An episode of “Changing the Conversation” podcast
Ken Kraybill and host Ashley Stewart discuss experiences with trauma-informed supervision and needs of supervisors.
February 20, 2023
[Music]
Ashley Stewart, Host (00:05): Hello and welcome to Changing the Conversation. I’m your host, Ashley Stewart, and today I am joined with Ken Kraybill, calling in from Seattle, Washington. And Ken and I will be building on a conversation we had from a previous podcast on trauma-informed supervision. Today our topic will be about experiences with trauma-informed supervision and the needs of supervisors. Ken is an MSW and a senior trainer at C4 Innovations doing incredible work with motivational interviewing and trauma-informed supervision. Ken, thank you so much for joining us again today.
Ken Kraybill, Guest (00:44): And once again, my pleasure. Thanks, Ashley.
Ashley (00:46): Ken, what a delightful conversation we had. I’m still thinking about and reflecting on some of the takeaways from our previous conversations on trauma-informed supervision. I thought it might be a great idea if we could talk about trauma-informed supervision and what it looks like from an experiential view. Getting us thinking about our own experiences with supervision and acknowledging in our previous conversation that trauma is about the wound, supervision is about creating the best possible environment for people to thrive in, what is something you’ve appreciated about previous supervisors and what have been some of your experiences with supervisors?
Ken (01:30): I’ve had a whole array of experiences with supervision and I think each one has been something that I have learned from for sure. But I can also say that I appreciated the ones that were more, let’s just say, user-friendly for me. You talk about what’s important, and one of the things that comes to my mind is it’s actually a rarity that supervision is taken seriously in so many realms of health and human services, and that’s become more clear to me. And I realize that the social work model, that field from which I derive, has tended to take it more seriously than many others. So I think one of the qualities of the supervisor, and that I’ve appreciated most, is that they take supervision seriously.
(02:17): And what I mean by that is they understand the importance, as we all do this hard work at many times, the importance of being able to step back and to create a safe place where we are asked about not only what would you do in this situation, but how is this work impacting you? What’s working well and also what’s maybe not working and where should we put our focus, on what? But it’s also about what feelings is it bringing up and getting into more of that sort of whole body experience. Then when you begin to move towards looking at possible ways forward, you are being asked things like what ideas do you have about how we might proceed or what might be the best course in this situation?
(03:13): What would be some reasons to pursue a different course than the one you did, and so on and so forth. I just think that sort of sense of curiosity that allows us to reflect on our practice is so critically important. It also relates to the ability to be self-caring and self-compassionate as well, because oftentimes those kinds of issues will come up. But what would you add, I’m curious?
Ashley (03:39): What I appreciate about supervisors? Supervisors tend to be stage setters. And what I mean by that is, what is the culture and what is the pace? What are the values? And in my opinion, things that I appreciate about great supervisors is that it’s not all informed by themselves nor is it all informed by the organization, institution or mission, but it’s also informed by the people, and that is the people who have the opportunity to supervise as well as the people or organization or the business or the network or whomever have the opportunity to serve. So when I think about what I really appreciate about supervisors is the willingness to take on and honor those values for themselves to be able to lead in that way.
(04:35): I think that clarity is so essential in a supervisory role, particularly if you’re trying to do it trauma-informed. And in my work equity and trauma-informed supervision, you have to be able to take a perspective of what are the necessary ingredients, if you will, to have success within this organization and then be able to highlight that and create a stage that has it all prepared and ready for people to engage with meaningfully. So, that’s a lot to juggle. That’s a lot to do. That’s a lot to balance, and I appreciate the multidimensional-ness of supervisors.
Ken (05:17): I so appreciate your bringing that in because I think I’ve tended in my career to think more of the one-to-one relationship, but I absolutely agree. I’ve often said that supervisors, I think, set the tone in organizations and they’re very pivotal to how things do or don’t work out. You’re probably quite familiar with the saying that people join organizations and they leave supervisors. I’ve certainly had that experience. But I also think the converse is true that people join organizations and they stick around and thrive because of supervisors as well. And it’s beyond supervisors, of course, it’s the bigger, larger culture too. But I do think, again, that that’s so pivotal and it is a leadership role, and sometimes that’s a teaching role and sometimes it’s a coaching role, but I am impressed by the very many different hats that are required to be worn by supervisors.
