Journal of Counseling Psychology1996, Vol. 43, No. 1, 25-34

Copyright 1996 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.0022-0167/96/$3.00

A Phenomenological Investigation of "Good" Supervision Events

Vaughn WorthenBrigham Young University

Brian W. McNeillWashington State University

This study explored the experience of "good" supervision events from the perspective ofsupervisees using a qualitative phenomenological research methodology. Eight intermediate-level to advanced-level trainees participated in a tape-recorded interview in which theydescribed a recent good supervision experience, yielding transcripts that were subjected to aqualitative analysis. A general meaning structure for the experience of good supervisionevents was developed. Identification of salient themes reflective of good supervision eventswithin the general meaning structure resulted in four distinct supervision phases: (a) exis-tential baseline, (b) setting the stage, (c) good supervision experience, and (d) outcomes ofgood supervision. In addition, the quality of the supervisory relationship was cited as a crucialand pivotal component by all supervisees.

The learning and acquisition of counseling skills and theformation of a professional counselor identity are two of themost important functions of graduate training in counselingpsychology, and psychotherapy supervision plays a centralrole in this learning. Although much effort is devoted tocounseling and supervision activities and theory building isin progress, little in the way of research has been conductedthat examines the experience of "good" psychotherapy su-pervision events from the perspective of supervisees. Whatdoes the experience of good supervision consist of forsupervisees? Are there any central factors that must bepresent for good supervision experiences to occur? Super-visees' experience of good psychotherapy supervision isessentially a question of personal meaning, and the phenom-enological research method lends itself well to the investi-gation of personal meaning.

Phenomenological inquiry is very similar to the inter-viewing techniques central to the training of counselingpsychologists. Thus, inquiry into the experience of goodsupervision events is a natural methodological extension ofresearchers' previous training experiences. Also, most su-

Vaughn Worthen, Counseling and Development Center,Brigham Young University; Brian W. McNeill, Department ofEducational Leadership and Counseling Psychology, WashingtonState University.

This investigation was conducted by Vaughn Worthen under thesupervision of Brian W. McNeill as partial fulfillment of therequirements for the doctor of philosophy degree at the Universityof Kansas. We wish to extend our gratitude to Gary Price, DennisKarpowitz, Diane McDermott, and Valerie Janesick for their valu-able input as members of the dissertation committee. We wouldalso like to extend appreciation to Aaron Jackson for his role as anexternal auditor of the present data and for his helpful commentsand input. Illustrative examples of the steps in the individual andgroup analyses are available from Vaughn Worthen.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed toVaughn Worthen, Counseling and Development Center, BrighamYoung University, 149 SWKT, P.O. Box 25548, Provo, Utah84602-5548.

pervisees have a very personal investment in supervisionand developing their therapeutic skills. Therefore, they areapt to participate actively in describing their supervisionexperiences. The interview "dialogue" offers the opportu-nity for immediate clarification and further elaboration andprobing. As new findings emerge, researchers can pursuethose lines of inquiry, because the goal of the investigationis to understand the experienced phenomenon as fully aspossible. Knowledge is arrived at through an inductiveprocess, leading from specific observations to the identifi-cation of general patterns (Patton, 1990). The essence ofdiscovery-oriented research is the ability to see the depthand intricacies of the phenomenon within individual cases.

Past research has spent little time examining the experi-ence of good psychotherapy supervision, in part because ofthe design characteristics of traditional research methodol-ogies, which are not devised to ask questions about personalmeaning. What has been lacking is the application of dis-covery-oriented research methodologies in the examinationand description of supervision phenomena as a means ofboth testing the soundness of theory and discovering salientsupervision components and processes that might contributeto theory building and effective practice (Borders, 1989;Holloway & Hosford, 1983; Stoltenberg, McNeill, &Creather, 1994). An in-depth understanding of what eventsconstitute good psychotherapy supervision, as experiencedby supervisees, is necessary if one is to fully comprehendthe relevant and crucial aspects of supervision that contrib-ute to the acquisition of counseling skills and the develop-ment of a professional identity.

Research on Good Psychotherapy Supervision

Past investigations have focused on the question of sat-isfaction with supervision, providing some indications thatwhat constitutes good supervision varies according to thedevelopmental level of trainees. Two general factors havebeen identified for positive supervision experiences: a good

25

26 WORTHEN AND McNEILL

supervisory relationship and attention to the task of devel-oping counseling skills. Good supervisory relationshipsconsist of warmth, acceptance, respect, understanding, andtrust (Hutt, Scott, & King, 1983; Martin, Goodyear, &Newton, 1987; Miller & Oetting, 1966), particularly forbeginning trainees (Heppner & Roehlke, 1984). Good su-pervisors self-disclose (Black, 1988) and create an atmo-sphere of experimentation and allowance for mistakes(Allen, Szollos, & Williams, 1986; Hutt et al., 1983; Nel-son, 1978). Beginning trainees prefer more attention de-voted to developing intake skills (Heppner & Roehlke,1984), didactic training in counseling (Worthington &Roehlke, 1979), and more time spent on developing self-awareness (Nelson, 1978). Intermediate trainees desire as-sistance with developing alternative conceptualization skills(e.g., Heppner & Roehlke, 1984), more emphasis on per-sonal development than technical skills, working within acohesive theory, and clear communication about expecta-tions (Allen et al., 1986). Advanced trainees prefer to ex-amine more complex issues of personal development,transference- countertransference, parallel processes, andclient and counselor resistance and defensiveness (McNeill& Worthen, 1989).

Supervision environment factors are also viewed as im-portant in contributing to positive perceptions of supervi-sion. Environmental discriminators of quality includelonger duration of training, more weekly contact time, morefrequent contacts per week, and the occurrence of goodsupervision experiences later in the training sequence (Allenet al., 1986). Nelson (1978) also found that trainees pre-ferred supervisors who showed interest in supervision, hadexperience as a therapist, were conducting regular therapy,and possessed technical or theoretical knowledge.

