are doing but sees it as an unproblematic part of their role might be invited to explore this as a normative issue if the supervisor feels it presents a risk to the client, the coach, the wider system or the professional norms.

What’s at the root of the diagnostic approach?

Assuming that the coach and supervisor have agreed that this is a useful inquiry then it would be beneficial to explore what’s at the heart of their tendency to diagnose.  The supervisor might ask questions like:

• What do you feel is behind this tendency to diagnose? – This will open up the conversation in a way that allows the coach to share whatever comes up.
• How do you feel when offering or presenting your diagnosis? – This might surface the shadow benefits to the coach such as feeling like an expert or feeling useful.
• How do you see this sitting within the coaching framework you operate within? – This will help establish the norms and understanding that the coach has of what is expected of them.
• What’s your belief around the idea that the client can find their own answers? – This can give the coach a chance to be honest and open about some of the assumptions that sit within coaching.

These are just possibilities of course but the key is that we focus first not on how to no diagnose but what’e behind the behaviour in the first place.

From here, there are a myriad questions which could be explored depending on what starts to emerge.

Is it a competency issue?

You could explore how they might help the client find their own answers without diagnosing. You might explore where they get stuck and why being stuck feels problematic.  You could support them to be OK with stuckness and to share that with the client, or to find ways to ask questions that come from curiosity rather than a needing clarity on the right question. You might explore the role of silence and presence over questions or you might explore non-linguistic approaches.

Is it a normative issue?

You might build on the conversation of how the coach perceives coaching and what professional norms they abide by.  You might ask if it’s worth reviewing the competencies and refreshing their understanding. You might explore the impact of diagnosis on the client? You might even check the nature of their insurance which might be predicated on a non-advisory approach.

Is it a restorative issue?

You might allow the coach to share their frustrations with themselves or the limitations they feel about coaching allowing a catharsis of emotion before moving to a formative approach.  You might help the coach remember the times they’ve been effective or to recognise they are on a developmental journey.

It it relational (Eye 3)? Is it systemic (Eye 7)?

Is their diagnostic pattern particular to certain clients or certain systems in which the coach feels compelled to be the expert who diagnoses the issue and saves the day? How might the coach remain true to their principles in the face of those relationships? And how might the coach draw attention to their felt need to be the expert as a reflection of the relationship of system?

Is it simply the coach’s habit and modus operandi for life in general (Eye 4)?

Is this the coach’s default position in life – to be the expert who knows what’s what and are they willing to reflect, to think about the role of a coach, to learn and change?  Do they find it hard to not in-the-know and not in control? Are they used to being the one that sorts stuff out?

Conclusion

As with all supervisory conversations, there is never one path.

It is tempting to think that when a coach presents such and such an issue, we press a particular button and off we go! But supervision, like coaching, is so much more complex, rich and intriguing than that.

One of my common refrains is that when diagnosis starts, coaching stops. Coaching is a place of unknowing, of relational grappling with sense-making but once a coach says, “this is what is going on” then the sense-making stops (or at least, changes to something else).

However, our role as supervisors is not to tell coaches not to do it from a place of authority but to bring awareness to their behaviour, explore what lies behind it and co-create a sense of what it means and what needs to change should they want to change.

Alice: Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
The Cheshire Cat: That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
Alice: I don’t much care where.
The Cheshire Cat: Then it doesn’t much matter which way you go.
Alice: …So long as I get somewhere.
The Cheshire Cat: Oh, you’re sure to do that, if only you walk long enough.

 

Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll

Contracts in Coaching

Contracts can bring up thoughts of dull, bureaucratic, stifling legalise, pointless small print only created to catch you out and an army of solicitors on hand to process it all!

I suspect that’s why many coaches, consciously or unconsciously avoid having meaningful contracting conversations: “Contracting? Can’t I just get on with the coaching?”

So let’s get clear on this, by coaching contract we don’t mean the piece of paper that says how much the coach charges, etc (let’s call the Coaching Agreement).  Instead, it’s the conversation that ensures the coach and client get on the same page as to what the work is and how they’re going to do it.

That’s it.  That’s contracting.

Yet, almost every coaching supervisor quickly sees that the coaching contract is at the heart of effective work.

Coaching contracts and supervision

So with that brief introduction to contracts, how do they feature as a topic in coaching?

In a sense, they are omnipresent – they permeate the work that coaches bring to us as supervisors.

However, they often become figural as an issue when the coach and client (and potentially commissioner) are no longer on the same page, or where they have lost sight of the page altogether and are wondering and wandering aimlessly and confusedly.

If coaching is about helping someone to navigate to a new place (whether that be an external, practical change or an internal shift), it has to be clear what the client wants.

In addition, what the client expects from the coach needs to be clear.  It would be a jolting experience for a client to have a normally challenging and probing coach suddenly switch to a Kleinian Thinking Environment in which they barely said a word other than an encouragement for the client to continue.  This is both the psychological contract and the agreement on how the coach will work.

In my experience as a supervisor, the majority of issues in coaching can be traced back to the contracting, or the incremental movement away from the agreed contract without discussion.

One of my most common questions in supervision is, “What does your client think the work is about? And what do you think the work is about?”

If coach and client are not working in partnership then the coaching and the outcomes will suffer.

Exploring the Coaching Contract in Coaching Supervision

As always, there are endless ways to explore any topic in supervision but, here, the first step is to notice that it is potentially a contracting issue.

The questions I shared above can help with this: “What does your client think the work is about? And what do you think the work is about?”

But you might also go straight to the question: “What have you contracted for?”

An Eye 1 enquiry might ask, “What is the client expecting of you?” “Or what are they hoping for?”

An Eye 2 might explore how the contracting was done, how clear was the process or the outcome of that phase of the coaching.

Perhaps Eye 5 will reveal that the supervision itself lacked clarity and the supervisor and coach might reflect on how rushed into the work, paralleling what was happening elsewhere.

An Eye 7 enquiry might seek to explore whether there is a systemic issue that is causing a rush to do the work versus getting clear on the outcome.  Or it might start to surface a more systemic lack of clarity within an organisation or the client’s life.

(Click here for more on the 7 Eyes of Supervision)

The avenues for exploration are endless, but ultimately the coach needs to do something to get the work back on track.

Finding Solutions to Contracting Issues in Supervision

Almost invariably coaches know (or at least feel) when they are out of contract.  They are confused, uncertain, probing randomly.

Finally naming that their issue is a contracting one can be a big relief!

So what next?

This will possibly depend on the coach’s level of experience.

A new coach might find a more informative approach on the part of the supervisor useful, benefiting from the sharing of contracting models and even having the supervisor role-model or role-play the process.

A more experienced coach might simply need to gain that awareness that there is a contracting issue and make the decisions about what they will do and say to bring clarity back to the coaching.

Sometimes the coach starts to see that contracting did not simply go awry in this session but that it is a wider problem for them, something of which they are frequently a little negligent.  There might be a conversation around this pattern to explore the assumptions or challenges around contracting.

Conclusion

Hopefully, you’re beginning to see what a rich map of exploration can be laid out for the coach to journey through with the supervisor.

The conversation is likely to be a formative one but could also, potentially, be normative depending on the context.

Any Eye might be explored as part of the uncovering and any of Heron’s intervention styles might be appropriate to help the coaching in revisiting the specific contract or their contracting style.

One thing’s for sure, where there is a lack of direction in the coaching or mismatch of expectation, explore the contracting!

We continue our exploration of themes in coaching supervision along the ethics axis by addressing an issue that is more common that one might suspect: collusion in coaching.

Collusion between coach and client.

What do we mean by collusion and how is it problematic? And, for the purposes of the article, what does a supervisor do with it particularly, if they do not want to fall into a further level of collusion?

I’ve written elsewhere about collusion in coaching, with a particular focus on the line between it and empathy – something that can that can lead to collusion if left to its own devices.

For the purposes of this article in which we are specifically interested in the supervisor’s response, let’s simply say that:

collusion in coaching is the act of the coach entering into the client’s paradigm of thinking in a way that limits the scope of new ideas, fresh thinking and alternative meaning-making whilst creating a shared narrative, emotional response and even, sometimes, behaviours.

In other words, the coach is no longer acting as effectively as possible in providing a thinking partner that catalyses new possibilities.

One might wonder what would lead this to happen.  Surely, the coach can see what’s happening and avoid it?

Well, in a sense, that’s where supervision comes in. But before we go there, let’s acknowledge that the coach is human and therefore as vulnerable to the same emotions and cognitive traps and patterns as the client.  This means that, given the right condition, collusion is a natural and ever present risk in coaching.

No coach will start off colluding but as they work with their client over time, they may feel drawn into this person’s way of seeing things either because the client is persuasive, the coach has a propensity to over-identify, or because the evidence that stacks up around the coaching suggests the client is accurate in their assessment and response to whatever issue they are bringing.

I often hear this in supervision when a coach says something like, “To be honest, his boss is a complete #@$*!” or “Her partner treats her so badly!” or even something more abstract like “He works in a really toxic environment!”

In all these cases there is a clear sign that some level of collusion is taking place.

The coach is no longer relating the client’s experience to me as a supervisor but instead telling me it as though it were a truth. The boss is a #@$*! The partner does treat her badly.  The workplace is toxic.

How is the coach to effectively challenge or support the client to think when they have lost perspective?

This is not to say that the things things are not true – they may well be – but coaching thrives on enabling the client to think vigorously and critically through having their ideas questioned rather the reinforced.

So what is the discussion in supervision  that needs to happen when this comes up?

Questions for the supervisor exploring collusion in coaching

As always, there is no single pathway for a conversation like this –  it is dialogic but what follows is a loose guide for a structure.

The supervisor’s own awareness.

The supervisor needs to maintain their own distance through self-awareness.

We would call this Eye 6 in terms of the 7-Eyed Model but essentially it’s about the supervisor disentangling their own response and being sure they themselves are not at risk of collusion.

A supervisor who has had experience of a “toxic” work environment might well find they unconsciously join in a “toxicity conga” with client, coach and supervisor holding each others hips, flinging their legs in the air and hollering “toxic!”

Terms like these become so common place that it can be easy to fall into lending them immediate credence, thus short cutting the need to think.

So the supervisor must be sure to retain the distance needed to bring fresh thinking.

The coach’s own awareness.

With the supervisor sufficiently aware of any parallel process, they can explore the coach’s own awareness of the potentiality that collusion is happening.

In other words, do they know they are colluding?

This might happen in a number of ways and supervision typically allows for a more full and frank sharing of sense-making than coaching and so the supervisor might share what they are seeing, describing the patterns they have observed and seeking to gain the coach’s perspective.

Alternatively, they might facilitate the coach to their own awareness without any direct input from the supervisor.

This might involve questions such as:

• What do you see going on here between you and the client in relation to the organisation/boss/partner etc?
• How do you feel when you’re talking about this with your client?
• Where does that feeling come from given it’s not your experience?
• How would you describe the relationship with the client around this issue?
• Or, should you want to be more metaphorical, you could ask a question like, “If you were to make a movie about you and the client facing this issue, what would it be like?”

In other words, we are beginning to focus here on:

Eye 4 – the coach’s experience

Eye 3 – the coach and client relationship

What’s a coach to do?

It goes without saying that awareness without change is somewhat pointless in a case like this.

The coach needs to do something differently.

Collusion can become so entrenched, so gamified in its emotional rewards, that any sudden change of behaviour might rupture the coach/client relationship.

As a result, a key conversation in the supervision is what the coach can do to begin to unpick the ties that bind and dissolve the collusion.

Perhaps this is a respectful broaching of the subject by the coach with the client so that they can explore this together.

Or maybe it’s the incremental introduction of a more questioning perspective that acclimatises the client to a newly emerging relationship.

The focus has moved to Eye 2 – the intervention.

The client’s awareness and needs.

And what about the client in all of this?

What do they need from the coach?  Yes, it might be comforting to “have someone on your side” but is it what they actually need?

What might the client say if someone asked them what they need from the coaching?

The supervisor might ask questions like:

• How useful do you think the client finds the coaching right now?
• What’s it achieving?
• What might they be thinking or doing differently that’s being missed?

At this point, of course, we have moved finally here to Eye 1 – the client.

Systemic Collusion.

Wrapping all of this might be some wider systemic issue in which individuals feels powerless and seek to form alliances of power against greater forces.

Or perhaps collusion runs through an organisation or family system such that the client naturally seeks collusion.  Maybe powerful cliques are how people survive and thrive in the relevant context of the coaching.

By approaching this from an Eye 7 perspective, we might notice how the coach has been drawn into a wider web of collusion from which they need to extricate themselves.

Being the voice of dissent.

The critical thing in all of this is for the coaching supervisor to be the “voice of dissent” that asks – “What if this were not true?” or “If it is true, what remains unknown?”

In so doing, the supervisor models the very behaviour and mindset that the coach needs to find their way back to – being a catalyst for new thinking and critical self-reflection.

The coach, though, is not always willing to do this.

I have come across coaches so disillusioned by the work they do, or they organisations they do it in, that they are truly treading water and playing the game of coach as they collude ever more knowingly with their clients against the organisation.

This is dangerous stuff. The coach is not only not helping the client think afresh but is likely actually reinforcing the very beliefs that are keeping them stuck and unhappy.

It is incumbent upon the supervisor in these situations to point this out – that is the moment of courageous authority in supervision: to be strong when needed in your own beliefs, values and professional appraisal whilst always seeking to facilitate the coach in being part of that exploration.

Collusion is antithetical to coaching and the supervisor that lets it pass unremarked upon is not serving the coach or client in the long run.

Summary.

The process I have mapped out here is not a fixed roadmap but simply one of many maps you might use to explore collusion in coaching.

What’s clear though is that this is a multi-dimensional issue and the greater number of perspectives we open up the more we can support the coach to look at their work anew and develop better coaching approaches.

I’ve written elsewhere on the three key functions of supervision – the normative, formative and restorative. These can sound abstract until specifics are offered.

I’ve also shared how the normative function is often the one newer (and perhaps more experienced) supervisors shy away from for fear of seeming authoritarian, prescriptive or imposing.

As a reminder, the normative function focuses the supervisory dialogue on ethics, standards and norms of the profession.

In this article, we explore a theme in coaching supervision which, as well as being very commonplace, sheds light on the normative function and shows that, far from being exclusively prescriptive, it can be immensely exploratory and catalytic.  

The topic comes up when a coach is questioning whether their work with a client is veering into the territory of therapy.  

The same question may also come up where the coach doesn’t notice this potential boundary breach but the supervisor does.

In either case, the supervisor and coach are left facing the question:

“Is this coaching or therapy?”

It might seem that a supervisor, seen incorrectly from the viewpoint of an authority figure, will state in no uncertain terms that this or that is therapy and that the coach is not following their professional standards.  This may, rarely, be the outcome of such a conversation but it more often an exploration around key questions that emerge from the originating question: “Is this coaching or therapy?” 

Supervisory Questions to Explore

Many inquiries spring from this first question that the supervisor and coach can explore collaboratively and with openness that they might reach confluence or difference.

Most obviously, one question is: 

What is the difference between coaching and therapy?

I make no attempt to answer this as it’s been explored in many other contexts nor is it the purpose of this article.  But we can certainly be clear that there is no one single answer that we can call upon to settle the matter for us.

Whilst the lines between coaching and therapy were often originally painted as clear and obvious, the truth has always been a great deal more complex.  

Indeed, I can recall in the early days, coach training schools admonishing coaches for talking about emotions as “that is for therapists!” It seems crazy now but the attempt to simplify the client into a task oriented being was pervasive for some years.

Thus, when a supervisor and coach face this question, they face it together and they must make choices together that support the coach in developing a response or, at least, making decisions for the future.

With the question of what the difference floating around unanswered, one could also ask:

Who decides what the difference is?

And, does it even matter?

Further questions might be:

• What does the client want and what does that count for?
• What does the coach feel able to do?
• What are the risks? 
• What are the benefits?
• What might be lost in holding too firmly to a perceived boundary?
• What might be lost in ignoring the perceived boundary?
• Is the “therapeutic” topic ongoing or was it a one-off that just happened?
• Was the coach aware and mentally “in control” or did they feel like the conversation was whipped away from them in some way?
• Is the coach qualified beyond coaching to do this kind of work?
• And, if so, does that need a new form of contracting?

These are not rhetorical provocations on my part but rather real questions that the coach and supervisor can explore together, potentially arriving at very different individual conclusions.

As you can see, the question of “is this coaching or therapy?” is not a binary one that results in a one word answer.  This is no simple algorithm.

This encapsulates the joy of supervision which is so often lost in the misperception of the word by a coach who has not yet experienced it.  

What happens when the coach and supervisor don’t agree?

I said above that the coach and supervisor might reach very different conclusions.

The coach might feel they are perfectly right to continue this kind of approach whilst the supervisor feels that it not coaching and potentially risky.

Again, there is no one answer to this.

It is a dialogue of navigating difference.

Unless the supervisor has genuine authority over the coach (which is extremely rare) for instance, because the coach and supervisor are working as part of a formal qualification or an internal coaching function in which the coach’s work, then the supervisor can only advise and strongly recommend based on their sense making.

But coaching is not regulated and nor is psychotherapy or counselling.  In other words, the coach is legally entitled to do this kind of work and the supervisory relationship is one of consent and collaboration.

The process for a supervisor at this point would be engaging in a frank and clear conversation and then, making their own ethical choice about what to do.  

This choice might be about continuing to work with coach knowing that supervision remains useful even if this becomes a challenging block.  Or it might be that the supervisor must end the relationship and recommend they seek supervision from someone who can more effectively work with them.

Ultimately, supervision in a non-authority context comes down to exploration, collaboration, dialogue and choice.

The power of supervision in the normative function then is not one of authority but rather one of reflection and inquiry.

The Problem with Ethics

Say the words “ethical dilemma” to most coaches and their eyes will glaze over, their ears will curls protectively inwards to thwart the meaningless sounds, and their mind will wander to what’s for dinner!

I exaggerate, of course, and many coaches are now interested in the concept of ethics.  However, there is something undoubtedly abstract about the concept.

Perhaps because, for too long, it has been the domain of philosophers (think Aristotle, John Stuart Mill or, more recently, Peter Singer) or of policymakers thrashing out codes of conduct that are then imposed, top-down, on a profession.

“Here is the code of conduct you must follow!”, it seems to say. “Do you agree to it!”

There is little a coach can do to challenge the code of conduct of their professional body, and that’s understandable. But it does make it all seem a bit distant.

Ethics Made Real

Yet, ask a coach how they might respond if they faced any of the following, and the conversation gets a whole lot more interesting:

• A client shares that a decision they have made was based on racist assumptions.
• A client shares with the coach that they are drinking during lunchtime due to stress and causing a level of danger in the workplace.
• A client continually terms up late and seems to be making no progress but always has a “reason” and says they want to continue.
• A client is predominantly talks about childhood abuse and its consequences and frequently becomes upset and distressed but says they don’t find therapy useful.
• The coach finds they are attracted to a client and that this is affecting the quality and nature of their coaching.
• The coach doesn’t like the client and dreads each session.
• An organisation asks the coach to coach someone who is going to be made redundant but asks the coach not to reveal this to them.
• The coach feels protective of a client and angry at the organisation who is paying their coaching fee and finds they increasingly side with their client against what they see as a “toxic” workplace.

