Supervision – HeartQuest 101

The Biblical Basis of Supervision

Posted on December 7, 2010 by Scott Chafee

Following up on the States of Supervision, my friend Glenn Prescott developed this study as an example of Jesus modeling the different states of supervision.

Jesus was intent on equipping men and women to make a significant impact throughout the world they were called to touch.

Structure provided the foundation out of which all ministry would grow.
Cooperation provided the understanding that ministry was conducted within the boundaries of the community of faith.
Fellowship provided the understanding that ministry was nourished in the depth of a personal relationship with the Master.
Partnership provided the understanding that ministry should be taken to the next level and that there would be no limitations on what could be accomplished.

Jesus provided the biblical basis of supervision as He poured His life into the lives of His disciples. As supervisors, we should pour our lives into those we are privileged to serve.

(Focal passage: Luke 9:1-6, 10, Other passages: Mark 6:6-13, 30-32, Matthew 10)

1. Structure – equipped, authorized, sent out – Luke 9:1-5 (also see Matthew 10)

Calling – Jesus called – they accepted (Luke 9:1)
Gifting – Jesus gave – they received (Luke 9:1)
Commissioning – Jesus sent – they went (Luke 9:2)
Instructing – Jesus told – they listened (Luke 9:3)

2. Cooperation – teamwork, united ministry, sent out by 2’s – Matthew 11:1, Mark 6:6-13

Working on a team
Working with direction
Working with a partner
Working under authority

3. Fellowship – report, spend time together, rest – Luke 9:6, 10, Mark 6:30

Disciples worked – Jesus blessed (Luke 9:6)
Disciples returned – Jesus received (Luke 9:10)
Disciples reported – Jesus cared (Luke 9:10 and Mark 6:30)
Disciples and Jesus withdrew – They rested and refueled (Luke 9:10 and Mark 6:31-32)

4. Partnership – evaluate, results, go on their own, duplicate – Luke 9:1, 10

What did I do?
How did I do?
What did I learn from this experience?
What do I do to take this to the next level?
Where do I go from here?
What do I do to encourage others to follow (not just you)?

[print_link] [email_link]

The Supervisory Conference

Posted on December 6, 2010 by Scott Chafee

This regularly scheduled supervisory conference provides the routine that will bind much of the anxiety which normally occurs in a supervisory relationship. It is not a staff meeting. It is a one-on-one conference where each party helps develop the agenda.

Before the Conference Preparation: (independently for both supervisor and supervisee)

Review written notes from previous meeting
Set goals and priorities
Develop your agenda

The Conference:

Break the ice – small talk
Negotiate the agenda – yours and theirs
Review any carryover items from last meeting
Work through the prioritized agenda
Preview next meeting – what needs to be carried forward
Calendar time and place of next meeting

After the Conference:

Take notes for future sessions (independently for both)
Debrief the meeting (for supervisor)
1. Facts – observations
2. Feelings – Impressions
3. Future issues needing work

The States of Supervision

Posted on December 6, 2010 by Scott Chafee

The states of supervision describe the development and quality of working relationships between the supervisor and the supervisee.

People in working relationships pass through four states in this order: structure, cooperation, fellowship and partnership. They cannot decide arbitrarily to start out in the second, third, or fourth state. They must begin in the first state. A person cannot set dates to be at certain states, but can recognize a move from one state into another. The states are not absolute but are mixed so that after leaving state one, a person may revert to it (consciously or unconsciously) from time to time. People who are conscious of the states can move through them more quickly than they might do otherwise.

The states are bound by task/personhood. For example, in state three, the fellowship state, supervision focuses on personhood. In this state, personhood, not tasks, is the primary concern.

Many supervisory relationships stop prematurely in one of the first three states. People may find a particular state productive and refuse to change patterns, or they may find one especially comfortable. Each state matches the experience, history or natural inclination of the supervisor. It may take diligence for the supervisor and supervisee to move through the states appropriately. A problem may develop when people have an idealized concept of states. They may see supervision as what they experienced in their families or in an earlier vocation. They may idealize the supervisory relationship as being non egalitarian or autocratic. The supervisory relationship is never egalitarian, because the supervisor is always held accountable for the supervisee and must, in turn, hold the person accountable. However, since there are various levels of non egalitarianism, it does not have to result in an autocratic style.

