This is one in a series of lists containing documents related to the field of professional coaching. This list focuses on coaching supervision.
Primary Documents
Criteria: (1) often referenced, (2) helped to establish the topic, (3) offers summary of literature on this topic, and/or (4) offers important cutting-edge perspective.
Passmore, Jonathan (Ed.) (2022) Coaching Tools: 101 coaching tools and techniques for executive coaches, team coaches, mentors and supervisors: Volume 1 (WeCoach!) Paperback – February 25, 2022
Coaching Tools, Volumes 1 and 2 offer a rich source of applied tools and techniques that have hitherto not existed and could never have been achieved without the valuable contributions and support of the 90+ coaches who helped create these books. Contained within these 2 volumes are over 200 tried-and-tested ‘favourite’ coaching tools. The tools are varied, reflecting the range of contributors, and drawing disparately from Behavioural, Cognitive Behavioural, Motivational Interviewing, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Compassion, Positive Psychology, Psychodynamic, Gestalt, Solution-focused, Mindfulness, and Neuroscience frameworks amongst others. The contributors include Marshall Goldsmith, Richard Boyatzis, Tammy Turner, Peter Hawkins, Suzy Green, Christian van Nieuwerburgh, Jonathan Passmore, and many more. Fully illustrated in colour, each tool is presented in a simple to use step-by-step guide, making this an essential contribution to every coach’s and leader’s personal library.
Brock, Vikki (2015) “Book Self: Supervision in Coaching.” Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/book-shelf-supervision-in-coaching/
Coaching supervision is the latest area in publication of books for coaches. Edited by Jonathan Passmore and supported by the Association for Coaching, Supervision in Coaching: Understanding coaching supervision, ethics, CIPD and the law is a 2011 addition to books on this topic. Chapters in each of the four parts of this book are authored by a variety of coach practitioners, with Jonathan Passmore writing the introductory chapter that provides an overview of the entire book.
What is interesting about the contributors to this book is that 17 are psychologist/counselors from the UK; seven are business people from the UK, and the remaining five are business people from the US. This aligns with the beginning of the coaching supervision movement in the UK by psychology professionals who have become coaches and bring with them the supervision mindset from psychology and counseling.
Moyes, B. (2009). “Literature review of coaching supervision.” International Coaching Psychology Review 4(2): 162-173.
Purpose and Methods: It is an interesting paradox that although coaches are expected to have supervision, little is known about coaching supervision. Coaching supervision has its roots in supervision in the therapeutic disciplines. The aim of this paper is to explore some of the key themes in the literature on supervision in those disciplines, and to discuss the limited research that has been conducted into coaching supervision within this context. Particular attention is paid to social work supervision, as two major proponents of coaching supervision, Peter Hawkins and Peter Bluckert, were originally social workers. Remits: The paper shows the influence of therapeutic concepts and process on coaching supervision, and identifies some of the benefits and limitations of using a therapeutic model in coaching supervision. Coaches and purchasing organisations want different things from supervision. Themes in the therapeutic literature concerning the transition from practitioner to supervisor are highlighted, suggesting that coaches making this transition need to learn to think like a supervisor, and find ways to manage the power inherent in the role. Conclusion: More research into coaching supervision is needed to find out what is happening in practice. Article
Brock, Vikki (Guest Ed.), William Carrier and William Bergquist. (2015) Supervision and the Future of Coaching. Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/supervision-and-the-future-of-coaching/
Welcome to this issue of The Future of Coaching magazine, whose purpose is to add more substance to the discourse of coaching—and to do so in a flexible and positive way. Our intent with this issue is to present a balanced perspective on coaching supervision, mentor coaching, and peer consultation within the coaching profession.