A coach might face any of these at any time and there is no clear path forward in each.

For example, in the last vignette, the coach might decide they need to stop working for the organisation but worry they are abandoning the client.  Yet continuing to do the work leaves them feeling compromised.

In the first, what is the solution? Report them? What about confidentiality? And report them to whom? Educate them? Is that the coach’s role? What is the way forward?

Ethical dilemmas are a huge part of coaching because it involves human beings with different values and worldviews working together in relational systems that are complex and ambiguous.

The Role of the Coaching Supervisor

The coaching supervisor is, of course, just another human with their own worldview, values and peculiar ways of seeing the world.

They are not gurus, nor are they a representative of a monolithic profession that, in some Orwellian manner, controls the minds and behaviours of coaches.

And so the role of the coaching supervisor is to facilitate conversations around dilemmas and enable the coach to come to their own conclusions.

This will involve:

• Drawing attention to potential dilemmas that the coach is not seeing.
• Enabling the coach to talk through their concerns.
• Exploring the nature of the dilemmas, potential solutions and choices.
• Offering their own take or, where appropriate, sharing the profession’s position (eg. by highlighting an element of a code of conduct)
• Playing out the consequences of the choices.
• Planning how to implement and explain a given route.
• Enabling the coach to be at peace with their final choice through restorative, supportive conversations.

Rarely (though it can happen depending on the nature of the supervisory relationship) will a supervisor tell a coach what they need to do.

Towards Ethical Maturity

In their book, Ethical Maturity in the Helping Professions: Making Difficult Life and Work Decisions, Elisabeth Shaw and Dr Michael Carroll describe a concept called ethical maturity which maps very closely to the points made above in terms of how a supervisor might work.

There are 5 areas within ethical maturity:

1. Ethical Sensitivity – being more aware of possible ethical issues.
2. Ethical Discernment – using emotional and cognitive processes to work through the issue.
3. Ethical Implementation – following through on the decision.
4. Ethical Conversation – being able to explain the course of action.
5. Ethical Peace – being able to live with the choice.

The subtlety of this model is that it is not binary.

A coach may be extremely good at working through options and solutions but remain tortured by the reality of their decision.  Or they may be highly-sensitive to the existence of dilemmas but feel complete lost in terms of how to deal with them.

Thus, maturity is a complex thing which supervisors can explore.

This, to me, seems like an excellent framework for considering and dealing with ethical dilemmas and is one we teach and use on the Diploma in Coaching Supervision.

Whilst the words “ethical dilemma”, then, may cause various responses, I believe it is vital that coaches become more ethically aware and ethically mature, and coaching supervision is critical in this journey.

In this article, I want to explore why some supervisors struggle with marketing their supervision business.  This is especially curious when they have already built a successful coaching business.  Isn’t marketing supervision services the same as promoting coaching services?  

Marketing is a significant area of interest for me, and I am curious why coaches and supervisors  often find it a place of discomfort. I can relate to comments like “marketing puts me off” because I used to feel the same. I am fascinated by the buyer’s and seller’s psychology around  sales and marketing.  

For many years coaching was ‘just’ a passion for me and not a business. I lived by the idea that  “if you do what you love, the money will come”. Well, I did what I loved, but the money didn’t  come. So, I decided to focus on the business side of my practice, and marketing played a  significant role. I qualified as a digital marketing expert, and I worked in marketing for a  company to gain practical experience from professionals in the industry. It took me some time  to learn that marketing doesn’t have to be done ‘by the book’ but can be adapted to suit you,  mainly your values and make it your own – what I call authentic marketing.  

This essay is based on my personal experience, observations and information drawn from  conversations and feedback from over 30 supervisors about promoting their supervision services.   

A supervision lens on marketing psychology through eyes 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the  Seven Eyed Model.  

I will attempt to explore the topic of marketing supervision services through the seven-eyed  model, and I want to invite the reader to join me in my attempt with an open mind and allow  me to adapt and tweak the model from time to time.  

Let’s start with eye 6.

Eye 6 – The Supervisor.  

I want to invite you, the reader, to look at what is going on for the supervisor in relation to  marketing, their beliefs, thoughts and feelings.  

I noticed that supervisors often come into the relationship with marketing with feelings of  dislike, frustration or overwhelm; they use statements like: “I don’t like putting myself out  there”, “I don’t want to come across as ‘pushy’ or ‘greedy’”, “I don’t want to look like I am self serving”.  

These statements have “I” in common, which indicates a strong focus on the self, the  supervisor’s ego. Almost all objections to marketing and selling one’s services are ego-based.  

A question to reflect on for the supervisor is, “If you didn’t exist in a selling conversation,  who would the conversation be about?” Of course, it would be about the client. 

In their role as coaches and supervisors, focusing on the client is a skill they master well. So, isn’t it a matter of applying this skill to their marketing? 

Good marketing and selling is just clean communication and relationship building. 

Part of being authentic is communicating honestly about who you are. That’s integrity. If  supervision is in integrity with the supervisor’s authentic self, then communicating the gifts  they have to offer the world is part of their authenticity. Not communicating their offer is  doing a disservice to all the potential supervisees that need them.  

Marketing made easy is using our strengths, our uniqueness, in combination with authentic  communication.  

Eye 6 statements adapted from Hawkins & Schwenk in Bachkirova, Jackson & Clutterbuck (eds)  (2011) Coaching and Mentoring Supervision: Theory and Practice: 

• I am aware that _______ (describe a bodily feeling, for example, my heart is beating  faster) as I talk about marketing/ promoting my supervision services, and I feel ________. 
• I am feeling __________ as I listen to the potential client’s reaction as I tell them  about my supervision approach/ services
• I’m getting an image of [a yin-yang symbol, with each part containing a piece of the  other] _________as I talk about what I do as a supervisor.  

There is a potential parallel process that could present itself when a supervisee brings to  supervision their challenges with marketing. A few questions that come to mind from a place  of curiosity are: what is going on for the supervisor? What thoughts and feelings are triggered? What impact does it have on the supervisory relationship, if any? How does the supervisor  show openness and vulnerability? 

Eye 4 – the Coach (or in this case the supervisee)  

Next, I want to explore marketing from the coach’s perspective as the potential buyer and  receiver of supervision services.  

Here I would like to look at the importance of understanding the coach’s problems and desires and their need for supervision. What are the blocks that the coach needs help with to facilitate their clients and system better towards change? What are their most common  supervision themes? 

Eye 4 questions adapted from (Hawkins & Schwenk, ibid) for the supervisor to reflect on in  relation to the coach/client from a marketing perspective: 

• What is the coach experiencing in their body as you discuss supervision and your services as  a supervisor? 
• What emotions or thoughts does the coach have? What does supervision remind them of?
• When have they been in a similar relationship dynamic? 
• What did they need to say in that previous situation? 
• What clue does that give you as a supervisor to what needs to be said here?
• Where is the learning edge in the coach’s work? How can supervision support them?  

Having answered the above questions, the supervisor will have an in-depth understanding of  the supervisee/client and will be able to tailor their invitation to work together.  

Supervisees are looking for solutions to their problems or desires, and they will be attracted by invitations that show understanding of the their needs. 

I have experimented with a marketing post on social media that I would like to present here to  demonstrate the importance and the effects of tailoring your messaging based on the client’s  needs.  

The post was designed for newly qualified coaches and is shown below. In the post  image, I used a question that one of my supervisees asked. I kept her words as I wanted to  make sure the question resonated with my audience.

I started the post with a few common questions brought to supervision that new coaches could resonate with.  

I explained briefly what supervision was, and I have also included a few words about my experience for credibility and trust. I also shared the fact that I was training as a supervisor.  

In the post, I offered two coaches a couple of free supervision sessions.  

The outcome of the post was: 22 coaches have shown interest in being supervised, I offered  (and had) 10 free hours of supervision and five coaches decided to continue with paid  supervision.  

I have asked coaches what made them reach out, and they all said that the questions in the  post resonated with the questions they have been asking themselves. Most of them didn’t  know what coaching supervision was, some hadn’t even heard of it.  

I have made two other posts in the past, but they focused on my services, talking about  supervision, and the response was nowhere near the client-focused post; I got one person  interested.  

Eye 5 – the relationship between the Supervisor and the Coach (as a potential client)  

At the purchase decision stage, the relationship between supervisor and supervisee doesn’t  exist or is being built. At this stage of the relationship, prospect clients are looking for answers to two questions: 

1. “Do you understand me and my needs (problems & desires)?” 
2. “Do I trust that you have the solution to my needs, and you can deliver?” 

The invitation to work together should answer the two questions above. This is what the  relationship is mainly about at this decision stage.  

Showing understanding and inspiring trust can be done through content (in whatever form or  channel is used: social media, blog, email, podcast, etc.) or delivered through in-person or  virtual conversations (events, calls, meetings, etc.). 

Sharing case studies, specific examples from other clients and personal experiences that  people can easily relate to are great ways to connect with potential clients.  

For example, in my chemistry calls with prospective supervisees, I give examples of some of  the challenges I faced as a coach. I had a few calls with coaches who have learnt GROW as their  primary coaching model, and they now feel that they need additional tools/ models to serve  their clients best. I also had this challenge and talked about how it positively impacted prospective clients, making them feel understood and trusting that I have the solution to overcome this  challenge. 

Eye 5 adapted questions for the supervisor to reflect on their relationship with the coach/client  from a marketing perspective: 

• Let’s look at how you and I could be working together  
• What could be helpful for you?  

Eye 7 – The wider system  

By the ‘wider system’, I refer to the supervisor’s and the coach’s networks.  

As supervisors, we impact the coach, their clients, stakeholders, their entire system, and we  have a responsibility towards the overall coaching profession.  

The answers to the questions below can be taken into consideration as part of the marketing  messaging – Eye 7 questions:  

• What are the organisation’s values, and do these match the supervisor’s values? How might they show up in the potential client’s relationships?  
• What are the organisation’s needs, pain points & desires? 
• Who are the client’s main stakeholders? How would you describe the client’s  relationship with each of them?  
• How are wider political/economic/social pressures showing up within this potential  work?  
• What is the shift needed in the wider system? What shift is needed in the client to  enable that wider shift to happen?  

Knowing the client and the system they operate in are essential to impactful marketing  messages.  

I recently attended an event about how coaching supervisors can help executives in their  reflections, which was new and intriguing for me, as I didn’t think supervision and executives  ‘go together’. The presenter, an experienced coaching supervisor, explained how a few  executives he was currently coaching had asked him to bring something different to the  sessions, a different approach than coaching. Some of the participants had experienced the same request from the executives they were coaching.  

The discussion continued about how leaders, especially after the Covid crisis, work in a  different environment while still facing pressure to perform. They might be at risk to leave  their need for reflection in favour of action. Coaching may not be the best approach to serve  this need, but supervision focused on reflective practice might be better. 

Some organisations might be open to supervision as a new approach to meet the new needs  of their executives in today’s high-pressure working environment. In my opinion, this is a new  business opportunity that can be explored by supervisors that offer coaching or training  services to organisations. 

A lot of what I have described in this essay applies to coaches as well as supervisors. 

I offer business coaching and mentoring services to newly qualified coaches, and I noticed the  same difficulties in promoting their services as the ones I see in supervisors.  

So back to my initial question, “Why do some supervisors struggle with marketing their supervision  business, especially when they have built a successful coaching business?”  

Quite a few supervisors, especially those who started their coaching business ten or more years ago, built their business in a completely different environment. Back then, coaching wasn’t so widely known, accepted and desired as it is today. Some coaches tell me that their business is based on referrals, and some even said they never had to market themselves. So now they feel like they need to start from scratch with promoting their supervision business and are unsure  of what to do.  

A few common reasons why supervisors struggle with marketing (and sales) are: 

1. Lack of clarity about who they are as a supervisor, what they offer and whom they want  to work with. 
   
   Clarity around themselves as supervisors is needed and can be gained by answering  questions like: “Who am I as a supervisor?”, “What is my supervision approach and  style?” “What experience do I bring, and I draw upon?” What changes do I help create?”.  So, their “what” is not clear, making it hard to market themselves and their services.
   
   When the lack of clarity is about whom supervisors want and don’t want to work with, the questions can help: “Who is the best fit for my supervision style?”, “Who are the  clients that share my values?”, “Do I want to niche down? Do I work with any coach, new  coaches, experienced coaches, coaches seeking accreditation, coaches who have transitioned from another profession like psychotherapy, counselling, etc.?”
   
   Gaining clarity is a combination of learning, reflection, and practice, and often, especially  at the beginning, it is about allowing the necessary time for these answers to come.
2. Lack of confidence in our supervision skills can stop or delay reaching out to potential  supervisees. A doubt that came up for a supervisor was, “Will I be able to deliver a high quality service?”
3. Some supervisors, especially those with a robust understanding of who they are and  what they offer, are struggling because they are missing the how: how to market their services: how to reach potential clients, present their services in a way that  attracts clients, how to choose a niche. 

I shared my ‘successful’ post with my colleagues, and soon after, a few more took  action and got supervisees. The acting was triggered by a combination of now having  an example of how to market and peer pressure.  

4. Irrespective of the format or channel, sharing what you do is essential, especially in a new business. A marketing expert once told me: “Andrea, think of yourself as an ice cream van; if you don’t play the music, nobody will know you’re there, and you won’t  sell any ice cream”. So, I would like to encourage supervisors to play their music  confidently.  
5. The supervisors’ mindsets and beliefs about what marketing is and isn’t can strongly  influence their actions. For example, supervisors who have referrals-based coaching or therapy businesses and don’t have to promote themselves view marketing as an  uncomfortable place. I want to challenge their view by asking, “Referrals are a  marketing tool/ strategy; why not use it in promoting supervision?” We can always  leverage strategies that already work for us.

Some supervisors view marketing as solely focused on social media, and many  expressed their dislike or even repulsion towards social channels. There are many other  marketing channels and strategies that can be used. 

Past experiences – negative or positive – have an influence as well. 

The shift of mindset from seeing marketing as something negative that we don’t like or  know to have the courage to turn marketing into authentic conversations is a significant step.  

Conclusion  

Supervision is such a wonderful experience, and the more I study it, the more I practise and  receive it, the more I think it’s a necessity rather than a ‘nice to have’.  

I believe that we would do the coaching profession and coaches a disservice if we  didn’t promote it. In a helping profession like ours, the focus is on the client, and that’s where  it should be in our marketing as well. We must let coaches know that we are here to support  them in their professional development and wellbeing.  

I have attended several events recently where coaching supervision was discussed, and at  every one of these events, coaches asked, “Where can I find a supervisor?”. This is excellent news for our profession because it means that there is demand. But it also means that we  didn’t put our ice-cream van song on (yet), or it wasn’t loud enough or maybe not in the right  place. 

Marketing represents us as a person and as a supervisor. We can make it authentic and fun by  just being ourselves. This is the best marketing strategy. 

I recently had a conversation with a very experienced coach, who is also a supervisor, with a  successful coaching business that really struck me. He said that after 20 years of coaching he  now started to align his business with his values and only accept clients that share his values.

I  want to encourage supervisors to build a value-based and authentic business from the start.  How? By being aware of their values, being themselves and following their intuition rather than  what the industry ‘experts’ say, when promoting their services.  

We can fall in love with marketing our supervision services. We just need to give ourselves  permission to be who we want to be as supervisors and create our authentic way of letting  the world know that we are here to serve and make the world a better place.  

“Marketing is about spreading the love” Jonah Berger 

In this new series of blog posts, we share 50 common themes, topics and challenges that come up in coaching supervision conversations.

These have been taken from our book, “Picturing Coach Supervision: An Illustrated Guide to Common Issues and Challenges.”

“Am I following the rules?”

One of the most common themes in coaching supervision, particularly, though not exclusively, with newer coaches, is an anxiety that they are not “following the rules”.

Indeed, a challenging aspect of this is that a new coaching supervisor can equally get locked into the same question, both for themselves and the coach/supervisee, especially if they have been a coach in a highly regulated setting.

Whose coaching rules rule?

But one has to ask the question: whose rules?

I remember supervising a supervisor (yes, it’s a bit Inception like, isn’t it!) and he described how he was struggling to supervise a coach because he felt that she was behaving unethically by not following the ICF core competencies.  She had occasionally offered advice and shared her own ideas.

The problem was, she wasn’t an ICF coach!

These weren’t her guiding competencies – her “rules’.

We explored why it is important that when we take a normative approach in supervision we first have to get on the same page of which norms and whose norms: The coach’s? The professional association’s? The supervisor’s? Or just some abstract sense of what is right or wrong?

Even if we accept that there are “rules” in coaching (which is highly questionable in the first place), we must at least be sure that we are talking about the same ones.

The problem with rules

Personally, I don’t think there are rules in coaching. I think it’s an unhelpful term that stultifies, constrains and inhibits coaches from being their true self.

Indeed, for me, the greatest gift a supervisor can help a coach uncover is the flourishing of their true self as a coach.

Martin Buber, the existential philosopher and theologian, talked of I/It and I/Thou relationships. Where an I/Thou is a true encounter between people in which their true selfs can meet, an I/It relationship is functional. The It, the Other, is an object for the I and achieves something for it.

When we follow “rules of coaching”,  we are, by default, being something for someone.

We really wish we could do, say, ask, share, offer or provide something but we dare not for fear of breaking the rules.

This can become crippling and demoralising to a coach (as well as predictable and dull for the client) and supervision often provides a space to find oneself as a coach and begin to drop the idea that there are rules.

So if there aren’t rules, what are there?

Rules are not helpful for coaching.  And yet coaching is something.  It’s not merely random, nor is it a meaningless signifier for something that can’t be grasped.

When I used to teach coaching, course participant would often say:

“I really wanted to give advice, but I didn’t!”

I would invariably respond:

“Why didn’t you?”

They would typically look at me in surprise, annoyance or some mixture of the two and reply something like:

“Because Animas told us not to!”

My answer?

“That’s the wrong reason not to do it.”

They were following a rule.  Their behaviour was not governed by a true belief in what they were doing.

I believe in the principles of coaching not the rules.

I truly believe in the importance and the usefulness of the principles of coaching.

I believe that someone is better off digging to deep to think for themselves and so that’s what I aim to encourage.

I believe that any advice I have, whilst possibly useful, is almost certainly not actually right which is why I naturally and without having to think about it only ever offer to share an idea or something I have seen work, rather than give advice.

Coaching is not about rules, it’a about principles that find their way into the world as behaviours and we are truly coaching when we have embodied them rather than doing them because we are meant to or were told to.