(06:14): And there are administrative details, there are clinical details, there are a value of details, there are clinical coaching details, it’s a big deal to be a supervisor. I think what happens in some organizations is that the gravitas of being a supervisor isn’t appreciated and time is cut short, and then you find out that many supervisors are just doing supervision on the fly or it’s, “Oh, my door is always open, feel free to walk in at any time.” Well, I feel like that is not sufficient or acceptable. I mean, yes, it’s acceptable, but because trauma-informed supervision requires breeding safety and predictability and a rhythm and flow that people can know that they’re going to encounter when they’re meeting with somebody. And then also that sense of vulnerability, I think supervisors need to learn the art of vulnerability in the way that Brené Brown talks about it, of this notion of being able to let our whole selves come forward, flaws and all, if you will. So there’s a whole lot more, of course, but those are things that come to my mind.
Ashley (07:24): Yeah, and that power of vulnerability, it’s being able to navigate critically through the unknown and to do that with a level of openness that is powerful and dynamic. So we’re on the topic, it makes me think, what do you think supervisors need to be successful? A lot of times we talk about what supervisors need to do, but as we take a little bit of a step out and think organizationally, what are some of the things that supervisors need to be trauma-informed and what kind of support could be provided to supervisors?
Ken (08:02): I too often think that supervisors are left to fend for themselves, and it’s a lonely position, which is why I know a lot of people find themselves meeting with peer groups, peer supervisory groups, whether in an agency or outside or even getting coaching around supervision. But I think what they need is the acknowledgement of the importance of the work and the space and time to do the work well. So again, an example I hear sometimes is people are supervising 10, 12, 15 people. Well, in my mind, to do that well in most situations, that’s at least half your job, at least half your time, but it’s not treated that way. There’s always these shortcuts that seem to happen. What supervisors need, I think, is also supervision themselves. We don’t think about that a lot, but every supervisor needs a supervisor is how I think about it, or at least some way of stepping back and reflecting on their own practice, because we run into snags, we have blind spots, we do things that are less than trauma-informed oftentimes.
Ashley (09:13): I’m so grateful that I often get to do work where I get to coach supervisors or I get to have conversations with the people who are charged with creating equity within an environment. And in those conversations, I see so much of what you are describing. We’re often tasked with doing things that we are trying to navigate through ourselves. Many of us are pulled into work that we’re connected to our why, as to why we’re excited about work. It’s often tied to something in our personal life or someone who we’re trying to honor in our work. And so being a supervisor does not exclude us from having to process through the challenges of systemic and structural oppression in my experience, it doesn’t remove the pressure of wanting to resolve things quickly but not always having the best approach. And in being a supervisor, you’re looked at constantly to have the answers, to be able to respond instantaneously.
(10:15): I think that giving grace to remove this idea of expertise from supervisors to be facilitators of critical thinking and processing is really helpful and a nice way to reframe. Supervisors are trying to think through different structures, different policies, different practices, different procedures that will create an environment for people to thrive and be nourished. And in order to do that, kind of to highlight and bounce off of our previous podcast that we talked about in supervision, that means that there has to be a prioritization of that supervisor’s wellness. So the conversations that I’m tending to have with coaching supervisors is about creating wellness for themselves, finding and sparking joy in the work that they’re doing but also recognizing how they can advocate for the organizational, systemic or even higher level structural changes that need to happen in order for equity to be paramount and prioritized within organizations.
(11:18): To expect a supervisor to know how to do that, to know how to process that for themselves and to disseminate that to a team, that’s a lot for one person. And so there has to be a support around that supervisor, a community that also values these same principles that allows for anyone within that supervisory capacity to lean on those values in the work that they do. I think that is something we don’t often get to talk about too much.