The Problem of Competence in Coaching by Bob Garvey
Supervision and Mentoring: A Distinction That is Arbitrary and Contrary? by Marcia Reynolds
We’ve Lost Our Way and Our Soul in The Process by Michael Stratford
Lost Souls? [Inspired by Stratford] by Bob Garvey
What is the Soul of the ICF? by Jay Perry
Supervision or Peer Consultation: An Op-Ed Blog by Patrick Williams
What Is Coaching Supervision and Is It Important? by Paul Lawrence
The Future of Coaching: Trends That Illustrate The End Is Near by Rey Carr
Gold Rush Coaching Supervision by Vikki Brock
Supervision of Coaches in Europe: Situation and Trends by Michal Moral
ICF Approach to Mentor Coaching: A Competencies Applied Model by Damian Goldvarg and Laura Zuvanic
Book Shelf: Supervision In Coaching by Vikki Brock
Moyes, B. (2009). Literature review of coaching supervision. International Coaching Psychology Review, 4(2), 162-173.
Recent Documents
Documents that were published between 2016 and 2023
de Haan, Erik , Birch, David (2021) Supervision for organization consultants and the organizations they work with. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol 73(3), Sep 2021, 214-228 https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000204
Supervision is a collaborative learning practice to continually build the capacity of anyone working in the helping professions, such as social workers, therapists, pastors, organization consultants, and coaches. The social-work profession claims a significant role in the development of supervision in the helping professions with arguably the most established tradition, which originates from the late 19th century. Supervision has become critical to the development, quality control, emotional processing, and competence enhancement of social workers, then therapists, then coaches. Supervision is now regarded as a foundation for sound and accountable professional practice among coaches, but growing numbers of organization consultants are also benefiting from the supervision of their organization consulting and design work. This applies both to those working as internal practitioners within large organizations and to those working independently or as part of a consultancy. In this contribution we look at the various forms of organization-consulting supervision, and we reflect on the pros and cons of different approaches. We argue that organization-consulting supervision is a distinctive field in its own right because of the way it can capture and observe organizational dynamics. We argue at the same time that the issues it faces are also of relevance to coaching and mentoring supervisors. We end with a few dilemmas that may arise for the supervisor and consider how supervision can also help to research and evaluate the consulting intervention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
Bachkirova, Tatiana (2016) The self of the coach: Conceptualization, issues, and opportunities for practitioner development. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol 68(2), Jun 2016, 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000055
This article offers a conceptual and developmental proposition based on the centrality of the practitioner’s self in the achievement of coaching outcomes. The central role of the self of the coach is established through a theoretical comparison with a competency (knowledge and skills) frame. Positioning the self in this way acknowledges the complexity and unpredictability of the coaching process and aligns with a complex-adaptive-system perspective on coaching. In turn, it provides a platform for a professional-practice view of the self as the main instrument of coaching and, further, a developmental proposition for the good use of self as an instrument. Three main conditions for the good use of self as an instrument are proposed: understanding the instrument, looking after the instrument, and checking the instrument for quality and sensitivity. Each condition is discussed, and the implications for coaches and educators of coaching in relation to initial training and the continuing professional development of coaches are considered. In keeping with the underpinning theory of self around which it is built, this article gives witness to multiple voices: theory, practice, and development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
Topical Documents
Documents grouped by Specific Topics.
Design of Supervisory Programs
Gray, D. E. (2007) “Towards a systemic model of coaching supervision: Some lessons from psychotherapeutic and counselling models.” Australian Psychologist 42(4): 300-309.
Although recent research indicates a growing engagement among coaches with supervision, many coaches still pursue their professional practice without the support and guidance of a supervisor. Also, while the organisations that purchase coaching are clear that the coaches they hire should have supervision, they are unclear as to what forms that supervision should take. This article sets out to identify the kind of models of supervision that might be appropriate to coaches by exploring models and lessons from the supervision of counsellors and psychotherapist. Such models are valid because many current practising coaches are professionally trained as counsellors or psychotherapists, and a range of alternative supervisory models have been tried and evaluated over several decades. Applying elements of these models to a coaching context has allowed for the design of what is termed a systemic model of coaching supervision, with contracting, teaching and evaluation at its core. Models of the supervisory relationship are also discussed as important elements of the supervisor-coach alliance.
Gray, D. E. (2010). “Towards the lifelong skills and business development of coaches: An integrated model of supervision and mentoring.” Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 3(1): 60-72.