Supervisions conversation around rules

Supervision conversations around rules then are not about investigating the rule-breaking and reinforcing the coach’s own fears and beliefs.

Rather they are about loosening the bonds to the idea of there even being rules and to exploring the coach’s deeper understanding of the principles.

Such a conversation then provides a rich and endless landscape of exploration.

• What does the supervisee take as the principles?
• What are the supervisee’s real feelings and thoughts about coaching principles?
• What would they really have liked to have done?
• What were their fears around this?
• What do they think are the consequences of breaking “rules”?
• How might that perceived “rule” be a worthy principle?
• Who are they as a coach without rules?
• What rules would they find useful, if any, and why?
• What is the deeper relationship to rules, competencies, agreed practices and shared principles?
• And, if you are going to discuss rules, whose and why?

I believe that supervision, at its best, is about enabling a coach to find their truest self.

A coach operating from their truest self doesn’t needs rules to do so.  They need to know and connect to their values, their core beliefs, their skills and their principles.

And that’s one powerful journey of supervision.

One of the most frequent questions we get asked by someone looking to train with us is: “Am I ready to become a coaching supervisor?”

Of course, the question is one that we can’t answer definitively because so much depends on the person’s own readiness and temperament but to help you decide for yourself we’ve put together a list of the core criteria to check if you’re ready.

Seven always seems to be the magical number for lists and so here are seven points to check whether you might indeed be ready to become a coaching supervisor. 

Check them off and see how many apply to you!

Are you a qualified coach?

The first one is pretty self-explanatory but actually, it’s surprising the number of people who are curious about becoming a coaching supervisor who aren’t yet qualified as coaches.

This is a must!

To be a coaching supervisor, you will have qualifed as a coach on a recognised coach training programme.

Whilst we don’t deny that a useful conversation can be had by anyone who is curious and interested in a coach’s work with their clients, this could hardly constitute supervision.

The first thing any coach would expect of a supervisor is that they are qualified and have excellent knowledge and skills in coaching.  

They would expect you to understand the dilemmas of coaching, to have experience working with different issues, to know theory and practice and to be able to advise, guide and ask the right questions.

Are you qualified as a coach from an accredited training programme?

OK, so that’s a pretty obvious one and if you tick this then, great you’re in the right place!

Do you have the right level of coaching experience?

So you’re qualified as a coach but do you have the requisite level of experience?

This is a much trickier question than it might first appear.

We suggest that a coach should have around 500 hours (ICF PCC and above) of experience before looking to become a coaching supervisor but it’s not always so clear-cut.

For example, an experienced psychotherapist who later trains as a coach might be ready to become a coaching supervisor sooner based on the many hours of related work in their original field.  Indeed, there are many such talking professions that would shortcut a coach’s need for coach-specific experience.  

As a supervision school, we treat this question on a case-by-case basis with the underlying assumption that around 500 hours is a good guideline. 

The bigger question is whether you feel you have the experience to be both credible and skilled as a coaching supervisor.

Do you feel you have the experience and know-how to be a coaching supervisor?

Do you have a context to do the coaching supervision work?

The next question concerns where and with whom you’ll do the coaching supervision.

We find that those who get the most from our training have a context to do the work. 

Perhaps you are part of an organisation with a coaching function, or you know coaches who you tend to support in different ways.  

Of course, just as when you trained to become a coach you had to find clients to work with, so you may find coaches to supervise using all the same kinds of approaches to getting clients that worked for you then: referrals, directories, networking and so on.

The key though is knowing how you’re going to apply the skills so that you can build your confidence through application and experience.

Coming into the coaching supervision training with a sense of where you’re going to do the work is a great place to be in.

So, do you know who would like to supervise? Do you have a sense of the context and work you would like to do?

Do you have the time to study and to do the supervision practice?

The next question is whether you have time to become a coaching supervisor.

Just like becoming a coach, training as a coaching supervisor takes study, practice, reading and reflection.

To be ready to become a coaching supervisor you must have time to dedicate to it.   

As an example, if you were to train as a coaching supervisor with ICCS, you would embark on a course that lasts around 8 months, and you’d commit time to complete 25 hours of supervision outside of the training. 

We estimate a minimum of 200 hours of study and practice over the 8 months and, of course, in reality, you’ll almost certainly want to do more as you fall in love with it!

Do you have the time to dedicate to it?

Do you have a love of coaching and helping coaches?

Here’s an interesting one! 

Becoming a coaching supervisor is not something you do because you have to – you do it because you choose to!

And it makes sense to choose what you love.

Over time, some coaches become disaffected with the profession, others naturally move on to other pursuits or careers. 

Supervision is not just the next step on a rung.  It’s a reflection of someone’s love of coaching.

To be a coaching supervisor is to love coaching and to want to support coaches, the coaching profession, and the clients and organisations that engage with coaching.

To be a coaching supervisor is to love continuous learning and mastery of coaching, to become fascinated by what coaches struggle with and aspire to, to connect to the aims and ethics of the profession, and to truly embrace the journey of becoming a coaching role model.

All the coaches who join ICCS’s programme love coaching and love working with coaches.

Do you love coaching, and supporting coaches?

Are you open to new ways of working?

A fascinating part of the journey to becoming a coaching supervisor is loosening up one’s attachment to certain coaching principles and practices.

Whilst coaching supervision is about coaching and whilst it is extremely related in its relational approach, it is also different. 

Coaches typically find the wider scope of behaviours and interventions in coaching supervision liberating and joyful.  They often feel set free to be more expressive.

Only occasionally do we come across a coach who is so firmly wedded to the specific practices of coaching that they struggle to fully step into the role of coaching supervisor.

One example of this is the wider, systemic view the supervisor has across the whole coaching field.  Whilst a coach’s main concern is their client, a coaching supervisor is interested in and concerned for  their supervisee, the supervisee’s client, the system sponsoring the coaching and the coaching profession as a whole. 

This might necessitate them to be more challenging of a coach who is demonstrating potentially unethical practices (whether knowingly or not) or to raise concerns about the outcomes of a coaching engagement.  All done with love and collaboration but nonetheless, this can feel different from the more classically person-centred approach that is coaching.

Are you open to widening the ways in which you work? Are you ready to spread your wings?

Are you ready to have a new level of authority and presence?

Finally, and related to the last point, are the twin themes of authority and presence.

This is something that Peter Hawkins writes extensively about in the classic work, “Supervision in the Helping Professions”.

Perhaps more than most disciplines, humanistic forms of coaching have taken a path of an egalitarian, collaborative relationship in which the coach’s “stuff” is set aside and their personality somewhat subdued. (Or, at least, in theory!)

As a coaching supervisor, however, the qualities of presence and authority are vital ingredients.  A coach in supervision wants to feel held and supported, though not told or diminished.  This calls for the subtle and judicious use of authority and presence.

We’ve found that this step can feel like a quantum leap for some coaches when they become a supervisor as many have been accustomed to reducing their presence and authority in order that the client assumes more of both.

We know this is a journey and whilst some coaches seamlessly move towards this position of authority and presence, others can take several months (even years) to truly trust themselves as a supervisor who can inhabit this space with these twin qualities.

Do you feel ready to use your experience, knowledge and wisdom with authority and presence?

Summary

There may be other questions that you have around your readiness, but for us at the ICCS, we’ve found that these seven are the most vital points to check in on for yourself. 

Some are simple and straightforward – such as whether you are a qualified coach. Others are more complex, subjective and intuitive.

The starting point, though, is you.

How do you feel about your readiness?

Do you find yourself answering yes to these questions?

If so, maybe it’s time to consider training as a coaching supervisor.  If that sounds like you then we’d love to chat!

Why not check out our Diploma in Coaching Supervision and if it looks a good fit, apply to join us or book a conversation with us.

New beginnings come with new challenges.  

And becoming a coaching supervisor is no different.  

Even though those who become coaching supervisors are highly experienced coaches, it can nonetheless leave them feeling like a beginner again with so much to learn, explore, and develop.

As a recently qualified coaching supervisor myself, I wanted to understand how other supervisors experienced this and what were the major challenges, either practical or emotional, that they encountered.

I was curious as to whether I was alone in experiencing this (I assumed I wasn’t) and whether the areas of challenge matched mine in some way.

To explore this, I interviewed 15 newly qualified coaching supervisors from the International Centre for Coaching Supervision, each of whom was a successful, long-standing and impactful coach, trainer and coaching mentor. 

The power of a shared challenge is a great catalyst for self-acceptance, which in turn is a catalyst for self-love, confidence and growth into who you truly are. My aim in writing this piece was to help all newly qualified coaching supervisors on this journey but also to help myself!

I hope this article may help to give you confidence in your transitioning phase and also focus a lens on some solutions that may have come up. 

What Do Newly Qualified Coaching Supervisors Find Challenging? 

Out of the 15 Supervisors asked, there were around 4 who reported that they didn’t experience any significant challenge transitioning from coach to coaching supervisor and 4 who felt it was too early to say what those challenges might be..

The remaining 7 supervisors shared similar feelings to my own.  Had I written this article without interviewing them, I would likely have mentioned all of these challenges but what would have been lost was the knowledge that these are such commonly shared experiences.  

In particular, two significant challenges were present in all of our experiences. I want to jump straight to these as they were mentioned by every interviewee.

The Two Most Common Challenges

The first of these challenges is the question: “Am I coaching or am I supervising?”

The second is the transition from a non-advisory role, to one in which our experience, ideas and advice was not only possible but expected.”

In coaching, we are trained to be non-directive. We work a lot on refraining from giving advice or on taking up the client’s space. 

This becomes a very valuable muscle, enabling us to fully and actively listen, become aware of what’s going on for us, remain unbiased, and gain full trust through the coaching conversation. The client becomes the catalyst for their own transformation in their lives by taking full charge and full responsibility for their inner and outer world. 

It is empowering for the client to experience how they can indeed listen to their own inner voice, rather than be dependent on the guidance and words of someone else. It frees them from dependence and being on the effect side of things rather than the cause. 

The lesson here is the client has all the answers within them. And as a coach, we facilitate that inner wisdom to shine through, by being an active, listening mirror and companion on their journey. 

We as the coach help them notice things they may not have noticed before. But, the role we play as coaches in coaching is not advising or directing nor is it about the wisdom of the coach; it is about the client. 

In coaching supervision, the same core belief in the individual remains present but there is permission to bring more of ourselves into the work and to inhabit the authoritative position when needed. 

After many years of being a coach, this can feel like a challenge at first. 

In his book, Helping the Client, the therapist John Heron shares six categories of intervention – essentially approaches to helping someone in conversation –  ‘a set of analytic and behavioural tools to shape his or her own method of practice’. The categories are split into two overarching types: Authoritative and Facilitative. 

The Authoritative Interventions are prescriptive, informative and confronting, and the Facilitative Interventions are cathartic, catalytic and supportive.

He also explains how they can overlap and have different connections..

He writes: 

The first three I call authoritative because they are rather more hierarchical: the practitioner is taking responsibility for and on behalf of the client – guiding his or her behaviour, giving instruction, raising consciousness. 

The second set of three I call facilitative because they are rather less hierarchical: the practitioner is seeking to enable clients to become more autonomous and take more responsibility for themselves – by helping to release the emotional pain that blocks their personal power, by eliciting their self-directed learning, by unfolding their spiritual potential, by affirming their worth as a unique being.”

He also mentions that neither the authoritative nor the facilitative interventions are more or less useful and valuable because it all depends on the particular needs of the client and their content that determines the focus of the intervention.

With that in mind, we can draw that there is indeed an importance of having the tools to be more prescriptive, confronting or informative when needed. 

It is only with friction, resistance and the meeting of genuine raw honesty that a person can truly get to their ability to shine. In supervision, we not only have the supervisee as our client, but their clients too (who are not in the actual conversation in supervision), which leads to that extra layer of responsibility to step up when needed, if a genuine place inside asks us to. 

I can very much relate to the findings of the answers of the supervisors I asked, that transitioning over from the space of coaching to supervision. 

Thoughts from the Coaching Supervisors 

I noticed how I asked myself questions as to whether I was being directive enough or too directive, and whether I was in coaching mode and not allowing myself to step into being a supervisor yet.

Supervision can be formative (coaching ability), restorative (enabling a coach to feel better about themselves in some way) or normative (the standards and ethics of coaching).

I remember our course trainer saying that he noticed the one function that a lot of supervisors shy away from in his experience was that normative function due the authoritative stance it can require.

And I get it. The normative function can necessitate directing the behaviour of the client, informative i.e imparting knowledge and information to the client, and also confronting, challenging the client’s consciousness and seeking to raise it. 

I guess the question to ask oneself is: 

“If I am noticing myself not ever going into a more authoritative space, what am I fearing and challenge oneself to be more authoritative, as well as when noticing, I am taking up a lot of space and being too authoritative, to question oneself am I serving the client or am I using the time as an excuse to share my knowledge?” 

I love the solutions that were raised by the supervisors I asked and here are some of the challenges and answers they shared:

Michele Kingston: Am I supervising or am I coaching at any given point?

Some of the questions I asked myself were: “Am I supervising or am I coaching at any given point?” I can now call myself out when I feel this may be the case, and I then focus on the 7 Eyed Model to bring myself back into a supervision space. 

Next has been creating a balance of how I work within the supervision relationship to support the coaches growth. I am very aware of the space I’m taking up within my 70 min sessions. 

I now agree with my supervisees at the start how they would like me to be, i.e. giving them the space to be more reflective, or me using what I’m observing and what I see as occurring in the space to support their development. On occasions, I feel that I’m just overthinking and need to get out of my own way! 

Kristina Sheppard: How do you want me to be? – more explorative coaching or offering some guidance?

The solution to finding the right balance between coaching and supervision, ie. no advice-giving, and giving advice and the permission to bring in one’s own experience, is solid contracting and asking the simple question of ‘How do you want me to be? – more explorative coaching or offering some guidance?’

Kristina notices around an 80% facilitative space and 20% guidance. 

Gilberto Nery: Change of hats from coaching to supervision 

I think the biggest challenge for me was the change of hats from coaching to supervision. Putting aside the neutrality and non-directive essence of coaching and embracing the more active role in the session. 

We develop so much of our listening skills and “parking” our opinions that putting them back into the conversation proved to be a challenge for me at the beginning. 

It was relatively easy to overcome, though, as working with coaches is a delight. The awareness and reflective nature make the session advance fast and be highly productive.

Ken Kelling: Keeping it Simple

I think the main challenge in transitioning from coach to supervisor is keeping it simple!

Perhaps naively, I hadn’t really considered the depth and breadth of theories, approaches and models that apply to supervision as much as they do to coaching.

Sometimes it can feel like re-learning and absorbing a lot of information that could all be useful in Supervision practice. Choosing how to navigate all the options available to you can be a tough mental task.

As usual, the mantra of “hold it lightly” is always useful and usually provides an answer that comes from the wellspring of intuition instead. Trust yourself that all that data has gone into your mind and the right thing will come out at the right time!

We still all have a job to do as well in explaining what Supervision is and isn’t, what it can help with and what it may be less relevant for. Managing expectations about Supervision is as much part of the process as the Supervision itself.

Nisha Vyas: Do I have what it takes?

As I stepped into the supervision space, I found myself reflecting on the following:

Who am I serving? How will I serve? How much will I charge? How will I talk about my supervision offering and not conflict the messaging with my coaching practice and my biggest question was – Do I have what it takes?

Staying in action and supervising regardless of having answers to the above has been key for my growth as a supervisor, also keeping active in the supervision world through seminars, and the ICCS community is hugely beneficial.

My Personal Challenges 

Am I Supervising or Coaching? 

Marta Abramska and Beatrice Zornek are both highly sought after supervisors as well as trainers and hold frequent reflective supervision groups.  They find that this question is equally present in that space: “Coaching vs advice and the question: am I supervising or coaching?” 

Looking at all this data, one can notice how even if supervision brings in a more directive approach, contracting plays an important role in asking for permission and also realising or noticing when the session asks for a more authoritative approach. Prescriptive doesn’t mean it is always prescriptive, plus there is no right or wrong in having a session that feels very ‘coachy’ if it is serving the client. 

One thing supervision asks of the supervisors is to own the space, to own who they are fully, and to use their wisdom when it is useful. 

A supervisor can be authoritative from a place of serving or from the place of thinking they know better. I think that a good supervisor knows how to differentiate that difference and doesn’t hold back on their authoritative side when it’s from a genuine place of serving. 

Personally, I notice myself having these same challenges. But, I have also noticed myself being more confident in the authoritative side than I thought I would be.  In part, I think this was, because of my background in mentor coaching.  I ask myself this question a lot: “am I serving the client to the highest potential?” Then, it always comes back down to asking the coach and contracting in the beginning. 

Do I Have Enough Resources? 

Other insecurities I have experienced in the supervision space derive from feeling I don’t have enough resources at hand when asked for reading lists or referencing other coaching professionals. 

And so for me, it comes back to being OK with who I am as a supervisor and not comparing myself to other supervisors’ superpowers. 

I’m also noticing where my area of development is, questioning myself to become more self-aware to serve my clients at the best possible and realising that, when the time comes, I gain more resources. 

Before I close this article about the challenges of transitioning from coach to supervisor, I also want to mention the business challenges. 

This mainly brings about the part of having two separate marketing channels and figuring out how to handle that. 

For many, this can be overwhelming —  a feeling of needing to split oneself and adding another area of work, which can sometimes be a reason for not wanting to spread yourself thin and focusing on one area of work at a time. This is a conversation for another article though!

I hope this has been an informative and perhaps even a motivating read for you, to either give you confidence as a supervisor transitioning that you are not alone in your challenges and to help you gain clarity on certain points that you may have questioned yourself in or anything else that has come up for you in reading this. 

Is nonviolent communication a language of supervision? 

This question evolved from a wider exploration of the role of supervision in developing ethical maturity, and the beginnings of an essay titled “Ethics in Coaching Supervision: More Formative than Normative?” It was quite engaging at a cognitive level, but the original spark of curious excitement soon fizzled out.  

The question lingered and prompted others that felt more interesting. What prevents a supervisee from saying what they really need to say in supervision? How can we create an environment where uncomfortable events or feelings are shared without fear or shame? Is this inherently more difficult when working mainly with self-reported data?  

While I still didn’t have my question, I knew it would be around presence and the supervisory relationship. I’d experienced some powerful moments of presence and deep connection and wondered about exploring this from a  philosophical or a transpersonal lens. However, that soon felt like just another interesting intellectual journey. 

I realised that I was looking for a framework or ‘hitching post’ for my thoughts about who I am as a supervisor. This framework also needed to contain some of the ideas and theories that resonate most with me. 

A comment in one of our training sessions brought Marshall Rosenberg’s Nonviolent Communication (NVC) back into my consciousness and at some point, it became part of this exploration. I knew the book was about nonviolent communication as a language for life. Might it also be a model for what I was trying to explore and articulate? 

