Skills and Perceptions of Entry-Level Staff Supervision

The following study consisted of 532 respondents to a survey related to the supervision of entry­ level staff in student affairs. Participants included both supervisors of entry-level staff and entry­ level staff themselves. Individuals shared their thoughts and experiences regarding the supervision of this population. Themes emerged in four areas: Readiness for the supervisory role, challenges related to supervision, supervisor skills, and working through transition. Implications and recommendations for practice and further research are discussed. Introduction Supervision is one of the most complex activities that student affairs professionals are called upon to peiform (Winston & Creamer, 1997, p. 187) To someone working in student affairs, truer words may never have been spoken. Supervision is a key component in the experience of nearly every student affairs professional. Whether overseeing undergraduate resident assistants and student leaders or graduate students, supervision is a critical aspect of one's early career experience. Magolda and Carnaghi (2004) indicate that the two primary objectives of most student affairs preparation programs are to socialize and professionalize graduate students for their future careers. As such, most entry-level staff member , a substantial number of who are recent graduates from advanced programs, are well-prepared and trained for supervising undergraduate and graduate students (Renn & Hodges, 2007). The term entry-level or new professional typically refers to anyone with five years or less of full-time experience in the field (Cilente, Henning, Jackson, Kennedy, & Sloane, 2006; Coleman & Johnson, 1990). This group represents approximately 15% to 20% of the personnel in the higher education workforce (Cilente et al., 2006). The study of college student development helps young supervisors understand the motivations and thought processes of their supervisees. Those who supervise graduate students and new professionals often push for reflection upon the supervisory experience. However, once an individual moves into midlevel and senior level positions, intentional training, mentorship, and opportunities for reflection are rarely implemented. In most mid-level to senior-level positions, despite being an expectation of the job, supervi ion of staff garners little attention. Wood, Winston, and Polkosnik (1985) indicated that most mid and upper level supervisors have received little if any formal training in the area of supervision and management. Perhaps it is assumed that supervision is an intuitive process or a rite of pas age, and once an individual reaches the mid to upper levels of the profession that they "just know" how to supervise. Unfortunately, the assumptions of skills needed and used by both supervisor and supervisee can cause challenges in the supervisory relationship. Harned and Murphy ( 1998) explain that: 20 Calhoun and Nasser: Skills and Perceptions Published by Digital Commons@Georgia Southern, 2013 A common dynamic is that a . professional is promoted into a managerial position with little or no true preparation, where the fallback to avoid failure is not better supervision [of subordinates] but harder work. This can create an unhealthy situation that may result in resentment and disenchantment by both overwrought supervisors and neglected staff (p. 45). Often times, assumptions about the skills needed and used by both supervisor and supervisee can cause challenges to the upervisory relationship. For a field that prides itself on training and preparation, student affairs professionals must more fully address the needs for supervision of full time professionals. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences and perceptions surrounding the supervision of entry-level staf in student affairs. Data collection focused on the supervisory relationship, training and preparation, and support from both those that supervise entry-level staff, and the staff members themselves. By further exploring the skills and perceptions of entry­ level staff supervision, our hope was to identify ways to bridge the gap between supervisor and supervisee and uncover methods to better support and prepare supervisors of entry-level staff. Review of Literature In order to fully explore the supervision of new professionals, it is important to look at the manner in which supervisors are prepared, what supervision models are utilized within student affairs, and the type of relationships that exist between supervisor and supervisee. Supervision Training Preparation for supervising staff should be a critical component of staff training. Garland and Grace ( 1993) argued that "employers of new student affairs professionals must recognize a responsibility to provide new staff with ongoing training and support to build expertise, develop professionalism, and provide opportunities to evaluate and improve performance" (p. 96). However, most student affairs staff training programs tend to focus on the preparation of individuals for a specific position, rather than the broader development of professional kills and competencies, such as those outlined by the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) and the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) (ACPA, 2007). While many new professionals may develop the skills necessary for staff supervision through routine practice of their first position, much of this skill development is implicit and not openly discussed. Moreover, these skills are often focused upon the supervision of undergraduate or graduate students, and not full time professionals. Finally, while some employers provide on­ going profes ional development opportunities for new professionals, there exists no standard curriculum for preparing professionals to take on the supervision of other professional staff members. In fact, it is clear that graduate preparation programs are instrumental in equipping many new professionals with appropriate skills for future experiences in student affairs, but that training will only go so far. For instance, some graduate preparation programs focus on ethical issues faced in transitioning to life as a new professional or supervising undergraduate student staff (Renn & Hodges, 2007), few programs dedicate time discussing the issues that happen beyond the entry-level stage and more specifically on matters surrounding the supervision of full 21 Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs, Vol. 29, Iss. 1 [2013], Art. 4 https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern. edu/gcpa/vol29/iss1/4 DOI: 10.20429/gcpa.2013. 290104 time professional staff. Once students make the transition to practitioners, the type of supervision they receive can impact their professional experience and warrants further examination. Supervision in Student Affairs The importance of good supervision on the development of professionals is well documented (Dalton, 1996; Ricci, Potterfield, & Piper, 1987; Saunders, Cooper, Winston, & Chernow, 2000; Upcraft, 1982). Several techniques have been recommended for supervision within the student affairs field, including a developmental model rooted in psychology proposed by Stock-Ward and Javorek (2003), and the concept of synergistic supervision, first introduced by Winston and Creamer (1997). Synergistic supervision has been touted as an effective model for supervision because it benefits both the individuals (supervisor/supervisee) and the institution, enhancing organizational effectiveness (Saunders, et al., 2000). If both the supervisor and supervisee can work together to realize each other's goals and maximize leadership growth, both the individuals and the organization will thrive (Winston & Creamer, 1997). This is consistent with the key components of synergistic supervision, which include mutual buy-in, two-way communication, and a focus on competence and goals by both parties (Winston & Creamer, 1998). In addition, synergistic supervision, and more specifically and the relationship between supervisor and supervisee, has been viewed as a means of retention for student affairs professionals (Tull, 2007). Shupp and Armino ( 2012) also evaluated the needs of entry-level staff in regards to synergistic supervision and recommended a number of ways that supervisors can better support supervisees. Some of the recommendations included: focusing on reflection, professional development, empowerment, communication, and the relational aspect of supervision. The literature supports the idea that synergistic supervision is an effective method to use within student affairs, primarily because of its focus on relationships. Supervision, at its core, is based upon the relationship between the supervisor and the supervisee. Supervisor/Supervisee Relationship Developing strong relationships is a focal point for student affairs practitioners, so it stands to reason that the relationship supervisor and supervisee would be a key factor in the development of new professionals. Recent research has examined the transition process for new professionals (Amey & Reesor, 2002; Cilente, et al., 2006; Janosik, Creamer, Hirt, Winston, Jr., Saunders, & Cooper, 2003; Magolda & Carnaghi, 2004; Renn & Hodges, 2007; Renn & Jessup­ Anger, 2008), the desired traits for new professionals (Belch & Mueller, 2003), expectations of supervisors, expectations of graduate students entering professional practice, and how to prepare new professionals for practice (Jones & McEwen, 2006). At the entry-level stage of a professional's development, it is crucial that they have the support and tutelage of mentors and supervisors. Cilente et al. (2006) suggested it is the responsibility of supervisors of new professionals to "help them adapt to an inherently different culture than what they may be used to" (p. 18). These individuals may not be equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to excel and need someone to provide guidance and direction. Ignelzi (1998) also