This article was downloaded by: [C.

Edward Watkins]
On: 17 September 2012, At: 13:40
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Forum of Psychoanalysis

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/spsy20

The competent psychoanalytic supervisor: Some

thoughts about supervision competences for
accountable practice and training
C. Edward Watkins Jr.

Version of record first published: 17 Sep 2012.

To cite this article: C. Edward Watkins Jr. (2012): The competent psychoanalytic supervisor: Some thoughts
about supervision competences for accountable practice and training, International Forum of Psychoanalysis,
DOI:10.1080/0803706X.2012.712219

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0803706X.2012.712219

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,
claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
 International Forum of Psychoanalysis
2012; 19, iFirst article

The competent psychoanalytic supervisor: Some thoughts about

supervision competences for accountable practice and training

C. EDWARD WATKINS, Jr.*

Abstract
What are the competences required to satisfactorily practice effective or good enough psychoanalytic supervision? In this
paper, I would like to consider that question. Over the past approximate 15-year period, increasing attention has been
directed toward more specifically identifying and defining the components of competent psychoanalytic practice. But any
parallel attention toward identifying and defining the components of competent psychoanalytic supervision practice has, in
comparison, been sorely limited if not virtually absent. If we are to best practice competent psychoanalytic supervision and
best train future psychoanalytic supervisors for competent practice, effort needs to be made to concretely delineate the
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012

competences that are requisite for such practice. In what follows, I present and adapt six broad-based families of
internationally relevant supervision competence areas for use in psychoanalytic supervision: (1) knowledge about/
understanding of psychoanalytic supervision models, methods, and intervention; (2) knowledge about/skill in attending
to matters of ethical, legal, and professional concern; (3) knowledge about/skill in managing psychoanalytic supervision
relationship processes; (4) knowledge about/skill in conducting psychoanalytic supervisory assessment and evaluation; (5)
knowledge about/skill in fostering attention to difference and diversity; and (6) openness to/utilization of a self-reflective,
self-assessment stance in psychoanalytic supervision. Although by no means an exhaustive list, 30 supervision competences
(five per family) are proposed as significant for guiding competent psychoanalytic supervision practice and supervisor
training, and a brief explanatory comment is offered in support of each broad-based family of competences.

Key words: psychoanalytic supervision, supervision competence, supervision competences, psychoanalytic supervisor,
psychoanalytic supervision practice, psychoanalytic supervision training

In the health and mental health professions, compe-
tence has long been a central concept of crucial
educational concern. The professional training pro-
cess typically involves years of varied conceptual and
practical learning experiences, all of which are aimed
at helping the trainee develop and enhance the
requisite competences needed to perform at an
independent level. But in the last approximate
generation of health and mental health education,
focus on training for competency has ratcheted up to
a whole new level of activity that seemingly has been
unprecedented in its scope, intensity, and specificity.
That focus: (1) appears to have been largely guided
by efforts to make training and practice more
accountable; and (2) has led to increasing attempts
to set in place systems of competency definition and
assessment for educational guidance and utilization.
This push for competency definition and assessment
has been evident across such disciplines as medicine,
psychiatry, psychology, and social work, and has
been international in its reach (Bang & Park, 2009;
Epstein & Hundert, 2002; Falender & Shafranske,
2012; Frank, Snell, ten Cate, Holmboe, Carraccio,
& Swing, 2010; Miller, Scully, & Winstead, 2003;
Psychology Board of Australia, 2011; Roe, 2002;
Snell & Frank, 2010; Swick, Hall, & Beresin, 2006;
Tebes, Matlin, Migdole, Farkas, Money, & Shul-
man, 2011).
Psychoanalysis has not been exempt from that
competency push and accountability concern. Per-
haps more so than at any other time in the history of
psychoanalytic practice, there has been and con-
tinues to be need to make the case for analytic
treatment in all of its forms (Gunderson & Gabbard,
1999; Leichsenring, 2005; Watkins, 2012a). Simul-
taneous with that need, we have also been confronted
with having to better make the case for analytic
education. Concerns with developing a more com-
petency-based training approach have increasingly
been in evidence (e.g., Israelstam, 2011).
In a seminal paper of educational and practical
significance, Tuckett (2005) proposed that psycho-
analytic competence could be defined by means of
three specific capacities: (1) to create an external
and internal setting in which to sense the relevant
data (affects and unconscious meanings); (2) to

*Correspondence. C. Edward Watkins, Jr., Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle, #311280, Psychology, UNT
76203-5017, Denton, TX, USA. Tel:
1 940 565 2671. Fax:
1 940 565 4682. E-mail: watkinsc@unt.edu

