Diversity and Supervision
patrifl_14i6
Unit8trans.pdf
Valuing and Practicing Competency-Based Supervision: A Transformational Leadership Perspective
Nadine J. Kaslow Emory University
Carol A. Falender Pepperdine University
Catherine L. Grus American Psychological Association, Washington, DC
A significant culture change to a competency-based approach to supervision reflects the current zeitgeist in professional psychology education and training. Accreditation, credentialing, regulation, and training have all been transformed to competency-based approaches. However, the transition within a program to a competency-based approach is not always smooth. This article addresses specific leadership compe- tencies that facilitate change, with attention paid to the supervisory process. Because most leaders in professional psychology have traditionally engaged in transactional leadership, a shift is required to transformational leadership, a style associated with effective change. As a backdrop to the focus on a transformational leadership approach and competency-based supervision, this article first overviews the competencies movement, particularly competency-based clinical supervision. Then transformational leadership is applied to changing educational and training cultures and climates to ensure the consistent and comprehensive implementation of a competency-based approach to clinical supervision. Strategies are offered for implementing such an approach to competency-based clinical supervision, as well as for overcoming barriers to implementation.
Keywords: competencies, clinical supervision, transformational leadership
After reading and discussing as a group a series of pertinent articles, Dr. Collegial and her training committee invite a nation- ally recognized expert in competency-based supervision to provide a workshop to the training program (faculty, staff, trainees, and administrators). Following a working lunch with the expert, the audience breaks up into workgroups to discuss ways the model could be implemented at their site. This is followed by a retreat 1 month later, in which the training committee creates a step-by-step plan for shifting the culture from one that supported multi-faceted
approaches to clinical supervision to one that was competency- based and building upon benchmarks. The group decided to start with gaining organizational buy-in for the approach by meeting with administrators to explain the advantages of and need for change. They agreed to implement one small component of the culture shift at a time, in a sequential manner that would be associated with an iterative evaluation process. Once each com- ponent was successfully instituted, the committee would regroup and determine the next step based on their experience with prior implementation. The committee agreed that when resistances or strains were experienced in the system, they would be approached thoughtfully, nondefensively, and with open dialogue and flexibility.
Although advocacy for a shift to a culture of competency (Roberts, Borden, Christiansen, & Lopez, 2005) has occurred across professional psychology education, training, and regulation (DeMers, Van Horne, & Rodolfa, 2008; Kaslow et al., 2004; Nelson, 2007), implementation in training settings has been un- even. Only recently has a competency-based approach to supervi- sion gained momentum (Falender et al., 2004; Falender & Shafran- ske, 2004; Falender & Shafranske, 2007, 2008; Fouad et al., 2009). Clinical supervision, a hallmark of education and training, is a significant means to enhance competency and is key to lifelong learning (Lucock, Hall, & Noble, 2006). However, in many aca- demic and practice settings, the supervision competence of faculty/ staff supervisors is not consistent with evolving standards of practice. In addition, those in administrative and/or supervisory positions often lack requisite transformational leadership style to foster a culture change. The targeted result of a transformational culture shift would be a context that values a competency-based
NADINE J. KASLOW, PhD, ABPP, received her doctorate in clinical psychology from the University of Houston. Professor, Vice Chair for Faculty Development, Chief Psychologist, and Director of Postdoctoral Fellowship Training at Emory University School of Medicine, her interests are in psychology education and training, family violence, and suicide.
CAROL A. FALENDER received her PhD from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. She is Adjunct Professor, Pepperdine Graduate School of Education and Psychology, Los Angeles, and Clinical Professor, Department of Psychol- ogy, University of California, Los Angeles. Dr. Falender’s areas of research include competency-based clinical supervision and supervision ethics.
CATHERINE L. GRUS, PhD, received her doctorate in clinical psychology from Nova University. She is the Deputy Executive Director for Education at the American Psychological Association (APA). At APA, Dr. Grus works to advance policies and practices that promote quality education and training in professional psychology.
THE AUTHORS CONTRIBUTED equally to this article. CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THIS ARTICLE should be addressed to
Nadine J. Kaslow, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Grady Health System, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Drive NE, Atlanta, GA 30303. E-mail: [email protected]
Training and Education in Professional Psychology © 2012 American Psychological Association 2012, Vol. 6, No. 1, 47–54 1931-3918/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026704
47
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
approach to supervision and to the monitoring, feedback, and assessment of supervisees’ development, as well as an emphasis on self-reflection and self-assessment on the part of both supervisors and supervisees. With inadequate attention to strategies for culture change and implementation, administrators and program/training directors may find that their supervising faculty/staff vary in practices and motivation to change and adopt innovative and new models. Beyond competency in supervision, supervisors in lead- ership positions require a new armamentarium of knowledge, skills, and attitudes to motivate interest in their supervising faculty/ staff in evolving clinical practice and supervision.
This article overviews the current state of the competencies movement within professional psychology and a competency- based approach to clinical supervision. This sets the backdrop for a review of a transformational leadership approach and ways that it can be utilized to create educational and training environments in which this model of supervision is adopted, practiced, and highly valued in all supervisory encounters. Strategies and programmatic interventions that utilize transformational leadership to overcome obstacles to creating competency-based supervisory environments are offered. In the interests of communicating a new framework, we have presented many of the critical topics and issues in a focused fashion and space limitations preclude as from expanding upon these points in detail.
Competencies Movement in Professional Psychology
Building upon prior efforts in the field, including the landmark work of the National Council of Schools and Programs of Profes- sional Psychology (Bourg, Bent, McHolland, & Stricker, 1989; Kenkel & Peterson, 2010; Peterson et al., 1992), the 2002 Com- petencies Conference was a seminal event in shifting toward a culture of competence within professional psychology (Kaslow, 2004; Kaslow et al., 2004). Borrowing the definition from the medical profession, competence is “the habitual and judicious use of communication, knowledge, technical skills, clinical reasoning, emotions, values, and reflection in daily practice for the benefit of the individual and community being served” (p. 227) (Epstein & Hundert, 2002). It depends on habits of mind, including attentive- ness, critical curiosity, self-awareness, and presence.
