Interprofessional supervision in social work and psychology in Aotearoa New Zealand
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol25iss4id60Keywords:
supervision, Health Practitioners Competency Assurance Act, professional development, interprofessional supervision,Abstract
The requirement of professional supervision within the health, justice and social service sector in New Zealand has increased greatly since the advent of the Health Practitioners Competency Assurance Act (HCPA 2003). As supervision is seen as a key vehicle for continuing development of professional skills, the demand for trained and competent supervisors has increased, with the resultant gap between demand and provision. One solution to this is for practitioners to seek supervision from a suitably matched professional outside the discipline. The limited literature on the practice of interprofessional supervision (IPS), suggests both advantages and limitations. This article presents the results of a survey (N=243) of social workers and psychologists practising IPS in Aotearoa New Zealand. The survey examined the rationale for seeking IPS, attention to function, and the perceived advantages and limitations for the supervisor and supervisee alike. Respondents receiving IPS reported a variety of reasons for seeking it including, but not most importantly, the lack of availability of same-profession supervisor. Respondents believed the advantages included the usefulness of different approaches/perspectives and an increase in knowledge and creative thinking. Disadvantages included that aspects of the supervisee role were not able to be adequately addressed and a lack of shared theories orlanguage.The practice more adequately provided for the formative and restorative functions than normative despite some having IPS as their only form of supervision. Recommendations therefore include ensuring the purpose of IPS is well clarified at the outset; that it is not a standalone practice forless experienced practitioners; that professional guidelines are appropriately flexible to provide for the varied and justifiable rationales and that programmes for appropriate preparation for IPS be developed. Further research is needed, however, to further clarify the specific agenda forseeking IPS including those for whom it is not a preferred or satisfactory approach.References
Beddoe, L., & Howard, F. (2012). Interprofessional supervision in social work and psychology: mandates and (inter) professional relationships. The Clinical Supervisor, 31(2): 178-202.
Berger, C., & Mizrahi, T. (2001). An evolving paradigm of supervision within a changing health care environment. Social Work in Health Care 32(4): 1-18.
Bogo, M., Paterson, J., Tufford, L. & King, R. (2001). Interprofessional clinical supervision in mental health and addiction: Toward identifying common elements. The Clinical Supervisor 30: 124-140.
Chipchase, L., Allen, S., Eely, D., McAllister, L., & Strong, J. (2012). Interprofessional supervision in an intercultural context: A qualitative study. Journal of Interprofessional Care 26: 465–471.
Clark, P.D. (2006). What would a theory of interprofessional education look like? Some suggestions for developing a theoretical framework for team work training. Journal of Interprofessional Care 20(6): 577-589.
Crago, H., & Crago, M. (2002). But you can’t get decent supervision in the country. In M. McMahon & W. Patton (Eds.), Supervision in the helping professions: A practical approach (pp. 79-90). French’s Forest: Pearson Education.
Davies, E.J., Tennant, A., Ferguson, E., & Jones L. (2004). Developing models and a framework for multi-professional clinical supervision. British Journal of Forensic Practice 6(3): 36-42.
Davys, A., & Beddoe, L. (2008). Interprofessional learning for supervision: ‘Taking the blinkers off’. Learning in Health and Social Care 8(1): 58-69.
Davys, A., & Beddoe, L. (2010). Best Practice in supervision: A guide for the helping professions. London: Jessica Kingsley.
Earl, T. (2010). Talking therapies and the stepped care model. Journal of the New Zealand College of Clinical Psychologists 20(2): 13-16.
Ferguson, K. (2005). ‘Professional Supervision.’ In M. Rose and D. Best (eds.). Transforming practice through clinical education, professional supervision and mentoring (pp. 293-308). Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone.
Gillig, P. M., & Barr, A. (1999). A model for multidisciplinary peer review and supervision of behavioural health clinicians. Community Mental Health Journal 35(4): 361-365.
Hair, H. (2012). The purpose and duration of supervision, and the training and discipline of supervisors: What social workers say they need to provide effective services. British Journal of Social Work 1(27) doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcs071.
Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (2003). Wellington: New Zealand Government.
Howard, F., Burns, B., & Waitoki, M. (2007). Supervision in Aotearoa New Zealand. In I.M. Evans, J.J. Rucklidge & M. O’Driscoll. Professional practice of psychology in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 211-228). Wellington: NZ Psychological Society.