ISSN 0803-706X print/ISSN 1651-2324 online # 2012 The International Federation of Psychoanalytic Societies
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0803706X.2012.712219
 2 C. E. Watkins
conceive what is sensed; and (3) to offer interpreta-
tions based on these, as well as to sense and conceive
their effects (p. 37). He linked each capacity to a
particular psychoanalytic frame, respectively, the
participant-observational, conceptual, and interven-
tional (or listening, conceptualizing, and interpret-
ing). Using Tucketts three frameworks for
competence conceptualization and assessment, the
European Psychoanalytical Federation (EPF) Work-
ing Party on Education (WPE) has even held several
work groups and forums over the last decade in
Budapest, Berlin, and Helsinki to take up the matter
of competence and its definition (Junkers, Tuckett,
& Zachrisson, 2008). The three proposed frame-
works have provided the container for much of the
EPF WPE discussion that has occurred, with the
belief being that they would help us approach more
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
specific definitions of what we mean by psycho-
analytic competence, and help us to move away
from global judgments, toward more explicit criteria
and towards more transparent judgments (Junkers
et al., 2008, p. 292). The EPF WPE mission is
ongoing.
Complementing that effort, we have also had
some useful contributions across the last approxi-
mate 15-year period that have increasingly accentu-
ated the critical importance of making criteria
explicit and judgments transparent for psychoanaly-
tic education and supervision (Cabaniss, 2008;
Cabaniss, Glick, & Roose, 2001; Cabaniss & Roose,
1997; Cabaniss, Schein, Glick, & Roose, 2004;
Rojas, Arbuckle, & Cabaniss, 2010). Guided by
the pioneering work of Cabaniss and her colleagues
at the Columbia University Center for Psychoanaly-
tic Training and Research, we have come to increas-
ingly realize that: (1) Transparent assessment based
on objectives that are clear and public is . . . vital to
the learning process . . . [and] essential to teaching
[and supervision] (Cabannis, 2008, p. 269); and
(2) instituting standardized criteria for clinical
competence is essential to the continued practice of
psychoanalysis (Cabannis, 2008, p. 270). If we as
educators hope to be able to more accurately and
reliably evaluate psychoanalytic candidates and their
competence, clarity, precision, specificity, and trans-
parency in psychoanalytic education have emerged
as sine qua non. Lacking those elements, ambiguity,
anxiety, self-concealment, nondisclosure, and com-
promised learning appear to be the outcomes that
await candidates (cf. Berman, 2004; Brodbeck,
2008; Garza-Guerrero, 2004; Kernberg, 1996,
2007, 2011; Reeder, 2004; Wallerstein, 2011). But
as this body of survey research has convincingly and
compellingly shown, it need not be that way, and the
remedy can actually be rather straightforward. (See
Appendix A in Cabannis, 2008, for a list of
developmental learning objectives for supervisory
evaluation; materials can also be accessed at http://
www.psychoanalysis.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/
LearningobjectivesRev_0.pdf).
As attention has increasingly been given over to
clarifying and specifying psychoanalytic competence,
we have also begun to see our first glimmer of
parallel attention being given over to clarifying and
specifying psychoanalytic supervision competence.
Some of the key questions to be asked have been:
what precisely is meant by psychoanalytic super-
vision competence?, what are its core components?,
and what are the requisite competences that are
needed to effectively practice psychoanalytic super-
vision today? These are substantive questions to
examine because: (1) while psychoanalytic treatment
is a difficult, highly challenging system of practice to
learn, it may well be that learning to become a
competent psychoanalytic supervisor is an even
more difficult and highly challenging endeavor
(Szecsody, 2008; Zachrisson, 2011); (2) to best
foster psychoanalytic competence in the treatment
situation, it would seem mandatory to first have in
place psychoanalytic supervisors who themselves are
competent in providing such training (Watkins,
2011); and (3) to put those competent supervisors
in place, we need foremost to have clearly articulated
and explicated what is meant by and involved in
psychoanalytic supervisor competence and its
practice (Watkins, 2012b).
Building on Tucketts (2005) work, Szecsody
(2008) has proposed that the participant-observa-
tional, conceptual, and interventional frames can
each be viably applied to the study of psychoanalytic
supervision and supervision competence. As com-
plement to those three, he also added an evaluation
frame (since supervision is by definition an evalua-
tive activity) that would be important to include.
Building on Szecsodys (2008) work, Watkins
(2012b) recently identified a number of supervisor
competences that seemingly (1) would fit under each
of the four frameworks and (2) could be used to
guide the practice of psychoanalytic supervision and
the training of supervisors. But beyond those two
efforts, any specific attention to delineating psycho-
analytic supervisor competences has been absent.
We lack for substantive focus on the competence of
the psychoanalytic supervisor.
Almost 20 years ago, Szecsody (1994) stated that
the need for training supervisors for competence was
being increasingly recognized within the psycho-
analytic community, but, unfortunately, recognized
need does not always readily translate into educa-
tional reality. As recently as six years ago, he
lamented that there are only a few institutes that
have organized training for supervisors (Szecsody,