This article offers an original model for the professional development of coaches that integrates models of coach supervision with mentoring–the supervisor-mentor. Many coaches are new to the profession and may lack experience of managing their own business. It is likely that these and many other coaches could benefit from the support and guidance of more experienced practitioners. One answer is a supervisor, but the functions of supervision often focus on helping the development of the coach as a professional, including skills development, emotional support and understanding the ethical principles in coaching. Supervisors are not necessarily responsible for the career development of coaches, nor do they normally provide advice on, say, business strategy or marketing principles for the coach’s business. This article argues that there exists a significant gap that can be filled by another kind of helping intervention–a mentor. The article explores three potential models of coach mentoring: constellation, complementary and integrated supervisor-mentoring–the latter combining coach supervision with mentoring. Recommendations are made for future research in this area.
Case Studies
Lewis, P. B. (1947). “Supervisory training methods.” Personnel Journal 25: 316-322.
The foundation of training at DuPont is training through example all along the line. Next in importance comes coaching on-the-job, which is really just good supervision. There is also departmental training which consists of discussion meetings held by department heads for their supervisors or foremen. To obtain uniformity of policy, plant- wide discussion meetings are held for department heads, foremen and supervisors from various departments. In addition, plant-wide informational meetings are held. Finally, special short programs are prepared to train along lines not yet incorporated into the regular training programs.
Armstrong, H. and M. Geddes (2009). “Developing coaching supervision practice: An Australian case study.” International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring 7(2): 1-15.
This paper describes a coaching supervision framework and practice and the effects of it on participants in the monthly supervision groups. The framework was originally developed in an action research process aimed at improving and standardising supervision practice and consists of a conceptual model and a structure for the supervision conversation. In 2008, in the spirit of continuous improvement, a qualitative researcher was invited to explore the effects of this revamped supervision practice. The paper draws on three sources of data: observation of supervision groups in action, written reflections from supervisors and interviews with supervisees.
Team Supervision
Bergquist, William (2014) “The Revised Balint Method: A Powerful Tool for Reflecting on Professional Coaching Practices. Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/applicationsuses/training-applicationsuses/the-revised-balint-method-a-powerful-tool-for-reflecting-on-professional-coaching-practices/
A particular reflective process has been used for many years in the supervision of physicians. Originally developed and used by a psychoanalytically-trained clinician (Balint), it has been used recently among professional coaches in their work with one another in a group setting (usually 6-8 coaches). Six steps are taken in conducting a Balint group (revised for use with coaches).
Support for and Critique of Supervision
Butwell, J. (2006) “Group supervision for coaches: is it worthwhile? A study of the process in a major professional organisation.” International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring Vol. 4, No. 2
This study sought to understand whether supervision provides real value to coaches, by observing the experiences of group supervision for internal coaches in a professional organisation. All participants appreciated the networking, learning and support gained from supervision but the work valued most by them related to case presentation. Findings suggest that more could have been achieved in this area if the group’s objectives, and possibly its supervisory model, had been set out in very clear terms at its inception, and if the group met more frequently. The author concludes that most of the benefits felt by participants could have been achieved in other ways, with the notable exception of the opportunity to discuss their cases, particularly their difficult cases and it is suggested that this aspect of the process should be the focus of the coaching profession. It is also suggested that large organisations using internal coaches should develop some standard best practice guidelines on the quality and quantity of continuing professional development and supervision for those coaches.
Passmore, J. and S. McGoldrick (2009). “Super-vision, extra-vision or blind faith? A grounded theory study of the efficacy of coaching supervision.” International Coaching Psychology Review 4(2): 145-161.
Objectives: Coaching supervision has become the dominant model of reflective practice in the UK. This study sought to explore coach and supervisor perceptions of supervision, and critically observe supervision practice. Design: The study utilised an observational design and semi-structured interviews. Methods: The study involved an observation of a coaching session, which was filmed, followed by interviews with the participants. This data was transcribed. In the second part of the study a series of semistructured interviews were undertaken with coaches and supervisors. The data was transcribed and analysed using Grounded Theory methodology until saturation was achieved. The transcribed data was combined in the development of a theoretical framework for coaching supervision. Results: The study outlines a number of perceived benefits of the coaching supervision process. These outcomes include: raised awareness, coaching confidence, perseverance, sense of belonging, increased professionalism and the development of an ‘internal supervisor’. The research also highlighted the need for a greater understanding of what coaching supervision involves for coaches. Conclusions: The paper questions the dominant mindset that supervision is the only intervention for reflective practice and argues for multiple models of continuous professional development, alongside calling for further research to identify the benefits from alternative model of CPD within coaching.