The inquiry method 

Although preceding the traditional starting point, my search for a question felt like part of the inquiry process. 

I re-read Rosenberg’s text, from the perspective of that question. It was no surprise when I saw many connections between NVC and what we do in supervision, especially around psychological safety, empathy and connection. 

The next steps involved searching for other articles or books on nonviolent communication (NVC) in the context of supervision. This didn’t yield any results, but it prompted me to reach out to Alison Hardingham, who has written and lectured on NVC in coaching. She was unaware of any supervision-specific resources. Conversations with other well-informed coaches also resulted in lots of interest and encouragement, but little in the way of content.  

I decided on three further methods of inquiry: 

1. Reading as much as I could find on NVC and its applications. 
2. Exploring in a curious and non-academic way how NVC principles fit (or don’t fit) with what I’m learning about supervision and specifically, my approach to supervision. 
3. Regular conversations with a classmate who’s very familiar with NVC. We enjoyed a creative and collaborative dialogue, where we brought our inquiry topics and discussed the direction of our ideas etc.  Each conversation seemed to super-charge my momentum and leave me with new ideas and perspectives.

This essay is not a detailed or objective study of Nonviolent Communication. It’s written from the perspective of a  curious learner and outlines my journey of matching NVC ideas and principles to what I’m learning about supervision. That said, it feels like the start of something bigger for me. 

What is Nonviolent Communication?

“What I want in my life is compassion, a flow between myself and others based on a mutual giving from the heart”.  Marshall Rosenberg PhD. 

Developed by Marshall Rosenberg in the 1960s and influenced by the work of Carl Rogers, Nonviolent  Communication (NVC) offers a powerful language of empathy and connection. 

The idea of ‘Nonviolence’ may seem a  little odd in the context of coaching supervision. At face-value, it’s a pretty low benchmark for our work! However,  NVC principles go deeper than traditional ideas of violence or nonviolence. 

In simple terms, NVC is a language of compassion where we give and receive from the heart. 

‘The intent is to remind us of what we already know – about how humans were meant to relate to one another’ (Rosenberg, 2015, p.3). This flow of compassionate giving allows for a deep presence and heart-to-heart connection. It’s a ‘giving and receiving of messages that center on two very important questions: what’s alive in us? And what can we do to make life more  wonderful?’ (Rosenberg, 2005, p.9). 

In contrast, ‘life-alienating communication’ is a language that blocks compassion. Examples include moralistic judgement, making comparisons, denial of responsibility and communicating desires as demands. On reading these examples and descriptions, my thoughts were around the everyday nature of this communication. It shows up in so many conversations, including those in supervision and coaching.  

As I delved deeper into NVC, it felt aligned with what I try to do as a supervisor. I also saw links with ideas that are important to me, such as unconditional positive regard (Rogers, 1957) and the transpersonal dimension of supervision. I’m intrigued by those powerful relational moments that seem to transcend the ‘stuff’ of a supervision or coaching conversation. 

It’s interesting to contemplate what might be the essence of those moments, e.g. I-Thou  (Buber) or Shohet’s elegant linking of this to supervision: 

‘Almost invariably the personal ‘I’ reclaims its kingdom, but somewhere inside us, this experience lives on. It is this transcending separateness that supervision can offer us.’  (Shohet R & J 2020, page 202).  

Rosenberg acknowledges the spiritual basis of NVC in quite a practical and accessible way: ‘The spirituality embodied  in NVC exists not so much to help people connect with the divine as to come from the divine energy we’re created out  of, our natural life-serving energy.’ (Rosenberg, 2005, p.15).  

For me, the labels or beliefs we attach to moments of presence and connection are less important than our shared and individual experiences in those moments. It’s perhaps like a situation where two people are deeply moved by a  piece of music, but in very different ways. If we try too hard to figure out what’s going on, will we lose something more important?  

When exploring this, I also thought about language and metaphor in supervision and coaching. If used thoughtfully,  metaphors are a powerful means of connection and understanding. However, it’s easy to forget the subliminal nature of some metaphorical constructs, particularly those around communication. This reminded me of the opening chapter of Metaphors We Live By (Lakoff & Johnston, 2008). In introducing the metaphorical basis of conceptual systems, they use ‘Argument is War’ as an example. 

Much of the metaphorical language around the argument is also used for conversation. Winning, losing, battling, challenging, disputing, boundaries, arenas,  defences, red lines, challenge, strategy, striking/struck….. Do we even notice that they are metaphors?

NVC perhaps offers a framework for noticing and working with metaphors, in a way that gets to the heart of what they embody. By learning and practising this language, we can model and share something very special. 

The principles of Nonviolent Communication 

The practice of NVC is based on four fundamental principles: 

• Separating our observations from our responses 
• Identifying and expressing feelings 
• Seeing needs behind behaviours and communications 
• Making and receiving requests with empathy. 

1. Separating our observations from our responses 

In introducing this principle, Rosenberg states: 

‘We need to clearly observe what we are seeing, hearing or touching that is affecting our sense of well-being, without mixing in any evaluation’ (Rosenberg, 2005, page 26). 

In supervision, separating observations from responses means listening and observing with empathy. When we respond, it should be without judgement or evaluation. We might, for example, reflect back a supervisees’ words and express curiosity about their repeated use of some phrases. However, sharing our impatience with their repetition is definitely not in the spirit of NVC! 

Rosenberg also notes that when we combine observation with evaluation, the receiver is likely to hear criticism. Our observations must be concise and specific. For example, a supervisor may feel annoyed when a coach seems unprepared for their session. If it happens regularly, their annoyance might be compounded. An appropriate response could be: ‘I’m noticing some uncertainty around how you’d like to use our time today.’ This is more likely  to start an empathetic and productive conversation than: ‘You never seem to prepare for our supervision sessions.’  In the first question, the supervisor has consciously separated their observations.  

As supervisors, we know the importance of listening and giving our full attention. As humans, however, we have our triggers. For example, our ‘ethical antennae’ may be on high alert when we hear something that causes us concern.  In such situations, separating observations from responses is particularly important, but also challenging. 

In ‘Ethical Maturity in the Helping Professions’ (Carroll & Shaw, 2013), the first component of ethical maturity is around ethical sensitivity and mindfulness. They note that: ‘To create a moral compass and extend our capacities to  be sensitive about ethics over time, the crucial skills needed include empathy and compassion.’ (p. 155). The principles of NVC seem very aligned with helping both supervisor and supervisee develop this capacity, with Principle  1 particularly supporting the mindfulness aspect.  

Thinking about this has reinforced my view that most ethical issues are best explored with a formative rather than a  normative focus. We can help a supervisee find quick answers to specific questions in a matter-of-fact way, but our role in supporting ethical maturity requires a more mindful and compassionate dialogue.  

2. Identifying and expressing feelings 

‘The mature person becomes able to differentiate feelings into as many nuances, strong and passionate experiences,  or delicate and sensitive ones, as in the different passages of music in a symphony’ (Rollo May, in Rosenberg 2015,  p.37).

Many people find it difficult to identify and talk about feelings. Rosenberg acknowledges this by including helpful lists of feelings in his texts. For example, feelings, when needs are met, include amazed, comfortable, confident,  energetic, glad, hopeful, inspired, optimistic, proud, relieved, stimulated, surprised, thankful. When needs aren’t met, we may feel afraid, alarmed, confused, disheartened, frustrated, jealous, overwhelmed, to name but a few. 

Much can be said about identifying and expressing feelings, but I’ll focus here on a specific link to our supervision work. We have a unique opportunity to develop our supervisees’ fluency in noticing and working with feelings. Doing so with a NVC mindset allows for a thoughtful and compassionate conversation, leading to reflective learning in the service of all stakeholders. 

For example, a supervisor might ask: 

• What did you feel when you first met this client? Was this unusual or unexpected for you?  
• How did you feel at the end of the session? 
• How do you feel before each session? 
• What annoyed you most? 
• When did you first notice that feeling? 
• Did you smile more or less than usual? 

There are many other possible questions. By helping the coach to name and acknowledge their feelings, we also help them step back from those feelings when coaching. This skill/competence can make a big difference to their coaching presence and maturity. When this happens, their clients experience the power of great coaching. 

Needless to say, the supervisor has to do more than just facilitating this learning. We need to work continuously on our own ‘feelings fluency’ and build it into our reflective practice. 

3. Seeing needs behind behaviours and communications 

This is linked to a basic concept of NVC: that everything we do is in service of our needs. Rosenberg contends that  this has no corollary in mainstream thinking and: 

‘When this one concept is applied to our view of others, we’ll see  that we have no real enemies, that what others do to us is the best possible thing they know how to do to get their  needs met.’ (Rosenberg, 2005, p.11.) 

Rosenberg shares a list of basic needs, categorised under Autonomy, Celebration, Integrity, Interdependence,  Physical Nurturance, Play, and Spiritual/Communion. This can be a helpful reference point in a conversation. 

In her chapter on Nonviolent Communication in ‘The Coaches’ Handbook’ (Passmore, ed. 2020) Alison Hardingham notes that this principle teaches us a practical method for developing our compassion, both for ourselves and for others. This compassionate stance is developed by ‘looking beyond the behaviours to the needs which give rise to  those behaviours.’ (p.63). 

As supervisors, we may experience moments where a person behaves in a way we find hurtful or disrespectful. NVC  principle 2 can help us notice and name our feelings, but no.3 is where Hardingham notes that ‘the hard work of  compassion begins.’ She proposes asking one question to unlock a compassionate way of thinking: Assume that the client is smart and well-intentioned. Why might they have said or done this thing? The next step is to generate three possible hypotheses, based on this assumption. 

For me, this is a great NVC take-away for everyday life. I also tried it recently when reflecting on a session with a  client who presents as somewhat disorganised. The assumption of a ‘smart and well-intentioned client’ helped me to step back from my irritation and consider his personal and work circumstances. This led to a very productive conversation around the timing and frequency of our sessions. He talked about how he was trying to integrate his coaching and our supervision sessions into his family life and schedules. He acknowledged that he felt overwhelmed and needed more structure and balance. 

4. Making and receiving requests with empathy. 

In NVC, this is about ‘requesting that which would enrich life’. Having attuned to our needs, we ask another person to do something to make our life more wonderful. Requests are made in positive language and are never presented as demands. They are made and received in a flow of compassionate communication – which doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be granted.  

At first glance, this might not seem relevant to our work as supervisors. However, we make requests all the time. We ask questions, to which we expect a response. We have spoken or unspoken expectations. It isn’t a one-way process: our supervisees also make requests and have expectations.  

Let’s think about expectations for a moment: 

Some are reasonable expectations and likely to be included in the supervision contract. In that sense, a clear request has been made and agreed upon. Others might be acceptable but remain unspoken, and some might not be acceptable to the other party.  

This is a good reminder of the importance of continuous contracting/re-contracting. Our version of ‘making life more wonderful’ is probably around making the supervision relationship the best it can be. When making a request,  we do so clearly and positively. When considering a request, we listen empathetically, separating observations from responses and remembering that the supervisee is a smart and well-intentioned person. 

Working in this way also allows us to see the nuances of each supervision relationship. For example, we might prefer  90-minute sessions, but our supervisee may have a shorter attention span. There may be specific times of the year  (e.g., Ramadan) where a client needs to take a break or change the timings of their sessions. It also allows us to model and share this practice for the benefit of our supervisee and their work.  

Summing up 

It came as no surprise when I answered my inquiry question with a resounding ‘yes.’ NVC can certainly be viewed as a language of supervision and has many useful applications in our field. It also sits well with the EMCC Supervision Competence Framework, particularly with those around self-awareness and relationship awareness (nos. 5 & 6). 

My ‘yes’ comes with a caveat. NVC is first and foremost, a language of life – so ideas of applying ‘bits and pieces’ to supervision are based on a false premise. The primary purpose of NVC is to connect with people in a spirit of compassionate giving. It’s an ‘all-in’ kind of thing, requiring ongoing practice. However, it’s also a very simple and accessible way of communicating. Small and regular efforts can really bring us closer to that deep and life-enhancing level of connection. That’s very much a ‘work in progress’ for me. 

When someone really hears you without passing judgement on you, without trying to take responsibility for you, without trying to mould you, it feels damn good. When I have been listened to and when I have been heard, I am able to re-perceive my world in a new way and go on. It is astonishing how elements that seem insoluble become soluble when someone listens. How confusions that seem irredeemable turn into relatively clear flowing streams when one is heard.  

Carl Rogers, 1964. Quoted in Passmore, ed. 2020, p.65. 

References and influences 

Buber, M. 2013 edition. I and Thou. Bloomsbury Academics. 

Carroll, M. and Shaw, E., 2013. Ethical maturity in the helping professions: Making difficult life and work decisions.  Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 

Hawkins, P. and McMahon, A., 2020. Supervision in the Helping Professions 5e. 

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., 2008. Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press. 

Murdoch, E. and Arnold, J., 2013. Full Spectrum Supervision:” Who you are, is how you supervise”. Ecademy Press. 

Passmore, J. ed., 2020. The Coaches’ Handbook: The Complete Practitioner Guide for Professional Coaches.  Routledge. 

Rogers, C.R., 1957. The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of consulting psychology, 21(2), p.95. 

Rosenberg, M.B. and Chopra, D., 2015. Nonviolent communication: A language of life: Life-changing tools for healthy relationships. PuddleDancer Press. 

Rosenberg, M.B., 2005. Speak peace in a world of conflict: What you say next will change your world. PuddleDancer  Press. 

Shohet, R & J. 2020. In Love with Supervision. PCCS Books. 

Websites 

EMCC Supervision Competence Framework

What is Nonviolent Communication?

Congratulations! You have completed your journey to becoming a coaching supervisor and now can’t wait to share your new skills with lots of brilliant coaches. 

What could possibly go wrong? 

And, in the interests of balance, what could possibly go right? 

Read on …

5 Challenges in Developing your Coaching Supervision Practice

The human brain is wired to respond to perceived or real threats more strongly than potential rewards (Rock, 2009). 

With this in mind, let’s get the possible challenges examined first, that you, the new coaching supervisor, may encounter. 

1. Supervision is new in an unregulated profession

Supervision in coaching is new in a relatively young profession in terms of industry maturity (Porter, 1979). 

There is little research and data measuring coaching supervision’s effectiveness and the “enthusiasm for supervision currently outstrips the evidence base” (Hawkins, Turner and Passmore, 2019). 

Perhaps, it is perceived as too new and untested and therefore there is mistrust on whether having supervision is essential to being an effective coach. 

Indeed, Hawkins and Schwenk’s research (2006) found that there was a lack of clarity in understanding in coaches interviewed about supervision and “well-trained supervisors” (cited in Hawkins et al. 2019). 

For coaches starting their career, supervision might be viewed as something more experienced and established practitioners need and perhaps, only those working as Executive or Leadership coaches and not those offering private Life Coaching. 

2. Coaches do not know how supervision can help them

If a coach has not experienced the benefits of having coaching supervision, then they may not fully appreciate how having a trusted reflective space and someone to speak to about anything from client and stakeholder challenges, to exploring their own feelings about their coachees and how their coaching and practice is progressing, will assist their efficacy and career.

Rather like coaching itself, it is difficult to explain the tangible benefits of supervision and, in my opinion, trying it out is the best way to achieve this. 

A coach can carry on coaching for years without supervision and be none the wiser as to whether supervision would make a positive impact on their work or not.

3. Yet another expense

The coaching profession can be quite self-serving in that it asks a lot of its practitioners in terms of financial investment. 

There are the costs of initial training, mentoring towards independent accreditation, the accreditation itself and continued professional development, not to mention the expectation to have a coach(es) yourself. 

Factor in all the other expenses involved in running a business (marketing, additional training, utilities etc.) and spending even more money is unlikely to be attractive.

Therefore, supervision can be deemed as yet just another expense which to the uninitiated is vague on its return on investment. 

4. Distinguishing from your other work 

You, the coach supervisor, may wear several different hats. According to research by the International Coaching Federation, only 7% of coaches receive all their income from coaching work alone (ICF, 2020). 

Examples of additional products and services offered include facilitating, training, mentoring, writing, speaking and digital programmes. Multiple streams presented together could dilute the power of your brand and your target audience may struggle to understand exactly where your expertise truly lies. 

5. Insufficient time, space or energy

If you enjoy a busy and full coaching practice (and deliver other work as described above AND marketing activities), a challenge to developing your supervision practice may simply be that there is not enough time in the day to focus on it. 

You look at your calendar and there is no space to fit anything else in, nor the energy or attentional capacity in your brain for a new area of focus. 

5 Opportunities to Develop Your Coaching Supervision Practice

Being a coach myself, of course, I believe that the challenges above can be met and overcome. A positive and growth mindset will go a long way towards overcoming them.

1. Organisations hiring coaches expect evidence

In the last few years, as organisations have become more familiar and knowledgeable of the coaching profession and the needs of their own employees, their expectations have changed. 

According to ICF (2020), 55% of managers/leaders now expect their coaches to be credentialled, and from my own supervisees, I’m hearing that coaching supervision is now often a prerequisite of being accepted into a coaching pool. 

This suggests that more external coaches will seek out the services of a qualified coaching supervisor to support them in gaining new coaching engagements as more industries adopt similar criteria. 

2. Professional body recognition 

Although implementation is slow, the European Mentoring and Coaching Council has formulated core competencies for coaching supervision, and it is likely that other international independent bodies will follow suit (EMCC, 2019). 

Anticipated to be beneficial to both the coaching and coaching supervision professions, my prediction is that there will be a separate coaching supervision credential launched in the near future or some other method of independent verification. 

If the coaching profession becomes regulated, then a standardised industry version of this will become the norm within each country. That the “ICF recommends coaching supervision” on their website is a step in the right direction (Sinclair, 2019). 

3. Ongoing coaching profession growth

Dubbed The Great Resignation, life re-evaluations following the pandemic could create an influx of people changing careers (Kaplan, 2021). Over 40% of respondents in a 30,000 global study are “considering quitting or changing professions this year” (Morgan, 2021). 

This suggests we could have even more coaches training and entering the game. Therefore, I believe it would be prudent to anticipate that quality and rigour will become even more of a determining factor in future success. 

Coaches benefiting from supervision are going to stand out from those without. And of course, with more coaches, there are more opportunities to supervise. 

4. Increased confidence

Whether a coach is new or established, a benefit to highlight is the increase in confidence that supervision brings. Having a trusted partner or group to discuss their challenges can enable a coach to ‘normalise’ their experience. 

Receiving support and encouragement can help in many ways, with a higher level of personal confidence often being the most striking. 

Usually (but not always), a professionally trained coach enjoys increased self-awareness and so will understand the benefits of having greater confidence and how this will positively impact their work. 

As we all know confidence can ebb and flow over a period of time, and coaching supervision can serve as useful means of increasing this valuable commodity. 

5. Marketing

Being aware of the potential challenges and objections you could encounter from the market you intend to supervise will help you to develop a strategy for growing your coaching supervision practice. Before you start I suggest you ask yourself: 

Who do you want to supervise?