Ken (11:50): I’m sitting here thinking for people who are listening in who are supervisors or wannabe supervisors, we don’t want to overwhelm you with the idea that so many hats and so many things to be aware of and all that. There is that, but it’s also, again, like you were saying, it’s creating the conditions, laying the groundwork, setting the stage, and allowing you to recognize that that person who is with you is also… you’re a team, you’re not in it alone and the two of you’re working. I love soccer and I’ve coached soccer and played soccer, and I think about good coaching does a lot of prep work to help people be ready to do the job of going out and playing the game. But during the course of a game, it’s rhythm and flow and you can’t be directing people where to run and all of that. Not that I haven’t tried that before, but you have to let the dance unfold and the play unfold with minimal input basically. That would be kind of the ideal situation for me of being a supervisor.
(12:55): I want to attach to that the idea of trauma-informed supervision also meaning that it starts at the point where when we’re looking for somebody to fill a position, we’re taking a lot of care and being involved in that process and we’re helping to screen people. We’re asking really interesting conversations during the interview process, try to get a feel for who the person is. The onboarding process, we try to make it dynamic and thorough, and then we begin the process. But hiring the right person for the job is such a critical part of being, shall we say, a successful supervisor. And when that’s not the case, when we bring somebody in who just doesn’t fit, I think we have to have the courage to let that person know and know for the team that this is not working moving forward. Again, that’s all part of this process too.
Ashley (13:51): I think about this particular analogy when it comes to supporting supervisors. A lot of times supervisors are looking at a bunch of different, metaphorically, fires that need to be put out, if you will. And a lot of times the pressure that is put on supervisors is to put a little bit out on this one, put a little bit out on this one, put a little bit out on this one, when a way that we could be so supportive would be to help to develop a unique skillset to be able to extinguish. And developing this really innovative, but distinct to this supervisor’s way of extinguishing, developing a team that’s prepared to extinguish. And then when we allow that space for creativity and flow and functionality to emerge, then putting out all the rest of the fires are almost instantaneous because we’re in a rhythm, we’re in a groove, we have a system that works.
(14:55): But I think a lot of times we don’t give that space for that system to be developed. And what I’m hoping for supervisors is that they can feel empowered in their ability to be able to take charge in different areas that are unique to them and their strengths and their capacity as a leader so that they can be able to see a bunch of different things and not feel overwhelmed by them, but recognize that they have a team and they have a system and they have a structure that is unique to themselves and their strengths that they can begin to implement. And what would that feel like to have that pressure be released, to go into the work environment and to know that you could just thrive no matter what comes your way?
(15:41): Sure, there’s going to be obstacles. Sure, there’s going to be different challenges. But all in all, we’re being trauma-informed, we’re being equitable about it. And in that we can begin to relinquish this idea that there’s one set of particular expertise, but instead there’s a process, a protocol, a toolbox of options that we can begin to use to respond to provide care or to nourish, or in that example that I described extinguish, whatever the issue is. Nurture it and then begin to nurture the other things that are calling or needing our attention. That would be really exciting, I think.
Ken (16:22): I’d love to be on that team and lead that team, and it’s something we can all aspire to. And like you said, it’s never completely perfect. But I will say in my own experience of supervision, it hasn’t been a burden. Maybe every now and then, but it’s really been a joyful process because it also gives me the opportunity to help equip others to grow and develop and nurture their own development because they too will become supervisors someday. So I even see it in that sense that I’m in the business, if you will, of equipping others to be good supervisors and hopefully they can pick up whatever I can offer as at least part of what they can carry forward.
Ashley (17:08): That’s great. So you and I are in this space where we support, we have conversations about supervision, trauma-informed supervision, equity-centered supervision, for most of our days, and I’m wondering was there a pivotal moment for you or a particular instance, moment or story that had you begin to think differently about supervision?
