Skip to main content

Developing a Working Model of Cross-Cultural Supervision: A Competence- and Alliance-Based Framework

Abstract

Despite numerous suggestions to integrate culture, diversity and social justice issues in clinical supervision, empirical studies on cross-cultural supervision indicate limited uptake of such recommendations. We suggest that a comprehensive model of cross-cultural supervision could benefit the field by guiding supervisors in this task. A working model is proposed based on a foundation of the supervisory alliance and a focus on social work practice competence, integrating strategies to promote self- and relational-reflexivity within the supervisory relationship. The model is comprised of four components: component 1: goal setting to contract on cross-cultural integration in supervision; component 2: active listening for cross-cultural markers; component 3: bonding through the supervisor’s self-reflexivity to foster the supervisee’s self-reflexivity; and component 4: working through tasks for cultural integration in supervision by modelling the supervisor’s relational reflexivity in case formulation and treatment to foster the supervisee’s relational-reflexivity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  • Almeida, R., Woods, R., Messineo, T., & Font, R. (1998). The cultural context model: An overview. In M. McGoldrick (Ed.), Revisioning family therapy: Race, culture, and gender in clinical practice (pp. 414–431). New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asakura, K., & Maurer, K. (2018). Attending to social justice in clinical social work: Supervision as a pedagogical space. Clinical Social Work Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0667-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R., Quiros, L., & Benavidez-Hatzis, J. R. (2017). The intersection of identities in supervision for trauma-informed practice: Challenges and strategies. The Clinical Supervisor, 37(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2017.1376299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., Katz, E., Regehr, C., Logie, C., Mylopoulos, M., & Tufford, L. (2013). Toward understanding meta-competence: An analysis of students’ reflection on their simulated interviews. Social Work Education, 32(2), 259–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogo, M., & McKnight, K. (2005). Clinical supervision in social work: A review of the research literature. In L. Shulman & A. Safyer (Eds.), Supervision in counseling: Interdisciplinary issues and research. New York, NY: The Haworth Press. (also published in The Clinical Supervisor, 24(1/2), 49–67).

  • Bordin, E. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 16, 252–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordin, E. S. (1983). A working alliance based model of supervision. The Counseling Psychologist, 11, 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000083111007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkard, A. W., Johnson, A. J., Madson, M. B., Pruitt, N. T., Contreras-Tadych, D. A., Kozlowski, J. M., Hess, S. A., & Knox, S. (2006). Supervisor cultural responsiveness and unresponsiveness in cross-cultural supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 288–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkard, A. W., Knox, S., Clarke, R. D., Phelps, D. L., & Inman, A. G. (2014). Supervisors’ experiences of providing difficult feedback in cross-ethnic/racial supervision. The Counseling Psychologist, 42(3), 314–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, J. (2006). Relational reflexivity: A tool for socially constructing therapeutic relationships. In C. Flaskas, B. Mason & A. Perlerz (Eds.), The space between. London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, J. (2012). Developments in Social GRRRAAACCEEESSS: Visible–invisible and voiced–unvoiced. In I.-B. Krause (Ed.), Culture and reflexivity in systemic psychotherapy: Mutual perspectives (pp. 139–160). London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, J., Palma, A., D., & Whitehouse, L. (2008). Learning as a context for differences and differences as a context for learning. Journal of Family Therapy, 30, 529–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. Y., Hays, D. G., & Milliken, T. (2009). Addressing social justice issues in supervision. A call for client and professional advocacy. The Clinical Supervisor, 28, 20–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ChenFeng, J., Castronova, M., & Zimmerman, T. (2017). Safety and social justice in the supervisory relationship. In R. Allan & S. Singh Poulsen (Eds.), Creating cultural safety in couple and family therapy: Supervision and training. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Divac, A., & Heaphy, G. (2005). Space for GRRAACCES: Training for cultural competence in supervision. Journal of Family Therapy, 27, 280–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2012). Getting the most out of clinical training and supervision: A guide for practicum students and interns. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fonagy, P., Gergely, G., Jurist, E., & Target, M. (2004). Affect regulation, mentalization, and the development of self. New York: Other Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, R. K. (2014). Supervision as pedagogy: Attending to its essential instructional and learning processes. The Clinical Supervisor, 33, 82–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, L. S., & Foerster, F. S. (1996). Task analysis exemplified: The process of resolving unfinished business. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 439–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, H. J. (2014). Supervision conversations about social justice and social work practice. Journal of Social Work, 15(4), 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, H. J., & O’Donoghue, K. (2009). Culturally relevant, socially just social work supervision: Becoming visible through a social constructionist lens. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 18, 70–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, K. V., & Laszloffy, T. A. (1995). The cultural genogram: Key to training culturally competent family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21, 227–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, P. (2003). The cultural context model in supervision: An illustration. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 15(4), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvath, A. O. (2007). The alliance in context: Accomplishments, challenges, and future directions. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 43(3), 258–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Federation of Social Workers (2014). The global definition of social work. Retrieved July 17, 2018 from https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/.