A product of the conference was a three-dimensional cube with stages of professional development, foundational, and functional competencies as the axes (Rodolfa et al., 2005). The foundational competencies were (a) reflective practice/self-assessment, (b) sci- entific knowledge and methods, (c) relationships, (d) ethical and legal standards/policy issues (renamed ethical legal standards and policy), (e) individual and cultural diversity, and (f) interdisciplin- ary systems. Professionalism was later added as a foundational competency, and self-care was added to the reflective practice/ self-assessment competence (Fouad et al., 2009). Functional com- petencies were (a) assessment/diagnosis/conceptualization (now termed assessment), (b) intervention, (c) consultation, (d) research/ evaluation, (e) supervision/teaching, and (f) management/ administration. Supervision was later separated from teaching in the Benchmarks document and advocacy was added as a functional competency (Fouad et al., 2009). With the publication of the Benchmarks document (Fouad et al., 2009), foundational and functional competencies were articulated in terms of their essential components. Behavioral anchors were provided to guide the un-
derstanding of expected level of performance for readiness for practicum, internship, and entry to practice. These behavioral anchors serve as a useful guide with regard to structuring the pedagogy and supervision at each level of training and providing formative and summative feedback.
The routine, systematic, and institutional assessment of compe- tence also has been advocated as part of this culture shift (Roberts et al., 2005). Competency assessment has transitioned from input to output (Roe, 2002). In input-driven training, faculty and super- visors determined requisite coursework and activities including hours of supervised clinical experience and the totality of that experience comprised graduate training, practicum, and internship. The shift to output requires deliberate attention to the assessment of resultant competencies of the supervisee, that is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes and their integration that comprise the func- tioning of a developing psychologist at each level of training. The Competency Assessment Toolkit for Professional Psychology was created to guide evaluators in making the shift to assessing the various foundational and functional competencies (Kaslow et al., 2009). This toolkit defines and describes 15 different competency assessment methods and provides information about the founda- tional and functional competencies and their essential components for which each method is recommended, the value of the method for both formative and summative evaluation, and the stages of professional development for which the approach is most advan- tageous. The toolkit also addresses the psychometric properties, strength, and challenges of each approach. The change from an input to output model and the movement toward competency assessment necessitate changes in pedagogy and the structure, process, skills and attitudes regarding supervision.
Competency-Based Approach to Supervision
There is growing consensus that supervision is a core functional competency (Falender et al., 2004; Fouad et al., 2009; Kaslow, 2004; Kaslow et al., 2004; Rodolfa et al., 2005). The cornerstone in educating and training professional psychologists, it is a collab- orative interpersonal process that entails education and training aimed at developing science-informed practice (Falender & Shafranske, 2004). It is an intervention by a more senior member to a more junior member embodying an evaluative relationship that extends over time. Supervisors have multiple responsibilities: enhancing the professional functioning of the more junior person, monitoring the quality of professional services offered to the client/patient, and serving as a gatekeeper (Bernard & Goodyear, 2009). Superordinate values of the supervisory process include integrity, ethics-based practice, and appreciation of diversity (Fal- ender & Shafranske, 2004). Supervision involves (a) observation; (b) facilitation of supervisee self-assessment; (c) acquisition of knowledge and skills by instruction, modeling, and mutual prob- lem-solving; (d) feedback and evaluation; and (e) role-modeling and support of self-care. Essential components articulated in the benchmarks include: (a) familiarity with the expectations and roles of the supervision process; (b) appreciation for the processes and procedures associated with supervision; (c) development of super- visory skills; (d) awareness of individual and cultural diversity factors affecting the quality of the supervisory process and rela- tionships; (e) participation in the supervision process; and (f) command and application of the relevant ethical, legal, and pro-
48 KASLOW, FALENDER, AND GRUS
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
fessional standards and guidelines. By recognizing the strengths and talents of the supervisee, supervision can encourage self- efficacy. In addition, ethical standards, legal prescriptions, and professional practices can be collaboratively addressed in a man- ner that is geared to promoting and protecting the welfare of the client/patient, profession, and society at large (Falender & Shafranske, 2004).
Multiple supervision models have been delineated (Westefeld, 2009): common factors (Morgan & Sprenkle, 2007), developmen- tal (Stoltenberg & McNeill, 2010), interpersonal (Ladany, Fried- lander, & Nelson, 2005), parallel process (McNeil & Worthen, 1989), multicultural (Ancis & Ladany, 2010; Constantine, 2003), common factors (Morgan & Sprenkle, 2007), and integrative (Lee & Everett, 2004). Competency-based supervision builds upon and incorporates the aforementioned models (Falender & Shafranske, 2004; Falender & Shafranske, 2007, 2008); identifies the knowl- edge, skills, and attitudes expected for trainees at a given stage of professional development with regard to the competency do- main(s) in which they are being supervised; and assists the student in meeting criterion-referenced competence standards (Falender & Shafranske, 2007). This approach has been applied to supervision practiced from different perspectives (Farber & Kaslow, 2010): cognitive–behavioral (Newman, 2010), psychodynamic (Frawley- O’Dea & Sarnat, 2001; Sarnat, 2010), humanistic-existential (Far- ber, 2010), family systems (Celano, Smith, & Kaslow, 2010; Kaslow, Celano, & Stanton, 2005) and integrative (Boswell, Nel- son, Nordberg, McAleavey, & Castonguay, 2010).
