Abstract
Effective professional supervision (PS) offers nurses the opportunity to develop both personally and professionally through formal conversations with a trained supervisor. Perceived benefits, in the situation of efficacious supervision, have included improved wellbeing, increased self-awareness, confidence levels and more client-focused, innovative care.
The aim of this research study was to ascertain the perceptions of Canterbury nurses, involved in professional supervision, of the effectiveness of and benefits from supervision activities. These activities included establishing a supervisory relationship, training, contracting and the learning gained from the supervision session.
An existing survey-questionnaire (survey), that was part of an interdisciplinary study within the mental health sector in Canterbury in 2001, was adapted to survey a group of Canterbury nurses undergoing supervision. The survey included questions for both nurse-supervisees and nurse-superivsors. Over half of the participants worked in mental health areas whilst the remainder came from a wide range of nursing specialties.
Findings from 107 surveys obtained from this study rendered a high degree of satisfaction and perceived benefits experienced by this cohort. Personal benefits included recognition of personal issues, feeling valued and having increased confidence. Joint problem-solving and creative-thinking resulted in perceived changes in the degree of therapeutic perception and the provision of more client-focused care and treatment options. In addition, the qualitative comments from the survey acknowledged further benefits through the promotion of best practice, the increased ability to manage challenges, cultivation of positive attitudes and increased efficiency.
Interestingly, the participants were forthcoming in their suggestions on how to assure the quality of supervision. Support from all levels of staff, financial backing for standardised training and ongoing education, greater numbers and choice of supervisors, evaluation of supervision and review of contractual agreements, were all identified as foundational elements for successful PS.
However, a limitation to this study was the low return rate and overall positive bias towards supervision of nurses who participated in the survey. Firstly, the positive leaning towards PS left a gap, omitting the non-survey participants experiences of professional supervision. Secondly, disproportionate sizes of groups of participants and the different models used within the nursing specialties limited the opportunity for comparative testing. Thirdly, as a sole researcher there was a risk of bias in the interpretation of results, and any generalisations needed to be made with caution.
Along with the benefits and limitations, significant findings from this study highlighted the point of view that effective PS is required if benefits are to be realised. Noticable inconsistencies in supervision activities and overall functional arrangements were emphasised. Suggestions made included: standardisation using generic standards and guidelines that could assist in operationalising, maintaining and sustaining PS as a quality support and professional development system.
The present study indicated that further research may add to the baseline information gained from these findings. Suggested research included: (1) a study situated in one location, in a generalist setting, utilising a well recognised research tool (2) an area that endorses and supports PS at all levels could be compared with an area where PS has not been introduced (3) contrasting formats of supervision, assessing personality traits and motivational characteristics of participants attending voluntary supervision are other research areas that have emerged from this study. This research could provide additional information to encourage the expansion and development of supervision in nursing.