Expert understandings of supervision as a means to strengthen the social service workforce: results from a global Delphi study

ABSTRACT

Learning on how effective social work supervision can strengthen the social service workforce is especially limited in low- and middle-income countries. To address this gap, this paper draws from a global study examining practices and approaches to effectively strengthen the social service workforce. Using a Delphi consensus methodology, the study provided a highly structured means to distil key lessons learned by experts across a range of practice and geographical settings. Over three phases, 43 global experts identified and rated the most effective practices and approaches to strengthen the social service workforce. The findings specific to supervision indicate that most experts strongly agree that access to quality supervision is important. There is also agreement related to the ways in which supervision should be carried out including: individual and group supervision, roleplaying, constructive feedback on practice, and flexibility in the supervisor–supervisee relationship. However, there is still indecision as to whether supervision should be non-hierarchical and egalitarian or, alternatively, directive and regulative. Finally, there was disagreement as to whether supervision should be incentivized. The diversity of participants’ examples suggests that the concept of ‘supervision’ is likely to be subject to highly localized variations that will challenge attempts at creating universally applicable paradigms.

RÉSUMÉ

Les recherches sur l’impact de la supervision efficace du travail social sur l’amélioration de la main d’œuvre dans les services sociaux sont limitées et surtout dans les pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire. Pour remédier à cet état de fait, cet article s’appuie sur une étude mondiale portant sur les pratiques et les approches pour renforcer efficacement la main-d’œuvre des services sociaux. Utilisant la méthodologie de consensus de Delphi, l’étude a fourni un moyen hautement structuré pour décrire les principales conclusions retenues par des experts ayant une gamme de d’expertise variée et venant d’horizons géographiques divers. Au cours de trois phases de participation, 43 experts mondiaux ont identifié et évalué les pratiques et les approches les plus efficaces pour renforcer la main-d’œuvre des services sociaux. Les résultats spécifiques à la supervision dans cette étude indiquent que la plupart des experts s’accordent fortement sur le fait que l’accès à la supervision de la qualité est un facteur important. Ils sont également en accord sur la façon selon laquelle la supervision devrait être effectuée, et préconisent : une combinaison de la supervision individuelle et la supervision collective, l’utilisation des jeux de rôle, les commentaires constructifs sur la pratique, et la flexibilité dans la relation entre le superviseur et la personne supervisée. Cependant, les experts demeurent indécis quant à savoir si la supervision doit être non hierarchique et égalitaire ou directive et réglementaire. Aussi, il existe un désaccord entre les experts quant à savoir si la supervision devait être sujette à des motivations ou pas. La diversité des exemples de participants suggère que le concept de « supervision » est susceptible à des variations hautement localisées qui mettront au défi les tentatives de création de paradigmes universellement applicables.

KEYWORDS:

• Supervision
• social service workforce strengthening
• Delphi study
• low- and middle-income countries (LMIC)

MOTS CLÉS:

• la supervision
• le renforcement de la main-d’œuvre des services sociaux
• la méthodologie Delphi
• les pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Courtney Clark, Natasha Crespi, Andrew Fields, Hana Hamdi, Yana Mayevskaya, Eleanor McGrath, and Elizabeth Meyer for their contributions to this project. We would also like to thank all of our participants who took time out of their busy lives to contribute to this research project. The research received ethics approval from Wilfrid Laurier University REB #4457.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Bree Akesson is an Assistant Professor at Wilfrid Laurier University’s Faculty of Social Work. Her research focuses broadly on global social welfare, ranging from micro-level understandings of the experiences of children and families affected by war to macro-level projects to strengthen social welfare systems. She has conducted an evaluation of psychosocial programmes for children in Chechnya and northern Uganda, a mapping of the social work education system in West and Central Africa, and a place-based study of the experiences of Palestinian families in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. She is currently working on research projects in Ghana, Lebanon, and Afghanistan.

Mark Canavera is the Associate Director of the Care and Protection of Children (CPC) Learning Network whose secretariat is at Columbia University. The CPC Learning Network convenes academics, policymakers, and practitioners in settings around the world to promote innovative research, to nurture communities of learning, and to build the next generation of researchers and advocates for children and families. He is also a humanitarian aid and development worker who has worked on former child soldier reintegration in northern Uganda, small arms control in Senegal, girls’ education promotion in Burkina Faso, and child welfare system strengthening in Benin, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Niger, and Senegal. He holds Master’s degrees in Peace Studies from Notre Dame and Public Policy from Harvard.

ORCID

Bree Akesson http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6760-7198

Notes

1. Please note that some participants identified themselves as belonging to more than one category.