ICF defines Coaching Supervision as follows: “Coaching Supervision is the interaction that occurs when a coach periodically brings his or her coaching work experiences to a coaching supervisor in order to engage in reflective dialogue and collaborative learning for the development and benefit of the coach and his or her clients.”

Aspects of  Coaching Supervision

• Ensuring that standards and ethics are maintained with clear contracting and boundaries
• Being sensitive to the coach’s learning and coaching style
• Enhancing reflectivity – working with content and process
• Enhancing the coach’s personal development thereby deepening their coaching presence
• Offering educative and restorative support to the coach.
• Creating the working alliance – with coach, client(s)/ teams and the wider field
• Opening up new areas of competencies for the coach with new perspectives
• Increasing the coach’s interventions and tools.
• Giving constructive feedback.

One way of understanding what supervision does is to think of it as a process of Reflection, Insight and Support – the fact that supervision enhances ‘seeing’, the seeing into one’s practice, the illumination of subtle processes in coaching conversations and of blind spots in oneself and in one’s thinking.  ‘Supervision’ is then something that I as a coach take away with me – an enhanced view, a super-vision of my practice and when leading or facilitating coaching circles.

A range of information about the coaching situation becomes available to the coach’s analytical/processing mind, which in turn decides interventions and strategies.  Coaches can then choose interventions that are appropriate, creative, perfectly timed, increased coaching presence and powerful, impactful coaching.

• Cognitive information
• Intuitive information
• Somatic information

Tips when facilitating Coaching Circles and Coaching Supervision

1. Always prepare an Agenda of what you want to discuss with your coaching supervisor as this will ensure you get the best from your supervision time.
2. Keep notes about what takes place in the coaching supervision session so that you can reflect on these after your session.
3. Ensure that you and your coaching supervisor set regular review dates to consider your coaching supervision relationship, its effectiveness and your development needs and how these can best be met.

Tools:

There are a number of tools available including the Full Spectrum Model (FSM); Seven ‘Eyes’ model; the Karpman Drama Triangle as well as the Gestalt approach.

The Full Spectrum Model (FSM) – is an integral model utilizing knowledge gained through attending to classic models of supervision as well as to the body, mind and spirit.This perspective brings lively, energetic and radical understanding to all the relationships that lie at the centre of coaching and establishing coaching contracts.

The Seven ‘Eyes’ model –  a systemic perspective to knowledge building and increased effectiveness.

Peter Hawkins and Robin Shohet developed this model originally for supervisors working with individuals, with groups, and with organisations, in the HR professions. It takes a personal and social systems perspective. It supports the coach/mentor to build and develop expertise in several levels of knowledge that will greatly enhance their effectiveness.

This model provides a valuable framework within which to focus on the various players in the coaching and mentoring process, and the social systems in which they operate. It combines attention to the details of the work; to the beliefs, feelings and experience of the coach/mentor; and to the interactions in the coaching/mentoring process, as well as in the supervisory relationship itself. The key benefit to coaches and mentors is that the wider and deeper the knowledge gained, the more effectively the work will flow.

Simply stated, whichever ‘eye’ we look through we will see a different facet of the whole.

The seven ‘eyes’ are as follows:

1. The Coach/Mentor/Supervisor system – the focus is on the situation, the problem the coach wants help with and how issues are presented.
2. The interventions – on what kinds of intervention have been made, the rationale for them, and what else could they have done.
3. The relationship between the coach and their client – on what is going on at both a conscious and an unconscious level and the mood or energy.
4. The coach’s own experience – becoming more self aware, identifying potential barriers and obstacles and so maximizing their full potential.
5. The parallel process – understanding the energy perspective and dynamics present between the coach/mentor and client which adds another dimension to learning and effectiveness.
6. The supervisor’s own self-reflections –  give an added dimension to the gathering of data and may open up new avenues of understanding the coach/mentor’s relationship with the client.
7. The wider context – the supervision meeting is also a time to reflect on the ethical, contractual, organisational, social and cultural aspects of the work with different concerns at different stages in the work. This ‘eye’ helps to view the wider world with overall influences.