2008, p. 381). Szecsody is certainly not alone in his
lamentation (e.g., Pegeron, 2008). We appear to
have need for efforts that more substantively address
psychoanalytic supervisor competence/competences
and how those might be better concretized educa-
tionally and practically.
In this paper, I would like to build on and add to
Watkins (2012b) recent effort in which he proposed
a set of competences for each of the four psycho-
analytical frameworks. Drawing from the interna-
tional supervision literature, I wish to put forth here
a different way of thinking about and organizing
psychoanalytic supervisor competences. My pur-
pose, then, is not to replace the four-frameworks
organization but, rather, to complement it. Based on
the study of psychotherapy supervision practice
throughout various corners of our world, from
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
Sweden to Slovenia, Lithuania to London, Bali to
Brazil, six broad-based competence areas have been
identified as being of potential supervisory signifi-
cance across countries and cultures (Watkins, in
press). Those six broad-based, internationally-
relevant supervision competence areas are:
1. knowledge about/understanding of supervision
models, methods, and intervention;
2. knowledge about/skill in attending to matters of
ethical, legal, and professional concern;
3. knowledge about/skill in managing supervision
relationship processes;
4. knowledge about/skill in conducting supervisory
assessment and evaluation;
5. knowledge about/skill in fostering attention to
difference and diversity;
6. openness to/utilization of a self-reflective, self-
assessment stance in supervision.
In what follows, these six areas will be specifically
adapted here for the psychoanalytic supervision
experience. This adapted configuration provides an
organizational net that can be potentially used to: (1)
structure families of psychoanalytic supervisor com-
petences for training and practice purposes; and
(2) frame supervision competency discussions
worldwide. This complementary organizational net
allows for certain key supervision competency issues
(e.g., ethical considerations, matters of difference
and diversity), through being grouped together, to be
more specifically highlighted and given more sub-
stantial attentional focus.
To best set the stage and provide orientation for
my competence discussion, I would like to first
provide some definition of the following: psycho-
analytic supervision competence and psychoanalytic
supervision competences. How might we begin to
define those terms?
Psychoanalytic Supervisor Competences 3
Defining psychoanalytic supervision
competence and competences
Competence defined
Adapting Epstein and Hunderts (2002) definition of
competence in medicine, I would like to define
psychoanalytic supervisor competence as: The super-
visors habitual and judicious use of communica-
tion, [psychoanalytic] knowledge . . . technical [and
supervision] skills, clinical [and educational] reason-
ing, emotions, values, and reflection in daily [super-
vision] practice for the benefit of . . . [supervisees,
patients,] and the community being served
(p. 226). Supervisor competence, more than the
mere possession of knowledge or skill, requires action
and public verification of what is achieved by that
action (Rodolfa, Bent, Eisman, Nelson, Rehm, &
Ritchie, 2005); it necessitates consistent demonstra-
tion over time. A molar term, psychoanalytic super-
visor competence refers to the overall functioning of
the supervisor  which can be adjudged to range from
generally high to low in its quality. Although by no
means perfect, this simple definitional adaptation of
Epstein and Hundert provides a way of defining
psychoanalytic supervisor competence that can at
least serve as a seemingly meaningful point of
orientation for further examination.
Competency defined
I would like to define the more molecular, specific
term, that of psychoanalytic supervisor competency,
as the necessary combination of supervisor skills/
abilities, knowledge, and values required to perform
a specific psychoanalytic supervisory task (e.g., form
a relationship bond). In the competency movement
today, skills/abilities (able performance), knowledge
(know-how), and values (e.g., respect for others)
have come to be regarded across varied disciplines as
essential ingredients for competency delineation.
Building on and extrapolating from that foundation,
any psychoanalytic supervisory competency, then,
would be viewed as a combination or bundling of those
three ingredients or components. Within this
conceptualization, psychoanalytic supervisor compe-
tences would be considered to result from the
interactions of: (1) the traits and characteristics of
the supervisor (e.g., empathic sensitivity, passion for