What is apparent from the supervision literature is thatfew studies have specifically examined what is perceived asgood supervision by supervisees beyond characteristics as-sociated with general dependent measures of satisfactionwith supervision determined on an a priori basis. Thus, thepurpose of this investigation was to further explore thephenomenological experience of what elements or eventsconstitute good supervision for trainees.

Method

Participants

Four women and four men of European-American ethnicitywere interviewed for this study. To ensure some variation intraining experiences, we solicited and selected participants fromthree counseling psychology doctoral programs approved by theAmerican Psychological Association (APA) and three APA-ap-proved counseling center internship sites in the Midwest. Traineesranged in age from 23 to 54 years, were in their 3rd to 7th year ofgraduate education, had completed 2-17 semesters of counselingexperience, and had completed 2-8 semesters of'Supervision re-sulting in levels of training that may be conceptualized as inter-mediate to advanced. Their supervisors were four men and fourwomen with 1-10 years of supervisory experience. Criteria forparticipant selection included willingness to participate in a tape-recorded interview and availability and willingness to participate

in a follow-up interview if necessary, use of English as primarylanguage, ability to articulate the experience of good supervision,and current counseling supervision in the practicum or internship.Participants were volunteers and were not paid for any part of theirinvolvement in the research. All trainees who were invited toparticipate accepted the invitation.

Researchers

At the time of this investigation, Vaughn Worthen, a European-American, had completed his doctoral course work in counselingpsychology, which included both didactic and experiential trainingin developmental conceptualizations of the supervision process,and was supervising doctoral trainees during his predoctoral in-ternship. His current work includes ongoing provision of clinicalservices, as well as training and supervision of graduate students.He views supervision as consisting of the belief that superviseeneeds vary as supervisees gain experience and that supervisoryroles must be adjusted if both the supervision tasks and thesupervisory relationship are to contribute to good supervision.Supervision helps a trainee to become a better counselor; morebroadly, it helps trainees form a counselor identity, and trust andanxiety are mitigating factors in good supervision. Brian W. Mc-Neill is of mixed Mexican American and European Ajnericanethnicity and has 10 years of postdoctoral experience as a therapist,supervisor, and researcher investigating developmental models ofclinical supervision.

Procedure

Interview. All interviews were conducted by Vaughn Worthenin person. Practicum-level trainees were interviewed approxi-mately three fourths of the way through their second superviseddoctoral practicum experience. Two interns were interviewed inthe middle of their second semester, and the other two wereinterviewed toward the end of the second semester, thus allowingtrainees time to establish a supervisory relationship. Each partici-pant was asked to read and sign an informed-consent form beforebeing interviewed.

A research question was formulated to guide the interview. Theinitial statement made to participants was as follows: "Pleasedescribe for me as completely, clearly, and concretely as you can,an experience during this semester when you felt you receivedgood psychotherapy supervision." The participant was then invitedto elaborate on that comment, and the interviewer's role was tohelp to facilitate the articulation of the good supervision descrip-tion.

Adequate time was allowed so that interviews would not beconstrained by an imposed time limit. No interview was more thanan hour in length, and most averaged between 45 and 50 min. Eachinterview was recorded with two tape recorders to ensure that theinterview was taped adequately, thus avoiding lost data.

Participants were asked to clarify and elaborate phrases andwords the researcher did not understand or in case of ambiguity orlack of clarity. The researcher attempted to maintain a focus onunderstanding the experience as it was being related by the par-ticipant. Examples of the interviewer's prompts for clarificationand elaboration included "Can you describe what you felt like?""Can you recall what it was like for you as you came into thatsupervisory session and were getting ready to play this tape?""And how did he show that understanding?" and "How did youmove to that broader level?" A strong attempt was made to makesure questions did not lead the interviewees toward specific or

SPECIAL SECTION: PHENOMENOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 27

predetermined conclusions but, rather, led them to clarify andelaborate.

When the interviewer perceived that the experience had beenfully articulated, the following question was asked: "Is there any-thing else that you would like to add that we haven't alreadyaddressed?" Any further descriptions were explored, and the in-terview was concluded.

Transcription. Tapes were transcribed verbatim and checkedfor accuracy by a second individual.

Transcript analysis. Analysis of the transcribed interviews fol-lowed a modified pattern outlined by Giorgi (1985, 1989) anddemonstrated by Wertz (1983,1985). The essence of this pattern isto break down transcribed interviews into units that can be moreeasily analyzed. These units are called meaning units.

Each analysis consisted of examining the descriptions untilpatterns of good supervision could be discerned. After each indi-vidual experience had been analyzed, all individual experienceswere examined to ascertain the essence of good supervision for allof the supervisees. Analysis of individual good supervision expe-riences followed a seven-step procedure. After completion of misphase of analysis, group analyses of the general meaning structurefor supervisees were conducted in a four-step procedure. Allanalyses were performed by Vaughn Worthen under the immediatesupervision of Brian W. McNeill. In addition, because the inves-tigation was part of Vaughn Worthen's dissertation, input wasprovided by four other committee members, three of whom pos-sessed extensive experience as supervisors and clinicians and onewhose primary research focus is the application of qualitativeresearch methods in education. In addition, a review of the anal-yses and interpretation of the results was provided by an externalauditor well versed in both supervision and qualitative research.Any disagreements regarding analyses and interpretation wereresolved through discussion and consensus between the two au-thors.

Individual Interviews: Developing a SituatedMeaning Structure

Step 1: Obtaining a sense of the whole. Before the analysis wasconducted, it was important to get a sense for the entire interviewwithin its context. Each interview was listened to and read three orfour times before analysis commenced.

Step 2: Identifying meaning units. This step consisted of iden-tifying meaning units by listening to and reading the transcribedinterview and identifying experienced shifts in meaning. Each shiftin meaning was marked by a slash on the transcribed manuscript.

Step 3: Defining relevant and psychologically explicit meaningunits. At this point, meaning units were examined for relevancyto the investigation of good psychotherapy supervision. Irrelevantmeaning units were discarded, as were some of the redundantmeaning units that could be identified at this point. Each meaningunit was grammatically rephrased, if necessary, to more directlyexpress the supervisee's meaning.

