#154 What is a supervision intervention?
Some people don’t like the word ‘intervention’ because it’s used in therapy, addiction and manoeuvres by the government or the military. However, an intervention is an ‘intentional action taken to change a situation, to improve it or prevent it from getting worse’ (Cambridge Dictionary).
Coaching involves intervening. Arguably, listening is an intervention; asking powerful coaching questions is certainly an intervention. In coaching supervision, Eye 2 of the 7-Eyed model comprises considering ‘the coach’s interventions’, and the creators of the model (Hawkins & Shohet, 1989) refer to what a supervisor does as interventions. Others prefer to avoid the term; for example, only one of ‘101 coaching supervision techniques, approaches, enquiries and experiments’ (Lucas, 2020) uses the term.
I have argued that coaching supervision involves processual tasks and interventions aimed at encouraging, enabling and externalising the coach’s reflective practice (Lewis 2023, 2024). Expanding on Peter Hawkins’ CLEAR process model, my own NEEDS framework provides a two-dimensional expansion of the LEA stages to help coaching supervisors intentionally choose their interventions. In summary:
Contracting: a joint process to agree the supervision outcomes, process and relationship.
Noticing: a joint process, perhaps guided by a framework such as the 7-Eyed model, to notice what is happening within the safe, relational space of supervision, and beyond it in the coach’s and client’s systems, and the wider social, economic and environmental context. At this stage, what is noticed is unspoken.
Exploring: both a joint process, guided by the Noticing, and also an intervention whereby a supervisor holds space for the supervisee to generate a new understanding of ‘what is’ or ‘who they are’. This is where ‘externalising’ (talking aloud) reflective practice begins.
Evaluating: a joint intervention, predominantly aligned with the Qualitative/Normative supervisory function, whereby the supervisor shares their knowledge and experience for the supervisee to generate a new understanding of ‘what needs to be’ in relation to coaching outcomes, process or relationships.
Developing: a joint intervention, predominantly aligned with the Developmental/Formative supervisory function, whereby the supervisor shares their knowledge and experience for the supervisee to move on towards ‘who they are becoming’. Moving on is where internalising the learning from supervision begins. The result is mutual learning for the supervisor and the supervisee.
Supporting: a joint intervention, predominantly aligned with the Resourcing/Restorative supervisory function, whereby the supervisor holds space for the supervisee to move on towards ‘what could be’, ie, supporting and challenging them to find options to re-source themselves.
Reviewing: a joint process to reflect on supervisory outcomes, process and relationship.
Thus far, it has been to me that Exploring, Evaluating, Developing and Supporting are the interventions. But is this correct? Perhaps Contracting, Noticing and Reviewing are also interventions. For example, I’m currently writing a book about coaching supervision that includes 18 case studies written by coaching supervisors. One of these case studies argues that the Review stage represents an intervention because the closing ritual was experienced as integral to sustaining the work.
So, I’m seeking your views on this. Please complete the poll.
Poll
Which of the following tasks that are jointly undertaken in coaching supervision represent coaching supervision interventions?