supervision); (2) the skills/abilities, knowledge, and
values that are developed or reinforced through
varied learning experiences (e.g., supervision work-
shops or seminars); and (3) integrative learning
experiences that maximize the use and potential of
those three components (e.g., supervised supervi-
sion). To paraphrase Junkers et al. (2008, p. 299),
Personality (character) and talent are in the
 4 C. E. Watkins
beginning of the psychoanalytic [supervisors] edu-
cation; the rest is training and development.
Six families of core psychoanalytic supervision
competences
The six families of core supervision competences,
adapted for the psychoanalytic supervision situation,
are identified and briefly described below. Although
by no means exhaustive, specific, representative
competences within each family are also identified.
Competency Area I
Knowledge about/understanding of psychoanalytic super-
vision models, methods, and intervention  the focus is
on: theories and models of psychoanalytic super-
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
vision; ways of conceptualizing supervision;
understanding the supervision role and functions;
the ability to implement appropriate supervision
functions when needed; the ability to implement
facilitative supervisory interventions; and utilization
of various methods that are apropos to the psycho-
analytic supervision experience.
Representative competences
Supervisor demonstrates an awareness/understand-
ing of the:
1. definition and purpose of the psychoanalytic
supervisor role, its varied functions (e.g., to
teach, consult), and when implementation of
those functions is most apropos;
2. supervision expectations and responsibilities for
both the psychoanalytic supervisor and super-
visee, and the importance of consistently at-
tending to those dimensions over the course of
the supervision endeavor;
3. core components of the psychoanalytic super-
vision relationship (learning alliance, trans-
ferencecountertransference configuration, and
real relationship) and the crucial significance of
each for maintaining relational integrity;
4. models of psychoanalytic supervision practice
and the ways in which those visions converge
and diverge;
5. diverse psychoanalytic supervision interventions
(e.g., delivering feedback sensitively and con-
structively) and when to best implement them
in practice.
Comment
Over the course of the last century of supervision
practice, we have come to increasingly see that:
(1) being a supervisee (although highly beneficial) is
not in and of itself sufficient to qualify one to
supervise; (2) being trained as an analytic treatment
provider does not de facto translate into being a
competent psychoanalytic supervisor; and (3) psy-
choanalytic supervision is a special skill that, in order
to be best developed and honed, appears to benefit
immensely from supervision training (cf. Dewald,
1997; Pegeron, 2008; Sarnat, 2012; Rodenhauser,
1997; Szecsody, 2008; Wallerstein, 1981). Just as
analysts need to be trained to analyze, supervisors
need to be trained to supervise. The five compe-
tences in Area I give voice to the distinctive and
specialized nature of psychoanalytic supervision,
reflecting its particular definition, supervisor func-
tions and interventions, supervision models, and
relational foundation (see Berman, 1997; DeBell,
1981; Filho & Pires, 2010; Filho, Pires, Berlim,
Hartke, & Lewkowicz, 2007; Fleming & Benedek,
1964, 1966; Fosshage, 1997; Hyman, 2008; Ruben-
stein, 2007; Watkins, 2011; Zachrisson, 2011).
Becoming a competent supervisor requires becom-
ing grounded in the conceptual foundations that
undergird the totality of the psychoanalytic super-
vision endeavor itself. Area I is centered on acquiring
and demonstrating an awareness/understanding of
that conceptual grounding.
Competency Area II
Knowledge about/skill in attending to matters of ethical,
legal, and professional concern  the focus is on: ethical
matters of particular relevance to the psychoanalytic
supervision endeavor (e.g., boundary crossings,
boundary violations, maintaining confidentiality); a
working knowledge of ethical standards and their
application to the supervision situation; an aware-
ness of legalities that have potential supervision
implications; commitment to continuing education
in supervision; and commitment to lifelong learning
in psychoanalytic supervision.
Representative competences
The supervisor demonstrates an awareness/under-
standing of:
1. ethical principles as they relate to and guide
action in psychoanalytic supervision;
2. ethical decision-making skills and their
appropriate application to the psychoanalytic
supervision situation;
3. ethical codes of conduct, laws, or statutes that
impact the practice of psychoanalytic super-
vision;