The supervisory relationship is transparent and has simultaneous functions: (a) clarifying supervisory goals and tasks, which can be formalized in a mutually crafted supervision contract; (b) facili- tating a context that supports reflection, exploration, and learning; (c) fostering competence; (d) assuring practice informed by sci- ence and vice versa; (e) promoting accountability and ethical practice; (f) monitoring the quality of the services provided; (g) offering formative feedback; evaluating performance; and (h) serv- ing as a gatekeeper. These myriad responsibilities are associated with tensions between maintaining a productive supervisory rela- tionship, mentoring, advocating, and gatekeeping. Balancing these multiple functions is a supervisory challenge (Johnson, 2007). Competency-based frames provide structure and calibration, as- sisting supervisor and supervisee to track supervisee develop- ment—but all is predicated on the supervisory relationship of trust (Bernard & Goodyear, 2009; Falender & Shafranske, 2004).
Just as the time has come to stop just talking about competencies and start actually using them (Bieschke et al., 2009), the time is now for articulating strategies for supervisors to integrate a com- petency framework into their practice. Doing so requires organi- zational endorsement of the competency-based model, a specific game plan, tools for assessing competencies, and strategies for addressing organizational structures and culture (Kenkel, 2009). Such culture change is most likely to occur if it is guided by an effective leader and leadership approach.
Transitioning to Transformational Leadership
The leaders of culture change (e.g., training directors, psychol- ogy administrators, deans), can benefit from familiarity with cur- rent trends in leadership, many of which have originated in the business and organizational development fields. Leadership com-
petence is essential as the change process is challenging, with predictable obstacles that can be overcome. Leadership requires social skills to mobilize people to accomplish key objectives despite barriers such as politics or power struggles (Kotter, 1985).
Transformational leadership is a significant change from trans- actional leadership, which has characterized many psychology administrators and supervisors historically.
Transactional leaders create clear structures and communicate what is expected of their subordinates and the rewards and pun- ishments that will emerge contingent upon performance. A prac- tical approach, transactional leadership focuses on meeting desig- nated and specific targets or objectives (Aarons, 2006). In contrast, while transactional leadership does not encourage innovative thinking or proactive planning, transformational leadership creates a vision within which subordinates are encouraged to exceed projections and think proactively and creatively. Many have as- serted that effective leaders combine elements of transformational and transactional approaches (Bass, 1998) and indeed, such com- bination is likely to be optimal for those who lead culture shifts to competency-based supervision.
A transformational leadership style reflects the leader’s person- ality, traits, and capacity to effect change and benefit the team/ organization via example. Transformational leaders are trustwor- thy, respected, instill pride, and are strong role models for ethical behavior. Articulating the vision in a way that motivates others to subscribe, they challenge assumptions and encourage and nurture innovation and creativity. They personalize training and opportu- nities, attend to individual needs, celebrate contributions, and mentor accordingly (Bass, 1998). Typically, transformational lead- ers are charismatic and visionary (Burns, 1978).
Transformational leaders employ a number of processes though evolution, revolution, or a combination of the two (Corrigan & Boyle, 2003). They support team processes that serve as precon- ditions for transformation: strong working relationships, shared goals among team members, and use of cohesiveness to enhance effectiveness (Corrigan & Garman, 1999). They build teams that work collaboratively with them to effect change. This often is accomplished via mentoring, coaching, role-modeling and gener- ally building upon relationships supporting change. They ensure these teams are cohesive via the use of inspiration and charisma, intellectual stimulation, and attention to considerations of individ- uals. Inspiration and charisma are activated by empowering team members through the encouragement of development and engage- ment in innovation.
To enhance intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders en- courage the team to address system change critically. They also provide educational resources that can offer a framework that will assist team members in understanding the changes to be made. To support the development of individual interests and the unique strengths of team members, particularly as these correspond to the change goals, they empower team members through providing train- ing opportunities or flexible job assignments or linking team mem- bers’ goals and strengths to corresponding aspects of the vision. Empowerment increases ownership of the team, with cohesion in- creasing as team members gain control over decision making. Through mirroring, valuing vision, and being open to innovation, leaders transform others to be helpful, encouraging, and harmonious to benefit the organization as whole (Aarons, 2006).
49TRANSFORMING THE SUPERVISION CULTURE
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
Transformational leaders motivate participants to personally take initiative and may find techniques from the field of behavioral decision-making helpful for doing so (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). One such technique is attention, which involves directing participants’ focus continually on the desired concept and on behaviors that conform with or depart from the goal. A second strategy is anchoring, in which the participant’s performance and conduct are anchored vividly to the goal. Through repeatedly focusing attention on the goal, such as supervising with a focus on specific competencies, transformational leaders provide anchors that offer structure to support behavioral transformation.
Positive outcomes associated with a transformational leadership style include higher levels of motivation, performance, morale, and satisfaction of all of the individuals within the system, as well as more positive group and organizational functioning (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). An additional benefit is developing followers into leaders.
Transformational Leadership and Competency-Based Supervision
The following is a blueprint for initiating, instituting, and im- plementing a culture change within an educational/training context to ensure an ongoing value on competency-based supervision and a commitment to utilizing such an approach in a consistent and dedicated fashion by all supervisors.
First, there needs to be a committed leader/leadership team that has the energy, enthusiasm, and passion to engage other educators/ trainers in the change process required to develop a competency- based supervisory culture. While an individual could lead this change process, it is most effective if coordinated by a team. The team can be forged at the outset, at a later phase, or can evolve over the course of the culture shift.