  • Kadushin, A., & Harkness, D. (2014). Supervision in social work (5th ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, J. J., Gale, J. E., & Bacigalupe, G. (2001). The discourse of race and culture in family therapy supervision: A conversation analysis. Contemporary Family Therapy, 23(2), 181–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor, D. (2013). A transformation programme for children’s social care managers using an interactional and reflective supervision model to develop supervision skills. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27(2), 177–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. (2010). Revisioning cultural competencies in clinical social work practice. Families in Society, 91(3), 272–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E., & Horvath, A. O. (2013). Early cultural dialogues in cross-cultural clinical practice. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 83(2–3), 185–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E., & Horvath, A. O. (2014). How a therapist responds cultural versus noncultrual dialogues in cross-cultural clinical practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 28(2), 193–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrman-Waterman, D., & Ladany, N. (2001). Development and validation of the evaluation process within supervision inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 168–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munson, C. E. (2002). Handbook of clinical social work supervision (3rd ed.). New York: The Haworth Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neden, J., & Burnham, J. (2007). Using relational reflexivity as a resource in teaching family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 29, 359–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M. L., Barnes, K. L., Evans, A. L., & Triggiano, P. J. (2008). Working with conflict in clinical supervision: Wise supervisors’ perspectives. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 172–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donoghue, K., Wong Yuh Ju, P., & Tsui, M. (2018). Constructing an evidence-informed social work supervision model. European Journal of Social Work, 21(3), 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2017.1341387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pendry, N. (2012). Race, racism, and systemic supervision. Journal of Family Therapy, 34, 403–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, L. N., & Greenberg, L. S. (1984). Patterns of change: Intensive analysis of psychotherapy process. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roper-Hall, A. (1998). Working systemically with older people and their families who have ‘come to grief’. In P. Sutcliffe, G. Tufnell & U. Cornish (Eds.), Working with the dying and bereaved: Systemic approaches to therapeutic work (pp. 177–206). London: Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rousmaniere, T. G., & Ellis, M. V. (2013). Developing the construct and measure of collaborative supervision: The supervisee’s perspective. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 7(4), 300–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safran, J. D., Muran, J. C., & Samstag, L. W. (1994). Resolving therapeutic alliance rupture: A task analytic investigation. In A. O. Horvath & L. S. Greenberg (Eds.), The working alliance: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 225–255). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (2010). Interactional supervision (3rd ed.). Washington DC: NASW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutter, E., McPherson, R., & Geeseman, R. (2002). Contracting for supervision. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 495–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Totsuka, Y. (2014). ‘Which aspects of social GGRRAAACCEEESSS grab you most?’ The social GGRRAAACCEEESSS exercise for a supervision group to promote therapists’ self-reflexivity. Journal of Family Therapy, 36, 86–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, A. K. T., & Bogo, M. (1997). Engaging with clients cross culturally: Using research and developing research for effective practice. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 6(3/4), 73–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufekcioglu, S., & Muran, J. C. (2015). Case formulation and the therapeutic relationship: The role of therapist self-reflection and self-revelation. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Session, 71(5), 469–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, C. E., & Hook, J. N. (2016). On a culturally humble psychoanalytic supervision perspective: Creating the cultural third. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 33(3), 487–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. (2004). Cross-cultural supervision. Clinical Social Work Journal, 32(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eunjung Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, E., Kealy, D. Developing a Working Model of Cross-Cultural Supervision: A Competence- and Alliance-Based Framework. Clin Soc Work J 46, 310–320 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0683-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-018-0683-4

Keywords

  • Clinical supervision
  • Reflexivity
  • Cultural humility
  • Alliance
  • Social work competence