School
of Coaching Case Study
In 2003, the School of Coaching pioneered training
in coaching supervision from Bath Consultancy Group for their
faculty. Subsequently,
they introduced a quarterly group coaching supervision with
John Bristow of BCG.
Structure of Group Supervision
The three-hour session typically follows a specific format:
|
A short check-in that enables the group to re-connect.
This allows time for questions to emerge and to co-create
the focus of the day. |
|
All participants are asked if they have anything on
which they would like to get supervision. Through discussion,
one person volunteers to be the supervisee, another volunteers
to be the supervisor whilst the others observe the process
as shadow supervisors. As the faculty has been trained
in the Hawkins and Shohet Seven-Eyed model, they work primarily
in this model.
Normally, the supervisor, facilitator, or an observer
suggests a time-out after 15-20 minutes of supervision
dialogue. During this 5-10 minute time-out, the
observers have a conversation with the supervisor about what’s happening
in the coach-supervisor dialogue, what the supervisor is doing, the observers’ perceptions,
hypothesis and recommendations. Normally, the supervisee listens in on this discussion
but does not directly engage. The purpose of this time out is to equip the supervisor
with insights and new choices for the remaining part of the supervision session.
Often this discussion will encourage the supervisor to be aware of what is happening
for themselves in Mode 6. Questions will often get the supervisor to attend to
impact on the ‘here and now’ in the relationship between the supervisor
and coach. The facilitator and observers encourage the supervisor to be aware
of their own internal processes, feelings, thoughts and fantasies that are
evoked when listening to the client system. The observers will also often identify
parallel
process that the supervisor and coach may be mirroring regarding the coach/coachee
and the organisational system. The time-out can also be used to identify Mode
7 aspects of the wider system and the stakeholders of the situation being discussed.
When the supervisor is ready, the supervision dialogue continues. Occasionally,
if another participant has a specific line of enquiry that the group wants to
explore, the supervisor role may be swapped.
At the end of the supervision session, feedback is given to the supervisor on
what they did well and what they could do differently. Typically, the supervisor
has the first go at self-assessment, then the supervisee and finally any observer
who wants to give feedback. There may be a short discussion on any aspect that
the supervision session flags.
This process enables all the participants to learn from both the supervisor and
coach perspective. |
|
Following a short break, the group divides into trios
or a combination of trios and pairs/quads depending on
numbers. The small group configuration is ever changing
from one quarterly meeting to the next. This enables each
participant to be supervised and observe every other member
over time.
The format is similar to the above process with one person as supervisor, one
as supervisee and one/two as observers. There are usually fewer time-outs. There
may be time for more than one session in the small groups. In this case, the
roles will rotate around to so there is a new supervisor, supervisee and shadow
supervisor(s). |
Benefits of Supervision
Since the supervision group has been running for an extended
period of time, there are a number of benefits that the individuals,
the team and organisation are experiencing:
|
Since it is one of the few regular meetings of the
faculty, it is an important opportunity to connect with
colleagues.
It is valued as an opportunity to learn together. It
also has the side benefit of creating a window into the
way
that each faculty member works with clients. Mike Munro
Turner describes this as “endlessly intriguing and
revelatory”. |
|
John Bristow, facilitator of the group, says, “I
have really seen the group develop their supervision
skills since the group situation facilitates learning
from each
other. I have seen the coaching and supervision capacity
increase significantly. I used to make more inputs but
now most of the interventions and observations come from
the group. This is an indication of their increasing
competence as supervisors.” |
|
Jane Meyler says “Since I have also have had 1:1
supervision for several years, I appreciate there are advantages
and disadvantages to group supervision. The group case
study and practice trios allow the participant to see others
supervise. One can learn a great deal by observing someone
else. It is often easier to see parallel process when observing
from the side. However, 1:1 supervision is more intimate
learning since you can really go into depth about the client
situation and also one’s own issues or concerns
as a coach.” |
|
From a personal point of view, Munro Turner notes
that whenever one works with a client it is inevitable
that
the coach will get entwined in some of the system dynamics.
It is difficult not to give up an element of one’s
detached, independent perspective in the process of getting
along side the client. Supervision provides the opportunity
to “go up a couple of steps” and get ‘unentwined’ in
order to look on the client-system-coach dynamic afresh. “Supervision
consistently helps me to have greater ‘choicefulness’ in
how I work with a client.” This in turn enables
the client to have more choice in how they respond in
their
situation. |
|
Meyler comments, “As a result of the group supervision,
I am working differently in my coaching and supervision
practice. I am now much more aware of myself in Mode
4 as a coach and Mode 6 as a supervisor. This has enabled
me to bring more of myself to my coaching and supervision
with positive impact for clients and supervisees.” |
|
The School of Coaching does not have any formal process
to evaluate the impact or return on investment of the
coaching supervision. Munro Turner asserts, “I know in my
gut that it is valuable, but we don’t have to have
objective data to support this view.” |
>> Back |