Guidelines for supervision: roles and responsibilities for supervisor and supervisee

Clinical supervision and peer consultation plays a pivotal role in the development and maintenance of professional practice skills of psychologists. This paper provides an overview of roles and responsibilities for both supervisors and supervisees, in the various forms of clinical supervision for students, provisional psychologists, registrars and professional supervision (peer consultation) for fully registered psychologists. Guidelines to ensure best practice for mandated supervision for practitioners subject to supervision conditions following a Council, Board, or Tribunal process are also provided.

The benefits of regular supervision are well documented as providing a supportive, educative and reflective space for psychologists at all levels of experience. Whether a student on placement, provisionally registered intern, registrar or experienced psychologist, collaborative supervision offers many benefits both for ongoing professional support and review of best practice aligned to areas of focus.

All parties in the supervision process have responsibilities to ensure that it is a productive and professional activity. Many responsibilities are shared but some devolve to primarily the supervisor or the supervisee. Shared and individual responsibilities should be articulated clearly in the Supervision Agreement.

It is important to clarify that professional supervision that meets various formal requirements is not synonymous with generic case reviews. There may be an overlap in select circumstances that should be discussed with senior psychology colleagues, but they are not within the scope of this document.

The supervisor’s responsibility is to model best practice at all times, including professionalism in record keeping, communication, punctuality of attendance, consistency of messages, and to exercise their duty of care to be alert to the supervisee’s emotional stability and cognitive capacity. The supervisor must know the ethical code for the PsyBA and how to support the supervisee[s] to adhere to it.

The Board has established Guidelines for Supervisorsopen_in_new and introduced a new Code of conduct for psychologistsopen_in_new that took effect in December 2025.

Each party shares responsibility to adhere to the negotiated written Supervision Agreement. In the near future the PsyBA will be releasing its own Code of conduct. It will be expected that all psychologists practise according to the Code.

Psychologists providing supervision must engage in supervision-of-their-supervision for professional support, to maintain their skill level as a supervisor, discuss issues of concern as they arise with supervisees, and receive constructive feedback.

Certain arrangements may present specific challenges for ethical and effective supervision, such as a dual role of employer / manager and supervisor. Supervisors must have the professional confidence to perform their role, and competence to communicate constructively, especially in providing directive, negative, evaluative, and corrective communication. The supervisor’s focus in supervision must not be challenged or diluted by any other considerations, such as either party’s emotional state, financial implications, or personal relations (Tromski-Klinhshirn, 2006).

An often-overlooked responsibility is to keep comprehensive contemporaneous notes of each supervision session and encounter. These are more than simple entries in a log for student or registration purposes. Supervisor notes may be reviewed by registration and other agencies when investigating concerns and complaints about a psychologist’s practice or an incident.

Although the supervisor’s responsibilities and duties are similar for all types of supervision, there may be qualitative differences that will depend upon the purpose of the supervision and the developmental level of the supervisee.

Supervision of provisional psychologists including students of a Master’s program puts the greatest onus on supervisors as the provisional psychologist will have little or no experience in applying the knowledge and skills that have been or are being taught in their coursework. Provisionally registered psychologists may be in a do not know what it is that they do not know situation that requires careful monitoring. Where possible, provisional psychologists initially see clients of the supervisor and learn by observing interactions and listening to the explanation of each step as the service is provided. As the provisional psychologist demonstrates capability, the supervisor arranges for more independent work that is planned before sessions and discussed afterward. The supervisor also completes any requirements agreed upon with the academic program or AHPRA.

Placements may be emotionally challenging for early career psychologists. The supervisor should be the first source of support for provisional psychologists, although the academic placement coordinator or an employer should be notified of any notable concerns. Conferring with the academic program, workplace or any other party does not remove the supervisor’s responsibility to follow AHPRA’s guidance on Mandatory notifications about registered health practitionersopen_in_new.