Step 4: Integration of meaning units. An important element ofthe analysis was to understand the temporal sequence of the eventsdescribed in the interview, as suggested by Wertz (1983, 1985).Because an interview does not typically proceed along a linearthought process, it was important to organize interview data withina logical and contextual relationship. Meaning units were placedinto a first-person narrative retelling of the good supervisionexperience.

Step 5: Articulating the meaning units. This step consisted oftranslating the participants' naive (i.e., unanalyzed) description oftheir experience into psychologically relevant meanings bearing on

their experience of good supervision. Thus, participant responseswere examined with the intent of understanding expressed andimplied meanings. These meanings were put into terminology thatexpressed the meanings in more direct psychological language.This process consisted of moving back and forth from data tomeanings. Derived meanings were, in essence, tested against theraw interview data to determine whether they were supported bythe data. This movement from concrete data to abstraction ofmeaning produced the articulate meanings.

Step 6: The situated meaning structure. From the articulatedmeaning units arrived at through Step 5, derived meanings wereintegrated in a third-person narrative retelling of the events asexpressed in more psychologically explicit language. The resultwas a meaningful description of the experience of good supervi-sion for the individual supervisee. The term situated refers tomeaning derived from the context of a specific situation or expe-rience.

Step 7: The essence of the experience of good supervision. Afinal step in the individual analyses of the transcribed interviewsconsisted of refining the description into its most distilled andconcise form. This was accomplished in the form of the followingquestion: "What is absolutely essential for this experience of goodpsychotherapy supervision, for which if it were missing this wouldnot represent the experience of good supervision?" This step in theanalysis distanced the findings a bit from the context of thespecific experience so as to distill the essential components of theexperience. An example from one of our trainees illustrates thisfinal step:

Dave experiences a sense of discomfort with his personallydefined therapeutic role. He then provides an implicit andambiguous invitation to his supervisor in an effort to solicitunderstanding and assistance and avoid perceived criticism.He experiences genuine support, empathy, and validationfrom his supervisor, which facilitates a nondefensive perspec-tive regarding experienced "unacceptable" feelings and theconsequent development of a metaperspective. The relievingof discomfort and tension allows for new learning. Thismetaperspective is experienced as freeing and reinvigoratesinterest in original motivations for helping others but newlyendows those original motivations with greater complexity.The horizon of therapeutic possibilities is expanded as Davebecomes forward looking with positive anticipation and plan-ning for the next therapeutic contact with his client. The linebetween client responsibility and counselor facilitation is thenredefined.

Group Analyses

After the individual interviews had been analyzed, an analysisand comparison of commonalities and differences between each ofthe interviews was performed. This procedure allowed generalfindings to emerge regarding the experiences of supervision for thesupervisees. The analysis was conducted in four steps.

Step 1: Individual events of good supervision. Step 1 consistedof examining all individual participant findings (Steps 6 and 7 ofthe preceding section) and then creating an inclusive list of eventsof each participant's meaning structure with his or her name besidethe good supervision event. Thus, an exhaustive list of goodsupervision events was developed.

Step 2: Common events of good supervision. Step 2 consistedof identifying and compiling a list of inclusive good supervisionevents shared in common by two or more participants with theparticipants' names identified for each element.

28 WORTHEN AND McNEILL

Step 3: Collective events of good supervision. At this point,only those good supervision events held collectively by 6 or moreof the participants were retained.

Step 4: General meaning structure for the experience of goodsupervision. Those events that remained after Step 3 were used togenerate a full narrative description of the general experience ofgood supervision for supervisees. A sequence of themes constitut-ing good supervision events was then identified, and these themeswere tied together in a temporal order of appearance.

Results

Good Supervision General Meaning Structure forTrainees

Good psychotherapy supervision unfolds from a level ofconfidence ranging from fluctuating to basic groundednesswith an aversion to overt evaluation. There is at least animplied, and sometimes overtly expressed, desire for re-warding supervision from those who have a reported historyof disatisfaction with supervision. The therapeutic processis viewed on a continuum from some disillusionment to afundamental sense of efficacy. With these elements in place,the supervisee experiences a disruption in the "usual" self-as-professional operation, with the concurrent feeling ofanxiety-induced emotional arousal and an often opaquelyperceived "needing." This is experienced as a state of inad-equacy that is responded to from a level of global exami-nation of therapeutic self-functioning up to a domain-spe-cific problem focus. This state of disruption is pivotallyaddressed within a discernibly nonjudgmental, empathizing,supporting, and validating supervisory stance that acts tonormalize the struggle. As a result, the supervisee feels a"freeing" that facilitates reduced self-protectiveness andincreased receptivity to supervisory input. This sense offreeing allows for increased participation in supervision andfosters a nondefensive analysis of self and situation, as wellas subsequent reexamination of therapeutic and professionalassumptions, enabling the acquisition of a metaperspectivefrom which a more comprehensive therapeutic pattern isrevealed. Self-confidence is strengthened and endowed withgreater complexity and stability. Consequently, the range of

therapeutic conceptualizing and intervening is expanded.Positive anticipatory planning follows new awareness andincorporates new understandings, with an excitement toreengage actively again in the previous struggle. The super-visory alliance is energized and strengthened with an expe-rienced invigoration and impetus for continued professionaldevelopment.

Phases and Themes of Good Supervision Events

On the basis of the group analyses resulting in the generalmeaning structure for all of the trainees, the themes of goodsupervision events were viewed conceptually as involvingfour sequentially connected phases. The first phase was theexistential baseline, or the context from which the events ofgood supervision emerged. Setting the stage was seen as asecond phase, in which events leading up to good supervi-sion were experienced. The third phase was labeled thegood supervision experience. This was the pivotal phase inwhich the influence of supervisor and supervisee factorsinteracted to create within the supervisee a sense that some-thing positive and eventful had occurred within supervision.The final phase was designated outcomes of good supervi-sion. The effects of the good supervision experiences weremanifested in this phase. Themes reflecting events identi-fied in the general meaning structure for trainees duringthese four phases are depicted in Table 1 and discussed,along with illustrative examples, in more detail in the sec-tions to follow.

