When the NHS Institute decided to invest in supervision for its internal coaching it turned to Peter Hawkins of Bath Consultancy Group. Liz Hall finds out how the Seven Eyed Model has both enhanced coaching skills and saved money too
Investing in internal coach supervision was the next logical step for the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement (NHS Institute), after having successfully built internal coaching capability and put in place a register of approved NHS external coaches.The business case was clear: it would enhance coaching skills, maintain capability, create regional pull for supervision and offset the cost of buying external supervision.
The NHS Institute approached Bath Consultancy Group (BCG), founded by Peter Hawkins who developed the renowned Seven Eyed Model with Robin Shohet1.
The first cohort went live in October 2009. To date, two have gone ahead, with another in March if funding can be secured.
Sue Mortlock, head of board development, says the programme is helping to embed coaching skills. “The experience of going through the programme has increased participants’ practice and externalised coaching practice and the impact for them in their own work, taking their coaching skills to a new level.”
Evaluation feedback from the first cohort shows the programme hit the spot for the nine participants interviewed. Eighty per cent strongly agreed and 20 per cent agreed the programme met overall and personal objectives.
Participants particularly appreciated the practice content, with one commenting: “This was a very action-orientated programme where we had lots of opportunity to practise from day one.”
Others relished “the opportunity to discuss key aspects with experienced, credible facilitators”.
Recruitment and selection
Strategic Health Authority (SHA) coach leads got involved in marketing the programme to recruit potential supervisors, and by headhunting probable candidates in their region. Criteria, agreed with the leads, were based on European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) accreditation levels – applicants were expected to have a coaching qualification at EMCC level 5/7.
A points-based application included 13 questions with 0-3 points each. Mortlock says the criteria for selecting participants worked very well.
Assessment was carried out by one internal and one external assessor. Shortlisted applicants were then referred to SHAs for confirmation. Applicants were expected to have been coaching for three to seven years, have carried out 100-500 hours’ coaching, have had 10-40 clients and some experience of one-to-one and group supervision. They were expected to commit to being an NHS internal coach supervisor and to supervise for five hours a month for two years.
Development
The development process consisted of a three-day foundation course, a two-day group supervision module (both with a gap of around three months), followed by a one-day group supervision and learning review.
They were also required to have 25 hours’ group or individual supervision, five one-hour supervision sessions, plus a one-hour tutorial, including 360-degree feedback.
Finally, participants were expected to have conversations with their SHA about developing a supervision service.
Take-up
Internal coach supervision has been offered nationally but take-up has been lower than hoped for, though it is still early days. In particular, there has been a low take-up of phone supervision (see Coaching at Work, vol 5, issue 5, page 38 ). “It has been really slow with very little appetite for it. We’ve been lucky if we’ve had two or three a month. But it is a safety net,” says Mortlock.
There has been more success with people picking up group supervision, she says: “People really value and learn from hearing about each others’ coaching experience.”
Employees operating within the NHS’ culture tend to be familiar and comfortable with reflective practice and with group settings. This is not always the case with external coaches. The NHS Institute has run a number of supervision developmental days with coaches on its external coach register.
Although these events are cost-effective and many participants get a lot out of them, some find them challenging and anxiety-provoking as they are accustomed to very personal, intimate supervision,” says Mortlock.
Local pull
Although it has not yet been achieved widely, Mortlock says the aim has been to create lots of local clusters of supervision and it has really helped build momentum: “Where we have been able to get that support in the locality, it’s been really helpful with people sharing ideas and bouncing ideas around.”
A handful of SHAs, including NHS West Midlands and NHS Yorkshire and the Humber have been good role models, says Mortlock.
“They have been role modelling what is aspired to in other SHAs, with people working to support each other.”
Traction is easiest where there is an existing infrastructure in place to support internal coaching, such as in NHS West Midlands, explains Mortlock. West Midlands has a history of doing internal coaching and offering support for internal coaches.
It helps to identify the right lead for the initiative too. At NHS Yorkshire and the Humber, Joanna Valentine has been leading the agenda.