Second, a transformational leader/leadership team strives to ensure that everyone is informed about competency-based super- vision, as knowledge is power. This likely necessitates inviting knowledgeable speakers to provide continuing professional edu- cation, in the form of colloquia, continuing education workshops, mini seminars, and so forth Single session events, while able to set the stage, do not provide adequate continuing professional educa- tion or support for change (Campbell, Silver, Sherbino, Cate, & Holmboe, 2010; Mansouri & Lockyer, 2007). Thus, it is valuable to provide relevant readings and have interactive discussions through online learning communities, supervisor seminars, or peer supervision of supervision groups. The formation and support of these latter groups affords participants the opportunity to share their supervisory efforts with colleagues and receive input, which bolsters their competence as supervisors. Such ongoing dialogues, particularly when they utilize multiple methods, strengthen the system’s motivation for change. Another element of establishing a context in which all supervisors are well-informed is to value and model self-assessment of supervisor competence (Falender et al., 2004; Rings, Genuchi, Hall, Angelo, & Cornish, 2009), which conveys to supervisees the importance of self-assessment. Such assessments should guide lifelong learning and ongoing self- reflection (Kaslow et al., 2007; Kerns, Berry, Frantsve, & Linton, 2009; Lambert, Lurie, Lyness, & Ward, 2010; Neimeyer, Taylor, & Wear, 2009; Wise et al., 2010).
Third, it behooves the transformational leader/leadership team to organize retreats or other intensive working meetings to create
a shared vision that values a competency-based supervision cul- ture. Involving all parties in the discourse elevates the importance to the system and its members of this approach. Steps include operationalizing the vision into short and long-term goals, linking vision to a strategy for attainment and associated goals, and com- municating to all relevant parties. The leaders and key partners generate optimism about the vision and its implementation, teach by example new behaviors associated with vision attainment, and empower others to act on the vision.
Prior to initiating change, it helps if the leader/leadership team considers the system’s readiness to change in accord with a tran- stheoretical model (Prochaska & Norcross, 2009). Conducting such an assessment and enhancing the group’s motivation for change in an overt and transparent fashion models the value of incorporating such a perspective in supervisory endeavors (Aten, Strain, & Gillespie, 2008). In keeping with the transtheoretical model, the leader/leadership team activates an intentional change process, which can facilitate buy-in within the educational/training context and possibly the broader organization (Boyatzis, 2008). This effort can be guided by intentional change theory, in which the ideal supervisory/training context is held up against the current environment (Boyatzis, 2006). Comparing and contrasting the two and ascertaining the culture’s strengths and areas for improvement supports the group’s development of a shared vision for the future and steps that can be taken to move forward. At the culmination of such gatherings, participants should be encouraged to experiment with new behaviors and thoughts related to supervision. Doing so sustains hope of attaining a culture change and supports practice to mastery. Trying new actions should be linked to multisource feedback (input from subordinates, peers, supervisors, and self), which fosters insight, self-discovery, and enhanced competence. It is essential that the setting be safe with mutual trusting relation- ships; only through security in the environment can there be growth, change, and development of leadership potential.
Fourth, ongoing meetings will serve to integrate a competency- based supervisory culture. In addition to faculty/staff supervisors, some meetings might include students and others might include administrators. Through these follow-up encounters, more signif- icant buy-in from all constituency groups will be fostered. Resis- tances to change can be addressed using the strategies suggested in the next section. In addition frequent and ongoing interactions with all parties enables a transformational leader to focus on the desired concepts and goals and highlight behaviors that conform to the goal. Doing so provides an anchoring function for change (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).
Finally, ongoing feedback should occur with regard to imple- menting a competency-based supervisory culture and its efficacy. Ongoing and consistent feedback is solicited, thoughtfully consid- ered, and responded to in a meaningful way. There are multiple ways the transformation to a competency-based supervisory cul- ture can be measured and the embedded nature of the evaluation of the supervisory experience can be ascertained. First, supervisee self-assessment, shared goal setting, collaborative monitoring, and constructive formative and summative feedback are linked to the expected developmental trajectory of the foundational and func- tional competencies in accord with the Benchmarks document and the local context. Such feedback must attend to strengths and areas requiring improvement. Second, supervisors model transparency to the team, demonstrating that they engage in ongoing self-
50 KASLOW, FALENDER, AND GRUS
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
assessment that recognizes and assesses lifelong learning; self- reflect regarding their attainment of relevant supervision compe- tencies and ways to continue to advance their development in this competency domain; and are sensitive to privilege and oppression among client/patient, supervisee/therapist, and supervisor (Vargas, Porter, & Falender, 2008). Third, the respectful and collaborative supervision process is marked by mutual (2-way) feedback and continuing attention to the supervision relationship, including awareness of, attention, and use of metacommunication to repair strains and ruptures in the supervisory relationship (Safran, Muran, Stevens, & Rothman, 2008). Fourth, attention is devoted to client/ patient outcomes, tracked via client/patient self-report and super- visee/therapist ratings. Assessment of outcomes includes supervi- sory satisfaction and alliance ratings, supervisory disclosures, awareness of triggers to emotional reactivity, and attention to fine tuning of the supervisory process based upon feedback from all relevant parties.
Transformational Leadership To Overcome Barriers to Competency-Based Supervision
The training director attends an all-day training on competency-based supervision. She returns to work, interested in putting this approach into practice. She circulates the materials from the conference and informs her staff that effective the next Monday, the program will use this model. She plans a two hour meeting for early the next semester to check in with the supervisors about how the program is going. Immediately she hears about push-back, though no one approaches het directly. Students come to her confused about how they are going to be assessed in light of this shift. She is mystified about the resistance to this approach, as it seems consistent with program’s newly instituted emphasis on evidence-based practice. Recognizing the concerns, she realizes she needs to slow down the implementation and get more buy-in. To this end, she invites supervisor and trainee volunteers to form a work group to create a vision, plan, and evaluation strategy for the culture shift. She is mindful not to have too large of a work group, yet recognizes the need to engage all members of the training environment in the culture change.
Effective transformational leadership teams are cognizant of the barriers to change within and outside of their organizational cul- ture. The following are commonly encountered barriers to moving toward and valuing a culture of competency-based supervision, and recommendations for overcoming these obstacles.