Summary of Good Psychotherapy Supervision Events

Existential baseline. A general sense of confidence for traineesprevailed, although more experienced supervisees appeared tohave a greater grounding in their confidence. This confidence levelis reflected in a statement by Kevin (all names are pseudonyms):

I was feeling like when I came out of my doctoral program,that I had a pretty good sense of how my theoretical orienta-tion was working at the time with clients, basic attendingskills, those types of things I was feeling pretty good with. But

Table 1Four Phases of a Good Supervision Experience for Advanced Supervisees: The Supervisee's Perspective

Phase Description

Existential baseline

Setting the stage

Good supervision experience

Outcomes of good supervision

Fluctuating to grounded level of confidence; aversion to overt evaluation; desire forrewarding supervision; previous unrewarding supervision; disillusionment to sense ofefficacy with therapeutic process

Sensed inadequacy consisting of disruption in the usual, anxiety-induced emotionalarousal, and perceived needing; global to domain-specific response to sensedinadequacy

Supervisory relationship experienced as empathic, nonjudgmental, and validating, withencouragement to explore and experiment; struggle normalized; sense of freeingconsisting of reduced self-protectiveness and receptivity to supervisory input;nondefensive analysis; reexamination of assumptions; acquisition of a metaperspective

Strengthened confidence; refined professional identity; increased therapeutic perception;expanded ability to conceptualize and intervene; positive anticipation to reengage in thestruggle; strengthened supervisory alliance

SPECIAL SECTION: PHENOMENOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 29

I felt like I was ready to move into a new realm, more intherapy and in supervision.

Rebecca, another intern, expressed it this way: "I felt fairlycompetent in this situation but wanted to expand my view ofwhat might be effective in this particular case."

Interestingly, 3 of the 4 practicum-level students madecomments indicating some sense of demoralization or dis-illusionment with conducting therapy, as illustrated in thefollowing comments: "I wasn't real happy; even my clientsseemed all the same and I just wasn't really that into it"(Dave) and "[My interaction with the faculty] kind of mademe feel, um, just really lost, I think, as a student and kind oflost about my abilities and the things I think are mystrengths" (Colette). Interns, on the other hand, displayed nosense of demoralization or disillusionment and demon-strated a basic sense of efficacy in the counseling process.

Participants also reported an aversion to an overt evalu-ative stance by their supervisors. Moreover, most partici-pants made reference to previous unrewarding supervisionexperiences. In relation to these experiences, there was alsoa hopeful desire for a qualitatively different supervisoryrelationship.

Themes for supervisees in the existential baseline phasedirectly influenced the way the following themes playedthemselves out in the other phases. It appears that theexistential baseline acted as the ground on which the figureof later good supervision experiences emerged.

Setting the stage. If it can be said that the existentialbaseline was the ground, then the next major theme, asensed inadequacy, acted to separate the figure and groundand provide a focus for supervision. This theme was com-posed of three interrelated events consisting of disruption inthe usual, anxiety-induced emotional arousal, and a per-ceived needing.

Disruption in the usual can be viewed as an event orexperience that intrudes and provokes a disorder in whatwas the taken-for-granted operation of therapeutic or pro-fessional activities. This disruption acted as a focusing agenton an area of concern. The area of concern can be quitebroad, consisting of such elements as a perceived deficit, anormal developmental professional task, a concern with thesupervisory relationship, or enhancement or development ofa new skill. An example of this disruption in the usual wasdemonstrated in the following comment by Dave:

It was just totally out of the realm of any kind of clientexperience I'd ever had before. Sometimes I'd been frustrated,or this or that, but it was in a working context. This I wantedto be over with. I didn't want this client.

Perhaps as a result of an observed difference in the levelof groundedness in confidence or the sense of demoraliza-tion and disillusionment between practicum and intern par-ticipants, it appeared that 3 of the 4 practicum students madeglobal responses to their sense of inadequacy. These globalattributions included general questioning of their sense ofefficacy as therapists. Interns, on the other hand, made moredomain-specific responses to their sense of inadequacy.This domain-specific disruption in the usual is illustrated inthe following two intern passages:

There was some kind of block in therapy. We reached a pointwhere I felt like I was offering those things that were reallynecessary for us to move on and to continue a good workingrelationship, but she wasn't, I don't think matching my desirefor her to experience that or to receive that. It was the firsttime I had ever worked with [a client] that had experiencedincest. (Kevin)

I had a sense of connecting with this person immediately,but not knowing whether the things that I normally do with aclient were going to be as effective with this client or not,because I was not feeling sure of the culture or background.(Rebecca)

Perhaps the motivation to address this disruption of theusual would be minimal unless the other two elements ofsensed inadequacy—anxiety-induced emotional arousal anda perceived needing—were in attendance. Trainees reportedfeeling distress about the disruption, which activated andmade them aware of a need that was sometimes experiencedonly opaquely. For example, Dave stated that "I went intosupervision and I was disturbed by the reaction I'd had[emotional arousal]." He then elaborated:

And I didn't know what to do with it. I didn't have any kindof immediate answer or solution to it, with what I was goingto do with my anger and what would I do with my client, whatkind of process should go on, what changes should be made oranything. I was just really stuck with it [perceived needing].

It appears that these three identified elements of sensedinadequacy need to be activated to set the stage for opennessto supervisory input and new learning to occur. It alsoappears that these elements can be activated by naturallyoccurring events within the counseling or supervisory rela-tionship or by the supervisor's strategic interventions. Whatis clear from this study is that this sensed inadequacypreceded the good supervision experience. It appears thatinterns are better able to direct the focus of supervision toaddress their sensed inadequacy and that they typicallyperceive this inadequacy as domain specific; practicumtrainees feel a more global impact on their sense of inade-quacy.