4. professional boundaries, their significance for
and place in the psychoanalytic treatment and
supervision contexts, and how they maintain and
contribute to the integrity of both endeavors;
5. institutional policies that impact and have
implications for the practice of psychoanalytic
supervision.
Comment
Just as there are ethical, legal, and professional
matters that attend the treatment situation, it is no
different for psychoanalytic supervision. Area II
recognizes that reality. Because supervisors are ulti-
mately responsible for the care of their supervisees
patients, a whole extra layer of concern and complex-
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
ity is added to the supervision experience for that
reason. Although not much has been written on the
ethics of psychoanalytic supervision, there are few
aspects of . . . [supervision] that are without ethical
implications (Hyman, 2008, p. 107). In conjunction
with potentially affecting legal and professional
issues, the competences in Area II give voice to that
ethical importance. Becoming a competent super-
visor requires becoming grounded in the ethical and
professional foundations that underlie the practice of
psychoanalytic supervision. Area II is centered on
acquiring and demonstrating awareness and under-
standing of that ethical/professional grounding.
Competency Area III
Knowledge about/skill in managing psychoanalytic
supervision relationship processes  the focus is on:
establishing supervision alliance; attending to build-
ing and maintaining supervisorsupervisee bond;
utilization of the supervision contract; establishing
mutually agreed-upon goals for supervision; being
sensitive to relational factors and their impact across
the psychoanalytic supervision and therapy dyads;
providing a safe space and safe place for the super-
visee to learn and grow; and being sensitive to the
supervisees developmental needs and planning
supervision accordingly.
Representative competences
The supervisor demonstrates knowledge about/skill in:
1. forming and establishing a good enough and conducting ongoing supervisor self-evaluation.
supervisory alliance and maintaining it for the
duration of the supervision relationship;
2. consistently creating a space for thinking and
reflection where empathy, respect, and trust
preponderate;
Psychoanalytic Supervisor Competences 5
3. implementing and modeling appropriate super-
visory interventions that are informed by in-
dividual difference and cultural diversity
considerations;
4. sensitively and effectively addressing matters of
supervisee transference, countertransference,
and parallel process as they arise in treatment/
supervision situations;
5. discussing and establishing a supervision agree-
ment with supervisees that is guided by an ethos
of mutuality, facilitation, and transparency.
Comment
A good enough supervision relationship lies at the
heart of any effective psychoanalytic supervision
experience, and Area III accentuates that relational
foundation. Almost 60 years ago, Fleming and
Benedek (1964, 1966) masterfully communicated
the supreme importance of supervisors striving to
develop and establish a meaningful learning alliance
with their supervisees. Fleming and Benedeks clinical
wisdom on the supervision alliance seemingly remains
every bit as true today and appears to now be widely
accepted and embraced as supervision sine qua non
(see Dewald, 1987; Frawley-ODea & Sarnat, 2001;
Gill, 2001; Jacobs, David, & Meyer, 1995; Levy,
2007; Sarnat, 2012; Teitelbaum, 1990; Ungar & de
Ahumada, 2001; Wallerstein, 1981; Watkins, 2011;
Zachrisson, 2011). In Area III, the significance of
attending to and being able to competently address
transference, countertransference, and parallel pro-
cess phenomena during supervision is also recog-
nized. Becoming a competent supervisor requires
becoming grounded in the relational foundations
that underlie the practice of psychoanalytic super-
vision. Area III is centered on acquiring and demon-
strating knowledge about and skill in that relational
grounding.
Competency Area IV
Knowledge about/skill in conducting psychoanalytic
supervisory assessment and evaluation  the focus is
on: assessment of the supervisees skills and abilities;
examination of supervisee progress across supervi-
sion sessions; examination of supervision outcome for
the supervisee; conducting useful needs assessment
to guide psychoanalytic supervision practice; being
able to provide constructive supervision feedback;
Representative competences
The supervisor demonstrates knowledge about/skill
in:
 6 C. E. Watkins
1. conducting an educational assessment for each
supervisee, whereby individual learning needs
are determined and supervision can ideally be
tailored to best meet those identified supervisee
needs;
2. developing evaluation procedures that are fair,
transparent, and explicit in purpose and execu-
tion;
3. providing periodic evaluations of supervisee
performance, where at minimum a formative
(mid-point) and summative (endpoint) review
is given for each half year of supervision;
4. formulating meaningful feedback (charting
progress, identifying strengths, and pointing
out challenges for continued development)
based on a study of supervision sessions and
observations of clinical growth over time;
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
5. delivering clear, concise, focussed feedback in a
respectful and non-threatening manner.
Comment
The supervision process  an eminently educational
endeavor  is built upon an informed assessment of
the supervisees learning style and learning needs.
The supervisor engages in continuous educational
diagnosis (Schlesinger, 1981, p. 37). We wish to
know: how does any particular supervisee best
learn?, and what are the particular learning needs
that are most pressing in helping any supervisee best
advance? In Area IV, emphasis is placed on super-
visors striving to tailor supervision to fit what the
supervisee most needs (one size does not fit all),
being open, honest, and clear about evaluation
procedures, and being able to sensitively and effec-
tively communicate feedback about the supervisees
performance. Becoming a competent supervisor
requires becoming grounded in the assessment/
evaluation foundations that underlie the practice of
psychoanalytic supervision. Area IV is centered on
acquiring and demonstrating knowledge about and
skill in that evaluational grounding.
Competency Area V
Knowledge about/skill in fostering attention to difference
and diversity  the focus is on: individual and
developmental differences (e.g., cognitive complex-
ity) in psychoanalytic treatment/supervision; under-
standing the potential impact of variables such as
culture, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation on
the treatment/supervision processes; openness/sensi-
tivity to considering ones own cultural and gender
biases; and continuing to learn about the possible
effects of difference/diversity factors in treatment/
supervision, and incorporating those learnings into
the psychoanalytic supervision experience.
Representative competences
The supervisor demonstrates an awareness/under-
standing of:
1. ones own diversity and self as a cultural being;
2. others diversity and their lives as cultural
beings;
3. the interaction between self and others as
shaped by individual and cultural diversity;
The supervisor demonstrates knowledge about/
skill in:
4. how to apply diversity understanding to the
psychoanalytic treatment and supervision situa-
tions, being consistently able to accordingly
model that understanding conceptually and
interventively;
5. how to help supervisees formulate and apply a
multicultural or diversity-sensitive case concep-
tualization to their treatment endeavors.
Comment
As a system of thought and practice, psychoanalysis
has been criticized for being slow to incorporate and
integrate difference and diversity variables (e.g.,
gender, culture, and ethnicity) into its vision of
humankind (Altman, 2010). But across the last
generation of psychoanalytically oriented activity,
efforts have been increasingly made to remedy that
lack of diversity attention (e.g., Altman, 2010;
Chodorow, 1994; Drescher, 1998; Harris, 2005;
Leary, 1995, 2012; Magee & Miller, 1997; Perry,
2011; Reis & Grossmark, 2009; Rodriguez, Caban-
nis, Arbuckle, & Oquendo, 2008). In that regard,
psychoanalytic supervision has been no exception.
Rubensteins (2007) edited book (part of the Inter-
national Psychoanalytical Associations Psychoana-
lytic Ideas and Applications Series) is a good, recent
example of that, in which all 10 expert analysts who
were interviewed were asked (among other ques-
tions) about supervising candidates across cultures
and languages. We have come to evermore see that, if
people are to be best understood, it is imperative that
we strive to understand the place of difference and
diversity variables in the representational worlds of
the participants and the resulting intersubjective
context (Safer, 1990, p. 113); that applies not
only to helping supervisees appreciate the impact
of diversity variables on patients lives, but also to
helping supervisors appreciate the impact of diversity

