Michael Ellis, “Harmful Supervision, a Cause for Alarm: Comment on Gray et al (2001) and Nelson and Friedlander”

Ellis comments on the supervision literature as of 2001, noting that “bad” supervision (e.g., not meeting with the supervisee) was lumped in with “harmful” supervision (e.g., sexual harassment). Ellis tries to differentiate between the two, noting that “bad” supervision “does not result in any psychological or emotional trauma or harm to the supervisees or to their clients”. “Harmful supervision may be defined as supervisory practices that result in psychological, emotional or physical harm or trauma to the supervisee… The key distinguishing feature between bad and harmful supervision is the effect on the supervisee.” Also noteworthy, Ellis notes that “[h]armful supervision should be distinguished from those instances where the supervisee struggled with painful issues in supervision or was given feedback from the supervisor that was difficult to hear or that was emotionally upsetting, but necessary for professional growth.” (402)

Michael Ellis, “Harmful Supervision, a Cause for Alarm: Comment on Gray et al. (2001) and Nelson and Friedlander” (2001) 48:4 J Counseling Psychology401.