New or established coaches? Or both. Whilst your supervision skills and interventions may be the same, both markets have different needs and levels of awareness and competence. 

Plus, probably varying numbers of coachees and other commitments. Connect your marketing messages to the desires of the specific coach type you are inspired to support and supervise. 

What format and when? 

One-to-one or group? Or both. Face-to-face or virtual. Or a combination. 

As per coaching, knowing your boundaries and what you find most energising will help you communicate in a way that will attract your ideal supervisees. 

Some supervisors have dedicated days in their calendar when they schedule coaching supervision and others mix it in with their other work during the week. Experiment to discover what works best for you.

I sincerely hope this brief article goes some way towards helping you with your coaching supervision. 

There’s so much more I would like to cover and to discuss any of the issues raised above contact me at www.rachelbamber.com. I’d be happy to help.

References

European Mentoring and Coaching Council (2019) EMCC Supervision Competence Framework [PDF] UK: EMCC. Available at: https://emccuk.org [Accessed: 08/10/201]

Hawkins, P. Turner, E. and Passmore, J. (2019) The Manifesto for Supervision Henley-on-Thames: Henley Business School

Kaplan, J. (2021)  The psychologist who coined the phrase ‘Great Resignation’ reveals how he saw it coming and where he sees it going. ‘Who we are as an employee and as a worker is very central to who we are.’ Insider 02/10/2021. Available at: 

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-everyone-is-quitting-great-resignation-psychologist-pandemic-rethink-life-2021-10?r=US&IR=T?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=topbar [Accessed: 08/10/2021]

International Coaching Federation (2020) ICF 2020 Global Coaching Study [PDF] USA: ICF Available at: https://coachingfederation.org/research/global-coaching-study  [Accessed: 08/10/2021]

Morgan, K. (2021) The Great Resignation: How employers drove workers to quit. BBC (01/07/2021) Available at: 

https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210629-the-great-resignation-how-employers-drove-workers-to-quit [Accessed: 08/10/201] 

Porter, M. (1979) How Competitive Force Shapes Strategy Harvard Business Review (March) 

https://hbr.org/1979/03/how-competitive-forces-shape-strategy

[Accessed: 08/10/2021] 

Rock, D. (2009) The Brain at Work New York: HarperBusiness

Sinclair, T. (2019) Coaching Supervision International Coaching Federation. Available at: https://coachingfederation.org/blog/coaching-supervision [Accessed: 08/10/2021] 

I’m going to do the most non-coachy thing right now and assume *gasp* that you don’t have time to read a lengthy, often boring, opening to this article. 

My second assumption is that you’re a supervisor (I’m quite a Sherlock, I know), you know what the formative function of coaching supervision is and you’re currently working (and if not, most likely you will in the future) with coaches who are borderline obsessed with learning new coaching tools, love the concept of Coaching Mastery and desire to be effective and confident in their coaching methods. 

I might even go as far as to say that you might even experience a slight pressure to ‘perform’, brush up your knowledge of various coaching tools and impress such clients with your knowledge. So … feeling seen yet?

The purpose of this article is to give you a pool of ideas to draw from. 

Read them, use them, thank me later. Let’s go!

A guide to supporting coaches who are obsessed with building their Coaching Mastery

1. Explore what’s currently in the coach’s toolkit 

What’s already in there? What are we adding on top of? Essentially, what’s point A in our journey? 

What strengths need to be internalized? 

I’d recommend it as a first step. Recognizing and valuing what the coach has already developed and honed can bring that sense of safety and potentially reassuring enough-ness into the here and now. It’s grounding. That way the journey of building one’s coaching mastery becomes more mindful and enjoyable. 

2. Explore what comes naturally to your client when they coach others

Oftentimes we discard the very things we’re so brilliant at because they come so easy to us. 

We sometimes don’t value those qualities enough and might even think that it comes easy to everyone else. It rarely does. 

So, what feels natural for you to be doing, what feels effortless? Does the client appreciate (or take for granted) their natural talents?

3. Explore the Use of Self with your client

Our go-to way to learn something new is usually to consult the external resources, – another book, another course, – and yet we always carry with ourselves perhaps the most important coaching tool ever. Our selves. Our bodies. Our intuition.

Sometimes, the best suggestion we can give other coaches is to train the sensitivity to their bodily sensations. 

The beauty of Use of Self is that by feeling connected to ourselves, we begin to feel more connected to others. 

We share reflections more powerfully and build a better rapport by attuning to our client’s needs and feelings.  

4. Help your client explore and define their unique coaching style 

Are they a gestalt coach working with the CBC model, or a person-centred coach where it’s all about the presence and very little about interventions? 

Could they potentially be a master of solution-focused approach with a flare of positive psychology? Or are they naturally drawn to the client’s stories and use the narrative approach sprinkled with metaphors or perhaps card pulls? 

Defining your unique coaching style is a creative process, where the possibilities are endless. 

I know for a fact that when a coach is able to describe their unique coaching style with ease, clarity and confidence, it becomes much easier to attract clients and set the tone for the psychological safety in a relationship (i.e., clients have a good idea what to expect from the coaching sessions)

5. Explore what coaching methods or interventions feel challenging to use

What are they *not* using and why? Is it because it’s “just not their style”, or is there a fear or insecurity hiding behind it? 

If you want to take it up a notch, ask your supervision client: “What about your work or how you run your coaching practice that for some reason you *don’t* want me to know about it?” …

Well, that could easily make for one very potent session. 

6. After having a few sessions, ask the coach what they appreciate about your style as their supervisor? 

What works for them and why? What do they want to learn or take from your style, practice, make it their own and add into their coaching toolkit?

7. What’s currently the crown jewel of a coach’s toolkit? 

What’s their go-to model and why? How can they perfect it? How can they master it?

And most importantly, based on a coach’s client experience and personal sense of creativity, how could they modify that tool so that it becomes uniquely theirs? 

8. Time to go through the client’s testimonials! 

Review client cases and the feedback received so far. 

What worked really well for the clients, what they appreciated, what they loved; is there something in those kind words that’s been missing and not being internalized?

9. Use the power of intention. 

Before adding any extra modality, it’s important to get really clear on the intention. 

Why do we choose to learn what we choose? What is our expectation? What do we think this new skill would do for us? How would it improve our effectiveness as a coach in practical terms? 

Intentionality is key and helps to prevent burnout. 

10. Integrity in mind. 

When a coach is considering learning a new modality, like NLP or somatic coaching, my first question is whether they’ve been on the receiving end of this type of support. 

Is this desire to study NLP for example driven by passion and how much *they* loved the approach and found it useful, therefore now want to learn it, or is it simply a desire to have “more”? 

In Summary… 

With coaching mastery, what I have come to realise is that the heart-led way of leading that journey does always work best. 

Learning new tools and building one’s coaching mastery is not a journey of filling the void with numerous techniques.  It’s about deepening and bringing forth what’s already within you. I hope that helps!

Which approach resonated most with you? Share in the comments below.

As a coach gains experience and maturity in the coaching profession, there is often an almost inevitable journey towards becoming a coaching “elder” of sorts.  

This has nothing to do with age but rather with their ability to draw upon this maturity and experience to help other coaches learn, develop and practise.

For some experienced coaches, the role they gravitate towards is one of mentoring.  This is particularly common in the business side of coaching and growing a practice, but also in helping other coaches achieve professional credentials. 

For many other coaches, however, the journey is one of becoming a coaching supervisor.

Whilst I won’t go into what supervision is in this article since we have covered that extensively elsewhere, I will just be clear that what I mean by coaching supervision is supporting other coaches with their client work, their sense of self as a coach and their wellbeing in that role.

Learn More: What is Coaching Supervision? 

The pathway to becoming a coach supervisor is increasingly popular for many reasons – it is professionally rewarding, creates an additional fee-generating service, contributes to the profession, and enhances the supervisor’s own coaching.

However, the pathway to becoming a supervisor is not clearly mapped out. Unlike some professions in which progression is unambiguous and formal, the journey to becoming a supervisor is one which each coach must figure out and navigate themselves.

In this article, I hope to set this right by offering a road map for what it takes to become a coaching supervisor as well as offering some key resources that will make planning your journey easier.

There are essentially 7 major stages to consider, each of a different scale and complexity. 

These are:

1. Deciding if you’re ready to become a coach supervisor.
2. Finding and choosing the right coaching supervision course.
3. Preparing for the training.
4. Completing the training.
5. Secure supervisees outside of training.
6. Gaining individual supervision credentials.
7. Building your practice and business over the long term.

Let’s take a look at these one at a time.

1. Deciding if you’re ready to become a coach supervisor

How do you know when you’re ready to become a coach supervisor?

Is it when you hit an arbitrary number of coaching hours? If so, how many? 100? 250? 500? 

Is it after a certain number of years in the coaching profession? Or after a certain amount of training?

It’s pretty clear even just by asking that question that this is not an easy question to answer.  

And, there is no clear guidance within the coaching professional bodies either.

There are clearly extremes that would seem ludicrous if we used them. For instance, demanding a Malcolm Gladwell 10,000 hours of experience would be as extreme as allowing a newly qualified coach to become a supervisor.  But surely, a case could be made for many levels of experience in between.

The truth is that it is a subjective decision.

As a school, we suggest a coach has around 250 hours of coaching under their belt but this is not a hard and fast rule.  

A “less-experienced” coach who has spent 20 years in social work or counselling has a very different history to draw upon than a coach who came from a more technical role and is now pursuing coaching as a career.

Ultimately, you will need to ask yourself some key questions about your own readiness:

• Do I feel ready and confident to support other coaches?
• Do I feel I have a wide range of experiences in the field to draw on?
• Do I have a clear sense of my own style of coaching whilst being open to others?
• How well do I have a grasp of the wider coaching profession?
• What is my level of maturity as a coach?

These are all subjective and to some degree even ambiguous, but they offer a starting point of self-assessment.

We have certainly seen some less obviously experienced coaches become exceptionally good coach supervisors and other more experienced coaches who have struggled with the differences between coaching and supervision.

So, there is no clear measure of readiness.

But certainly, it is a question that must be asked of yourself and answered to your own satisfaction.

A useful model to use in exploring yourself as a coach is David Clutterbucks Coaching Maturity Model. Again, this is not to say that you must assess yourself as in the top category, but it is useful to ask yourself where you are and where you’re heading.

READ: Why Become a Coaching Supervisor 

2. Finding and choosing the right coaching supervision course

If you decide that you’re ready to become a coach supervisor, then the next step is to find the right training provider.

A search on Google for “coaching supervision training” will reveal nearly 55 million results. Thankfully, there aren’t 55 million supervision schools and, actually, the choice is relatively limited when compared with initial coach training.

Some of the main coaching supervision schools include: 

• International Centre for Coaching Supervision
• Coaching Supervision Academy
• Barefoot Coaching
• Henley Business School
• Goldvarg Consultancy

Each, of course, has its own unique style, delivery approach, philosophy and “vibe”.

Whilst I wouldn’t want to comment on other schools since they can surely best describe what makes them different, what I can share are the key things to look out for.

Accreditation

I have written an extensive article on accreditation in coaching supervision, but in a nutshell, the gold standard of coaching supervision accreditation is the European Supervision Quality Award (ESQA) by the EMCC.

A list of providers of this credential can be found here.

There are currently 10 providers in the world of which the International Centre for Coaching Supervision is one.  This makes the choice somewhat easier than 55 million!

If you are an ICF credentialed coach you will almost certainly look to gain Continuing Coach Education hours from your training and a fewer number of these same 10 schools provide both.  We are one but we are not alone.  

In our case, our Diploma in Coaching Supervision provides 164 hours of CCE of which 76 are Core Competencies.  This can be a crucial factor for choosing the right course.

Learn more through our FAQ. 

Delivery Method

As I write this, probably all coaching supervision training remains online due to the global pandemic.  However, if and when this abates, you will want to decide whether to train in-person or online.

There are pros and cons to both, of course, which I won’t rehearse here since I think we all now have a sense of this.

The one area I’d like to point out, however, that can be easily forgotten in the talk of convenience versus connection, is the way in which virtual environments have internationalised training.

READ: Why Did We Choose To Be A Virtual Coaching Training School?

This was something that we wanted to achieve from day one and so, for us, virtual was never just a solution to the pandemic.  It was a conscious choice to build virtually and stay virtual to enable coaches from across the world to access our course.  

In the last year, we have had people join us from the UK, of course, but also Kenya, Turkey, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, the USA and even Reunion Island.  This makes for a very unique flavour which our participants value.

This is something to consider – who are your fellow learners going to be and how will they expand your experience and understanding?

Course Fee

The cost of training is always a consideration of course. From my experience, the cost differentials in the coaching supervision training world are not significant. 

Most schools are in the same ballpark, so unless even the slightest difference matters than this is unlikely to be a major factor in your decision.

That said, depending on your circumstances and country of origin, you might be able to gain access to a bursary such as the one we offer which covers 25% of the course fee for individuals from countries with a lower-than-average income.

Connect with us if you’re interested.

Course Content

Whilst most coaching supervision courses will cover similar foundational content (3 functions, 7 Eyed Model, etc), the tone and vibe can often be significantly different.

Some schools have emerged from a counselling/psychotherapy background, others from an organisational background, and others again from a coaching background.  I would categorise ICCS in the latter.

Some schools are more spiritual in nature, others more managerial, and others psychological. Again, ICCS would be the latter of these.

There will also be differences of emphasis.  The International Centre for Coaching Supervision focuses on an integrative, psychological approach as the key differentiator. 

It is worth looking at each school to explore what makes them different.

Other Considerations

There are many other considerations when choosing a school and some will be more important than others to you.

These might include:

• Duration
• The faculty
• Support during the course
• Ongoing community and development
• Qualification requirements

We try to make it as easy as possible to understand our course and we include everything on our website and prospectus. 

Explore our Coaching Supervision Training

3. Preparing for the training

Once you’ve chosen your coaching supervision training and you’re enrolled to begin, there is likely to be some time delay between this and the start of the training.

This is an important time and a great opportunity to be as prepared for the training as possible.

One of the things we notice is that participants who prepare ahead of the training have an even more rewarding experience.

Here are just a few things you can do as you wait for your course to start:

Start to source supervisees. 

Let people in your network know that you’re about to undertake the training and that you’ll be looking to gain practice hours as part of your course.  

Even if you have just one or two people lined up as supervisees, this can make a big difference to the ease of being able to apply what you learn on the course.

Read a couple of foundational books

It’s never too soon to read Peter Hawkins’ “Supervision in the Helping Professions” – one of the seminal texts in this field.  But there are many more that are worth diving into as a way to get your mind absorbing the ideas and models.

Engage with your school’s community

If your chosen supervision school has a community, get active. Introduce yourself, join events even before you start the training and jump in on conversations. Don’t be shy! Being part of a community is extra gas in the tank of your learning and it’s usually free!

Plan your diary

Finally, make sure you block out time for your training, supervision and practice.  

It is all too easy to find until the training is suddenly upon you and you already have a task list of other activities that get in your way!  Prioritise your learning and practice to get the best from the training.

4. Undertake and complete the training

Undertaking and completing are of course two different things.  I always remember meeting someone on a course, in which I was also a student, who had been studying what should have been a 9-month programme for over 8 years! There’s nothing wrong with that if it’s what you want but often it’s simply that the people procrastinate for any number of reasons.

Whilst I can’t comment here on the training as it will depend on which course you choose, I can share some best practices that I have seen to help people complete their training.

In no particular order, these are:

• Be prepared (see the previous section)
• Stick to deadlines set by the course and don’t let missed deadlines become a snowball that rolls ever-faster
• Set your own target date for completion and plan in what you need to do by when to make this happen
• Attend all the training. It’s so easy to let other parts of your life take you away from something but this can have an insidious effect on your commitment to the journey
• Start the practise supervision as soon as you can. There’s no perfect time to start supervising
• Don’t overcomplicate things. Do what’s needed to pass but don’t make the hurdles higher than they need to be
• Be a pragmatist, not a perfectionist. Completing your training is the end of the beginning and you have a lifetime of improvement ahead of you. You’re not perfect and you never will be so enjoy being you at the level of skills you currently have not that you wish you had!

5. Secure supervisees outside of training

As you go through your coaching supervision training, you will almost certainly have practical supervision to complete as part of your course work.

But just like the moment you take the steering wheel of a car without an instructor next to you, there’s something uniquely rewarding about supervising someone purely for yourself and the coach.  Whether that is a paid contract, pro bono or part of a wider project matters less, I believe, than that the supervision is no longer part of your training. 

You are a coaching supervisor.

And coaching supervisors supervise! They have supervisees.

The critical step is to ensure you continue to develop your supervision skills through application.

Seek out opportunities to build your supervision muscles – volunteer for projects that need supervision, ask for referrals, supervise in your workplace, network, advertise, build a website, do whatever it takes.

6. Gaining individual supervision credentials

Once you have a particular level of experience in delivering supervision, it’s time to become credentialed as a supervisor with one of the professional bodies.

This is not mandatory or essential but many coach supervisors find it an important part of cementing their place in their new professional role and building their credibility.

The International Coach Federation (ICF) does not currently recognise coaching supervision as a discreet profession and so have no process for credentialing.

The three key bodies to consider are:

• EMCC in which you could seek the European Supervision Individual Award (ESIA)
• The Association for Coaching in which you could aim for the Accredited Coaching Supervisor
• Association of Professional Executive Coaches and Supervisors (APECS) in which you could achieve varying levels of accreditation depending on your experience.

It is common in supervision that someone has been supervising long before they formally train as a coach supervisor.  The professional bodies are flexible in their approach to this and so depending on your experience, it may be possible to achieve individual supervision credentials immediately after training.

Each of the organisations above has its own unique criteria and process and so you will want to check which of these suits you best and which matters to you.

7. Building your practice and business over the long term

The final stage is the one that never ends! The ongoing development of your business and your coaching practice skills.

Just as with coaching, there are many areas to consider here and given that you are likely reading this before you have even trained, I won’t go into too much detail.

But in this stage you will focus on:

• Engaging in professional spaces – conferences, networking and events
• Continuing professional development – training, supervision, reading
• Personal branding and positioning 
• Research and exploration
• Business building and marketing
• Writing and communicating about supervision
• Training the next generation of supervisors

This is the stage in which you flourish into the full supervisor you can be, uniquely qualified and experienced to do the work you love.

This stage is the work that is what it was all about: making an impact, shaping the next generation of coaches, influencing the profession.

This is being a coaching supervisor.

Conclusion

I hope you’ve found this article helpful in considering the journey ahead of you.  Depending on where you are in this path, there is plenty for you to explore in our blog and website. Many articles develop these ideas further and will help you consider them more deeply.

However, if you’re right at the start wondering whether you’re ready to become a coach supervisor, why not book a call with us and have a chat.  

We offer a free Let’s Talk Supervision session and we’d be delighted to hear from you.