In the internship year (or two years), provisional psychologists usually have more autonomy than on academic placements, but their supervisor remains responsible for overseeing all aspects of their work. This cannot be delegated to anyone else unless the other person has PSYBA accreditation to supervise and there is a formal agreement including open discussion amongst the relevant parties, for example a secondary supervisor. This comprehensive oversight of all work allows the supervisor to teach the provisional psychologist how to identify which issues to bring to supervision, what concerns warrant their further exploration and how to present the salient aspects of situations for most effective understanding. This stage of a psychologist’s development requires the supervisor to monitor and guide the supervisee’s formation of professional boundaries and healthy self-care practices and also requires the supervisor to perform an educative role to guide continued learning and stage-appropriate skills development.

This stage is also when deficiencies in professionalism may be identified. It is the supervisor’s responsibility to require adherence to timelines for notes and logs and other requirements.

Supervisees who cannot maintain the relevant standard should be notified to the PSYBA without exception or excuse, once supervisory intervention has been unsuccessful. They may need to be guided toward pausing their progress while they address any health concerns, personal matters, or other impediments to satisfactory professional performance.

Supervisors have a duty of care to provide the support and guidance in structured sessions as stipulated in the Supervision Agreement such that the provisional psychologist is not left to practise without the necessary oversight. It is the provisional psychologist’s responsibility to satisfy the requirements for full registration under the supervisor’s guidance and not their supervisor’s role to complete these steps for them. Provisional psychologists who have difficulty arranging or attending supervision [even if through no fault of their own] may be in breach of their duty of care and supervisors should not sign logs for any periods when the supervisee was not receiving contemporaneous supervision per the PSYBA registration requirements.

Registrar supervision occurs in one of nine approved areas of practice following the completion of an approved postgraduate qualification in the same area of practice. Registrar programs are an important training context for developing a psychologist’s next stage of knowledge and competence in their area of expertise. There is potential risk to themselves and the public if they do not undertake this step. The three components including psychological practice, Active CPD and regular supervision with an approved supervisor are the basis of the supervision agreement and progress through the registrar pathway. A challenge for the registrar is they straddle having completed six years of study and being fully registered yet are still at an early developmental level of applying learning in practice. Often there is a sense of mixed feelings and self-expectations, such as: “I should know this… or can I still ask questions…I’m being paid now so I need to know this stuff”? It is not uncommon for the registrar to feel overwhelmed balancing continued learning and paid employment as psychologist. This risk is increased if psychologists complete postgraduate study in one area of practice endorsement and then practise in another area. For example, a graduate of a forensic psychology course may not have the required knowledge and skills to practise in an organisational area.

There are shifting responsibilities for registrar supervision for both supervisor and supervisee. The supervisor needs to ensure the registrar has relevant knowledge and they need to offer sufficient supervision opportunities to observe and evaluate the application of core competencies. The supervisee needs to recognise both their strengths and areas for development as well as actively seek out both relevant CPD education and opportunities to apply the new knowledge in practice and then review their learnings with the supervisor. Most importantly at this next developmental career stage both supervisor and registrar need to take responsibility for identifying if they are working outside their scope of competence. If so, they should be provided sufficient support, education and guidance to develop the skills necessary to work independently or change employment. Developing competence as a psychologist is not a race, so stepped learning as well as consolidation of knowledge, skills and confidence should be a priority fostering both self-reflection outside the supervision session and reflective practice within guided supervision discussions (Bell et al, 2017; Senediak, 2015).

Ongoing professional supervision does not diminish a supervisor’s responsibilities but expects these will be shared more collegially. The supervisor continues to model best professional practice and encourages the supervisee to use reflective practice for their boundary-setting and self-care as well as client-related work. The supervisor is always alert to areas that are omitted in discussion that the supervisee may be avoiding or may not realise are missing.

As psychological work may be provided in a friendly manner but is never “friendship” - supervision should be conducted with a similar arm’s length, neutral stance to foster the best outcome. There is a risk of the process devolving into professional socialising and the supervision intention being contaminated if the boundaries and agenda become ambiguous. Although the scope of supervision is legitimately broader than just the consideration of clients, the supervisor and supervisee share the responsibility to maintain their professional focus and adhere to their supervision agreement.