Leaders may encounter resistance to their new vision. To coun- ter this resistance, they may elect to use an array of strategies in an effort to overcome barriers and modify systems that appear incom- patible with a culture of competency-based supervision. Resistance may appear in the form of fear mongering, death by delay, con- fusion, ridicule and character assassination (Kotter & Whitehead, 2010). Leaders are encouraged to respond by preparing carefully for institutional buy-in; respectfully soliciting and acknowledging input; and capturing attention and defusing attacks through com- munications that are clear, simple, and based on good common sense. They must bring the vision to fruition through successive approximation leading to full implementation, consolidate prog- ress and produce more change, and institutionalize new approaches that allow for full attainment of the vision and continued evolution of the vision as the system grows and changes (Kotter, 1995).
Reading business self-help and metaphorical stories of overcoming resistance to change may be useful (e.g., Blanchard et al., 2009; Kotter & Whitehead, 2010; Kotter & Rathgeber, 2005).
Vision is not enough. Team members want to understand the rationale for the transformation (Corrigan, Garman, Canar, & Lam, 1999). One factor that may make such understanding challenging is a disconnection between what the leadership say they value and how they actually behave (Brainard & Brislen, 2007). Both super- visors and trainees who witness mixed messages regarding the value of supervision may feel disengaged from or react negatively toward the supervisory process or may engage in conflict with leadership regarding the importance of supervision. A transforma- tional leadership strategy for overcoming this barrier is to develop a collaborative approach that focuses on the implementation and assessment of and accountability for supervision (Smith, Saavedra, Raeke, & O’Donell, 2007).
Another challenge relates to the diversity of values of individ- uals within the system (Chin, 2010; Chin, Lott, Rice, & Sanchez- Hucles, 2007). Diversity of opinions can be valuable and must be respected. However, such diversity may be problematic if it per- tains to the value placed on supervision or if there is variability in the supervisory processes that are supported in terms of a lack of consistency in approach to training, insensitivity to the develop- mental level of both the supervisors and the supervisees, and actual conflict. Transformational leaders capitalize on the different values of their team members by realizing the performance potential associated with the diversity, highlighting the strengths of each of the perspectives, assisting in the negotiation among conflicting or difference perspectives, and ensuring that such differences are not associated with negative consequences (Kearney & Gebert, 2009).
An additional potential obstacle is lack of consideration to the contextual and situational influences with regard to change. Trans- formational leaders are attuned to the prior, current, and emerging contexts in which leaders and followers are dynamically embedded (Avolio, 2007). They are sensitive to the organizational climate and cognizant that they are an integral part of the system and both influence and are impacted by the situational context (Avolio, 2007). To institute change, transformational leaders confront and reshape the organizational context or they harness it (Pawar & Eastman, 1997). They recognize the need for guiding changes in the followers’ cognitions and motivational states and in attaining changes in the overarching institutional and larger professional psychology cultural context (Pawar, 2003).
It is impossible to build an effective leadership team when maladaptive power dynamics permeate. On one hand, this may occur as rigid or autocratic leadership marked by unilateral decision-making, overcontrol, and reliance on error correction (Corrigan et al., 1999). When only the leader takes charge of the change process, there may be no buy-in and/or there may be “push-back”, and change is unlikely to occur (Kotter, 2005). When change is mandated from the top, but left for implementation to those lower in the hierarchy, those responsible feel helpless (Ei- sold, 2009). At the other end of the continuum are laissez-faire leaders who assume insufficient levels of responsibility and shy away from difficult decisions (Corrigan et al., 1999). When sys- tems are leaderless, change is unlikely and members often feel frustrated and impotent.
What strategies can be taken when the leader resists transform- ing the system, but other members of the system (e.g., junior
51TRANSFORMING THE SUPERVISION CULTURE
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
faculty or supervisors, trainees) are motivated for change? Con- cerned parties can meet with the leader to address the negative consequences of the status quo or of the lack of a team approach to change. Examples of such consequences may include risks to program accreditation, lower levels of productivity and morale, potential legal liability related to accountability, and problems with recruitment and retention. It may be valuable to recommend that all leaders participate in a 360 degree feedback process with an associated action plan following the receipt of the input (Kaslow et al., 2009), so that everyone engages in increased self-reflection and self-awareness and a greater commitment to personal change to improve the system. In dialogues with relevant parties it can advantageous to reframe the culture of leadership within the or- ganization to one characterized by compassion, engagement of all members in the change process, and the creation and implemen- tation of a shared vision. When problematic power dynamics are in play and are not effectively addressed from inside the system, an outside consultant may help effect change.
Concluding Comments
Supervision is a distinct professional practice requiring specific articulated training and competence (Falender & Shafranske, 2007). Training in supervisory competencies is crucial for ensuring effective professional practice of new members of the health care workforce (Tebes et al., 2011). Several states (e.g., California) have adopted supervisory training requirements to increase the likelihood that supervisors and those they supervise perform opti- mally (http://www.psychboard.ca.gov/lawsregs/archive/ supervision-regs.shtml).
Competency-based supervision models describe a proactive strengths-based approach that is most successful when the local context is taken into account (Falender & Shafranske, 2004; Fal- ender & Shafranske, 2008; Kaslow & Bell, 2008). They are metatheoretical and can be applied to any theoretical approach (Farber & Kaslow, 2010), specialty (Celano et al., 2010; France et al., 2008; Kerns et al., 2009; Knight, Karel, Hinrichsen, Qualls, & Duffy, 2009; Stucky, Bush, & Donders, 2010) or context (Hatcher & Lassiter, 2007; Kaslow, Dunn, & Smith, 2008).
Transforming a supervisory culture is not a linear process. Transformational change does not happen overnight. Rather mov- ing toward system-wide competency based supervision may pose significant challenges with regard to time, energy, and human resources, and financial capital may be required to institute such changes. In addition, gaining buy-in is likely to be a complex process in many training environments. These challenges are very real issues in training programs and as such warrant specific attention and accommodations need to be made based on the local context. However, the resultant increased accountability and more outcome-focused training over time likely will make such an investment beneficial. Seeing small changes over time hopefully will create a momentum that will catapult the system further forward.
