For the past four years, Oxford Brookes University has hosted and annual conference on Coaching Supervision. The 4th International Conference on Coaching Supervision was held in June this year in conjunction with Ashridge Business School.

Bringing together some of the most respected names in the field of coaching supervision whose writing is influencing the development of coaching supervision theory and practice, the goal of the conference is to:

“develop further a knowledge base for coaching supervision and thus promote good practice, support research in this area and contribute to professional debates”.

Two key-note speakers Dr. Tatiana Bachkirova and Sam Magill led a program of presented offering a wide variety of perspectives on the theme of coaching supervision. Dr. Bachkirova raised the question of

“quality or equality and other questions of supervision in light of two dominant modernist and postmodernist paradigms”

arguing that a tension exists between quality of practice and equality of all perspectives.

Sam Magill posed questions that seem important for many coaches, namely:

“Why do I need it?” and “What happens in it?”

Dr. Anthony Grant carried out research in 2011 confirmed an earlier report from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development that many coaches say that coaching supervision is important, but that not all coaches undertake supervision partly due to cost.

Among all the presentations, the approach proposed by Prof. Bob Garvey gave me much pause for thought. Using the EMCC Code of Ethics which requires that all members have supervision, and using the labels first espoused by Kadushin (1978) that supervision is normative – fits within the agreed rules, formative – providing feedback on knowledge and skill development and supportive, Garvey suggests that this is a form of neofeudalistic control suggesting as an alternative that coaching could adopt a Rogerian “person-centred and humanistic approach”.

At is worst, as Bob Garvey suggests, perhaps there could be a high level of control in coaching supervision which seems almost neofeudalistic. At its best however, supervision provides a place to reflect, work through challenging issues and identify a new perspective and ways of working.

Have a read of Bob’s presentation at http://business.brookes.ac.uk/assets/commercial/coaching-supervision-conference/2014/bob-garvey.pdf and let me know what you think.