The Structure State:
This is a task/task state, which has high structure. It is characterized by the supervisor outlining responsibilities, resources, and methods for doing the work. It is a “tell” state in which the supervisor tells the person about the tasks. Getting locked into this state is tempting when it is productive. However, if the person is to mature in the work and demonstrate initiative, supervision must move out of the structure state. This state is good for a beginning, or short term (a week or so), responsibility or for a person who is not ready to function independently. If the person is capable of growth and responsibility and the task is ongoing, the work relationship should grow beyond the structure state.

The Cooperation State:
This is a task/personhood state, where the supervisor moves from telling in the structure state to asking in the cooperation state. It is a “sell” state where the supervisor must determine if the supervisee is buying into the system and if he/she understands his/her role. In this state, the supervisor begins to take the personhood of the supervisee into consideration. By this time, the person has learned about the structure and the responsibilities and has demonstrated commitment to the work. The cooperation state allows him/her to take more direct responsibility.

The Fellowship State:
This state is bound by personhood/personhood. Leaving the cooperation state for the fellowship state may be difficult because the fellowship state is very person oriented with a tendency toward intimacy, and intimacy may be especially difficult when it is part of supervisory relationships. This is the “jell” state where the relationship between the supervisor and supervisee really starts to come together. The fellowship state may be the idealized state that many ministers envision about any relationship. The fellowship state is a productive time of planning and evaluating tasks. Only when the choice has to be made between person and task will there be an impediment to the task.

The Partnership State:
The partnership state goes back to personhood/tasks. This is not regression, nor is it the same as the previous task/personhood state. Because the person has been highlighted in the fellowship state, there is increased respect for and trust of the person when entering the partnership state. This is the “swell” state where this trust translates into increased responsibility for the supervisee. The partnership state is not the cooperation state revisited. In the partnership state, the supervisor makes the person a partner in the project, not simply someone who cooperates. The new partnership state makes the person a partner who has a voice in decisions and has greater ownership of plans and actions. Sometimes supervisors in the fellowship state fear moving into the partnership state because they must give away some control.

Using the States to Supervise:
When a new person arrives, begin the structure state with the highest structure you will ever need. This is an opportunity to help the person define roles and responsibilities. It is unrealistic to expect the person to begin in any other state. When a friend becomes your assigned supervisee, you can still have a close personal relationship, but you should define your supervisory relationship carefully. A problem develops with the states of supervision when the supervisor has several supervisees. Because of different levels of maturity, training and previous relationships, they may move through the states at varying paces. New supervisees will take more time to move than supervisees with tenure.

A person in an early state of supervision who does not understand the dynamics of the states may think the supervisor is playing favorites or may feel inadequate. When supervisees interact with each other, they can take into account the states of supervision and help new people move through the states. A situation or a crisis may necessitate moving back into an earlier state, even to the structure state. When the crisis is over the supervisory relationship can return to its previous state.

The Covenant Process in Supervision

Posted on December 6, 2010 by Scott Chafee

This post will serve to guide supervisor and supervisee through the covenant development process.

The first section, Covenant Worksheet, will provide answers to the questions that must be asked prior to the writing of the covenant. It will take a few days or weeks for the supervisee to understand his/her assignment well enough to complete the form. As this understanding comes, the answers to these questions will become apparent.
The next step will be to transfer the information from the worksheet to the pages of the covenant itself. The second section, Covenant Outline, will include the personhood and task elements in which the supervisee has identified and asked to be held accountable.

The Covenant Worksheet:

Covenanting is a process. It is a way through which we can together agree upon the specifics of your role during your term of service. Together, we will negotiate this role. Together, we will change it as situations and needs change. Together, we will evaluate it.

In establishing our covenant, please be ready to discuss the following questions:

1. Why am I here?

2. What are my expectations?

3. What are my personal needs at this time?

4. What goals need to be set in order to meet these personal needs?

5. What tasks should be developed to meet these personal goals?

6. How and when will we know we have accomplished my personal needs (evaluation)?

7. What are the work needs at this time?

8. What goals need to be set in order to meet these work needs?

9. What tasks should be developed to meet these work goals?

10. How and when will we know we have accomplished our work needs (evaluation)?

The Covenant Outline: Personal

Supervisee and position:

Supervisor:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

The Covenant Outline: Work

Supervisee and position:

Supervisor:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

Goal #____:

Tasks to accomplish goal:

Evaluation:

The Covenant Within Supervision

Posted on December 6, 2010 by Scott Chafee

“Covenant” is a word that has been used to described numerous relationship between people throughout history. People still make covenants today. In many states, a marriage license is called a “marriage covenant.” Covenants are necessary for good supervision.

