Wellness & Clinical Supervision
A. Stephen Lenz & Robert L. Smith (2010) Integrating wellness concepts within a clinical supervision model, The Clinical Supervisor, 29:2, 228-245, DOI:10.1080/07325223.2010.518511
The authors of this article identify that there is a need to develop a wellness informed model of supervision and, that by integrating wellness concepts into supervision, this can in turn lead to better outcomes for our clients.
There was plenty of discussion around these topics in our fortnightly book club. Firstly, what is wellness? Wellness and the definition that the authors came to conclude, is a multi-dimensional approach to viewing the wellbeing of an individual, usually consisting of several dimensions. Wellness also comes with its own measurement scale: the five-factor wellness inventory (5F-WEL), which came about from the works of Myers and Sweeny (2005), The indivisible self: Evidence-based model of wellness (image below).
When thinking about the integration of wellness and a set of purposeful information about a particular individual, does this then blur the line between supervision and therapy? When thinking about supervision, the group presented that traditionally, supervision has been about the way in which we conduct our role, not the way in which we conduct ourselves as individuals. It was posed that perhaps an inventory about the self is too intimate for supervision and that in many office cultures, it is not safe to disclose personal information to your supervisor, lest you be performance managed or asked to take time off. Yet, in a smaller workplace with a good office culture, some of the group felt as though this could be a viable option, at least in part, for supervision moving forward.
Reasonable points were made about integrating the WELMS model in a coaching style of supervision or, even in a group supervision. If the whole group is involved and the approach is that one of encouragement and support in the workplace, then why not? And, if the worker is offering up their information, rather than being, in a sense, told to offer up information, then it would truly be a person-centred approach to get behind.
However, what is the point of the article? It was wondered what the article is saying about perfection and the pressure to be 100% in all areas of our lives, all the time. What would it be like if we scored the inventory at assessment time and did not get 100% at the end? How would the world work without us 80%er’s? Can everybody be well all the time?
But, in the time of COVID-19 especially, there is validity in increasing wellness amongst staff. Perhaps the implementation of WELMS is not something that will decrease burnout for those at the end of their tether, but add a sense of reluctancy and monitoring, making the problem worse. Perhaps it could do the opposite and increase professional identity and responsiveness to clients. Only time and implementation will tell.