Mandated supervision is guided by the relevant regulatory body and requirements/imposed conditions pertaining to the specific situation. Psychologists providing mandated supervision require a high degree of experience in practice as a psychologist and as a supervisor. Supervisors must have the professional confidence to perform their role and competence to communicate constructively, especially when providing directive, evaluative, and corrective communication. The supervisor’s focus in supervision must not be challenged or diluted by any other considerations such as the supervisee’s personal, financial, or emotional state. They should not provide mandated supervision when there is a pre-existing relationship of any nature without considerable thought being given to the risks inherent in this. Any preexisting relationship should be disclosed to the regulatory body.

It is important that the psychologist and supervisor discuss the nature and circumstance of the mandated supervision, the psychologist’s perception and needs both as required by the regulating authority and their own circumstances, and then align this with what the supervisor can offer and how they provide supervision, to decide if they can form a genuine and transparent working alliance beyond fulfilling a formal requirement. The Supervision Agreement may need to be ratified by the relevant Board or Council and must prioritise the matters of concern in the remediation process and should clarify the scope and whether the psychologist will simultaneously engage in other supervision [mentor or peer].

The complaint / notification / investigation process can be emotionally distressing for all parties and the supervisor should not be drawn into a therapeutic role but should guide the supervisee to seek their own personal psychological support. The supervisor should be alert to possible substance abuse, cognitive loss, or other health concerns that may affect the supervisee’s capacity to provide ethical professional service.

The supervisor must keep comprehensive contemporaneous notes of each session. Some mandated psychologists present a range of difficult personal behaviours and will seek to derail the intention of supervision with interpersonal manoeuvres or distractions. They may also attempt to engage the supervisor as an advocate or ally or fail to genuinely collaborate. Sessions should focus on the psychologist’s knowledge, skill and practice relevant to the complaint. Preoccupation with the supervisee’s distress, including focus on the complainant and complaint process, are the purview of their own psychological support provider. It is the supervisor’s responsibility to be alert and monitor this behaviour and never to become either overbearing nor an advocate for the psychologist.

Supervisors should never hesitate to notify the Board, Council, or other regulatory body if they perceive the following: • the supervisee to be disingenuous • they fail to engage in a constructive manner • are preoccupied with the complaint rather than remediation • remain in denial regarding the complaint • attempts to manipulate the supervisor.

A supervisor will be routinely expected to provide feedback to the regulatory body and there would be an expectation of improvement over time in their assessments. A constant rating of “excellent” in the short to medium term, for example, would suggest that the supervision is not addressing the correct skills and deficits.

A psychologist providing supervision at this level of professional maturity should be engaged in their own supervision-of-supervision to assist with the transference and counter-transference aspects that can develop. This is particularly so if they feel they may be influenced to collude with the mandatory supervisee’s avoidance of responsibility or explanatory perspective.

Provisionally registered students in degree programs are expected to: follow their supervisor’s guidance; it is their responsibility to maintain their reflective log and participate in supervision in a fully engaged and professional manner. It is expected that students ‘don’t know what it is that they don’t know’ so should be proactive and err on the side of caution when seeking direction. Placements may be emotionally confronting and students may need to seek support from their placement supervisor and their academic program as needed.

Provisionally registered psychologists in their internship year (s) are expected to be meaningfully and constructively engaged in the supervision process and maintain all records and logs per the PSYBA requirements. They are expected to demonstrate their professionalism by respecting their supervisor and the registration process. It is the supervisee’s responsibility to undertake and complete the requirements for full registration in a timely manner and not their supervisor’s responsibility to initiate or remind them of any obligations or requirements. Complaints to official bodies can often be traced to poor understanding of what should be presented to a supervisor. Provisional psychologists must present the full scope of their work on a consistent basis for review in supervision and may not avoid disclosure or keep silent any area of practice.

