How are the interpersonal conflicts presented in supervisory relationship?

1995) that facilitates supervisees to move from being immature, dependent to

independent and autonomous in their professional developmental process.

Although attachment theory offers us a wider horizon to study the dynamic

supervisory relationship, not many in-depth studies can be found with regard to

supervisory relationships. Would the attachment style in a collective culture be

different from in an individualistic culture? How does that affect the supervisory

behaviour, cognitive process and emotional responses of the supervisors and

supervisees? Besides, it is interesting to know how supervisees who have insecure

attachment styles have gone through their struggling process as a professional

counsellor. Lots of these questions need to be researched in the future.

3.2.3.5 How are the interpersonal conflicts presented in supervisory relationship?

Disagreement and conflicts exist everywhere especially in close relationships.

Conflict has been defined as a disagreement between two interdependent people

who perceive that they have incompatible goals (Guerrero, Andersen and Afifi,

2001).

A supervisory relationship is a kind of close relationship with close encounters,

aiming at facilitating supervisees to solve the difficulties they face in counselling but

at the same time this is also a source of supervisory conflicts. Various sources of

89

supervisory relationship conflicts are obviously researched and discussed in the

literature (Mueller and Kell, 1972; Friedlander et al., 1984, 1986; Olk and

Friedlander, 1992; Nelson and Friedlander, 2001; Oetzel et al., 2001). How far does

the potential hierarchy impact the dynamic supervisory relationship and the

supervision and their learning? What are the potential conflicts found in the

relationship? How do the student counsellors’ coping mechanism when facing these

conflicts? How far do the cultural assumptions and values affect the learning

process?

Figure 3.8 Sources of supervisory interpersonal conflicts

I have categorized three major sources of supervisory relationship conflicts from the

literature (see Figure 3.8). Firstly, the nature of the supervisory relationship is the

principal source of interpersonal conflicts. This is paradoxical in nature and the

90

complexity of the relationship has set the stage for interpersonal conflict. A

supervisory relationship is an evaluative relationship in which the performance of

the junior counsellors is evaluated by a more experienced professional (Stoltenberg

and Grus, 2004; Bernard and Goodyear, 2004). Some critical functions of the

supervisory relationship which have contributing impacts on the complexity of the

relational dynamic have been touched (Doehrman, 1976; Friedlander et al., 1984;

Nelson and Friedlander, 2001; Gazzola and Thériault, 2007). The supervisees, in

order to learn, are contented with the notion that they might need to be directed,

but they expect the mastery to be operated in a very clever and subtle way (Bernard

and Goodyear, 2004). When supervisors reject and disapprove of their thoughts and

feelings, react inflexibly, conflictual feelings will be aroused (Gray, Ladany, Walker

and Ancis, 2001). Supervisees, especially novice counsellors, are viewed as

vulnerable to poor judgment (Nelson and Friedlander, 2001). However, I am curious

if the way and manner of presentation of the judgment will affect the responses of

the supervisees or not.

Difference in experience will result in difference in understanding and perception of

the reality. Power and positional status is another critical factor that contributes to

the supervisory conflicts. Supervisees’ sense of powerlessness is expressed

frequently in terms of feeling controlled or in terms of a violation of boundaries

91 (Nelson and Friedlander, 2001).

Secondly, unsatisfactory performance, either from supervisors or supervisees,

hinders the supervisory process. If the supervisors show little interest in developing

the supervisory relationship, it will cause frustration in the supervisees. Educational

neglect and emotional neglect (Kozlowska, Nunn and Cousins, 1997) remoteness

and being uncommitted to establishing supervisory relationships (Nelson and

Friedlander, 2001) are examples of poor performance. Interns will also feel conflict

when supervisors give little recognition of their strength and discourage their

independence (Wulf and Nelson, 2000).

The third source is personal difference. McAdams (1995) argues that individual

differences in personality can be described on three levels: what a person has, what

a person does and how the person makes meaning of his or her experiences.

Personality is regarded as one of the most important determinants in studying

conflict (Ahmed et al., 2010; Robbins et al., 2008). The relationship between

personality and conflict has captured the attention of researchers for many years

(Bono et al., 2002). Personality clashes take place between supervisee and

supervisor with opposite polarities which can cause great tensions and relationship

conflicts. Personalities are genetically determined resulting in different sets of

emotional reactions and orientation of thinking patterns and behaviour patterns.

92

Learning styles refer to the ways an individual characteristically acquires, retains

and retrieves information (Felder and Henrique, 1995). It has been extensively

studied in educational psychology literature (Schmeck, 1988). Similar to learning

styles, teaching styles refer to the pervasive way of approaching the learners.

Mismatches of supervisee learning styles and the supervisor teaching styles is a

potential conflict in the supervision (Bernard and Goodyear, 2004).

‘Cohort’ is widely used demographically referring to people of about the same age

with similar experience of a particular generation. ‘Cohort model’ refers to “a group

of students who begin and complete a program of studies together, engaging in a

common set of courses, activities, and/or learning experiences” (Barnett and Muse,

1993, p. 401). Rosow (1978) defines ‘cohort’ as people who share a given life

experience and this experience is socially or historically structured in a common

generational framework which distinguish one generation from another and are

relatively stable over the life course. Normally, the supervisors and supervisees are

from different generations with different professional experience. The difficulties,

which they have encountered, such as social status, workplace norms, social

perception of the professional identities, are different from the newer generations.

Conflicts caused by cohort difference are frequent sources I have seen in my

working experience. However, little research has been done especially in the

93 counselling profession.

Conflicts need not be destructive. Conflicts are actually signals to arouse our

attention to the needs. They play an important role in facilitating personal as well as

relational growth. From the literature and my experience, having a conflict in

supervision is not necessarily negative. Positive learning and self-discovery can

result from the experience (Nelson and Friedlander, 2001) if the conflicts are

well-acknowledged and properly managed. More in-depth studies will surely benefit

the supervision profession. Besides, how do counselling students cope with different

types of conflicts in the internship process? Are there any significant differences in

the handling of different types of conflicts? What types of strategies will student

interns prefer and why? These are interesting questions which I wished to explore in

this research.

3.2.4 Key theme (4): Examining the intersection of culture