The Karpman Drama Triangle – this model originally conceived by Steven Karpman and was used to plot the interplay and behavioural “moves” between two or more people based on the Transactional Analysis (TA) model as proposed by Eric Berne in the 50’s.

Simply stated, the basic is the connection between responsibility and power, and their relationship to boundaries.  A script is based on what an individual is told, what they experience, and how they interpret these external stimuli from their own internal frame of reference.

Berne suggested that each of us play “Games” which are unconsciously motivated behavioural interactions with the World, our environment and those people with whom we are in contact. A “Game” in this context is an unconscious belief/s which drives our actions/behaviour, in such a way as to result in either contributing to, or causing situations to occur that evoke a familiar feeling – usually negative. This feeling reinforces our beliefs or perceptions about ourselves, the World, other people, and how we fit in, and how we are treated. – i. e. our “Script”.

Not all Scripts are negative, and Berne talked about having a positive Script, however in reality, 99% of Scripts are negative and support, in coaching terms, a limiting belief about ourselves, other people, or the World/ Universe.

Whilst it was originally devised as a therapeutic tool, it is also a communications device and plots the moves of a series of transactions between people. It is in this context that it is used in coaching as it will give us insights into our client’s belief system and behaviour as part of our work is to support our client with any changes to their behaviour.

Essentially Karpman devised a simple formula which plots the moves of a “Game” :

Con + Hook = Series of Complementary Transaction -> Switch ->Pay off

The moves are as follows:  someone, usually the Victim, presents a con: “Can you help me?”

The particular con matches the specific hook of the person to whom it is directed, who will usually be a Rescuer, however some Victims play to and “hook” a Persecutor. The other party, a Rescuer, responds by saying “Yes, of course I can help you!”

If the con does not match, the perspective Rescuer/Persecutor usually will not be “pulled in” or “hooked” and the Victim will wander off to find someone else to play the game. Alternately the Victim may try to initiate another Game, this time from the position of being a Persecutor, e.g. “You’re an awful coach” or perhaps”Are you accredited?”

Once the game begins, a series of complementary transactions will continue as long as it suits both parties which may go on indefinitely and may take the form of a lifelong friendship or marriage as both parties are content to stay in the game, without going for the pay off. However, more often than not, one party becomes discontented or unhappy, for whatever reason, and ends it with the players rushing round the Triangle.  Usually at this point, the Rescuer becomes the Victim, and the Victim often becomes the Persecutor. The game is over and both retire to tend to themselves.

It can be observed that the Karpman Drama Triangle works at both the social level ie observable behaviour and at the internal dynamic level which is what a player feels inside. It is therefore quite possible to feel a Victim and be seen by others as a Persecutor, or present as a Victim but in reality be a Persecutor.

Definitions of the Roles:

A “Rescuer” may offer “help” that is unasked for often not asking how the other person wants to be supported;  does not take responsibility for themselves, but rather takes responsibility for the perceived Victim;  is someone who often does not own their own vulnerability and seeks instead to “rescue” those whom they see as vulnerable. This means that the Rescuer may then often end up feeling used or unappreciated or resentful and end up feeling the Victim, but sometimes may be perceived by others, who are on the outside looking in, as being the Persecutor.

A “Victim” does not take responsibility for themselves or their own power, and therefore looks for a Rescuer to take care of them; is someone who usually feels overwhelmed by their own sense of vulnerability, inadequacy or powerlessness and at some point may feel let down by their Rescuer, or perhaps overwhelmed or even persecuted by them. At this stage the Victim will move to the Persecutor position, and persecute their erstwhile Rescuer. They may even enlist another Rescuer to persecute the previous Rescuer. However, the Victim will still experience themselves internally as being the Victim.