Provisional psychologists who have difficulty arranging or attending supervision [even if through no fault of their own] may be in breach of the requirements for practice and registration and are responsible for addressing this dilemma and documenting efforts to rectify any problems.

Generally registered psychologists are expected to respect the supervision process with meaningful and constructive engagement. They must keep comprehensive contemporaneous reflections per PSYBA requirements. They are encouraged to develop a process in their annually reviewed supervision agreement whereby they review all of their professional activity on a planned basis. Even experienced psychologists engage in supervision with a senior colleague who acts in a mentoring capacity and would treat this relationship as having some authority. Such a supervisor still needs to be mindful of reporting obligations.

Peer consultation where participants provide mutual supervision in a collegial manner should be conducted with the same professional approach as mentoring supervision. It offers a valuable form of professional development and support but can also be challenged by the shift from supervision experienced earlier in career progression to a situation with potential multiple relationships and less structured boundaries. All parties share the responsibility to maintain their professional focus, to raise genuine concerns and adhere to their Supervision Agreement. In particular, providing evaluative or conflicting feedback to a peer can be challenging but must take precedence over maintenance of any other relationships, including being colleagues. Maintaining the reflective approach will assist with any corrective discussion to be constructive.

Peer group supervision is also fraught with ambiguous boundaries and may risk developing an ethos of “supportive commentary” as a euphemism for avoidance of providing forthright constructive feedback when required. In addition to any other elements, the supervision agreement should stipulate procedures for chairing, presenting, commenting, and organising sessions in a manner that ensures safe and equitable participation of all parties.

Mandated professional supervision occurs in an emotionally charged circumstance for the supervisee, who is advised to seek personal support from professional resources at the initial phase and possibly for the entire duration of what may be a lengthy process. Defensiveness is understandable as well as despondent or angry reactions. These emotions may manifest in behaviours that challenge constructive engagement with supervision, especially if the psychologist feels misunderstood or victimised. This should be addressed transparently in initial discussions where the psychologist and the supervisor clarify if they will develop a sound working relationship or if another supervisor would be better suited to the need.

Formal complaints are sometimes associated with poor supervision practices at the time of the concerning behaviour. Mandated supervision is an opportunity to learn how to identify fraught situations and client interactions and present them constructively for discussion and resolution. It is the supervisee’s responsibility to be transparent and to provide evidence of practices and not the supervisor’s role to investigate any concerns. Supervisees should expect to initially see reports back to the Board or Council which are suggestive of a need for improvement. Over time, knowledge and skills should improve.

A focus on defensive explanation or re-litigating the complaint process may be formulated by the supervisor as poor self-reflection and an attempt to minimise the seriousness of the situation.

Efforts to seek an ally or advocate through supervision may be regarded as disingenuous engagement intended to derail the intention of the remedial process.

Supervision focussed upon a specific theoretical model may promote a specific perspective. This does not diminish either party’s duty of care to clients, responsibility to adhere to empirically supported evidence-based practice, or fulfillment of the APS Code of Ethics. Some models of care advocate minimalist communication with referring parties in health care in an effort to keep the client-psychologist relationship confidential. This needs to be reviewed in supervision such that the theoretical model does not interfere with best practice recommendations from research.

Supervision of psychologists from a Culturally or Linguistically Diverse heritage including Indigenous Australians, or psychologists who provide service to these populations, must be provided with due sensitivity and knowledge of the relevant cultural, religious and historical aspects (Hook et al, 2016). Knowledge and skills for psychologists working in these communities may be enhanced by a supervisor with the relevant experience and qualifications. A parallel aspect is that sensitivity to cultural or linguistic concerns is not an excuse to detour away from ethical and empirically supported evidence-based practices. Supervisors must be alert to boundary challenges and identity influences that may arise and assist the supervisee to use reflective skills to maintain their professional role. Cultural competency for working with Aboriginal people requires additional consideration and both supervisors and supervisees need to consider relevant education and resources to support professional practice (Dudgeon et al, 2014).