Michel Moral, EIA Master (EMCC) (2015) Supervision of Coaching in Europe: Situation and Trends. Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/supervision-of-coaches-in-europe-situation-and-trends/
Members of the helping professions share a basic principle that is illustrated with the following analogy: « It is difficult to make your bed if you stay in it. In other words, a coachee needs a dialogue with someone else, a coach, to find fixes to his or her concerns, challenges and issues. Similarly, a coach needs a dialogue with someone else to find responses to his or her professional difficulties and development ambitions. More specifically, what is unknown by the coach about him/herself, but which the coachee can see, might impact the coaching process. Blind areas, blind self, blindspot, deaf spots, limiting beliefs and values, implicit theories, etc.… need to be made conscious. More generally, the coach might need support if something in his or her activity make him or her feel bad, need some kind of help for his or her development and need some kind of help to understand why some of his or her professional acts do not work as anticipated.
Brock, Vikki (2015) Gold Rush Coaching Supervision: Professional coaching and the dangers of coaching supervision. Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/gold-rush-coaching-supervision/
Professional coaching burst onto the world stage in the early 1990s, though a form of coaching had been practiced since the 1930s. Much has been written about coaching in research, articles, books and papers since, and coaching supervision has been touted as the next extremely lucrative revenue stream for coaches. There is a paradox between coaching and mentoring which has roots in person centred humanism and the control by professional coaching bodies as highlighted by Bob Garvey in Part 1 of this special issue of e-O&P focusing on the future of coaching and mentoring. This article explores the potential for detrimental consequences and inappropriateness of imposing mandatory ‘supervision’ on coaching practitioners, versus the established mentor coach approach.
Developments in the International Coach Federation (ICF) towards mandatory imposition of practice supervision framed on models applied in psychotherapy, counselling and clinical psychology are used to highlight key developments in America, which could herald a significant culture shift within the profession if they are to be accepted by the wider, global ICF community of practice. With the ICF being a leading coaching professional body, where the ICF goes other organizations may follow.
Lawrence, Paul (2015) “What is coaching Supervision and Is It Important?” Library of Professional coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/what-is-coaching-supervision-and-is-it-important/
The ‘Standards Australia Guidelines for Coaching in Organizations’ states categorically: “All coaches should be engaged in professional supervision.” However, the industry doesn’t yet agree what coaching supervision is, its primary purpose, nor who is qualified to act as a supervisor. Our study revealed that although some purchasers of coaching services (clients) are aware of the push for supervision, most are unsure how supervision relates to coaching outcomes. For clients wondering how to incorporate supervision into coach screening processes, we recommend that they ask prospective coaches five questions. The asking of these questions will provide deeper insight than simply asking a coach if they undergo supervision. The five questions are:
? What are your learning goals for this year, and what steps are you taking to achieve them?
? How do you get ‘unstuck’ when confronted by a particularly challenging assignment?
? How do you look after your own wellbeing, for the sakes of your coachees as well as yourself?
? What coaching ethics do you ascribe to, and how do you monitor your practice with reference to those ethics?
? How do you make sure that coaching goals are aligned with organisational purpose, and remain so for the duration of an assignment?
Reynolds, Marica (2015) “ Supervision and Mentoring: A Distinction that is Arbitrary and Contrary,” Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/supervision-and-mentoring-a-distinction-that-is-arbitrary-and-contrary/
Dr. Marcia Reynolds, MCC, Past President ICF, Current President ACTOMentoring in both the coaching and leadership worlds has always been about a more experienced professional guiding someone new to a field or aspect of business. Mentoring can be about helping people master particular skills. It is also about exploring context where the skills are applied. To narrow the focus to only skill building feels awkward. When I hired a mentor coach for my own career, the person helped me with all aspects of my business and growth as a coach.