Good supervision experience. The most pivotal and cru-cial component of good supervision experiences that wasclearly evident in every case studied was the quality of thesupervisory relationship. All trainees described the supervi-sor as conveying an attitude that manifested empathy, anonjudgmental stance toward them, a sense of validation oraffirmation, and encouragement to explore and experiment.The sensed inadequacy discussed earlier set the stage for alearning experience. However, without a positive supervi-sory relationship that invited openness to learning, it islikely that learning from this anxiety-arousing experiencewould have been minimized. Supervisory relationshipevents and dynamics contributed to this supervision learn-ing experience. According to Dave, "She kind of, empa-thized with, and said that she'd also felt some strong feel-ings towards her [the client] and could see why I had theseemotions and why she did too." Tina's comment was sim-ilar: "Once I realized that he agreed with me, okay, or heshowed that he could understand why I felt like I was giving

30 WORTHEN AND McNEILL

band-aids. So he showed understanding." Collette's com-ments reflected similar relationship dynamics:

And what was so great, was that my supervisor was reallyaffirming of and validating of my ability to speak clearly. I feltvery much understood by her and I felt also like she appreci-ated those abilities that I had taken pride in the past and whichI had felt, I just hadn't felt were being recognized at all, at anylevel.

It is likely that this kind of relationship can be developedonly when concern about self and performance are mini-mized and anxiety is diminished, as the following com-ments by Jan illustrate: "Mary was just really great at kindof somehow calming me down" and "She just really gaveme permission to think about things without pressuring meto do anything." Rebecca reported that "rather than launch-ing into what I could do, I was first given that kind of stepup by the supervisor and reassurance and it seemed to takeoff from there."

In many of the cases, it was hinted at or hypothesized thatwithout this type of relationship being present, the super-visees would likely have undergone a different kind ofexperience. For example, Dave declared:

But if she'd given me a look of kind of like, "you're angry,"I would have wanted to put the file away. I don't want to havethat client. I would have had to, like I did the week before, notthink about it.

And Kevin stated:

When I talk about drat process, when we play with theseprocess pieces or when we would stop the tape at whatevertimes, that couldn't have happened, I don't think, if it didn'tfeel like a real collegial relationship, if I didn't feel like I wasrespected at a level that, I guess, I wanted to be respected at,or if I was going to move on as a professional.

These findings also suggest that the desire and need for asupportive supervisory relationship are ever present in su-pervision. Although all supervisees value and benefit froma supportive supervisory environment, this need is not nec-essarily expressed directly (Black, 1988).

Trainees believed that their supervisors helped to normal-ize their "struggle." This was often accomplished by apersonal self-disclosure from their supervisor. In this study,self-disclosure of the supervisor played a significant role inhelping supervisees, especially those with less experience,to reduce negative attributions of their behavior and de-crease anxiety by allowing them to "see" into the supervi-sor's behavior and thinking, thus normalizing and tacitlyrelabeling "mistakes" as learning experiences. Dave's su-pervisor shared her reaction to his client, which was similarto Dave's own reaction, as well as disclosing a similarexperience from her own training:

I think two things happened. The first, my supervisor helpedme normalize what I was feeling and that it was okay as atherapist to be having [angry feelings]. .. And she also dis-closed her own experience of, I'm not sure whether she was inpracticum or intern, where she had some countertransference.

Jan also described her supervisor as providing a normalizingexperience: "I guess that was normalizing in a way, like thisis okay, you're going to get through this. This is how itworks, you know."

Participants also experienced a freeing, the next signifi-cant theme. Jan felt freed from her self-imposed restrictions,which were brought on by anxiety and fear, and felt arenewed energy to engage in the previously feared andburdensome tasks of completing a dissertation and begin-ning a job search. Kevin described the experience of freeingas helping him move beyond some of his self-imposedconstraints regarding therapy. He reported being able todevelop a deeper level of perception and understanding. Inhis words:

And working through this process with him, I experienced [abetter understanding of what was going on in therapy]. Andthe way I experienced that, was that it was freeing. It was likeI can move up now to the next level or a deeper level.

Dave also felt freed from his assumptions of overresponsi-bility for his client and thus could see how to intervene withhis client differently: "I remember it was kind of freeing atthe end. It was like, I'm going to throw this back on yourlap, if you don't want to do it, that's okay."

The theme of freeing is composed of two separate butrelated events. Reduced self-protectiveness was evident assupervisees felt supported and came to sense the supervi-sor's benevolent interest in promoting learning and devel-opment. As supervisees perceived less need for self-protec-tiveness, they concurrently experienced the secondimportant element of the freeing experience, an increasedreceptivity to supervisory input. These findings are similarto Black's (1988) conclusion that reduced defensivenessand a strong learning alliance contribute to supervisees'perceptions of supervision effectiveness. A statement madeby Dave illustrates these two themes at work: "Whatchanged was, as soon as she like said 'Oh me too,' it let mehave, it was like, now we can deal with it and talk about it."He further stated, "It kind of took the heat off, you know, isthis my individual reaction?.. . So it really let me have thisissue in supervision. I felt like it was okay to be talkingabout them." Mike showed a clear pattern of high self-protectiveness to begin with, followed by an increased re-sponsiveness to his supervisor. Mike's initial guardedness isreflected by the following statement:

I felt a little bit vulnerable, that's probably due to it being myfirst quarter. I didn't know how supervision was going to goor if I was going to get picked a p a r t . . . I felt like I needed todefend by orientation.

As Mike's supervisor responded to this expression of de-fensiveness from him with a nondefensive acceptance, Mikefelt a greater openness to listen and possibly learn from hissupervisor: "Maybe that modeled something for me, I don'tknow, maybe his being willing to hear what I had to say,maybe it modeled, maybe I should consider what he has tosay." Suffice it to say that when supervisees felt a sense ofsafety and support, there was increased ability to participate

SPECIAL SECTION: PHENOMENOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 31

actively in supervision and receptiveness to supervisoryinput.