A  “Persecutor” is often unaware of their  own power and therefore discounts it. Either way, the power used is negative and often destructive. Any player in the “game” may at any time be experienced as the Persecutor by the other player/players. However their own internal perception may be that they are being persecuted, and that they are the Victim. Of course, there are instances in which the Persecutor is knowingly and maliciously persecuting the other person. If this is the case, then strictly speaking the Persecutor is no longer playing a “Game“, in the TA sense of the word, as the Persecutor is operating from a place of conscious awareness; it could then be argued that they are in fact employing a strategy.

Each position is taken up as a result of an issue being discounted or disowned. To resolve this –

• The Rescuer needs to take responsibility for themselves, connect with their power and acknowledge their vulnerability.
• The Victim needs to own their vulnerability, take responsibility and recognise that they have power and are able to use it appropriately.
• The Persecutor needs initially to own their power, rather than be afraid of it or use it covertly.

What is Gestalt supervision?

 Gestalt essentially means ‘to make into a comprehensive whole’ and with it comes the notion that each one of us has the intrinsic drive to ‘make sense’ of our experience and to function at the most effective, satisfying level possible.

As a Gestalt-orientated coach, I am interested in the process by which the individuals or teams become aware (or block awareness) of what is going on in any moment, how they mobilise (or block) their energy for action and how appropriate or not that action is in achieving satisfying and relevant outcomes. This approach is to work with people to become more aware of themselves, others and the situations they are in, to have more choice in the actions they take and experience greater satisfaction with their achievements.

Gestalt is concerned with raising awareness of how we engage with those around us in meeting or not meeting our needs and live satisfactory lives or not. By focusing on the ‘here and now’ interactions between the supervisor and supervisee, the supervisee can learn how he or she builds good coaching alliances, or how they block this process. Gestalt also uses ‘active experimentation’ to raise awareness, e.g. by inviting the supervisee to ‘speak as’ their client, they can gain insight into the client’s world; by inviting the supervisee to ‘speak to’ the client (on an empty chair) the supervisee can gain insight into what they might be holding back from saying aloud; by drawing the various stakeholders in the client’s situation and representing them in the form of a ‘sculpture’ the supervisee can get a better perspective on the wider system. All of this can make Gestalt supervision very creative, and lead to a number of insights that may not have been reached using other forms of supervision.

A great many managers and leaders view resistance to change as something that needs to be ‘overcome’, to be ‘pushed through’ and then behave in ways that provoke further resistance. We believe instead of seeing ‘unwanted behaviour’ as something to be overcome, the fastest route to change is engaging with human beings who need to be understood. When someone is truly understood, they become significantly less ‘invested’ in their habitual stance. They become more able and willing to experiment with different ways of doing things, different ways of viewing their situation.

Our starting point in working with individuals or teams is to raise awareness of ‘what currently is’ (current thinking, behaviour, feelings, assumptions) and to fully understand the ‘meaning’ that these hold for the people concerned. We find that when a person or team engage with this deep exploration, change follows.

Practical Applications

When facing a situation where you may have been a Rescuer, Victim, or Persecutor or in relation to your coaching in general and your relationship with your clients- reflect on the following questions:

Using that situation, ask yourself the following questions.

• What am I not seeing? What am I not doing?
• What do I need to do?
• Who has the power? How do I know?
• Who is taking responsibility for whom? Who am I talking responsibility for?
• Am I allowing the other person to take responsibility for themselves and their actions?
• Am I owning my power positively and appropriately?
• Have I agreed to more than I want or am able to do?
• What boundaries do I need to set up?
• What am I feeling about this situation? What would I like to feel?
• What action do I need to take to deal with this in the best possible way to ensure the best possible outcome?

Concepts of this article are based on an excerpt from ICF, Transactional Analysis and  two models: Karpman Drama Triangle: Steven B Karpman and The OK Corral: Eric Berne author of Games People Play