For a transformation to be effective, it must be collegial and collaborative, rather than a top-down effort (Kotter & Whitehead, 2010). The approach must respect the diversity of the participants and be creative in design and implementation (Chin, 2010; Chin et al., 2007; Kearney & Gebert, 2009). All individuals within a transforming system must be open to change and to continued
professional and personal development. Individuals and groups whose efforts are exemplary with regard to goal attainment should be acknowledged and rewarded (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). Throughout the change process and its ongoing implementation, progress and the efficacy of the change must be assessed using different methodologies and by securing and valuing input from all relevant constituency groups.
When a transformational leadership process regarding competency-based supervision is effective, it will lead to an “em- powered dynamic culture” (Smith, Montagno, & Kuzmenko, 2004). There will be a high level of interpersonal trust, openness, playfulness, and group cohesion (Corrigan, Diwan, Campion, & Rashid, 2003; Gillespie & Mann, 2004; Isaksen, 2007). Not only will burnout be minimized (Corrigan et al., 2003), but the psycho- logical well-being of all members of the training culture will be enhanced (Arnold, Turner, Barling, Kelloway, & McKee, 2007). Trainees will receive higher quality supervision, which will enable them to be more competent practitioners. Of course, it will be imperative that empirical studies be conducted in the future that examine both the benefits and challenges of a competency-based approach to supervision, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of a transformational leadership approach associated with shifting the culture toward one that values the comprehensive, implementation of competency-based supervision.
References
Aarons, G. A. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership: As- sociation with attitudes toward evidence-based practice. Psychiatric Services, 57, 1162–1169. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.57.8.1162
Ancis, J. R., & Ladany, N. (2010). A multicultural framework for coun- selor supervision. In N. Ladany & L. J. Bradley (Eds.), Counselor supervision (4th ed., pp. 53–94). New York, NY: Routledge.
Arnold, K. A., Turner, N., Barling, J., Kelloway, E. K., & McKee, M. C. (2007). Transformational leadership and psychological well-being: The mediating role of meaningful work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 193–203. doi:10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.193
Aten, J. D., Strain, J. D., & Gillespie, R. E. (2008). A transtheoretical model of clinical supervision. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 2, 1–9. doi:10.1037/1931-3918.2.1.1
Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building. American Psychologist, 62, 25–33. doi:10.1037/0003- 066X.62.1.25
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industrial, military, and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2009). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Blanchard, K., Britt, J., Hoekstra, J., & Zigarmi, P. (2009). Who killed change? Solving the mystery of leading people through change. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Bieschke, K. J., Bell, D. J., Davis, I., C., Hatcher, R. L., Peterson, R. L., & Rodolfa, E. (2009). Editorial. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, S1–S4. doi:10.1037/a0017574
Boswell, J. F., Nelson, D. L., Nordberg, S. S., McAleavey, A. A., & Castonguay, L. G. (2010). Competency in integrative psychotherapy: Perspectives on training and supervision. Psychotherapy Theory, Re- search, Practice, Training, 47, 3–11. doi:10.1037/a0018848
Bourg, E. F., Bent, R. J., McHolland, J. D., & Stricker, G. (1989). Standards and evaluation in the accreditation and training of professional psychologists: The National Council of Schools of Professional Psychol- ogy Mission Bay Conference. American Psychologist, 44, 66–72. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.1.66
52 KASLOW, FALENDER, AND GRUS
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
Boyatzis, R. E. (2006). An overview of intentional change from a com- plexity perspective. Journal of Management Development, 25, 607–623. doi:10.1108/02621710610678445
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Leadership development from a complexity per- spective. Counseling Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60, 298–313. doi:10.1037/1065-9293.60.4.298
Brainard, A. H., & Brislen, H. C. (2007). Viewpoint: Learning profession- alism: A view from the trenches. Academic Medicine, 82, 1010–1014. doi:10.1097/01.ACM.0000285343.95826.94
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Campbell, C., Silver, I., Sherbino, J., Cate, O. T., & Holmboe, E. S. (2010).
Competency-based continuing professional development. Medical Teacher, 32, 657–662. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2010.500708
Celano, M. P., Smith, C. O., & Kaslow, N. J. (2010). A competency-based approach to couple and family therapy supervision. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 35–44. doi:10.1037/a0018845
Chin, J. L. (2010). Introduction to the special issue on diversity and leadership. American Psychologist, 65, 150–156. doi:10.1037/a0018716
Chin, J. L., Lott, B., Rice, J. K., & Sanchez-Hucles, J. (2007). Women and leadership: Transforming visions and diverse voices. Malden, MA: Black- well.
Constantine, M. G. (2003). Multicultural competence in supervision: Issues, processes, and outcomes. In D. B. Pope-Davis, H. L. K. Coleman, W. M. Liu, & R. L. Toporek (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural competencies in counseling & psychology (pp. 383–391). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Corrigan, P. W., & Boyle, M. G. (2003). What works for mental health system change: Evolution or revolution. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 30, 379–395. doi:10.1023/A:1024619913592
Corrigan, P. W., Diwan, S., Campion, J., & Rashid, F. (2003). Transfor- mational leadership and the mental health team. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 30, 97–108. doi:10.1023/A:1022569617123
Corrigan, P. W., & Garman, A. N. (1999). Tranformational and transac- tional leadership skills for mental health teams. Community Mental Health Journal, 35, 301–312. doi:10.1023/A:1018757706316
Corrigan, P. W., Garman, A. N., Canar, J., & Lam, C. (1999). Character- istics of rehabilitation team leaders: A replication. Rehabilitation Coun- seling Bulletin, 42, 186–195. Retrieved from http://rcb.sagepub.com/
DeMers, S. T., Van Horne, B. A., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2008). Changes in training and practice of psychologists: Current challenges for licensing boards. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 2008, 39, 473–497. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.39.5.473
Eisold, K. (2009). What you don’t know you know. New York, NY: Other Press.