The preceding themes set the stage for the next threerelated themes: nondefensive analysis, reexamination ofassumptions, and acquisition of a metaperspective. Becausesupervision is concerned with the acquisition of skills andthe development of a professional identity, it is importantthat supervisees be able to examine themselves as honestlyas possible. As long as the supervisee feels a need to protector defend himself or herself, the likelihood of honest intro-spection and examination of therapeutic activities and be-liefs is minimized.

Nondefensive analysis occurred as supervisees felt safe inexploring and experimenting. Colette, a practicum trainee,originally felt an intense self-referent threat in her encounterwith a faculty member. She felt misunderstood and invali-dated. This intense self-referent, emotionally charged con-fusion dissipated as she experienced congruence betweenher self-perception and the understanding expressed by hersupervisor. The experience became detached from its priorself-referent threat as it was given the status of "chalk it upto experience." In Kevin's case, he was able to examine hisfeelings more "objectively":

I could sense that I was wrestling with it in session, but, in asense what we did was, we kind of put it in a box and I steppedback from it and I could just look at those feelings andexperiences by stepping away from it and analyze it moreobjectively.

One trainee discussed this process as developing an "inter-nal supervisor." This internal supervisor is reminiscent ofthe advanced stage of self-supervisor described by Littrell,Lee-Borden, and Lorenz (1979).

Outcomes of good supervision. There were six identifi-able themes that constituted this phase. In each of theindividual cases, there were many expressions regarding theeffects of good supervision, but the six outlined subse-quently were those consistently identified among the super-visees in this study.

Supervisees experienced both a strengthening and affirm-ing of their confidence. Colette, who was questioning herability to communicate effectively, remarked, "I would saythe main thing for me is just that it really instilled self-confidence once again." And according to Rebecca:

What then developed in the session was, I felt like I relaxed,because I was being affirmed for what I had done so far wasvery natural and I was being given a reassurance that I wascompetent and that I had done a good job, and that thenallowed me to kind of open the blinds a little bit more. . . . Itwas even more of an opening to the experience by me, bybeing given that kind of undergirding of feeling like I wascompetent.

In each of the cases, it appeared that there was an in-creased ability to see greater complexity in the issues beingfaced. The flip side of this theme was that, along with anincreased ability to see complexity, there was a correspond-ing ability to make what was complex and confusing morecoherent. It would be expected that a natural outcome ofsupervisees being able to develop a metaperspective would

be the ability to perceive therapeutic activities with anincreased comprehensiveness and sophistication. Davestated it this way:

I think that part of that was that I was still being manipulated.I hadn't been able to step back and look at what do I want todo, really what's my role. How do I fit into this picture towhere I'm comfortable?

Similarly, Mike reported:

It made me start thinking about what I was doing, instead ofjust doing it. It's like each time I do something, now I'massessing whether that was effective, how was the timing on itand not only what is that person feeling in, it's a much morecomplex process than beginning counselor, when you're justtrying to figure how to respond to the affect and you don't seeanything else or hear anything, you're just nervous.

The heart of psychotherapy supervision is the attempt toincrease the supervisee's ability to work effectively withclients. Thus, the ability to conceptualize clients more fully,as well as to intervene successfully, is central to the task ofsupervision (i.e., an expanded ability for therapeutic con-ceptualizing and intervening). What was interesting aboutthis study was that participants did not focus on specifictangible skills. Predominantly, attention was centered ondeveloping new, more refined abilities in conceptualizingclients or dealing with professional development situations.Although therapy outcome was not examined in this study,it appears that supervisees felt an increased ability to con-ceptualize client issues and intervene with a greater sense ofefficacy. An excerpt from Kevin's transcript is illustrative:

And so I walked out of there widi what I felt were a handfulof things to try out and a real good sense that I'd had avaluable experience, that my repertoire was expanded. Myunderstanding of myself, my understanding of therapy wasbroadened just a bit, in a real tangible way. . . . It really turnedon lights.

With a new sense of understanding for either a therapeuticor a professional development issue, the participants ac-quired a positive anticipation to reengage in their previousstruggle. Dave spoke of developing a "game plan" to returnto his client to implement his new understanding. That samephrase was used by Bruce, "That's basically how we woundup that session, with a game plan." Both Kevin and Rebeccaexpressed an eagerness to return to their clients with theirnew understanding.

I think for me I was really excited to get back and work withthe client. I felt like I had picked up a lot of good informationabout myself, about what I thought with the client, certainlymy relationship with her. I was just raring to get into the nextsession and continue this. (Kevin)

And in a sense I was looking forward to going back into thatcounseling situation and seeing what I then could do, feelingfreed up regarding the situation and dealing with the client.(Rebecca)

Although the focus was on professional development ratherthan therapy skills, there was still a planning to reengage inthe struggle. Some of the language used to described thefeelings of reengaging in the struggle suggested that trainees

32 WORTHEN AND McNEILL

felt energized, focused, and ready to try out new strategiesin dealing with what was previously believed to be chal-lenging or difficult.

The good supervision events also had the effect ofstrengthening the supervisory alliance. Many of the traineestalked of other constructive experiences that transpired laterin supervision because of the trust that had developedthrough this positive experience. One intern suggested thather good experience had been a tacit test of the supervisoryrelationship and preparatory for discussion of other moreintense issues later.

The final theme was increased impetus for continuedprofessional identity development. This theme was con-cerned with the supervisees' motivation. In this light, Davemade the following comment: "I basically said, 'Cool, nowlet's turn on my psychological thinking which brought meinto this field, what I love to do.' " For Jan, this eventincluded breaking through some of the "rigidity" that shehad developed. As for Kevin, he related that this had theeffect of opening up a whole new part of the therapeuticprocess:

It was kind of like adding an entirely new dimension and suchan important dimension. And that was what was happening,just the general process of what was occurring between theclient and I, and I don't think I really focused on much before.

Finally, as trainees perceived a need and desire for honingtheir professional identity, they experienced an increase intheir commitment to supervision.

