Supervision is a cornerstone of ethical and effective counselling and psychotherapy practice. It provides a space for us counsellors to reflect, learn, and refine our skills while ensuring accountability and client safety. Over the years, a number of supervision models have been developed, each with its own emphasis and strengths. Understanding these models can help both supervisors and supervisees engage in richer, more purposeful supervision conversations. I’ll also discuss my preference!
Developmental Models
Developmental perspectives emphasise that counsellors progress through stages of growth. Supervision adapts accordingly, shifting from a directive style early in training to a more collaborative and consultative stance as practitioners mature. Stoltenberg and Delworth’s Integrated Developmental Model (IDM) highlights changes in awareness, motivation, and autonomy, while Rønnestad and Skovholt’s model traces professional development across the entire career span—from novice to seasoned professional. I quite like Skovholt’s way of looking at supervision, and use bits and pieces of this model.
The Discrimination Model
Developed by Janine Bernard, this model offers a practical, flexible approach. Supervisors adopt one of three roles—teacher, counsellor, or consultant—depending on the supervisee’s needs, and focus on one of three areas: intervention skills, conceptualisation skills, or personalisation. Its adaptability makes it one of the most widely applied supervision frameworks. It’s ‘simple and powerful’. Without knowing the model in-depth, I have integrated parts of it in my own supervision work.
The Seven-Eyed Model
Hawkins and Shohet’s Seven-Eyed Model looks at supervision through multiple lenses, including client issues, the therapeutic relationship, the counsellor’s inner world, the supervisory relationship, and the wider system. This model is particularly valuable for supervisors who want to highlight relational and systemic dynamics, as well as for supervisees seeking deeper reflection. It’s a powerful model, I think, but in my own practice I don’t use this one very deliberately, as it’s fairly complex.
Proctor’s Functional Model
One of the foundational frameworks in supervision, Proctor’s model identifies three essential functions:
- Normative (monitoring ethical practice and accountability)
- Formative (fostering learning and skills development)
- Restorative (providing support, reducing stress, and promoting resilience).
This tripartite structure has influenced many subsequent models. It has that more ‘simpler’ feel, and can be integrated very well.
Systems Approaches
Holloway’s Systems Approach reminds us that supervision does not happen in isolation. It acknowledges the broader influences on practice, including workplace dynamics, organisational culture, and professional regulation. It sounds very “Adlerian”, in many ways! This model helps supervisors and supervisees consider the bigger picture when reflecting on cases and practice.
Constructivist and Postmodern Models
More recent approaches influenced by narrative therapy, collaborative-dialogical practice, and social constructionism highlight supervision as a co-created process. These models encourage reflection on language, meaning, and power in the supervisory space.
The RISE UP Model
In Australia, Dr Phil Armstrong’s RISE UP model has become a structured and widely used approach. It provides a clear process for supervision sessions by following these steps:
- R – Review: Revisiting commitments and insights from previous supervision.
- I – Issues: Identifying key cases or practice concerns.
- S – Supervisee: Attending to the wellbeing and professional development of the counsellor.
- E – Ethics: Ensuring ethical and legal standards are met.
- U – Unfinished business: Returning to unresolved matters.
- P – Planning: Setting goals and strategies moving forward.
The RISE UP model’s strength lies in its balance of accountability, structure, and personal support, making it highly practical in busy clinical contexts. This is the model I was trained in, and still primarily use. I like it for its -again- simplicity, while still encompassing all the necessary elements of supervision.
Integrating Models in Practice
Most supervisors draw on more than one model, tailoring their approach to the supervisee’s stage, context, and needs. For example, developmental and functional models may be combined with the Seven-Eyed Model to create a reflective yet structured supervisory space.
Ultimately, effective supervision is less about strict adherence to a single framework and more about thoughtful integration—ensuring that supervisees are supported, challenged, and guided to provide the best care for their clients.
What do you think your preferred model of supervision would be? Let me know!