The purpose of coaching supervision is to support coaches in using the right tools that best serve their clients,  reflect on their coaching practice and ultimately become the best coach they can be. 

The success of supervision relies heavily on the material we are working with. Or in other words, what the coach chooses to share with the coach supervisor. 

Therefore, it stands to reason that it’s in the coach’s best interest to share all the relevant details.

…Or at least, that’s the theory. 

In reality, coaches often feel uncomfortable fully opening up with their coach supervisor. Full disclosure can elicit vulnerability or bring up a worry of being judged or doing the wrong thing. This might prevent coaches from getting the full benefit from their coach supervision. 

This article will explore the reasons why coaches might feel uncomfortable opening up in supervision, and how you can navigate this dilemma as a supervisor to best support the coaches you’re working with. 

Not all coaches feel uncomfortable opening up in supervision 

It’s important to get this clear from the get-go. Talking about the discomfort to open up in coaching supervision doesn’t mean you need to start every coach supervision session with the premise that the coach you’re working with will be holding back. That’s not conducive to building mutual trust or serving your clients in the best way. 

However, having an awareness that sometimes coaches might feel worried to open up can help. If you can recognise the signs and know how to navigate them, you can feel more equipped as a supervisor to overcome this potential obstacle early in the relationship, put your clients’ minds at ease, and get some real work done within the partnership.

Some facts and figures 

Although research on this specific topic in coaching supervision is lacking, there is a study done by Ladany et al. (1996) on trainee counsellors. One of the key results of this study showed that 84% of trainee counsellors withheld information from their supervisors. 

Now, for the purpose of this article, there are some caveats. Firstly, it was done on counsellors rather than coaches. Secondly, these were newer (trainee) counsellors rather than very experienced counsellors/coaches with an established counselling/coaching practice. And thirdly, the feedback was based on having received a single supervision session (rather than a longer supervisory relationship). 

Because of these caveats, we need to be mindful of generalising these figures and jumping to the conclusion that most coaches don’t open up in their supervision sessions. However, it’s clear that we can draw some parallels to coach supervision. 

While the exact figure may not be 84% for coaches and this figure may reduce after a longer period of supervision, there are some clear parallels we can draw to coaching. If many coaches feel uncomfortable fully opening up in supervision, how do we recognise the signs and how can we address them as supervisors? 

Self-doubt is a common experience 

There is a lot of research on topics like self-confidence, self-doubt, or impostor syndrome. For example, a 2020 KPMG study showed over 75% of women have experienced the impostor syndrome in their careers. 

It’s no surprise that self-doubt is also experienced by many coaches, especially in the earlier stages of their practice. 

Consciously, we may seek to improve ourselves, grow, learn and develop as coaches. However, on another, deeper layer, we also seek reassurance that we’re doing enough already and that we are serving our clients powerfully and doing right by them. 

When coaches come to supervision, it’s not uncommon for them to experience at least some degree of self-doubt about their coaching, whether they verbalise this doubt or not. This is why the restorative function of supervision is so important. 

Learn More: 3 Functions of Coaching Supervision 

As a supervisor, it’s important to be aware of this deeper need that coaches come to supervision with, especially in those cases when it’s not verbalised directly by the coach. 

Power in the helping professions 

A lot has been said about the intrinsic motivations as well as the shadow side of choosing to work in a helping profession.

A. Guggenbuhl-Craig, a Jungian analyst, was one of the first therapists to shed light on the “dark side” of helping professions. In his book, “Power in the Helping Professions”, he mentions that in addition to all the beneficial work that takes place in helping professions, there’s often an unconscious game of power, where the therapist can take the role of a saviour in the relationship.

This can create an imbalance of power which can negatively impact the outcome of the support for clients. Because it’s a shadow aspect, by definition this side of us is unconscious, so we wouldn’t necessarily immediately resonate with the idea that we’re taking the role of saviour in our coaching or supervision. This further highlights for us the reason to have our own therapy, supervision and/or coaching to shed light on these more hidden aspects of ourselves. 

In the article “Using TA in Supervision”, psychotherapist and clinical supervisor Lynn Martin talks about the ego states that can be present in the room. 

Dr Martin says: 

“When working with trainee and newly qualified counsellors [NB or coaches] it is often useful for us to monitor our own ego states in the room. It is not unusual for inexperienced therapists [NB or coaches] to present in a Child ego state with some anxiety, and in some awe of the supervisor as being the one who knows everything.” 

Whether we look at the concept of power in coaching and coaching supervision from the perspective of shadow or ego states, it’s clear that there is a potential for projection to take place and to inadvertently enter a space where the supervisor somehow has the “upper hand” over the coach. 

Dr Martin continues: 

“This then invites the supervisor into a Parent ego state which may be overly sympathetic – ‘marshmallowing’, or overly critical, neither of which is helpful to the supervisee. The danger here is that the supervisee, in order to avoid being shamed, may only bring their best practice and can sometimes even exaggerate their skill in an attempt to receive ‘positive strokes’ from the supervisor.” 

So, now comes the obvious question: ok, so coaches might feel uncomfortable to open up to their supervisor. What do I do about it? 

How coach supervisors can help coaches feel comfortable to open up in supervision

There could be many ways for coach supervisors to navigate this with their clients, and we’ll be sharing a few in this article. 

Naming the statistics 

When we’re caught up in self-doubt, we often feel alone in our experience and instinctively it doesn’t feel safe to express it. 

As a coach supervisor, you can use the awareness you’ve gained from this article to proactively address this with the coaches you work with. 

You could mention the Ladany et al. study and say to your client that most coaches feel uncomfortable to open up fully. This can help normalise the experience. 

By simply bringing something difficult into awareness, it means we can navigate it consciously, together, rather than let it drive what happens in supervision. 

Contracting 

By bringing up the potential that the coach might at some point feel uncomfortable opening up, as a supervisor you can contract with your supervisee how you can best navigate those moments if and when they occur. 

What does the coach need from you in those moments? And how can the coach take responsibility and feel safe to verbalise these moments of discomfort when they do occur? 

Remember you’re working on two levels 

In addition to the technical, formative or ethical perspective you bring to your supervision, remember you will often be working on another, deeper level with your clients. 

There’s often an inner conflict between wanting to do more (stretching/challenging ourselves as coaches) and wanting to know we’re already doing enough (receiving reassurance/positive strokes from our supervisor).  

Knowing this, it’s important to find a balance together with our clients between supporting them enough to build trust and a strong supervision alliance, while also challenging them enough to stretch themselves and grow. 

In the book “Challenging Coaching”, Blakely and Day refer to approaches that are low in challenge and high in support as “the cosy club” which is too comfortable. They continue by saying that approaches that are high in challenge but low in support, often produce stress for the client. 

Finally, they advocate for an approach they name “the loving boot” – a balance of high support and high challenge, where we go beyond powerful questioning and explore a higher degree of provocative challenge, pushing our clients (and ourselves) out of our respective comfort zones. 

Conclusions

It’s not uncommon for coaches to feel uncomfortable opening up to their supervisors. Sharing details of their coaching can be a very personal, vulnerable experience. 

As a supervisor, it’s important to be aware that there’s a potential for these dynamics to take place under the surface, so we can navigate these dynamics together with our clients, rather than let them drive what’s happening in supervision. 

Contracting, naming the statistics and having an awareness of the ego states and levels you’re working on, are all effective methods to navigate this as a supervisor. 

If you have other suggestions on how to navigate it, or if you’d like to share some feedback on this article, please leave a comment below. We’d love to hear from you! 

References and Further Reading: 

1. Power in the Helping Professions by A Guggenbuhl-Craig 
2. Challenging Coaching by John Blakey and Ian Day
3. KPMG Women’s Leadership Report 2020
4. Study: Predictors of Supervisee Self-Disclosure Within the Supervisory Relationship, Chelsey Hess-Holden
5. Trainee nondisclosure in supervision: What are they not telling you?, Ladany et.al
6. Using TA in Supervision, Lynn Martin Psychotherapy
7. What are Ego States?
8. 3 Functions of Coaching Supervision | ICCS 

Chirona — This is the supervisor superhero name Mia O’Gorman gave to herself when she was asked about her superhero name as a final assignment in the Diploma for Coaching Supervision. 

Derived from the Greek mythology centaur, Chiron, who was deemed the “wisest and justest” and the “trainer of heroes”, Mia resonates with this Greek character in her role as a course trainer of supervisors at the International Centre for Coaching Supervision. 

With almost 20 years in the coaching industry, she shines in her superpower of enabling people — from her corporate clients to experienced coaches she’s supervised — to recognise their potential, see new possibilities and take confident steps forward. In other words, to become their own heroes!

In this article, Mia shares her passions for coaching and coaching supervision and how she aims to teach in an experiential way as a course trainer at the ICCS. 

From HR to Coaching: Mia’s Introduction to Coaching  

Coaching and developing coaches have long been Mia’s greatest professional passions.

In fact, before Mia discovered this profession, she already realised that she has a coaching mindset — one that was curious about people, their motivations and their behaviours. 

Mia started her career in human resources, working in the personnel department in the automotive, finance and energy sectors. As part of her role as an operational HR officer at a UK bank, she had an informal introduction to a few coaching skills to help employees navigate their problems and issues at work. 

She was then chosen to be a part of a special group of trainers that delivered coaching skills training to 2000 leaders nationwide. 

Seeing the power of coaching in action and finding great joy in witnessing people develop and achieve, this ultimately fueled her love for the profession. 

“I recognised really quickly that it helped individuals do their jobs better, help teams work together more successfully and generally made the whole place a better place to work. That really sparked a passion for me which has been with me for the following 20 or more years,” Mia shares. 

Mia O’Gorman’s Journey from Coaching to Coaching Supervision

Mia has specialised in leadership development, moving from in-house leadership development roles into external leadership development consultancy. 

In addition to her executive coaching portfolio, she has also designed and delivered informal and EMCC-accredited programmes for coaches and leaders. 

While working at a consultancy focused on programs using emotional intelligence concepts in coaching and leadership, she started to dive into supervision.

“That started to give me a real taste for it and see that additional layer and the enjoyment of talking to coaches about their coaching practice. I often describe myself as a coaching geek. So, the opportunity to spend time reflecting on how it works, why it works, what happens when it doesn’t work, and what we can do about it — It was just another layer that I really loved.” 

Using Emotional Intelligence in Coaching Supervision 

In her coaching practice, Mia recognised the complexity of human relationships. Since coaching and supervision are both relational processes, the theoretical underpinnings of emotional intelligence play a significant role in her practice. 

Transactional analysis has particularly helped Mia in navigating her supervision sessions. 

“While I don’t use TA in every supervision conversation, it’s something that I often find myself tuning into because the models and approaches are so helpful.”

Within her supervision practice, she dials into the two modes of working: the forensic mode and the reflecting mode. 

In the forensic approach, she enjoys going into the details of the casework and understanding what’s really happening in particular coaching situations. 

On the other hand, the much broader reflective approach hones into how the coach is feeling about their practice and their relationship to the work. Evaluating the impact of their work on their professional journey and development is also an important aspect of this mode.  

Both of these highlighted the importance of coaching supervision for her. 

Mia sees supervision as a coach’s space for a metaphorical workout with the personal trainer, a nutritious meal prepared by the chef and a healing massage from the physiotherapist. It’s like a day at the health spa for you as a practitioner.

Mia’s Facilitation Approach: Learning the Experiential Way 

When asked about her training and facilitation approach at the ICCS, she mentioned her intent to lead her training sessions in an experiential way. 

“I really believe that in this profession, so much your personal development informs your professional development. As much as possible, I will take opportunities to put in exercises and activities and reflection questions, that means we’re not just learning cognitively about a particular supervision concept, but that people have the opportunity to really experience it for themselves.”

Through the insightful modules, supervision sessions, and group practices in the course, training under the Diploma in Coaching Supervision at the ICCS showcases what it really feels like to be supervised. 

“I just think that’s fundamental. I think it’s important to walk a mile in the shoes of a client or, in this case, a coach that we might be supervising.”

Learning Supervision in a Safe Environment 

Many coaches that have trained as supervisors quickly realise how it can make you feel like you’re going back to basics with coaching again. 

Since supervision provides a zone of reflecting into one’s coaching practice, it can conjure a feeling of vulnerability. 

This is why Mia finds it important to provide a psychologically safe learning environment for the trainee supervisors coming into the course. 

“It’s a funny thing when you go to train as a coaching supervisor. For some people, it throws up that idea of being a beginner again, even having gotten really well established in the coaching practice. So the first thing I want is for people to feel safe and to enjoy the learning experience.”

At the end of the day, she hopes that the trainees find confidence, competence, and capability once they graduate from the Diploma. 

“It’s that combination of feeling confident in your abilities, but also knowing that you’ve built up competence and capability. Again, the experiential approach really helps with that because you’ve demonstrated to yourself and to others and gotten lots of feedback about how your signature style as a supervisor is shaping up. So, I think it’s confidence, competence, and that sense of your identity as you move into coaching supervision.”

Becoming a Better Coach through Coaching Supervision 

Training as a coaching supervisor adds a new layer to one’s coaching skills. 

It also makes you reevaluate your coaching practice, as you look into different aspects, such as the relationships you have with your clients, other coaches, and the wider profession. 

This can make the journey a daunting experience for coaches looking to become coaching supervisors. However, Mia shares this advice: 

“The main advice would be to enjoy the journey. Just be kind to yourself while you’re going back and learning new skills and make the most of the opportunity that you’ve invested in.” 

The coaching supervision training at the ICCS is unique because of its rich and diverse background. Students coming from all over the world are able to learn together, regardless of their locations and time zones. 

For Mia, this international and diverse exposure contributes greatly to the learning experience. 

“There’s potential for the participants in the program to learn not only from the faculty, the experience that we bring, and the content and methods that we share, but also from each other. That experience of being in a closely connected learning group over the course of several months in the programme is something that several of the participants have commented on… just how much they’ve enjoyed connecting in that group with other like-minded supervisors in training.” 

Coaching supervision is a rewarding experience for many coaches and aspiring supervisors on so many levels. Not only will you be able to help out those starting with their coaching journeys, but also contribute to developing the profession and the coaching community as a whole. 

Mia O’Gorman parts with her vision for future coaching supervisors: 

“I hope that people go away feeling well-trained that they’ve had a good workout and really feeling like a hero that they can go out and succeed as well.”

—

If you’re interested to join our Diploma in Coaching Supervision, click this link or download our brochure for more details. 

You can also reach out to us through our contact page or info@iccs.co for any questions and queries you may have about the supervision course. 

To become happier, confident, and inspired coaching supervisors — this is the mark that Rachel Bamber, a coaching expert in powerful, brain-friendly strategies, would like to leave with her trainees completing the Diploma in Coaching Supervision at the ICCS. 

Since 2003, she has helped people all around the world to work with their brain rather than against it and deliver peak performance through neuroscience. 

In this interview, Rachel shares her journey from coach to coaching supervision and how neuroscience and her holistic approach play a role in her facilitation in the Diploma in Coaching Supervision with the ICCS. 

From BBC to Coaching: How Rachel Discovered Coaching

Rachel’s introduction to coaching began when she took part in a leadership and management training programme whilst working as a Sales Manager at BBC Clothes Show Live. 

The course showcased the power of coaching as a form of leading and managing people. 

“I love people development and I knew that I wanted to run my own business.  The leadership and management training was a catalyst: I later left the company and trained professionally in both coaching and then subsequently in Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP.)  I’ve done lots of other training since then too,” Rachel shares. 

Rachel Bamber and Her Work in Neuroscience 

We all experience times that have led us to feel uninspired and unmotivated. 

Despite countless efforts, like working out, eating healthier, or sleeping more, many people still struggle to find their energy. This leads to drops in performance levels at work, poor relationships, and overall unhappiness for a lot of people. 

Neuroscience, the study of the brain and the nervous systems and how it affects the way we physiologically react, dials into how we can begin to work with our brain rather than against it.  

In the last 20 years, the world of neuroscience has evolved. With technological developments, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging scanners (FMRIs), our understanding of our brain’s power has tremendously accelerated. 

This is where Rachel, with her work in the neuroscience of leadership, finds the beauty of how impactful our brain and thinking are on the way we function every day. 

“Everything that I do is what I call brain-friendly. When we learn about how the brain works, (and of course we all have one!), we can then communicate much more effectively with others. We can lead them to be more effective and improve [their] relationships.” 

In particular, she uses neuroscience to help people achieve their peak performance so that they can get more done with zero stress. 

“I like to think of this as helping you work with your brain rather than against it. It takes away a lot of the angst [and] a lot of the stress.  Because our brain can be like a little child and can get easily distracted and likes novelty and all sorts of other things, which can end up causing us a lot of unnecessary stress.”

Rachel has coached various professionals worldwide, from elite sport, directors, corporate leaders, to ambitious small business owners. 

Renowned for her bold and intuitive coaching and supervision, Rachel aims to create a motivating and powerful transformative experience in a fun and sustainable manner for her clients as well as for the coaching supervisors she trains at the ICCS. 

Rachel’s Journey from Being a Coach to Becoming a Coaching Supervisor 

Coaching supervision felt like a natural next step for Rachel. With 18 years of success in the coaching profession, she has found her passion in helping new coaches find their wings. 

Training people all around the world in brain-based coaching skills and assessing them against ICF’s core competencies, she has also helped coaches to deepen their skills and establish themselves in their coaching practice. 

It was the combination of her experience and expertise which naturally led her to supervision. 

“I’m very much about wanting to help coaches be confident in their skills. Because when they’re more confident in themselves and when they’re confident in their business and being able to deal with all sorts of different types of clients and stakeholders and what’s going on with them, then they’re more able to then help a lot more people and go out and make even more of a positive difference in the world.”  

Rachel’s Holistic Approach to Coaching Supervision 

Coaching supervision is known for its reflective space, where both the supervisee and the supervisor can have a collaborative dialogue. 

“My approach is very much holistic in that, it’s not just about the supervisees, coaching clients and the stakeholders, it’s [also] about them as a whole person and what’s going on in their life – and business. What is great about coaching supervision is that there are no rules about what the supervisor can cover, and every one of us will have our own individual approach.” 

According to Rachel, supervision goes beyond helping another coach. The benefits extend to their coaching clients, stakeholders, and all the other people in the system that are going to be impacted by that coach’s engagement. 

“However, I think it’s very important that, especially based on my work in peak performance, that ultimately how the coach is showing up will make an impact on how they are facilitating their coaching sessions and their business, and what’s going on of course will all feed into that.”  

At the end of the day, she aims to help coaches and supervisors feel good about themselves, their skills, and what they do with their clients and their business. She believes this will create an even wider-ranging impact on the world. 

Rachel’s High Energy, Confidence Inspiring, and Inclusive Training Sessions at the ICCS 

Rachels finds parallelism with her work as a coach and now as a course trainer at the ICCS. 