Discussion

The results of this phenomenological investigation pro-vide an in-depth, detailed, and intricate picture of the expe-rience of good supervision events from the perspective ofthe trainee that is often missing in investigations of thesupervisory process obtained by more traditional quantita-tive methodologies. The finding of a distinct structure ofgood supervision composed of the salient themes and eventsoccurring within the phases of an existential baseline, set-ting the stage, a good supervision experience, and the out-comes of good supervision helps to clarify the context ofsupervision as well as the anatomy of good supervisionexperiences. This particular structure of supervision has notbeen noted elsewhere in the literature to date and thereforeadds significantly to an understanding regarding the processof good supervision.

Within this structure, many of the themes and events arealso generally consistent with previous quantitative studiesin terms of what constitutes good supervision. For example,events reflected positive aspects of the supervisory relation-ship, which include supervisor self-disclosure (Black, 1988)as experienced by participants in this study as a techniquehelpful in normalizing the struggle, a supervisory environ-ment of experimentation and acceptance of mistakes andfailures (e.g., Allen et al., 1986; Hutt et al., 1983), taskorientations specific to developmental level (Allen et al.,1986; Heppner & Roelke, 1984), and expression of warmth,

respect, support, acceptance, trust, and understanding bysupervisors (Hutt et al., 1983; Martin et al., 1987).

In each of the eight transcripts examined, participantsreferred to the quality of the supervisory relationship ascrucial and pivotal. Perhaps over the course of an entiresemester of supervision, the supervisory relationship, al-though a significant factor in supervision, would not alwaysplay a predominant part in each session, and other issuesmight become more focal. However, it is likely that, in thecourse of addressing the variety of supervision issues, thesupervisory relationship would continue to serve as the baseof all good therapeutic and professional training, suggestingthat the learning and acquisition of professional skills andidentity may be delayed, hampered, or not fully developedoutside the context of an effective supervisory relationship.Indeed, previous investigators have concluded that "didacticand structural aspects of supervision were not nearly asinfluential determinants of quality as clear communicationand respect" (Allen et al., 1986, p. 95). In addition, Black(1988) has stated that "the largest and most structurallysimilar factor found in both effective and ineffective [su-pervision] was that of the supervisory relationship" (p. 167),describing such differences between supervisory relation-ships and supervision as correspondingly responsive andsupportive versus insensitive and judgmental. It is perhapsthese components that led Loganbill, Hardy, and Delworth(1982) to suggest that the supervisory relationship is essen-tial in supervision in much the same manner as the coun-seling relationship is in psychotherapy. Thus, a more centralrole and examination of the supervisory relationship intheory building may be warranted.

However, a surprising aspect of this study was that 6 ofthe 8 participants, in expressing a desire for a qualitativelydifferent supervisory relationship, indicated that they hadexperienced some previous supervisory relationships as lessthan fulfilling. This result, along with Galante's (1988)finding that 47% of trainees reported that they had experi-enced at least one ineffective supervisory relationship, pro-vides support for the notion that supervisors may need muchmore extensive training in supervisory models and pro-cesses exclusive of therapeutic training and experience toincrease their effectiveness. However, future research needsto determine whether the nature of the supervisory relation-ship is such that supervisees have been genuinely disap-pointed or whether the developmental perspective of super-visees influences their retrospective view of supervisionsuch that past supervision is seen as negligent when in fact,at the time it was received, it was viewed to be adequate. Itis also possible that retrospective evaluations of previoussupervision experiences may be biased by viewing presentneeds as being inadequately met in previous supervisionrelationships, especially in cases in which current supervi-sion needs are being adequately attended to.

We found it particularly interesting that a disruption in theusual, with its attendant anxiety and perceived needing,operates so as to set the stage of good supervision and thatthis often overlooked event can provide some guidance instructuring supervisory interventions. For example, we maybe posed to intervene more strategically as supervisors if we

SPECIAL SECTION: PHENOMENOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION 33

understand that when supervisees experience a disruption inthe usual, it is a possible opening for new learning to occurand a positive supervisory experience to unfold. When it isdetermined that a supervisee is entrenched prematurely incertain therapeutic thinking patterns or activities, strategi-cally evoking a disruption in the usual could be productiveby providing a new challenge. "Catalytic" interventions (asdescribed by Loganbill et al., 1982) designed to promotechange and "get things moving" may evoke the disruptionin the usual. In addition, those supervisees experiencingnatural disruptions in the usual could be assisted to see thepossibility for new and expanded learning opportunitiesarising from the disruption. However, it is possible that, ifthe usual becomes disrupted too frequently and the experi-ence with counseling and supervision lacks sufficient con-tinuity, a supervisee might not develop a coherent pattern tohis or her therapeutic thinking and interventions.

The results of the present investigation are best viewed inthe context of the developmental training level of the par-ticipants, which ranged from intermediate practicum levelto the second semester of internship. In fact, some observeddifferences based on the trainees' general level of experi-ence are consistent with developmental models of supervi-sion (e.g., Littrell et al., 1979; Loganbill et al., 1982; Stol-tenberg & Delworth, 1987). These included differencesbetween the practicum and intern trainees in levels of con-fidence, a respective disillusionment to a sense of efficacywith the counseling process, and a global versus specificresponse to sensed inadequacy. However, as noted by Stol-tenberg and Delworth (1987), general experience level onlyroughly equates with developmental level. Indeed, in thisinvestigation, a number of events of good supervision ex-perienced by all trainees appeared to encompass aspects ofboth Level 2 and Level 3 supervisee issues as hypothesizedin Stoltenberg and Delworth's integrated developmentalmodel, and perhaps reflect the transition between theselevels. Because these findings were not derived via hypoth-eses and dependent measures determined a priori, theycomplement and expand the growing quantitative literaturesupportive of developmental conceptualizations of the su-pervision process (Stoltenberg et al., 1994).