Ken (17:36): One of my very first supervisors who rightfully saw me as new at my job and showed me the ropes and all of that, but then when it became a process of my beginning to ask questions for which I was really not seeking answers, I was seeking the opportunity to talk out loud with somebody about that, sadly this particular supervisor seemingly always had an answer for everything I brought up. And there was not that inquiry, that curiosity about what are your thoughts about this? And it left me feeling wondering why I was hired. I mean, because I thought I came with some expertise and some experience, I was hired. And so for me, that taught me a really important lesson early on that I don’t want to be the answer man, which is what I dubbed this person. I want to be somebody who has answers that I’m offering and often doing so with permission, or at least providing advice and counsel for sure, but really tapping into the inner wisdom and strength and knowledge of that person, which makes for a much more happy supervisor and supervisor and supervisee.
(18:44): And then on the flip side of that, I’ve had people who have met with me and it almost hasn’t even felt like supervision in my traditional way of thinking about it. It’s felt like a really helpful deep conversation in which I understood there was a power differential, but that was never played out. It also involved at times a little pushback and a little bit of confrontation, or maybe that’s not quite the right word, but being able to receive constructive feedback. It was often the invitation of me coming up with my own constructive feedback, frankly, that worked better. So those are two that come to mind. What about for you?
Ashley (19:23): As you share, two come to mind as I lean back and think about it, how profound were they and how I think about supervision today. So the first one is one that I think provided a lot of opportunity. I’m going to choose the word opportunity. It was interesting. I had this supervisor who, to attempt to engage with me on a cultural level, began to use some culturally performative language, personification of my culture inappropriately. And he did that in a way that was demeaning and condescending to me, and I had to sit and process and think, and it was one of the first conflicts I remember having was someone in a supervisor position with me where I knew I needed to step up and I needed to address something inequitable that had happened. As I thought through how to respond, how to be thoughtful, how to be able to maintain a relationship with the supervisor but also make it very clear that boundaries had been crossed and I had been harmed.
(20:29): Developing the language and the strategy to be able to have that conversation was very pivotal for me and something that I think about and honor in a lot of the work I do now. So it was about being able to go to someone and say, “I understand that these were the areas that we have opportunities to develop in, as well as I want you to know that what you said to me and the context for what you said to me was very harmful,” and being able to navigate through that. It wasn’t a quick fix, that one conversation didn’t resolve anything. But being able to develop a strategy that felt good to me and felt like self-care and that I stood up for myself, but also was able to move forward in that person’s work. They actually do a lot of work in the area now. I think that was probably a really critical moment for them too as a supervisor. That was foundational.
(21:21): And then I think about some of my early supervising experiences that were just phenomenal, of doing at the time… we called it cultural competency work… with English language learners and having a supervisor who was of a different cultural and ethnic background than me, and seeing how she poured her cultural identity into her work, how she wove it into every bit of the organization down to and up to her supervising, to the notes that she was sent, to the materials that she would produce, and her encouraging me to do the same. When I sit back and reflect on the fact that trauma-informed practices and equity-centered practices are at the top of what I do right now, it is not surprising to me that I had some of these really early transformative or really memorable moments about supervision that focused on these two topics as well. So that’s what comes to mind for me.
Ken (22:12): We can’t really interact with somebody without it having some effect on us. And you’re naming the legacy that those folks left for you and other supervisors as well. The one thing that came to mind as you were talking too, is that this is part of being vulnerable, but why not ask and have time set aside, how is our supervisory relationship going from your point of view and from my point of view? And have an honest, frank conversation. And that may well bring up different culture differences and other things that for some of us maybe we’ve been not aware of. And so having the opportunity to talk about those things in a frank way, I think, is another part of this experience.
Ashley (22:59): You brought in some incredible resources into the last podcast. And just in our conversations, I know that you’ve been doing some amazing reading lately and throughout the trajectory of your work on these topics. I’m wondering, is there a particular resource that stands out to you that helps you ground yourself in this work?