variables in their own lives as well as the lives of their
supervisees. Becoming a competent supervisor re-
quires becoming grounded in the difference and
diversity foundations that underlie the practice of
psychoanalytic supervision. Area V is centered on
acquiring and demonstrating an awareness and
understanding of that difference and diversity
grounding.
Competency Area VI
Openness to/utilization of a self-reflective, self-assessment
stance in psychoanalytic supervision  the focus is on:
reflective self-examination; ongoing scrutiny of ones
own supervision behaviors, skills, and abilities; and
continuing psychoanalytic supervision education
and self-enhancement efforts.
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
Representative competences
The supervisor demonstrates a recognized need for/
is committed to:
1. ongoing self-reflection about and self-study of
their own practice and its impact on the
psychoanalytic supervision experience;
2. examining supervisor countertransference and
reverse parallel process phenomena and their
understanding and management throughout the
supervisory process;
3. ongoing self-evaluation of their supervision
practice;
4. soliciting and using supervisee evaluation data/
opinions about the supervisor to inform their
practice efforts;
5. consistently attending to and monitoring their
own self-care, and taking appropriate action to
insure that personal well-being is fostered.
Comment
Being and becoming a competent psychoanalytic
supervisor is not a product of a one-time event, such
as attending a single seminar about learning to
supervise. Rather, it is a product of multiple
events  participating in training seminars/discussion
groups about supervision, having been a supervisee,
serving as a supervisor to analytic candidates, on-
going reading about psychoanalytic supervision, and
continuing, unremitting efforts to stay informed and
remain current about all matters supervisory. Area
VI, with its vigorous embrace of self-reflection and
self-examination, recognizes that need for continu-
ing professional development with regard to super-
vision. Being and becoming a competent
psychoanalytic supervisor is foremost a full commit-
Psychoanalytic Supervisor Competences 7
ment, a lifelong endeavor that requires incandescent
passion for, abiding interest in, and unwavering
dedication to the supervision enterprise itself. In
Area VI, along with continuing professional devel-
opment, emphasis is also given to the recognized
importance of and need to focus on supervisor
self-care, countertransference and reverse parallel
process manifestations, self-evaluation, and solicit-
ing the supervisees evaluations of supervisory per-
formance. Becoming a competent supervisor
requires becoming grounded in the self-reflective,
self-assessment foundations that underlie the prac-
tice of psychoanalytic supervision. Area VI is cen-
tered on acquiring and demonstrating the need for
and commitment to that self-reflective, self-assess-
ment grounding.
Toward greater accountability in
psychoanalytic supervisor training
and supervision practice
Although psychoanalytic supervisors have always
been concerned about competent analytic and
supervision practice, the current competency move-
ment  affecting such disciplines as medicine,
psychiatry, education, psychology, and social
work  is now focussed more than ever before on
the delineation and specification of training out-
comes and on demonstrating that those desired
outcomes have indeed been achieved across different
levels of training. In answer to the question, why
bother with competences in supervision?, Falender
and Shafranske (2012, p. 129) have stated the reason
for doing so in compelling, convincing fashion:
so whats new? What is new is the position that it is no
longer acceptable to simply assume that competence has
been attained. This critique challenges the implicit
assumption that competence is necessarily or automati-
cally achieved during the usual course of doctoral
education and clinical training, and requires the explicit
demonstration of competence. Such a shift involves an
increased emphasis on evidence-based modes of assess-
ment and places significant demands for accountability
at all levels of training, i.e., on the institution, the
supervisor and the supervisee, to ensure that professional
capability has been attained and demonstrated . . . efforts
to address todays standards require steps to be taken to
better identify the knowledge, skills and values that are
assembled to form competencies as well as the means to
reliably evaluate their development.
Our current competency push, then, is oriented
increasingly toward showing that the competences in
question have been achieved. But to be able to start
any sort of assessment of psychoanalytic supervision/
supervisor competences and their demonstration, we
 8 C. E. Watkins
must first begin to identify the core supervision
competences that define good enough psycho-
analytic supervision practice. The complementary
competency framework presented here is an attempt
to contribute to that beginning competency
definition dialog. Just as it is imperative that the
components of competent psychoanalytic practice
be more specifically identified (Israelstam, 2011;
Junkers et al., 2008; Tuckett, 2005), it is equally
imperative that the components of competent psy-
choanalytic supervision practice be more specifically
identified as well (Watkins, 2012b). Only by doing
that first will we then be better positioned: (1) to
evaluate the actual practice of competence (or lack
thereof) in psychoanalytic supervision; and (2) to
train supervisors for competency across Areas I
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
through VI.
References
Altman, N. (2010). The analyst in the inner city: Race, class, and