This investigation focused on the examination of an ex-perience of good supervision from the perspective of super-visees. A different vision of good supervision might emergeif supervisors' perspectives were also investigated; differ-ences in perceptions between supervisees and supervisorshave been found in previous studies (Heppner & Roehlke,1984; Krause & Allen, 1988; Worthington & Roehlke,1979; Worthington & Stern, 1985). For example, whatsupervisors may view as a challenging, growth-producingintervention constituting good supervision (e.g., a disrup-tion of the usual) may be negatively viewed initially bytrainees. It is also natural to assume that how superviseesperceive supervision will affect how they develop and func-tion as emerging professionals. Therefore, it will be impor-tant in future studies to examine the link between thephenomenological experience of supervision for supervis-ees and the therapeutic process and outcomes that are re-lated to those phenomenological experiences. In other

words, when supervisees experience what they believe isgood about supervision, do they become more effective infacilitating better therapy outcomes in their clients?

Readers may question the generalizability of the sampleof participants in terms of lack of representativeness orsmall size. Thus, it is important to reaffirm that the intent ofthis phenomenological investigation was to describe anduncover the structures of personal meaning regarding goodsupervision events from the perspective of the participants.As a result, the structure of good supervision themes andevents derived from the eight interviews is best understoodas applying to the recalled experiences of the eight partic-ipants and may be used to view experiences of other super-visees. However, this structure is not necessarily generaliz-able to or predictive of all good experiences of supervisionand may not be inclusive of all important events or elementsof what may be considered good supervision.

Thus, in this study, we discovered components of goodsupervision that appeared to be uniform between the partic-ipants and constituted a "structure" of good supervision. Itis evident that even though commonalities were found, eachtrainee had a unique experience that varied in some degreefrom those of other trainees. It is also evident that there is arichness to each individual's experience of good supervisionthat is difficult to capture through collective descriptionsand identification of themes and events. These results sug-gest that there is no uniform formula that can be applied insupervision to ensure a good experience. Rather, it is im-portant that supervisors demonstrate certain interpersonalqualities that will accompany their theoretical knowledge,practical interventions, and experience base. With the cre-ation of a facilitative supervisory relationship, a supervisorwill be attuned to opportunities to intervene strategicallywith trainees to meet their unique supervisory needs.

References

Allen, G. J., Szollos, S. J., & Williams, B. E. (1986). Doctoralstudents' comparative evaluations of best and worst psychother-apy supervision. Professional Psychology: Research and Prac-tice, 17, 91-99.

Black, B. (1988). Components of effective and ineffective psycho-therapy supervision as perceived by supervisees with differentlevels of clinical experience (Doctoral dissertation, ColumbiaUniversity, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48,31O5B.

Borders, L. D. (1989). A pragmatic agenda for developmentalsupervision research. Counselor Education and Supervision, 29,16-24.

Galante, M. (1988). Trainees' and supervisors' perceptions ofeffective and ineffective supervisory relationships (Doctoral dis-sertation, Memphis State University, 1987). Dissertation Ab-stracts International, 49, 933B.

Giorgi, A. (1985). Phenomenology and psychological research.Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.

Giorgi, A. (1989). One type of analysis of descriptive data: Pro-cedures involved in following a scientific phenomenologicalmethod. Methods, 1, 39-61.

Heppner, P.P., & Roehlke, H. J. (1984). Differences among su-pervisees at different levels of training: Implications for a de-

34 WORTHEN AND McNEILL

velopmental model of supervision. Journal of Counseling Psy-chology, 31, 76-90.

Holloway, E. L., & Hosford, R. E. (1983). Toward developing aprescriptive technology of counselor supervision. The Counsel-ing Psychologist, 11, 13-11.

Hutt, C. H., Scott, J., & King, M. (1983). A phenomenologicalstudy of supervisees' positive and negative experiences in su-pervision. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 20,118-123.

Krause, A. A., & Allen, G. J. (1988). Perceptions of counselorsupervision: An examination of Stoltenberg's model from theperspectives of supervisor and supervisee. Journal of Counsel-ing Psychology, 35, 77-80.

Littrell, J. M., Lee-Borden, N., & Lorenz, J. A. (1979). A devel-opmental framework for counseling supervision. Counselor Ed-ucation and Supervision, 19, 119-136.

Loganbill, C , Hardy, E., & Delworth, U. (1982). Supervision: Aconceptual model. The Counseling Psychologist, 10, 3-42.

Martin, J. S., Goodyear, R. K., & Newton, F. B. (1987). Clinicalsupervision: An intensive case study. Professional Psychology:Research and Practice, 18, 225-235.

McNeill, B. W., & Worthen, V. (1989). The parallel process inpsychotherapy supervision. Professional Psychology: Researchand Practice, 20, 329-333.

Miller, C. D., & Oetting, E. R. (1966). Students react to supervi-sion. Counselor Education and Supervision, 6, 73-74.

Nelson, G. L. (1978). Psychotherapy supervision from the train-ee's point of view: A survey of preferences. Professional Psy-chology, 9, 539-550.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research meth-ods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Stoltenberg, C , & Delworth, U. (1987). Supervising counselorsand therapists: A developmental approach. San Francisco: Jos-sey-Bass.

Stoltenberg, C D . , McNeill, B. W., & Creather, H. (1994).Changes in supervision as counselors and therapists gain expe-rience: A review. Professional Psychology: Research Practices,25, 416-449.

Wertz, F. J. (1983). From everyday of psychological descriptions:Analyzing the moments of a qualitative data analysis. Journal ofPhenomenological Psychology, 14, 197-242.

Wertz, F. J. (1985). Methods and findings in a phenomenologicalpsychological study of a complex life event: Being criminallyvictimized. In A. Giorgi (Ed.), Phenomenological and psycho-logical research (pp. 155-216). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne Uni-versity Press.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Roehlke, H. (1979). Effective supervi-sion as perceived by beginning counselors in training. Journal ofCounseling Psychology, 26, 64-73.

Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Stern, A. (1985). Effects of supervisorand supervisee degree level and gender on the supervisoryrelationship. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 252-262.

Received March 22, 1995Revision received July 18, 1995

Accepted July 18, 1995 •