Epstein, R. M., & Hundert, E. M. (2002). Defining and assessing profes- sional competence. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287, 226–235. doi:10.1001/jama.287.2.226
Falender, C. A., Cornish, J. A. E., Goodyear, R., Hatcher, R., Kaslow, N. J., Leventhal, G., . . . Grus, C. L. (2004). Defining competencies in psy- chology supervision: A consensus statement. Journal of Clinical Psy- chology, 80, 771–786. doi:10.1002/jclp.20013
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. (2004). Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10806-000
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2007). Competence in competency- based supervision practice: Construct and application. Professional Psy- chology: Research and Practice, 38, 232–240. doi:10.1037/0735- 7028.38.3.232
Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2008). Casebook for clinical super- vision: A competency-based approach. Washington, DC: American Psy- chological Association. doi:10.1037/11792-000
Farber, E. W. (2010). Humanistic-existential psychotherapy competencies and the supervisory process. Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 28–34. doi:10.1037/a0018847
Farber, E. W., & Kaslow, N. J. (2010). Introduction to the special section:
The role of supervision in ensuring the development of psychotherapy competencies across diverse theoretical perspectives. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 1–2. doi:10.1037/a0018850
Fouad, N. A., Grus, C. L., Hatcher, R. L., Kaslow, N. J., Hutchings, P. S., Madson, M., . . . Crossman, R. E. (2009). Competency benchmarks: A model for the understanding and measuring of competence in profes- sional psychology across training levels. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, S5–S26. doi:10.1037/a0015832
France, C. R., Masters, K. S., Belar, C. D., Kerns, R. D., Klonoff, E. A., Larkin, K. T., . . . Thorn, B. E. (2008). Application of the competency model to clinical health psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 573–580. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.39.6.573
Frawley-O’Dea, M. G., & Sarnat, J. E. (2001). The supervisory relation- ship: A contemporary psychodynamic approach. New York, NY: Guil- ford Press.
Gillespie, N. A., & Mann, L. (2004). Transformational leadership and shared values: The building blocks of trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19, 588–607. doi:10.1108/02683940410551507
Hatcher, R. L., & Lassiter, K. D. (2007). Initial training in professional psychology: The practicum competencies outline. Training and Educa- tion in Professional Psychology, 1, 49 – 63. doi:10.1037/1931- 3918.1.1.49
Isaksen, S. G. (2007). The climate for transformation. Creativity and Innova- tive Management, 16, 3–15. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00415.x
Johnson, W. B. (2007). Transformational supervision: When supervisors mentor. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 259–267. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.38.3.259
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755–768. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
Kaslow, N. J. (2004). Competencies in professional psychology. American Psychologist, 59, 774–781. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.8.774
Kaslow, N. J., & Bell, K. D. (2008). A competency-based approach to supervision. In C. A. Falendar & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Casebook for clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 17–38). Washing- ton, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11792-002
Kaslow, N. J., Borden, K. A., Collins, F. L., Forrest, L., Illfelder-Kaye, J., Nelson, P. D., . . . Willmuth, M. E. (2004). Competencies Conference: Future directions in education and credentialing in professional psychol- ogy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 80, 699–712. doi:10.1002/ jclp.20016
Kaslow, N. J., Celano, M. P., & Stanton, M. (2005). Training in family psychology: A competencies-based approach. Family Process, 44, 337– 353. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2005.00063.x
Kaslow, N. J., Dunn, S. E., & Smith, C. O. (2008). Competencies for psychologists in academic health centers (AHCs). Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 15, 18–27. doi:10.1007/s10880-008- 9094-y
Kaslow, N. J., Grus, C. L., Campbell, L. F., Fouad, N. A., Hatcher, R. L., & Rodolfa, E. R. (2009). Competency assessment toolkit for profes- sional Psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, S27–S45. doi:10.1037/a0015833
Kaslow, N. J., Rubin, N. J., Bebeau, M., Leigh, I. W., Lichtenberg, J., Nelson, P. D., . . . Smith, I. L. (2007). Guiding principles and recom- mendations for the assessment of competence. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 441–451. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.38.5.441
Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. (2009). Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: The promise of transformational leadership. Journal of Ap- plied Psychology, 94, 77–89. doi:10.1037/a0013077
Kenkel, M. B. (2009). Adopting a competency model for professional psychology: Essential elements and resources. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, S59–S62. doi:10.1037/a0017037
Kenkel, M. B., & Peterson, R. L. (Eds.). (2010). Competency-based edu-
53TRANSFORMING THE SUPERVISION CULTURE
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
cation for professional psychology. Washington, DC: American Psycho- logical Association. doi:10.1037/12068-000
Kerns, R. D., Berry, S., Frantsve, L. M. E., & Linton, J. C. (2009). Life-long competency development in clinical health psychology. Train- ing and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, 212–217. doi:10.1037/ a0016753
Knight, B. G., Karel, M. J., Hinrichsen, G. A., Qualls, S. H., & Duffy, M. (2009). Pike Peak model for training in professional psychology. Amer- ican Psychologist, 64, 205–214. doi:10.1037/a0015059
Kotter, J. P. (1985). Power and influence. New York, NY: Free Press. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail.