Supervision in the helping professions has always been about overseeing skill application and is narrowly defined through observing the demonstration of skills and providing feedback. Using the word supervision in coaching blurs the distinction coaching has with therapy. Using the term to broadly signify guiding a coach in a professional context is confusing. I agree with Patrick that Coaching Consultation would be a better name for this role.
THE BIGGER QUESTION HERE is why were the elders of the ICF membership not consulted in this change? Since we have been using the term Mentor Coaching for years in a different context than the ICF is proposing, it seems like simple Change Management procedures, that you include the early adapters in any change initiative or you get resistance. I would have responded to a survey about the use of the words Mentoring and Supervision if asked (and what else these could be called so they make more sense), as I am sure my colleagues would have as well.
William, Patrick (2015) “Supervision or Peer Consultation: A Op-Ed Blog,” Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/strategy/future-of-coaching/supervision-or-peer-consultation-an-op-ed-blog/
In the last few years there have been increasing opinions expressed about the need (or not) for supervision of coaches. From what I see, much of this seems to have emerged from European (the European Mentoring and Coaching Council – EMCC, the Association for Coaching – AC) and Australian coaching associations. The International Coach Federation (ICF), in an attempt to be globally sensitive, seems to have fallen for a false expression of this need for supervision??? and is considering incorporating coach supervision as highly suggested (but not required) for both new and experienced coaches.
While this is not a problem if it is not required, it may set a confusing and misguided precedent in the coaching industry or certification of professional coaches. In my career as a psychologist (a term that cannot be used in the USA unless you have a doctorate AND are licensed in your state locale) we were required to be supervised. Due to the fact that our 2000 required postdoctoral counseling hours were either in a mental health center or contracted with a therapist group, we were treating those with diagnosed mental disturbance (the medical model). Psychologists were required to have 2000 hours of supervision before sitting for the state licensing exam. The supervision included case review and guidance, and often a ‘behind the mirror” observation of the therapy session with a team watching behind a one-way mirror with the patient/client knowledge. Coaches do not require supervision in an unlicensed profession, but peer consultation is highly suggested and encouraged all along the way.
Mallett, Lisa (2015) “An Independent External Coach’s Perspective on the Trend of Coaching Supervision” Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/marketing/an-independent-external-coachs-perspective-on-the-trend-of-coaching-supervision/
I have been a successful, self-employed “single shingle” executive coach since 2002, and I keep abreast of trends and developments in our industry. I have been closely following and researching the coaching supervision trend since July 2014, and have the following thoughts to offer – that may be of particular interest to other experienced, self-employed, independent external coaches who work under contract to various businesses and organizations.
1. The coaching supervision “trend” is currently the subject of great debate – especially within the main professional/regulatory body for coaches, the ICF. There is currently no real agreement on a clear definition of coaching supervision (exactly what it is and who is truly qualified to “supervise”), nor can it be clearly articulated (or demonstrated) as to how it is separate and distinct from mentor coaching, or even just highly skilled regular coaching. There is no research or validated information to prove that coaching supervision ensures high performance or provides additional quality assurance – with particular respect to external coaches who are independent business people/contractors (versus internal, salaried coaches, whose employers may choose to “supervise” them).
2. If a contracting employer were to require contracted external coaches to undergo coaching supervision (the pro-supervision faction is out there telling employers they should only contract with supervised external coaches), there would be serious implications to consider – such as the significant economic cost for the external coach who would have to pay out of their own pocket for the service, plus forgo income as they cannot be delivering coaching services while being supervised (unlike an internal coach who is getting paid their wage while they are being supervised, and who does not have to pay anything for their own supervision).
Foundational Documents
Documents from various fields that help to provide a conceptual foundation for this topic.
Schon, Donald (1996). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Drake, David, D. Brennan and K. Gørtz (eds), (2008) The Philosophy and Practice of Coaching: Insights and Issues for a New Era. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, William and Stephen Rollnick (2002) Motivational Interviewing (2nd Ed.) New York: Guilford.