Howkins, E. & Bray, J. (Eds), (2008). Preparing for interprofessional teaching: Theory and practice. New York: Oxford Univeristy Press.
Hudson, B. (2002). Interprofessionality in health and social care: The Achilles’ heel of partnership? Journal of Interprofessional Care 16(1): 7-17.
Inskipp, F. & Proctor, B. (1993). The art, craft and tasks of counselling supervision. Pt 1: Making the most of supervision. Twickenham: Cascade.
Miller, S. D., Duncan, B. L., Sorrell, R., Brown, G., & George, S. (2005). The partners for change outcome management system. Journal of Clinical Psychology 61(2):199-208.
Milne, D., Aylott, H., Fitzpatrick, H., & Ellis, M. V. (2008). How does clinical supervision work? Using a ‘Best Evidence Synthesis’ approach to construct a basic model of supervision. The Clinical Supervisor 27(2): 170-190.
Milne, D. (2009). Evidence-based clinical supervision: Principles and practice. Chichester: Blackwell.
Mullarkey, K., Keeley, P., & Playle, J. F. (2001). Multi professional clinical supervision: Challenges for mental health nurses. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing 8(3):205-211.
O’Donoghue, K. (2012). Windows on the supervisee experience: An exploration of supervisees’ supervision histories. Australian Social Work 65(2): 214-231. doi:10.1080/0312407x.2012.667816.
Paulin, V. (2010). Professional supervision in dietetics: A focus group study investigating New Zealand dietitians’ understanding and experience of professional supervision and their perception of its value in dietetic practice. Nutrition & Dietetics 67(2): 106-111.
Rains, E. (2007). Interdisciplinary supervisor development in a community health service. Social Work Review 19(3): 58-65.
Reeves, S., Zwarenstein, M., Goldman, J., Barr, H., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., et al. (2010). The effectiveness of interprofessional education: Key findings from a new systematic review. Journal of Interprofessional Care 24(3): 230-241.
Simmons, H., Moroney, H., Mace, J., & Shepherd, K. (2007). Supervision across disciplines: Fact or fantasy? In D. Wepa (Ed.), Clinical Supervision in Aotearoa/New Zealand: A Health Perspective (pp. 72-86). Auckland: Pearson Education.
Temple, S., & Bowers, W.A. (1998) Supervising cognitive therapists from diverse fields. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy 12: 139-151.
Townend, M. (2005). Interprofessional supervision from the perspective of both mental health nurses and other professionals in the field of cognitive behavioural psychotherapy. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing 12: 582-588.
Žorga, S. (2002). Supervision: The process of life-long learning in social and educational professions. Journal of Interprofessional Care 16(3): 265-276.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
By completing the online submission process, you confirm you accept this agreement. The following is the entire agreement between you and the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) and it may be modified only in writing.
You and any co-authors
If you are completing this agreement on behalf of co-authors, you confirm that you are acting on their behalf with their knowledge.
First publication
By submitting the work you are:
- granting the ANZASW the right of first publication of this work;
- confirming that the work is original; and
- confirming that the work has not been published in any other form.
Once published, you are free to use the final, accepted version in any way, as outlined below under Copyright.
Copyright
You assign copyright in the final, accepted version of your article to the ANZASW. You and any co-authors of the article retain the right to be identified as authors of the work.
The ANZASW will publish the final, accepted manuscript under a Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC BY 4.0). This licence allows anyone – including you – to share, copy, distribute, transmit, adapt and make commercial use of the work without needing additional permission, provided appropriate attribution is made to the original author or source.
A human-readable summary of the licence is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, which includes a link to the full licence text.
Under this licence you can use the final, published version of the article freely – such as depositing a copy in your institutional research repository, uploading a copy to your profile on an academic networking site or including it in a different publication, such as a collection of articles on a topic or in conference proceedings – provided that original publication in Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work is acknowledged.
This agreement has no effect on any pre-publication versions or elements, which remain entirely yours, and to which we claim no right.
Reviewers hold copyright in their own comments and should not be further copied in any way without their permission.
The copyright of others
If your article includes the copyright material of others (e.g. graphs, diagrams etc.), you confirm that your use either:
- falls within the limits of fair dealing for the purposes of criticism and review or fair use; OR
- that you have gained permission from the rights holder for publication in an open access journal.