culture through a psychoanalytic lens (2nd ed.). New York:
Taylor & Francis.
Bang, K., & Park, J. (2009). Korean supervisors experiences in
clinical supervision. Counseling Psychologist, 37, 104275.
Berman, E. (1997). Psychoanalytic supervision at the crossroads
of a relational matrix. In M. H. Rock (ed.), Psychodynamic
supervision: Perspectives of the supervisor and supervisee
(pp. 167188). Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
Berman, E. (2004). Impossible training: A relational view of psycho-
analytic education. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Brodbeck, H. (2008). Anxiety in psychoanalytic training from the
candidates point-of-view. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 28,
32943.
Cabannis, D.L. (2008). Becoming a school: Developing learning
objectives for psychoanalytic education. Psychoanalytic
Inquiry, 28, 26277.
Cabannis, D.L., & Roose, S. (1997). The control case: A unique
analytic situation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic
Association, 45, 18999.
Cabaniss, D.L., Glick, R., & Roose, S. (2001). The Columbia
Supervision Project: Data from the dyad. Journal of the
American Psychoanalytic Association, 49, 23567.
Cabaniss, D.L., Schein, J., Glick, R., & Roose, S. (2004).
Progression in analytic institutes: A multicenter study.
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 84, 7794.
Chodorow, N. (1994). Femininities, masculinities, and sexualities:
Freud and beyond. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
DeBell, D. (1981). Supervisory styles and positions. In R.S.
Wallerstein (ed.), Becoming a psychoanalyst: A study of
psychoanalytic supervision (pp. 3960). New York: Interna-
tional Universities Press.
Dewald, P.A. (1987). Learning process in psychoanalytic supervision:
Complexities and challenges. Madison, CT: International
Universities Press.
Dewald, P.A. (1997). The process of supervision in psycho-
analysis. In C.E. Watkins, Jr. (ed.), Handbook of psychother-
apy supervision (pp. 3143). New York: Wiley.
Drescher, J. (1998). Psychoanalytic therapy and the gay man.
Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Epstein, R.M., & Hundert, E.M. (2002). Defining and assessing
professional competence. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 287, 22635.
Falender, C.A., & Shafranske, E. (2012). The importance of
competency-based clinical supervision in the twenty-first
century: Why bother? Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy,
42, 12937.
Filho, G.V., & Pires, A.C.J. (2010). Benign and disruptive
disturbances in the supervisory field. International Journal
of Psychoanalysis, 91, 895913.
Filho, G.V., Pires, A.C.J., Berlim, G.I., Hartke, R., & Lewkowicz,
S. (2007). The supervisory field and projective identifica-
tion. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 88, 6819.
Fleming, J., & Benedek, T.F. (1964). Supervision. A method of
teaching psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 33, 7196.
Fleming, J., & Benedek, T.F. (1966). Psychoanalytic supervision: A
method of clinical teaching. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Fosshage, J.L. (1997). Towards a model of psychoanalytic super-
vision from a self-psychological/intersubjective perspective. In
M.H. Rock (ed.), Psychodynamic supervision (pp. 312335).
Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
Frank, F.R., Snell, L.S., ten Cate, O., Holmboe, E.S., Carraccio,
C., & Swing, S.R. (2010). Competency-based medical
education: Theory to practice. Medical Teacher, 32, 63845.
Frawley-ODea, M.G., & Sarnat, J.E. (2001). The supervisory
relationship: A contemporary psychodynamic approach. New
York: Guilford Press.
Garza-Guerrero, C. (2004). Reorganisational and educational
demands of psychoanalytic training today: Our long and
marasmic night of one century. International Journal of
Psychoanalysis, 85, 326.
Gill, S. (ed.). (2001). The supervisory alliance: Facilitating the
psychotherapists learning experience. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
Gunderson, J.G., & Gabbard, G. (1999). Making the case for
psychoanalytic therapies in the current psychiatric environ-
ment. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 47,
679704.
Harris, A. (2005). Gender as soft assembly. Mahwah, NJ: Analytic
Press.
Hyman, M. (2008). Psychoanalytic supervision. In A.K. Hess,
K.D. Hess, & T.H. Hess, (eds.), Psychotherapy supervision:
Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 97113). Hobo-
ken, NJ: Wiley.
Israelstam, K. (2011). The interactive category schema of
candidate competence: An Australian experience.
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92, 1289313.
Jacobs, D., David, P., & Meyer, D.J. (1995). The supervisory
encounter: A guide for teachers of psychodynamic psychotherapy
and analysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Junkers, G., Tuckett, D., & Zachrisson, A. (2008). To be or not to
be a psychoanalyst * How do we know a candidate is ready
to qualify? Difficulties and controversies in evaluating
psychoanalytic competence. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 28,
288308.
Kernberg, O. (1996). Thirty methods to destroy the creativity of
candidates. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 77,
103140.
Kernberg, O. (2007). The coming changes in psychoanalytic
education: Part II. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 88,
183202.
Kernberg, O. (2011). Psychoanalysis and the university: A
difficult relationship. International Journal of Psychoanalysis,
92, 60922.
Leary, K. (1995). Interpreting in the dark: Race and ethnicity
in psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Psychoanalytic Psychology,
12, 12740.
Leary, K. (2012). Race as an adaptive challenge: Working with
diversity in the clinical consulting room. Psychoanalytic
Psychology, 29, 27991.