Ken (23:20): Anyone who’s been listening to my responses has probably picked up that I’ve been weaving motivational interviewing, MI, into this conversation. And I do think when I do some teaching and training about trauma-informed care, I actually call it MI and trauma-informed care. It’s just too long, so I cut out the MI. I do think infusing practice with MI principles, including some strategies for how we provide feedback, how we support people, how we have exploratory conversations, has been a huge resource that I think is absolutely applicable to trauma-informed supervision. But I’m also very moved, and of course as new materials come out, I’m moved by different things, but I think more recently, well, in years past, Bessel van der Kolk’s book, Trauma Keeps the Score, has been a real way of helping me frame trauma and its impact and also what it might mean to experience growth and healing.
(24:22): And then the same with a more recent book that I do highly recommend, at least I’ve gotten partway through, but Gabor Maté’s the Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness and Healing in a Toxic Culture. I think that the knowledge and understanding of trauma is still very much in its infancy in many ways in our culture and our country. And so staying up, if you will, with some of this material, I think, is critically important. So those are a few things.
Ashley (24:50): Amazing. I think a lot about some resources, ones that stand out to me, particularly around thinking about culture and identity, you have amazing books like Resmaa Menakem’s My Grandmother’s Hands. You have the wonderful work of Dr. Joy Degruy. I have all these resources that come to mind that really begin to critically illustrate how we process information and how that shows up in our day-to-day interactions. I think that thinking about day-to-day is so important. One of the resources that I can’t help but to get out of my mind as well is one that I’m reading right now. It’s called Breaking the Habit of Being Yourself, and it was a book that was gifted to me. I didn’t really know what to expect. I was like, “I don’t know if I want to break the habit of being myself, I like myself.” But what it really gets into is going into neuropsych and neurobiology around thoughts and the impact that thoughts have on our bodies, the role of feelings and emotions.
(25:58): I think that to be a truly trauma-informed, equity-centered leader, it really does involve appreciating and understanding how the body functions, building on Bessel van der Kolk’s book, The Body Keeps the Score. These experiences live in the body and so having some understanding and some knowledge about how the body functions, I think is really helpful to me as a supervisor and me as an individual who supports supervisors in this work. If you had one key takeaway for people who reflect on their experiences as supervisors and how to catapult that into something dynamic for themselves as leaders, what would that be?
Ken (26:40): When you were just mentioning The Body Keeps the Score it made me remember that one of the things he says in that book is that all trauma is pre-verbal. And I think that’s worth paying attention to as a trauma-informed supervisor, to recognize that trauma impacts our bodies in ways before we can even talk about it. And so I’ll just say that we can’t always expect people to give words to what they’re experiencing, and we need to allow things to simmer. So part of it is sitting with people, and I think about the idea of compassion as applying to supervision, and by that I mean passion literally means suffering, right, and so we’re with people in their suffering, in their trauma, when there’s secondary trauma, that being there for them and with them is sometimes the most powerful thing we can do as supervisors.
(27:34): And then of course, there’s words that follow. But I say that because in part we have to grieve with people when they’re doing this work, which in turn can lead towards what we sometimes call post-traumatic growth or new learning and all of that. So it’s living into the reality of what is without trying to make it all better or trying to cover it up, but acknowledging what is and then seeing how that indeed is life giving.
Ashley (28:05): Awesome. Thank you so much, Ken. And thank you for honoring the gift of being present. This has been an awesome conversation, Ken, and I want to thank you for joining us today.
Ken (28:17): I’ve loved being here with you, Ashley, thank you so much.
Ashley (28:21): And to our listeners at C4 Innovations, we offer a multitude of support options for supervisors, for managers, and for organizations around change, culture change, and trauma-informed supervision and coaching. For an opportunity to connect with Ken Kraybill, myself Ashley Stewart, or any of our C4 professionals who are trained and prepared to support you and your organization, please click the link below in the show notes. Join us next time on Changing the Conversation.
Erika Simon, Producer (28:55): Visit C4innovates.com and follow us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube for more resources to grow your impact. Thank you for joining us. This episode was produced by Erika Simon and Christina Murphy. Our theme song was written and performed by Peter Hanlon. Join us next time on Changing the Conversation.
[Music]
Access additional “Changing the Conversation” podcast episodes.