“She can leverage what’s needed to pull it together. It’s more than having a champion, it’s having someone with a deeper understanding. We’ve got other areas where people are leading but they aren’t trained in the dynamics of relationships [like Joanna],” says Mortlock.
Bath Consultancy Group www.bathconsultancygroup.com
Case study: Anthony Owens
Prior to his participation in the programme, Anthony Owens, internal coach and senior OD practitioner at the Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, wasn’t convinced about supervision. He’d had some buddy supervision but no one-to-one and had carried out very little supervision. He’s now a big fan, particularly of the Seven Eyed Model.
“The programme was a fantastic experience because I had lots of models, principles and content already but I’d struggled to make them come to life with buddy supervision. I found some of the models clunky and didn’t get to the issue. I had a sense of frustration.”
One session was particularly memorable. His cohort was practising group supervision. After the first round, the facilitator, Gil Schwenk, principal consultant at BCG, encouraged honest feedback. Owens said he didn’t feel part of the group, he felt he was just watching one-to-one coaching. But by the end of the three-hour session, he felt they’d moved into group process. “I’d never seen that before and there was a real sense of community of practice. It might have been an explicit goal of Gil’s but it emerged for us as we worked together.”
The feedback helped participants try out new ideas and be brave, says Owens. He shifted away from experiencing the Seven Eyed Model as clunky, becoming more able to “trust intuition with intelligence, learning that the model offers you several lenses of curiosity”.
Owens now uses the model when coaches come to talk in general terms about learning effectively or managing boundaries.
“We start by getting the client in the room, which generally helps the conversation. We describe the client and what they look like, and from the perspective of their partner and manager somewhere else.”
The model is “never far from” him nowadays: “If I’m working with a client, as they’re talking, I’ll become aware of where their intent is. I’ll ask which tools they’ve been using, which makes you aware of the areas of the model not talked about, the impact of the client and how they felt, for example. It’s about where the conversation is loaded or headed and it allows me to offer really good challenge.”
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust is now looking at creating a supervision policy, which Owens is contributing to, highlighting the need for supervision of the supervisors. There might also be opportunities to use the supervision to support other non-coaching groups too. “For example, there are people whose roles have the same title but the job itself is differenr. The supervision approach helps to understand what’s going on in their system,” he noted.
Learning points: implementing supervision
- What is your definition of coaching supervision. Does it apply company-wide?
- Who is going to be supervised?
- What types of coaching should be supervised?
- How frequently should coaches be supervised? This will depend on the type, level of coaching and the amount of coaching being done. BCG recommends a supervision/coaching ratio of 1:35 hours for experienced developmental/transformational coaches, quarterly at least; 1:20 hours for trainee coaches, every four to eight weeks, and for line managers, quarterly – twice a year, often including ongoing development
- Group versus individual supervision? Individual supervision can work at a deeper level but is more expensive and can lead to dependency. Group offers more value for money, can simultaneously accelerate group capability but confidentiality is trickier, individuals get less attention and group dynamics can get in the way
- Make sure there are opportunities to practise and share learning
- Build up clusters of local support and identify local champions/leads
Internal supervision: the pros and cons
PROS
- Know the system and language
- Have a better understanding of the service needed
- Builds internal capacity rather than ‘renting’ external supervisors
- Cost-effective compared to using external supervisors
- Greater opportunity to feed back the learning from supervision
CONS
- May lack identity and credibility
- Too busy to participate in supervision
- May not be able to see systems and patterns since they are immersed in the system
- Confidentiality and ethical dilemmas are more likely
- Hard to avoid ‘organisational issues’
Source: Mortlock and Schwenk
Seven Eyed Model
Developed by Peter Hawkins and Robin Shohet, the model offers a framework for supervision, with seven lenses through which to look at what’s going on:
- The client and how they present
- The interventions and strategies used by the coach
- The relationship between the client and coach
- The coach
- The supervisory relationship
- The supervisor’s process
- The wider context
Coaching at Work, Volume 6, Issue 1