Harvard Business Review, March-April, 59–67. Retrieved from http:// hbr.org/magazine
Kotter, J. P. (2005). Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Kotter, J., Rathgeber, H., Mueller, P., & Johnson, S. Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Kotter, J. P., & Whitehead, L. A. (2010). Buy in: Saving your good idea from getting shot down. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Ladany, N., Friedlander, M. L., & Nelson, M. L. (2005). Critical incidents in psychotherapy supervision: An interpersonal approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10958-000
Lambert, D. R., Lurie, S. J., Lyness, J. M., & Ward, D. S. (2010). Standardizing and personalizing science in medical education. Academic Medicine, 85, 356–362. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c87f73
Lee, R. E., & Everett, C. A. (2004). The integrative family therapy supervisor: A primer. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Lucock, M. P., Hall, P., & Noble, R. (2006). A survey of influences on the practice of psychotherapists and clinical psychologists in training in the UK. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 13, 123–130. doi:10.1002/ cpp.483
Mansouri, M., & Lockyer, J. (2007). A meta-analysis of continuing med- ical education effectiveness. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 27, 6–15. doi:10.1002/chp.88
McNeil, B. W., & Worthen, V. (1989). The parallel process in psycho- therapy supervision. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 5, 329–333. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.20.5.329
Morgan, M. M., & Sprenkle, D. H. (2007). Toward a common-factors approach to supervision. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 33, 1–17. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2007.00001.x
Neimeyer, G. J., Taylor, J. M., & Wear, D. M. (2009). Continuing educa- tion in psychology: Outcomes, evaluations, and mandates. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 617– 624. doi:10.1037/ a0016655
Nelson, P. D. (2007). Striving for competence in the assessment of com- petence: Psychology’s professional education and credentialing journey of public accountability. Training and Education in Professional Psy- chology, 1, 3–12. doi:10.1037/1931-3918.1.1.3
Newman, C. F. (2010). Competency in conducting cognitive-behavioral therapy: Foundational, functional, and supervisory aspects. Psychother- apy Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 12–19. doi:10.1037/ a0018849
Pawar, B. S. (2003). Central conceptual issues in transformational leader- ship approach. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24, 397–406. doi:10.1108/01437730310498596
Pawar, B. S., & Eastman, K. K. (1997). The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: A conceptual ex- amination. Academy of Management Review, 22, 80–109. doi:10.2307/ 259225
Peterson, R. L., McHolland, J. D., Bent, R. J., David-Russell, E., Edwall, G. E., Polite, K., . . . Stricker, G. (1992). The core curriculum in pro- fessional psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Asso- ciation. doi:10.1037/10103-000
Prochaska, J. J., & Norcross, J. C. (2009). Systems of psychotherapy: A transtheoretical analysis. Belmont, CA: Brooks Cole.
Rings, J. A., Genuchi, M. C., Hall, M. D., Angelo, M-A., & Cornish, J. A. E. (2009). Is there consensus among predoctoral internship training directors regarding clinical supervision competencies? A descriptive analysis. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, 140– 147. doi:10.1037/a0015054
Roberts, M. C., Borden, K. A., Christiansen, M. D., & Lopez, S. J. (2005). Fostering a culture shift: Assessment of competence in the education and careers of professional psychologists. Professional Psychology: Re- search and Practice, 36, 355–361. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.355
Rodolfa, E. R., Bent, R. J., Eisman, E., Nelson, P. D., Rehm, L., & Ritchie, P. (2005). A cube model for competency development: Implications for psychology educators and regulators. Professional Psychology: Re- search and Practice, 36, 347–354. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.36.4.347
Roe, R. A. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist? European Psychologist, 7, 192–202. doi:10.1027//1016-9040.7.3.192
Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., Stevens, C., & Rothman, M. (2008). A relational approach to supervision: Addressing ruptures in the alliance. In C. A. Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Casebook for clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 137–158). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/11792-007
Sarnat, J. (2010). Key competencies of the psychodynamic psychotherapist and how to teach them in supervision. Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47, 20–27. doi:10.1037/a0018846
Smith, B. N., Montagno, R. V., & Kuzmenko, T. N. (2004). Transforma- tional and servant leadership: Content and contextual comparisons. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10, 80–91. doi: 10.1177/107179190401000406
Smith, K. L., Saavedra, R., Raeke, J. L., & O’Donell, A. A. (2007). The journey to creating a campus-wide culture of professionalism. Academic Medicine, 82, 1015–1021. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e318157633e
Stoltenberg, C. D., & McNeill, B. W. (2010). IDM supervision: An inte- grative developmental model for supervising counselors and therapists (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Stucky, K. J., Bush, S., & Donders, J. (2010). Providing effective super- vision in clinical neuropsychology. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 24, 737–758. doi:10.1080/13854046.2010.490788
Tebes, J. K., Matlin, S. L., Migdole, S. J., Farkas, M. S., Money, R. W., Shulman, L., & Hoge, M. A. (2011). Providing competency training to clinical supervisors through an interactional supervision approach. Re- search on Social Work Practice, 21, 190 –199. doi:10.1177/ 1049731510385827
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heu- ristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science .185.4157.1124
Vargas, L. A., Porter, N., & Falender, C. A. (2008). Supervision, culture, context. In C. A. Falender & E. P. Shafranske (Eds.), Casebook for clinical supervision: A competency-based approach (pp. 121–136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/ 11792-006
Westefeld, J. S. (2009). Supervision of psychotherapy: Models, issues, and recommendations. The Counseling Psychologist, 37, 296–316. doi: 10.1177/0011000008316657
Wise, E. H., Sturm, C. A., Nutt, R. L., Rodolfa, E., Schaffer, J. B., & Webb, C. (2010). Life-long learning for psychologists: Current status and a vision for the future. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41, 288–297. doi:10.1037/a0020424
Received June 5, 2011 Revision received November 1, 2011
Accepted November 15, 2011 �
54 KASLOW, FALENDER, AND GRUS
Th is
d oc
um en
t i s c
op yr
ig ht
ed b
y th
e A
m er
ic an
P sy
ch ol
og ic
al A
ss oc
ia tio
n or
o ne
o f i
ts a
lli ed
p ub
lis he
rs .
Th is
a rti
cl e
is in
te nd
ed so
le ly
fo r t
he p
er so
na l u
se o
f t he
in di
vi du
al u
se r a
nd is
n ot
to b
e di
ss em
in at
ed b
ro ad
ly .