According to her, the feedback that she has received emphasises her high energy, confidence-inspiring, and inclusivity, which also resembles her extensive coaching experience, plus, training executives in 6 continents — her next goal is Antarctica, to complete her global reach. 

“People would also say that I make it fun and accessible. They feel like they can go away and implement what they’ve learned immediately. That is my approach — to be motivating, whether it’s helping those who want to learn about supervision or coaching or anything else.” 

Becoming confident in their newfound skills and strengths is what Rachel wants to impart to her trainees. She wants them to realise how their coaching strengths equip them and how supervision becomes an extension of that. 

At the end of the course, she would like the coaching supervisors of ICCS to be able to go out and help other coaches and make an even greater positive difference in the world. 

“I know it sounds a bit cheesy and cliché, but yeah, that’s what I’m about.”

On Taking the Next Step through Coaching Supervision 

Coaching supervision is a natural progression for some experienced coaches. But is it all that it takes to become one? 

For Rachel, it is an important add-on, but she doesn’t think it’s a replacement. Although the skills and strengths of coaching and supervision are similar, Rachel believes that willingness plays an important influence for those looking to become a coach supervisor. 

“On the previous programmes that ICCS have run so far, there’s been a diverse level of experience and backgrounds and the kind of coaching work that people do. But ultimately, I think having a willingness to help other coaches grow and to know that there is an abundance in the world of coaching, that there’s room for everyone is also important.”

READ: Why Become A Coaching Supervisor?

How the ICCS Diploma in Coaching Supervision Can Help You Become A Better Coach 

When asked about her thoughts on why the International Centre for Coaching Supervision stands out as a supervision training programme, Rachel simply says, “because it’s fun!”

Through its virtual learning environment, aspiring coaching supervisors have the opportunity to learn with coaches from all around the world, with varying backgrounds and experiences. 

It is also a conducive setting to reflect on one’s own practice, to have supervision amongst peers, and to learn about different modalities that might not have been familiar in your initial coach training. 

It’s not only ICCS’ collaborative and integrative learning styles that allow coaching supervisors to acquire these skills, but as well as its inclusion of other talking interventions like psychotherapy, positive psychology, and neuroscience — enabling a very rich approach that builds on their existing skills. 

“The feedback that I’ve received from those who have done the course so far say that they feel like they’re much better coaches because of doing the training and the coaching supervision. That’s added to all aspects of their work.” 

—

Interested to undertake the Diploma in Coaching Supervision? Head on to our coaching supervision training page to learn more about the programme! 

Got questions? Reach out to us through our contact page or through our email info@iccs.co

One of my mentors once told me, “It doesn’t even matter what you do. What matters is why”. 

Undoubtedly, coaching supervision is an important and even honourable type of support which offers that healing concept of ‘caring and protecting the carers’, but the main question that I’d like to help you answer today is …why become a coaching supervisor? 

Why would you even want to consider becoming one?

I’d like to explore that inquiry through the lens of making a decision that feels aligned to you, i.e. it has both your heart and mind fully on board with your next move.

As I’m writing this, I want you to imagine sitting across from me having a cup of coffee together (or your beverage of choice), as I invite you to have a dialogue with me. There’s no fun in me writing (or talking) “at” you, so allow yourself to ponder over the reflections I will be sharing with you below.

In this article, I gently offer you to reflect on two main questions that I hope will encourage you to think deeply about what really matters here, i.e. your ‘why’.

Why Become A Coaching Supervisor: Finding Your Why 

Question 1:  “What is it about coaching supervision that touches something in you that makes you want to become a part of this honourable and life-changing profession?” 

Intellectually speaking, I believe it is easy to understand why coaching supervision is so important and as I mentioned, even honourable for the coaching industry. 

After all, it supports coaches in developing their professional mastery and becoming better at their craft, thus improving the quality of support that they have to offer for their clients. This means – more people in this world will receive quality coaching! 

Coaching supervision also encourages practitioners to go deeper with their own inner work and helps them overcome their inner blocks, like burnouts, which may stop them from doing the great things in their work altogether. Things like writing books, creating courses and building successful businesses in a heart-centred way. This means – more practitioners will unlock their potential and bring their gifts to this world!

And lastly, it’s the sense of credibility that I believe coaching supervision provides. When coaches complete their coaching qualifications and venture into the wild waters on their own to seek and support their coaching clients, what would prevent them from falling into habitual and perhaps unintentionally mindless ways of being? 

The quality assurance element of coaching supervision helps practitioners reflect on their methods and its effectiveness rather than just carry on doing things the way they’re used to – all whilst being mindful of and deepening their own meaning of the ethical and professional standards of the industry. 

This means – we can gain that sense of order, structure and high standards of excellence in a sometimes perceived-to-be chaotic reality of a self-regulated industry that’s not immune to the emergence of  “self-proclaimed” and “overnight” coaches. 

Supervision for coaches is like that safe haven we need to retreat to on a regular basis to stay meaningfully engaged, intellectually stimulated and emotionally supported in our work and most importantly, life. 

It’s difficult at times to separate you-as-a-professional from you-as-a-person (and why would we anyways?), so when we engage in coaching supervision we tend to naturally receive that holistic type of support that can directly or often implicitly elevate all areas of our life.

I’d like to invite you to take a moment now and see if you feel drawn to the meaning of what’s been mentioned so far? What words stood out for you specifically? 

And why would it make total sense for you to become a coaching supervisor as the next logical step in your coaching career? If you like, share them in the comments down below.

Question 2: “What is it about you that makes you feel like coaching supervision is the work you’re meant to be doing?”

I know, this might sound like a very ‘high-vibe’ question you might not even be in a mood for right now, especially if you adopt a rather pragmatic approach to reflecting on it. 

However, I believe there is always a part of us that ‘knows’ that something ‘just feels right’, even though logically we might struggle to explain it.

Many of us might sometimes feel like we need to present logical reasons to ‘justify’ our next investment or move, even though in reality we were sold on our decision based on those inner nudges way before we took time to rationalise it in our mind.  

You might call it instinct, gut feeling, inner knowing, or that visceral spark that says “that’s it, that’s the next step”. 

In his interview with Nick Bolton, Robin Shohet confessed that he sustained his love for supervision for over 40 years because “it fits totally with my character”.

This resonates deeply with me because I remember the day I decided to become a coaching supervisor. 

I was still studying to become a life coach back then and during one of the group supervision calls that I had attended, I found myself feeling positively consumed and thoroughly enjoying the process. 

During the call, we explored a number of client cases presented by other beginner coaches like myself and I felt like I was thriving as we explored the reality of what happened and possibilities of what could be done, and then shared our observations, hypothesis and suggestions of what we would try if we were in the coach’s shoes. 

When I finished sharing my thoughts, our supervisor said: “And I have nothing to add, because Kris just mentioned all of my ideas.” 

It was at that moment that I felt like I re-emerged from the deep waters of that process of collaborative exploration, to have a look around and realise: “I’m in my element.”

Joseph Campbell once famously said, “Follow your bliss and success will follow.” and I’m a huge believer that in order to make an aligned decision to do something (or rather become!), we need to enjoy the process, not just the results. 

Coaching supervision is a process of deep exploration of the coach’s client work, relationships they build with their clients and other stakeholders, as well as the exploration of their own inner world and how it informs their coaching practice. 

Similar to Robin Shohet, supervision suits my personality. I feel most alive when I gently investigate the stories my supervision clients bring, engage in explorations of facts and feelings, leaving no stones unturned, raising the current level of awareness, and wondering what we are not seeing that could potentially uplevel our way of thinking, doing and being. 

That’s my equivalent of Robin Shohet’s “it fits with my character”. 

The question is – what would be yours? What is it about you, your personality, your nature that makes you feel like you’d enjoy the process of coaching supervision?

Why do coaches train as coaching supervisors?

After having a number of conversations with some of my colleagues, I’d like to offer you a few ‘why’s’ from other coaches who have trained as coaching supervisors.

Maybe one or some of them will touch something in you and perhaps even feel right on a visceral level.

“I simply love working with other coaches. They know the power of coaching so well and are so open to going deep in our sessions to understand themselves better and lead their lives more authentically.”

“I’ve been coaching for a while and started feeling like I wanted to go beyond it. Coaching supervision was a godsend because it offered me a platform to share my rich professional experience and guidance with other coaches.”

“I love the therapeutic feel of coaching supervision, it plays to my strengths to facilitate that recreational space; my supervision clients often call our calls  “a spa for coaches”

“I’m a lifelong student and always have my nose in a coaching book or training, so helping other coaches build their coaching mastery and expand their toolkit really feeds my passion for learning.”

“I noticed how some fellow coaches just naturally started opening up to me about their inner dilemmas and asked me for my guidance and opinions. I wanted to make sure I’m equipped to support them effectively and ethically with this.”

“I feel like as a coach I can only help so many people. But as a coaching supervisor, my albeit indirect impact is exponential. I can implicitly support people that I have no idea how to reach otherwise.”

“I consider myself a spiritual person and that feeling of interconnectedness that’s so ever present in supervision practice just feels so right for my soul.”

These are just a few inspiring examples of why you might want to become a coaching supervisor. 

And if your mind and heart are indeed onboard, then what would be your why? 

Share in the comments below. 

As someone interested in workforce sustainability and support, and the place of coaching in compassionate leadership, and interested in the role supervision can play in staff retention, the question “What does good supervision for NHS clinician coaches¹ look like in a pandemic?” has been on my mind.  

The question changed multiple times as my inquiry progressed and as I examined what it means to be working as a coach in healthcare during Covid – a landslide of concerns.  

As a doctor involved in workforce education in the NHS, the question “What do clinical staff need, in order to flourish in the workplace?” is a frequently considered one.  

During this pandemic, the question has become “What do staff need to keep going in their jobs?” More specifically “What are NHS staff bringing to coaching in a pandemic and how can our coaches best support them?” 

As I set out to examine this question and consider what form coaching supervision should take, the enormity of concerns that both coachees and coaches are carrying swiftly emerged as a dominant theme.  

My role as Coaching Lead includes responsibility for appropriately addressing the CPD and supervision needs of our clinician-coaches.  As a practising coach and supervisor in this system, I am also hearing the same burden of concerns from coachees and coaches.  

Perhaps not surprisingly given the current pandemic a single coachee can present with a wide ‘circle of concern’², in addition to their coaching goal.  The complicating factor in this system is that the coach may also be holding similar concerns.  

Emotive descriptors such as ‘tsunami’ or ‘landslide’ have been used frequently to describe working conditions encountered in healthcare during the pandemic – it did indeed feel like a landslide at times listening to my supervisees.  

Many concerns voiced were common to more than one coach.  By now the question had evolved into “Given the burden of concerns experienced right now, what form should coaching supervision take?”.

This inquiry is examining what one part of the ‘system’ – clinician-coaches working in healthcare during a pandemic – need to continue their work.  

The system that coaches are bearing witness to is of course much broader than individual clinical care, as evidenced by the concerns documented in the appendix.  

It is important to note that we are not talking about people incapacitated by their mental health – the coaches and coachees I am referring to feel able to function at work and wish to continue to do so.  

This is not an exploration of burnout or the boundary between therapy and coaching, but a pragmatic look at what our colleagues – the carers – are holding and how as supervisors we can support the wider system through providing supervision.  

My own experience and the breadth of concerns expressed by others signposted me towards looking at the restorative component of supervision as a practice in its own right.   

What did I find?

As I explored further, the theme of self-compassion as an essential ingredient began to emerge.  

I reflected on my own experience of self-compassion as a restorative practice and added the question “What do we know about the place of self-compassion in sustaining staff?” to my inquiry: something which I had not contemplated during my training.  

Certainly in balancing the needs of others, whether coachees, trainees, patients or their family members, I have found the development of robust boundaries an absolute imperative, in order to manage my ‘rescuer’³.  

As Brene Brown teaches “the most compassionate and generous people are the most boundaried”⁴ and this certainly rings true both personally and working with healthcare professionals suffering burnout.

Professor Michael West’s longitudinal work examining the NHS workforce data provides an essential evidence base as we unpack the links between care of self and care of others.  

His work robustly describes:  

1. The link between positive staff experience and good patient outcomes19 and 
2. The link between self-compassion and ‘more effective interaction with all those we work with and offer care for’⁵.  

By now, the question had changed from:

“What would good supervision look like in a clinical setting right now” 

to 

“What is the place of ‘compassion practices’ in attending to the system (healthcare during a pandemic)?” and “How can we provide supervisory spaces which foster self-compassion and compassion?”.  

One of the concerns articulated by many involved in coaching in the NHS is that coaching and supervision become sticking plasters over staff need, in particular where systemic changes to amend demanding working conditions are not occurring.  

However, if coaching offers an opportunity for connection to core values and motivation, then it can be a place of self-compassion, and hence safe reflection.

And so I came to compassion practices – practices which are “all about reconnecting people to purpose, humanity, self, and each other, in a way that feels accessible, simple, and straightforward to implement.”⁶  

The practices I chose to explore are the 10-minute pause and #spacesforlistening, both small-group, compassion-based tools amenable to online delivery, and growing in use in the NHS currently.   

Both tools have their origins in the Thinking Environment described by Nancy Kline22 and so I revisited her ‘ten components’.  Whilst all the components are important in the creation of a Thinking Environment, I am reminded of the particular importance of attention, ease and place in restorative supervision.⁷  

Attention comprises non-interruption and listening with fascination – both ways of communicating compassion to the thinker.  

Ease is described as ‘freedom from internal urgency’ – consciously bringing this component invites safe exploration of thoughts and feelings, and the place is creating a supervision space which says ‘you matter’. 

Previously, this would have been the physical environment. But working virtually, I have found it to be clear instructions, the respect of and adherence to time boundaries, the equality generated in a round and again the non-interruption and fascination in where someone’s independent thinking will go in their supervision.  

Taken together these combinations and the remaining components is a powerful generator of a compassionate environment for independent thinking to occur.

Two points become clear through this line of inquiry: 

1. That compassion and self-compassion are essential components underpinning any supervision occurring with and for clinicians (indeed perhaps any supervision?), and 
2. The restorative component assumes a really important place in supervision, given the cognitive and emotional overload coachees and coaches are experiencing in their workplaces right now. 

As Kristin Neff, the voice of clarity and evidence on self-compassion explains,

“The beauty of self-compassion is that instead of replacing negative feelings with positive ones, new positive emotions are generated by embracing the negative ones. The positive emotions of care and connectedness are felt alongside our painful feelings”.⁸

She describes the three components of building self-compassion as tuning in and being aware of our suffering, understanding the common humanity in our situation, and offering kindness towards ourselves.⁹  

In other words, by becoming aware that we are in the midst of a landslide, that others are too and that it is tough, and that we are doing the best we can, we can escape from under the landslide.  

The piece that Michael West’s work adds to the picture is that by escaping it ourselves, we are able to assist others in seeing the landslide for what it is and getting out from under it in order to continue to work.

Brigid Proctor’s model describes the restorative, formative and normative functions of supervision;¹⁰ she also says, 

“practitioners of supervision and healthcare need support and help in seeking virtue and embracing wisdom in a complex and multicultural world.  One way they can get this is by being offered regular space to reflect on their moment-to-moment practice.”¹¹  

The compassion practices are not claiming to offer supervision in themselves but provide a component of supervision.  

Given the burden of concerns coaches are hearing and holding currently this seems a useful route of investigation – to explore the place of compassion practices as tools for bringing ease, mental space, and self-compassion, in doing so paving the way for additional supervisory exploration. 

Moreover, commencing supervision without attending to restorative practice would render the session redundant.  As Proctor says, 

“If supervision is not experienced as restorative, the other tasks will not be well done.”  

This makes intuitive sense as well as being born out in the neuroscientific literature: holding numerous concerns without attending to them leaves little space for independent thought, new perspective and appropriate development.¹²

Proctor’s model acknowledges there are always more than two stakeholders within clinical supervision.  

In the offering of restorative supervision, supervisees working in healthcare are empowered to support other staff they meet who in turn can support patients, their families and their wider system.  The ripple effect is powerful.¹³

Proctor references Gerard Egan’s Helper model¹⁴, and Heron’s 6 categories of inquiry¹⁵, and goes on to describe the value of reflecting, summarising, paraphrasing and exploring further with questions that facilitate deeper understanding.  

This contrasts with the compassion models undertaken during this inquiry which use timed rounds, generative attention and non-interruption to facilitate personal reflection and independent thinking.  

This underlines the fact that a compassion practice forms part of a supervisory session, not supervision in its entirety.

What was my experience of using compassion practices?

The two models I used were a 10-minute pause and a #spacesforlistening session.  I found both tools profound and impactful.  

I was invited to join a #spacesforlistening session by reaching out to the creators of the model for the purposes of this inquiry.  The session was held via Zoom and had eight participants – the maximum stipulated number.  

The practise consists of three timed rounds, with each participant having two minutes to speak per round, managed by a facilitator, with non-interruption agreed as part of the contract.  

All participants were on mute apart from the thinker, and speaking was limited to participants’ invited to turn in the round.  The questions were:

• “How are you and what is on your mind right now?”, 
• “In light of what you have heard in Round 1, what are your reflections and feelings?” and “What is one thing you might take forward and is there an appreciation you would like to share?”

Whilst at first glance these questions appear non-specific in the context of supervision what becomes quickly apparent is that they provide a safe space very rapidly, where participants share very personal and often moving thoughts.  

In practice, this means that people deal with what is ‘front of mind’ very swiftly. This quick dive into vulnerability facilitates sharing of unexpected things (more than one participant commented that they were surprised by what they spoke about and hadn’t intended to).  

The connection created through shared vulnerability feels very validating even when each other’s content is vastly different.  There is enormous potential for rapid connection with people who were strangers a minute ago, and yet the process is ‘stand-alone’.  Several participants commented that the lack of introductions or longer-term obligations felt liberating.  

My experience of the #spacesforlistening model resonated with my previous use of the Thinking Partnership, specifically that stating and adhering to time boundaries builds and strengthens psychological safety and that two minutes feels incredibly spacious.  

Also, that non-interruption is vital in the exploration of the content of one’s thoughts, when previously the content may have been eclipsed by the associated emotional load, or landslide.  

It is surprising what emerges from the ‘luxury’ of non-interruption: new insights which may up until that point have been opaque, or unavailable, somewhat out of reach in one’s awareness.  

It is profoundly moving to have others bear witness to these and the offering of generative attention (listening with fascination and non-interruption) is both validating and nourishing.  

My experience of this process is that even when one is carrying burdensome thoughts, lightness is achieved through having others hear them without further comment.  

There is a rich reward of accountability within the group: it may be easier not to think these thoughts than think them but being present and being heard encourages examination of all that one is holding.  

That feels necessary for maintenance and self-care.  Of course, further work might need to be done in terms of exploring patterns, unhelpful attachments or inference etc.  But this deeper work of further exploration is made available through opening the supervision space with a compassion practice and making space for new thinking.  