Covenants are not job descriptions. A job description relates only to task issues not personhood issues. A job description is generic inasmuch as it applies to whoever accepts the job. A covenant is personal since it relates to a specific person who has a responsibility. An employing agency develops a job description, but a supervisor and a supervisee negotiate a covenant. Both the job description and the covenant are compatible and important. A job description always contains more duties than a person can work on at any one time. A covenant helps define responsibilities, designated by the job description, that the person will work on during a specific period of time.

Types of Covenants:
There are three types of covenants: formal, informal and tacit. Each provides ways for supervisors to relate to the supervisee.

Formal Covenants: Formal covenants are written agreements. They include conditions, responsibilities and expectations of the parties agreeing to the covenant. Formal covenants are intentional; they set out specific expectations.
Informal Covenants: Informal covenants may be as intentional as formal covenants out are less likely to be written. They may be adequate for short term and non-developmental transactions. However, oral covenants are subject to game playing disclaimers, such as “I didn’t say that,” or qualifications, such as “But that is not what I meant.”
Tacit Covenants: Tacit covenants include hidden conditions that one or both parties do not want to admit. The tacit covenant usually benefits one party to the detriment of the other. It can be changed without notice. A tacit covenant may exist alongside a formal or informal covenant. The reasoning goes like this: “We have this formal covenant, but what we will really do without telling anybody is….” A tacit covenant creates suspicion and confuses accountability. Avoid this type of covenant.

Goals in Covenanting:
Goals provide one of the most important parts of the covenant. They serve as a road map for the supervisee in relating to others, especially the supervisor. Goals are not static and may need to be revised. The covenant should be dated, and a review time should be designated for revising the goals when new situations arise or self awareness increases. The supervisor and the supervisee will have goals to enter into the covenant beyond the goals of the systems. These goals may deal with relationships or areas of the person’s personal growth. The goals should be reviewed carefully to ensure they are reasonable. The supervisee must not be caught between conflicting goals set by the system and the supervisor.

What to Include in the Covenant:
Four areas should be covered in the covenant: needs, goals, activities and evaluation. Different organizations use a variety of technical phrases to describe these areas, but the process is the same.

Needs: First, determine what is needed. Write down a need followed by the goal it produces, the activities required to achieve the goal, and the evaluation process. Then write down the next need and repeat the process. The need serves as the overall “big picture” for the work.
Goals: Goals should be a response to the need. While the need is general, goals should be specific. Goals should be attainable. It is tempting to set goals that are idealistic but unreasonable given the time, situation and resources. The goals should also be measurable. Personhood goals are often more difficult to measure and may need different criteria than task goals.
Activities: Each goal will need multiple activities; actions designed to reach a specific goal. This is where you will outline the responsibilities and roles for accomplishing the stated goal.
Evaluation: Each goal requires an evaluation process that includes a date set to accomplish the goal. The criterion for evaluation is as necessary as the process. How do you know they did what they set out to do?

Other Considerations in Covenanting:
Expectations:

Time: The covenant should specify a time frame. An important time concern is the number of hours per week the person should spend at the task. The person may consider 40 hours per week a normal expectation, while the supervisor may expect 60 or 80. Personal time is also important. The emotional demands of a work setting may exact a toll that can be dealt with only by adequate personal time for renewal. The wise supervisor will be concerned about not only the task time, but the person’s time for study, family and spiritual renewal.
Work: The type and intensity of work also should be defined in the covenant. The person may not see paperwork or other activities as relevant even though the system may require them.
Behavior: Supervisors sometimes have been surprised by the behavior of their supervisees. The surprises may involve dress, personal habits or language of supervisees who were not aware of cultural differences, taboos or expectations.

Roles and Relationships: The supervisor and the person should covenant their relationship and roles. When the supervisor is program oriented and the person is person oriented, difficulties can arise. Differences in age, gender and culture can heighten these problems.

Renegotiation: Circumstances and relationships may require the covenant to be re evaluated and rewritten. A time for renegotiation should be included in the original covenant. This gives the covenant a chance to work and prevents change on a whim. Renegotiation, as part of the original covenant, is done by mutual consent of the supervisor and the supervisee.