Supervisors of psychologists who provide service focused on clients from gender diverse communities should be fluent in the relevant psychosocial concerns. It is beneficial for supervisors to have knowledge of issues that affect members of these communities, including safety, identity formation, and relationships. In particular, supervisors must be alert to the supervisee’s potential transference or counter-transference experiences. It may be appropriate to enlist secondary supervision or consultancy with a psychologist with significant experience in gender diversity to ensure coverage of any specialist services or resources.

Supervision with awareness of neurodiversity: Increasing awareness of neurodiversity highlights the need for supervisors to consider the possibility their supervisee may be neurodiverse. The professional responsibilities of the parties are not reduced but adjustments may be required to complement the learning needs of the supervisee. Considerations and modifications may include a more flexible approach to the structure of supervision and identification of any specific learning styles and communication needs of the supervisee. Extensive knowledge of both assessment and resources for clients may be required and should be considered where necessary. Consideration may also need to be given to any possible impacts of the psychologist’s own neurodiversity on their practice and potential modifications/considerations related to this potential bias.

Over the past few years there has been a rise in the popularity of professional psychology chat groups. These groups allow for psychologists, of varying degrees of clinical experience and orientations nationwide, to engage in spirited and sometimes emotive conversations about topical areas in psychology. For many, these groups have the benefit of regular online contact with peers providing a forum to seek and provide opinions, ideas, resources and treatment recommendations. The forums can be of great benefit, especially to those working remotely.

A concern, however, is that these groups are also used as a forum to ask specific questions about client care. Often advice that is given is based on a ‘snapshot’ description of the situation rather than a well formulated presentation that would occur if presented in supervision. Whilst forums can be very helpful in locating services and learning about resources, chat group advice does not take the place of clinical supervision. Be cautioned that the forum discussion is just that, a sharing of an array of different ideas that should be further considered within the context of a professional supervision session where these ideas can be fully explored in discussion aligned to best practice models. If engaging in these groups, extra care needs to be taken with regard to client privacy and confidentiality including consideration of what the client’s views would be in regard to this form of discussion about their care matters. Be aware that not all participants may actually be psychologists. Lastly, it is important to remember that these groups are not formal supervision groups with overt agreements regarding all aspects of confidentiality, annual quality review and mutual ethical oversight.

This paper offers the reader an overview of roles and responsibilities for both supervisor and supervisee when entering into a professional supervisory relationship, outlining some specific considerations in various supervisory stages of development and training and strategies to enhance the supervisory experience. The reader is encouraged to reflect on their practice and consider what is already practised well in supervision and what can be changed or improved to ensure that every encounter in supervision offers professional insight and opportunities for reflection and growth.

Psychology is an evidence-based profession and the importance of applying a competency-based reflective practice model of supervision is highlighted. Whilst not endeavouring to cover all aspects of the professional relationship, it is hoped that both supervisors and supervisees consider their practice and ways to continue fostering professionalism within the psychology field in Australia. It is recommended that all psychologists should at a minimum annually review the PSYBA guidelines regarding CPD and supervision.

References

_{Bell, T., Dixon, A & Kolts, R. (2017). Developing a Compassionate Internal Supervisor: Compassion-Focused Therapy for Trainee Therapists, Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 24, 632–648. Senediak, C. (2015). Practical guidelines for Integrating Reflective Practice in Clinical Supervision for Psychologists, Australian Clinical Psychologist, 1, 3, 24–31 Dudgeon, P Milry, H., & Walker, R. (2014) Working Together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health and Wellbeing Principles and Practice, University of Western Australia, Australian Government Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Hook, J, Watkins, C, Davis, D, Owen, J, Van Tongeren, D, Ramos, M. (2016). Cultural Humility in Psychotherapy Supervision. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 70, 149–166. Tromski-Kling, D. (2006). Should the clinical Supervisor Be the Administrative Supervisor? The Ethics versus the Reality, The Clinical Supervisor, 25, 53–67.}