Prioritising listening without offering comment or solution communicates a deep respect for the quality of the thinker’s own reflections and the assumption that the thinker is resourceful, able to attend to their own needs and that they may hold the new perspective they seek.

Another reflection is of how normal it is to receive others’ ideas as ‘good or bad’, ‘right or wrong’ very quickly and without full examination.  

Allowing the thoughts of participants to be stated fully and without interruption means we listen to the end of them, where previously we might have ‘reacted’ and switched off.  This observation is deeply uncomfortable, yet the awareness is so valuable.

The 10-minute pause presents an alternative, briefer restorative space, again via a script and schedule.  The scripted nature of this tool means it can be used by many and without a trained facilitator.  

Whilst the presence of a trained facilitator enhances the session, it is not essential, making this a pragmatic offer available to a wider reach of staff.  A lack of allocated supervision time or trained staff is a reality for much of the workforce. 

The 10-minute pause begins and ends with a round and uses a listening pair in the middle to consider a question and receive and offer appreciation.  The opening round is the question “What is something you feel grateful for or that is going well for you?”  

The listening pairs occur in breakout rooms or physically in pairs if able to meet in a room together.  

This segment offers two minutes each to contemplate uninterrupted the question “What does caring for yourself mean to you?”, and then to offer “One thing I appreciate about you is…” to their partner.  The final round is “To be wise, kind and compassionate to myself, I will…”.

The learning from this model reflected much of that from #spaceforlistening and Thinking Partnership work – in short segments of time participants in a group can create authentic and meaningful connections that are moving and profound.  

When I ran the 10-minute pause sessions, I found that participants were astounded by their own responses to the self-care question.  

These are seasoned healthcare providers, aware of the prevalence of burnout and the need to look after themselves, and yet time and time again commented that this was something that they had lost sight of, perhaps buried under the landslide of the cognitive and emotional load they were carrying.  

A frequent comment was “no-one has ever asked me that” (about self-care).  Although self-care is replenishment work we need to do for ourselves, asking about it can be a way of offering compassion to colleagues and embedding self-compassion as a cultural norm.

I was also reminded of the power of silence for creating space for independent thought. This allows work to be done and reflections to occur at the pace that an individual requires. It is tempting to feel that as supervisors we add value through reflection, comment, noticing, sharing insights. 

Whilst this may be true, there is undoubtedly value to be gained by fostering an environment where the supervisee knows their own thoughts are valued, essential for their own growth and development, and that giving voice to them is an act of self-compassion.  

This is advantageous in a group space where there can otherwise be pressure to go at a group-led pace, rather than an individual one.  

What did I conclude?

The pandemic has added new pressures to a system already struggling with chronic overload.  This combination magnifies risk to patient safety, intention to quit amongst staff, and staff burnout.  

Living with the landslide of concerns described in the appendix is deeply damaging.  This damage is born by individuals but may be visited by others – colleagues, patients, family members unless attended to.  

Clinician coaches are providing welcome space to coachees in the NHS wanting to reach their potential, explore career challenges and bring new awareness to their situation.  Both coachee and coach may also be standing in the way of the landslide and require techniques to manage the burden of concerns.  

One way of managing concerns is through a group compassion practice.  We know that compassion is a core value in health and social care – it resonates strongly with staff as a key purpose for choosing to work in healthcare, and it is also essential for the quality of interaction across teams and with patients.  

Yet the healthcare system can be poor at reflecting ‘you matter’ back to its staff.  Practices that model staff compassion and embed the statement that staff matter is essential, for good patient care, for staff retention and for quality supervision.

Underpinning the use of these compassion practices is the assumption that taking time to properly examine one’s thoughts is an act of self-compassion.  

Without this gift to oneself, it is impossible to be present for others and to enable them to do the work required in coaching or supervision.  Unless one creates a restorative space in supervision, little normative or formative supervision work will land.  

Self-compassion is an essential component of professional life for all of us working in health and social care (all of us in general!).  By investing time in ourselves, we invest in our capacity to work effectively and compassionately with our teams, our patients and their families.  

Compassion practices are one way of ensuring supervision for healthcare professionals models and builds self-compassion – an essential way to survive the landslide.

At the very heart of what I hold as a core belief, is that given the right environment, people can change, grow and develop. 

Through this transformation, they can go on to do more or do differently, achieve more, understand more and ultimately, be more. 

However, I fundamentally believe that in order for people to be more, they need to be more. 

By this, I mean that they need to truly stop and stay in the moment to feel and understand where they are now, in the here and now. 

In this reflection essay, I wanted to explore the importance of being more in supervision and the impact this can have on our supervisees and ultimately their clients, as well as the idea of co-creation with a supervisee, to help them co-create with their clients. 

By allowing our supervisees to be more, we will perhaps be able to help them find a solution faster. 

On Practicing Conscious Reflection

In my work in people development over the last 25 years and specifically as an executive coach over the last 10 years, I have noticed that in many organisations, the requirement to do more (often with less), achieve more, and be more has also increased. 

I have also noticed that the executives I have worked with have gone on to make lasting change because they have given themselves ‘permission’ to have space, to reflect and understand where they are — the opportunity to be more. 

They were able to consider what and where they are, rather than constantly striving to be what they are not.  

Personally, before the COVID-19 pandemic, I now realise, I was constantly trying to achieve more and help others achieve more. 

Constantly travelling, on a plane, train or automobile, constantly running from meeting to meeting. Perhaps never fully reflecting deeply enough on my coaching practice.  

Working with clients during the pandemic has highlighted the importance of coaching and how transformational it can be. It has also shown me that, in order to do our best work, we need to reflect well on the quality of our work and how crucial the practice of conscious reflection really is. 

According to Julie Hay,

“Reflecting helps you consider what you have done, how you and your client behaved, what the outcomes were, how you might have handled things differently”.

(Hay, 2007, p7)

However, since the start of my supervision training and my encounters with coaches around me, I have been surprised by the number of coaches, not yet engaging regularly in supervision. 

Perhaps in their quest to be more in their coaching practices, they are not allowing themselves the permission to be more — to fully engage the formative, normative and restorative functions of supervision. 

Perhaps, in their desire to help others be more and go on to have extraordinary impact, they may not be allowing themselves the same benefits. 

As Shohet and Shohet suggest,

“if we rush to a solution because of a need for a quick fix, then we will not have taken the time to look at the whole system. Parts of the system that have been neglected have the potential to sabotage. Action at all costs is replacing the thoughtful assessment of the whole picture. The job of the supervisor might be, among other things, not to collude with that picture, but slow things down”

(Shohet & Shohet, 2020, p.26). 

For supervision clients, if we can successfully create this environment, we move into the “contact stage” and as Bluckert suggests, we “rediscover our sparkle” (Bluckert, 2015, p.78). 

My role as a supervisor is to allow that opportunity for space for the supervisee to be more, so that they can do their work on whatever is presenting, at a pace that allows them to experience what is really going on for them. 

It is allowing them to move away from their own critical inner voice and just explore their learning.

In reference to coaching, Bluckert says

“A large part of the role that a coach undertakes is to listen and reflect, not to attempt to answer questions that they are not qualified to answer” (Bluckert, 2006, p.78). “Staying grounded, dealing with your own anxiety and avoiding a premature rush to fix things can be one of the most difficult aspects of the coaching role”

(Bluckert, 2006, p138). 

4 Key Principles To Being More in Supervision 

To be able to do the work that I do, I have four key principles that underpin my work as a supervisor. 

They are not only really important to me but also crucial for me to do my best work, which in turn will allow my supervisees to do their best work with their clients.  

1. Connection

This is about the connection that I build as a supervisor with the supervisee, which is genuine and authentic. 

Through this genuine connection, my supervisee is more able to feel they are in a safe place to be more. A place to be held, to work with whatever is emerging for them and explore its meaning. 

Connection is the key pillar to my supervision model. For me, it’s at the very heart of my supervision practice as I believe that one of my natural strengths is to allow my supervisees to feel supported and ‘held’ in the moment and that they feel that I am by their side all the way, not to ‘rescue’ them, but to stay in the moment to just ‘Be’.  

This follows the person-centred approach in psychotherapy that Carl Rogers discusses when he says “I would like him to know that I stand with him … and that I can look upon it relatively unafraid” (Rogers, 2004, p.66). 

The stronger the bond between supervisor and supervisee, the more open the supervisee will feel held in the moment and able to explore more of what is presenting for them, which again Rogers shares that the client may be expressing “It makes me feel that I want to go further, exploring me, perhaps expressing more of myself” (Rogers, 2004, p.67). 

Rogers goes on to explain that in order for the person-centred approach to work, three conditions must be present: Genuineness, unconditional positive regard and empathetic understanding. 

Silence is also crucial in this principle for clients to do their best work. As Nancy Kline suggests,

“It doesn’t matter if you already know what someone is about to say before they have finished saying it. What matters is what happens for them because they say it”

(Kline, 2014, p.8).

I try to use silence whenever appropriate in my supervision practice. 

The contracting phase is also crucial for building connections. Mary Beth O’Neill suggests “it is the most important phase” (O’Neill, 2000, p.92) and as Jonathan Passmore suggests it paves the way “for a rich, highly rewarding learning experience” (Passmore et al, 2010, p.38).

I have been given feedback from my supervisees that I contract well, that I demonstrate a genuine warmth and interest and listen intently, tracking what’s being said and what’s not being said, but expressed through body language or pace of breathing.

As a result, this helps the supervisee build trust in my credibility as a supervisor to work with them on whatever is emerging.

2. Attention

This is about my presence as a supervisor, to be totally in the moment to pay attention and notice what is being said and what is not being said, through tone of voice and body language and then bring this to the attention of the supervisee. 

It is also to share what is emerging for me, as the supervisor, during the session. 

After having built a strong connection with a supervisee, the second most important principle is ‘Attention’; to pay attention and bring to my supervisees’ attention not only what I notice they are saying or doing in the session, but what also emerges for me. 

“Attending well to another person requires giving them full and undivided attention”

(Hawkins & Smith, 2013, p252).

All of this can help to bring clarity to the supervisees’ situation. 

This is what Marion Gillie would describe as “active / pro-active attending” (Gillie, 2008, p.2) and means that you are not only listening to what the supervisee is saying, but also paying attention to what the supervisee is not saying. Erik De Haan says “being able to listen closely and attentively is essential” (De Haan, 2012, p21).  

This also links with the Gestalt approach and staying with the energy. From the early work of Frederick Perls and the later work of Duncan Coppock, John Leary-Joyce, Marion Gillie, Marjorie Shackleton and Peter Bluckert, this principle is all about allowing the supervisee to ‘be’ in the moment and stay with the data. 

As Gillie and Shackleton share;

“At the heart of the Gestalt approach lies working with the client’s immediate phenomenology and the notion of staying with whatever emotion is evoked during a session”

(Gillie & Shackleton, AoEC PDF, p.6). 

This might show up in my supervision practice with me playing back what the supervisee just said or did. For example, with a recent supervisee, I played back by saying “I noticed when you talked about that you audibly breathed out. What was going on for you there?”. Or even more simply “what’s coming up for you here?”. 

This allows the supervisee to amplify and explore what this is and see if this represents more data about their situation. 

It also follows the Gestalt approach of allowing the supervisee the choice to experiment. Experiments may show up in my supervision when I notice a significant body language or gesture. 

For example, with a recent supervisee, when using Eye 1, when we “concentrated on the detail of the client situation and how the client presented themselves” (Hawkins & McMahon, 2020, p.87), I noticed a big hand slap whenever they talked about their client. 

When I said “what’s this” and mirrored back the same gesture, they said, “oh wow, I didn’t know I was doing that”. I said, “do it some more, exaggerate it more … what’s coming up for you now?”. 

It emerged that they were feeling frustrated with the client but hadn’t until then, realised quite how much. We then continued our supervision session with this new data.  

This is about the natural curiosity I have as a supervisor and the challenge that I bring to the session. 

This is able to happen through questions and metaphors to help to facilitate deeper understanding for the supervisee.  

This might also be highlighting the formative and normative functions of supervision. 

3. Challenge 

Once I have built a connection with a supervisee and I have been paying attention to what is coming up for them and for me, the third principle in my practice is ‘Challenge’. 

This is about challenging their assumptions and helping people shift from, as Rosabeth Kanter Moss would describe, “stuck to moving” (Bailey, 2013, p.1). 

I would say that this is my learning edge as a supervisor and, in the words of Mary-Beth O’Neill, I am probably supervising with a lot of heart and not enough backbone. 

“Backbone is about saying what your position is, whether it is popular or not. Heart is staying in the relationship and reaching out even when that relationship is in conflict.”

(O’Neill, 2000, p.13). 

I do have a natural curiosity and therefore, in my supervision practice, this might show up with some incisive questions, to really help the supervisee think differently and try to free themselves from their own limiting assumptions and beliefs. 

However, the part that I am most excited about in my evolving supervision practice is within Heron’s Six Categories of Supervision, using the Authoritative function. 

This is something new to me and as Nick Bolton says

“It is predicated on the expertise, experience and authority of the supervisor who can credibly, knowledgeable and appropriately administer such advice” 

(Bolton, Expanding your Supervision Range blog, 2020).

4. Va Va Voom 

This is about my signature presence as a supervisor and my natural tendency to bring a little fun and irreverence to what I do. 

For many people that I work with, the feedback is that this helps me build empathy quickly, helps them feel at ease with me and as a result, more able to share their thoughts and feelings, yet the whole interaction feels fresh. 

I can only do this when I am at my best, so I also need to focus on the restorative function and what keeps me restored. 

‘Va Va Voom’ is the fourth principle of my supervision model and the one that best describes my signature presence. I have a fascination for Positive Psychology and the impact it can have. 

For me, ‘Va Va Voom’ is about allowing myself permission to bring my natural personality to work. I have natural strengths of humour, fun and optimism and I really love it when I can bring these to work and encourage others to do the same.  

I also bring a slight irreverence, which I believe, keeps my interactions feel fresh. This allows me to help my supervisees “generate as many positive emotions as possible by asking supervisees about their desired future, competencies, successes, etc. to enhance their creativity, flexibility and empathy” (Bannink, 2015 p.26). 

For me to be at my best, it’s working in, as Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi would suggest, the state of ‘Flow’.

“Flow is marked by being so absorbed in a task that time passes without noticing the clock”

(Pemberton, 2015, p.112).

Therefore I also need to prepare myself for my supervision sessions. 

This for me is also not allowing my critical voice to interfere. As Tim Gallway explains, “In other words, the key to better tennis – or better anything – lies in improving the relationship between the conscious teller, Self 1, and the natural capabilities of Self 2” (Gallwey, 2015, p.10). 

Or as Dr. Steve Peters suggests, it’s about managing your “chimp” (Peters, 2012, p.1) so I am totally in the moment, fully absorbed with my supervisee.

There are various techniques, as Landsberg describes,

“First, we can use selected techniques before a session, to declutter our minds and access states of strong intention, attention and attitude”

(Landsberg, 2015, p.89). 

This is a short term approach, but I also used a longer-term approach through the use of mindfulness that I have been practicing over the last 3 years. 

Mindfulness;

“One of the most well-known studies is that of Richard Davidson, who scanned the brains of Tibetan Buddhist monks who had between fifteen and forty years’ intensive practice in meditation. Scanning showed that when meditating, the activity in their left prefrontal cortex was far greater than in the right prefrontal cortex to an extent never previously recorded. Since left prefrontal cortex activity is associated with happiness, and right prefrontal cortex activity is associated with negative emotions and anxiety, the study suggested that one’s emotions could be changed through mental training”

(Pemberton, 2015, p.83).

I believe that for me to do my best work, I need to focus on getting ready before the supervision session. This helps me to be more with the supervisee. Because I have prepared well I can declutter the other noise in my head and trust the process of the supervision session. 

As John Leary-Joyce suggests,

“Your focused relaxed attention intuitively knows the most efficient route you can take with your client and you surrender to it”

(Leary-Joyce, 2014, p.225) 

However, we perhaps don’t need to have three years of mindfulness practice, or as with the Tibetan Buddhist monks, fifteen – forty years of experience in meditation. We could perhaps just focus on the “three-minute breathing space” (Hall, 2013, p.95) as Liz Hall suggests, by breathing consciously (even during a supervision session). 

In Summary 

In summary, my core belief is that given the right environment, supervisees can change, grow and develop. 

Through this transformation, they can go on to be more, achieve more, do more, get more. 

However, to truly achieve sustainable transformational change, they need to be more. They need to be carefully held at the moment to experience where they are in the here and now. 

“Acting alone is thoughtless … just as reflecting alone is passive. Both are crucial. But today, one – reflection – gets lost”

(Gosling et al, 2004, p.151). 

Bibliography 

• Bailey, S. (2013). Stuck in a Rut? Three ‘M’s to Keep You Moving. Forbes.com.  p.1 
• Bannink, F. (2015). Handbook of Positive Supervision. Hogrefe. p.26 • Bluckert, P. (2015). Gestalt Coaching Right here, right now. Open University  Press. p.8, p.73, p.75. p. 78, p.138 
• Bolton, N. (2020) Expanding your supervision range: Using Heron’s 6 Categories  of Intervention in Coaching Supervision blog 
• De Haan, E. (2012) Supervision in Action. p 21 
• Gallwey, W, T. (2015). The Inner Game of Tennis. Johnathon Cape. p.10 
• Gosling, J & Mintzberg, H. (2004). Reflect Yourself. HR Magazine Vol 49(9). p.151 
• Hall, L. (2013). Mindful Coaching: How Mindfulness can Transform Coaching  Practice. Kogan Page Limited. p.95 
• Hawkins, P. & McMahon, A. (2020). Supervision in the Helping Professions. P87 
• Hawkins, P. & Smith, N. (2013). Coaching, Mentoring and Organizational  Consultancy – Supervision Skills & Development. Open University Press. p252 
• Hay, J. (2007) Reflective Practice and Supervision for Coaches. Open University  Press. p7 
• Kline, N. (2014). Time to Think AoEC PDF Article. Nicola Strong Enterprises. p.8 
• Landsberg, M. (2015). Mastering Coaching. Profile Books. p.89 
• Leary-Joyce, J. (2014). The Fertile Void. AoEC Press. p.225 
• O’Neill, M. (2000). Executive Coaching with Backbone and Heart. John Wiley &  Sons. p.13, p.92,  
• Passmore, J. et al (2010). Excellence in Coaching. Association for Coaching. p.38 
• Pedrick, C. (2021). Simplifying Coaching, Open University Press. p102. 
• Pemberton, C. (2015). Resilience: A Practical Guide for Coaches. Open University  Press. p.83, p.112 
• Peters, S. (2012). The Chimp Paradox. Vermilian / Ebury Publishing. p.1 
• Rogers, C. (2004). On Becoming a Person – A therapist’s view of psychotherapy.  Constable & Company. p.67 
• Shohet, R. and Shohet, J. (2020), In Love with Supervision p.26