Leichsenring, F. (2005). Are psychodynamic and psychoanalytic
therapies effective? A review of empirical data. International
Journal of Psychoanalysis, 86, 84168.
Levy, J. (2007). Commentary. In L.E. Rubenstein (ed.), Talking
about supervision: 10 questions, 10 analysts 100 answers
(pp. 107120). London: International Psychoanalytical
Association.
Magee, M., & Miller, D. (1997). Lesbian lives: Psychoanalytic
narratives old and new. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
Miller, S.I., Scully, J.H., Jr., & Winstead, D.K. (2003). The
evolution of core competencies in psychiatry. Academic
Psychiatry, 27, 12830.
Pegeron, J. (2008). A course on the supervisory process for
candidates . . . and supervisors: An attempt to address incon-
sistencies in psychoanalytic education and fundamental
paradox of psychoanalytic training. Psychoanalytic Inquiry,
28, 34460.
Perry, J.C. (2011). When race and culture matter in psychody-
namic child therapy: Considerations on theory, process, and
technique. Psychoanalysis, Culture, and Society, 16, 17995.
Downloaded by [C. Edward Watkins] at 13:40 17 September 2012
Psychology Board of Australia (2011). Exposure draft: Guideline
for supervisors and supervisor training providers. Retrieved
May 28, 2012 from http://www.psychologyboard.gov.au/
news/current-consultations.aspx.
Reeder, J. (2004). Hate and love in psychoanalytic institutions. New
York: Other Press.
Reis, B., & Grossmark, R. (eds.). (2009). Heterosexual masculi-
nities: Contemporary perspectives from psychoanalytic gender
theory. New York: Routledge.
Rodenhauser, P. (1997). Psychotherapy supervision: Prerequisites
and problems in the process. In C.E. Watkins, Jr. (ed.),
Handbook of psychotherapy supervision (pp. 527548). New
York: Wiley.
Rodolfa, E., Bent, R., Eisman, E., Nelson, P., Rehm, L., &
Ritchie, P. (2005). A cube model for competency develop-
ment: Implications for psychology educators and regulators.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36, 34754.
Rodriguez, C.I., Cabannis, D.L., Arbuckle, M.R., & Oquendo,
M.A. (2008). The role of culture in psychodynamic psy-
chotherapy: Parallel process resulting from cultural simila-
rities between patient and therapist. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 165, 14026.
Roe, R.A. (2002). What makes a competent psychologist?
European Psychologist, 7, 192202.
Rojas, A., Arbuckle, M., & Cabaniss, D. (2010). Dont leave
teaching to chance: Learning objectives for psychodynamic
psychotherapy supervision. Academic Psychiatry, 34, 469.
Rubenstein, L.E. (ed.). (2007). Talking about supervision. London:
Karnac.
Safer, J.M. (1990). Symposium: Gender issues in psychoanalytic
supervision introductory remarks. In R.C. Lane (ed.),
Psychoanalytic approaches to supervision (p. 113). New York:
Brunner/Mazel.
Sarnat, J. (2012). Supervising psychoanalytic psychotherapy:
Present knowledge, pressing needs, future possibilities.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 42, 6574.
Schlesinger, H.J. (1981). General principles of psychoanalytic
supervision. In R.S. Wallerstein (ed.), Becoming a psycho-
analyst: A study of psychoanalytic supervision (pp. 2938).
New York: International Universities Press.
Snell, L.S., & Frank, J.R. (2010). Commentary: Competencies,
the tea bag model, and the end of time. Medical Teacher, 32,
62930.
The author has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate.
Psychoanalytic Supervisor Competences 9
Swick, S., Hall, S., & Beresin, E. (2006). Assessing ACGME
competencies in psychiatry training programs. Academic
Psychiatry, 30, 33051.
Szecsody, I. (1994). Supervision: A complex tool for psycho-
analytic learning. Scandanavian Psychoanalytic Review, 17,
11929.
Szecsody, I. (2008). Does anything go in psychoanalytic super-
vision? Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 28, 37386.
Tebes, J.K., Matlin, S.L., Migdole, S.J., Farkas, M.S., Money,
R.W., & Shulman, L. (2011). Providing competency training
to clinical supervisors through an interactional supervision
approach. Research on Social Work Practice, 21, 1909.
Teitelbaum, S.H. (1990). Supertransference: The role of the
supervisors blind spots. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 7,
24358.
Tuckett, D. (2005). Does anything go? Towards a framework for
the more transparent. International Journal of Psychoanalysis,
86, 3149.
Ungar, V.R., & de Ahumada, L.B. (2001). Supervision: A
container-contained approach. International Journal of
Psychoanalysis, 82, 7181.
Wallerstein, R.S. (ed.). (1981). Becoming a psychoanalyst: A study
of psychoanalytic supervision. New York: International Uni-
versities Press.
Wallerstein, R.S. (2011). Psychoanalysis in the university: The
natural home for education and research. International
Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92, 62339.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (2011). Is psychoanalytic education effective?
A comment on Damsa et al. (2010). American Journal of
Psychoanalysis, 71, 2902.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (2012a). On psychoanalytic supervisor compe-
tencies, the persistent paradox without parallel in psycho-
analytic education, and dreaming of an evidence-based
psychoanalytic supervision. Psychoanalytic Review, 99,
475506.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (2012b). Race/ethnicity in short-term and
long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy treatment re-
search: How white are the data? Psychoanalytic Psychology,
29, 292307.
Watkins, C. E., Jr. (in press). On psychotherapy supervision
rising: Supervision competencies in international perspec-
tive. International Journal of Psychotherapy.
Zachrisson, A. (2011). Dynamics of psychoanalytic supervision:
A heuristic model. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92,
94361.
Author
C. Edward Watkins, Jr., is Professor of Psychology,
Department of Psychology, University of North
Texas, Denton, TX, USA. His primary professional
interests focus on psychoanalytic theory, practice,
and supervision. He teaches psychotherapy super-
vision and conducts supervision in the Psychology
clinic. He is editor of the Handbook of Psychotherapy
Supervision and co-author (with C. H. Patterson) of
Theories of Psychotherapy, and is currently in the
process of co-editing (with Derek Milne) the
International Handbook of Clinical Supervision.