Citation
On becoming a psychotherapist

Material Information

Title:
On becoming a psychotherapist an experience of good supervision
Creator:
Buehner, Timothy M
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vii, 150 leaves : ill. ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Clinical psychology ( jstor )
Learning ( jstor )
Professional training ( jstor )
Psychological counseling ( jstor )
Psychological research ( jstor )
Psychology ( jstor )
Psychotherapists ( jstor )
Psychotherapy ( jstor )
Research methods ( jstor )
Supervisory training ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Psychology -- UF ( lcsh )
Psychology thesis, Ph.D ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 1997.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 138-149).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Timothy Mark Buehner.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
028624630 ( ALEPH )
38863619 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











ON BECOMING A PSYCHOTHERAPIST:
AN EXPERIENCE OF GOOD SUPERVISION














BY


TIMOTHY MARK BUEHNER









A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1997















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS




I would like to acknowledge my committee chairman, academic advisor, and

friend, Franz Epting, Ph.D. His introduction of phenomenological research sparked my interest and his support allowed my enthusiasm to grow. I would also like to acknowledge my other committee members, Drs. Jim Archer, Wayne Francis, David Suchman, and Robert Ziller, for their interest and support of qualitative research in psychology. Finally, I would like to acknowledge a supervisor, Enrique Casero, Ph.D., who re-ignited my passion for qualitative research and who hinted that it is okay to be regarded as a "phenomenologist."

I would also like to acknowledge my wife, Randi, and my children Anja, Linnea, Nathaniel, and Tyra. Without their perpetual love, support, and faith in me, this project and this manuscript would never have become complete.














TABLE OF CONTENTS



A CKN O W LED GEM EN TS ................................................................................................ ii

LIST OF TA BLES ............................................................................................................... v

ABSTRA CT ....................................................................................................................... vi

IN TRODU CTION ............................................................................................................... I
Clinical Supervision of Psychotherapy .......................................................................... 2
Research M ethodology in Counseling Psychology ....................................................... 5
Phenom enological Research .......................................................................................... 9
Sum m ary ...................................................................................................................... 11

REV IEW OF LITERATU RE ............................................................................................ 13
Im portance of Supervision ........................................................................................... 13
Conflicts in Supervision Theory .................................................................................. 15
M odels and Theories of Supervision ........................................................................... 18
W hat is Good Supervision? ......................................................................................... 52
Sum m ary ...................................................................................................................... 58

M ETH OD .......................................................................................................................... 59
Subjects ........................................................................................................................ 61
Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 62

RESU LTS .......................................................................................................................... 68
Essential D escription of Good Supervision ................................................................. 76
Structural D escription of Good Supervision ................................................................ 79

DISCU SSION .................................................................................................................... 81
Personal Reflections ..................................................................................................... 82
Orientation of the Subject ............................................................................................ 84
Qualities of Supervision ............................................................................................... 86
H ow D oes This Relate to D evelopm ental M odels? ..................................................... 93
Other Phenom enological Studies of Supervision ........................................................ 96
Training in Supervision .............................................................................................. 105
Conclusions and Recom m endations for Future Research .......................................... 106
Com m ents Regarding the M ethodology .................................................................... Ill



iii









APPENDIX A SAMPLE PROTOCOL WITH MEANING UNITS ............................. 114

APPENDIX B FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURE OF POSITIVE SUPERVISION ....... 135 LIST O F RE FER EN C E S ................................................................................................. 138

BIO G RA PH ICA L SK ETCH ........................................................................................... 150












































iv















LIST OF TABLES


Table

1: Characteristics of Beginning and Advanced Supervisors ................................. 34

2: Empirical support of supervisee developmental models .................................. 41

3: Empirical support of supervisor developmental models................................... 43

4: Bernard's 3x3 matrix of supervisor roles and functions................................... 49

5: Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz four-stage unidimensional. model of supervision ...50 6: Three additional supervisor roles added by Ellis, Dell, and Good ...................... 50

7: Meaning units derived from the five subject protocols.................................... 69

8: Four phases of a Good Supervision Experience for Advanced Supervisees............ 97



























v










Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


ON BECOMING A PSYCHOTHERAPIST: AN EXPERIENCE OF GOOD SUPERVISION By

Timothy Mark Buehner

December, 1997




Chairman: Franz R. Eating, Ph.D.
Major Department: Psychology

Supervision in the training of professional psychologists is recognized as a

necessary and valuable practice. Despite its clinical relevance, supervision has received relatively little attention in the forin of empirical research. This study uses a qualitative research method, the phenomenological method as developed by Amedeo Giorgi, to explore good clinical supervision as experienced by predoctoral psychology interns. Five interns were interviewed to elicit narratives of their lived experiences of good supervision. Each interview began with the same question, then proceeded to clarify the experience as reported by each subject. No questions were asked to support nor deny preexisting hypotheses regarding the phenomenon. An analysis and eidetic reduction were then performed on the interview transcripts to reveal the essential nature of the lived experience of good supervision. The result of the analysis is reported as the essential description and the result of the reduction is reported as the structural description of good



vi









supervision. This study found that supervisees experience supervision to be a direct extension of the supervisor. Experiences of good supervision were attributed directly to how the supervisor interacted with the supervisees rather than to learned skills or behaviors. Supervisees were able to develop and invest in a supervisory relationship in which they felt respected and supported. Supervisees valued supervision by competent and invested supervisors. When supervision was valued, supervisees performed harder and were more likely to actively participate in the supervision process. Supervisees experienced good supervision as developmental in nature-building upon their existing strengths rather than being corrective or critical. Other necessary components of a good supervisory relationship include, trust, confidence, and likability of the supervisor. The relevance of these results to existing empirical research in supervision is discussed.





























vii














INTRODUCTION


Since Freud began delving into the unconscious over one hundred years ago, psychotherapy has become an important treatment modality in the United States and throughout the world. Psychotherapy has been referred to as an art, a craft, and a science. Regardless of how it is classified, psychotherapy is, in essence, a relationship between two (or more) persons striving towards the mutual goal of the restoration of a person's mental health and/or well-being. How one of those persons becomes qualified to assist the other(s) in the pursuit of health is the focus of this paper. We will examine how a person becomes a psychotherapist through good clinical supervision by conducting a phenomenological investigation of good super-vision.

The training of professional psychologists is an area that has stimulated discussion and research in the professional literature for many years. In accordance with the scientist-practitioner model advocated by the American Psychological Association, the psychologist should be trained as a researcher as well as a clinician. The training of the scientist-practitioner is often reported to be composed of four primary elements: academic course work, supervised practical experience, personal psychotherapy, and applied research experience. While the requirement of engaging in personal psychotherapy varies greatly across training programs, the requirements of academic course work, supervised clinical experience, and applied research experience are the essence of all training programs accredited by the American Psychological Association


1






2

(APA). Research into how psychology trains its professionals has become an area of increased interest during the past 20 years.

The purpose of this research project is to examine two areas that are essential in the training of professional psychologists, clinical supervision and research methodology. The process of clinical supervision will be empirically studied from the perspective of the psychologist trainee. The examination of research methodology will be experiential in nature-this project intends to utilize a human science methodology, the phenomenological method, to perform the empirical analysis. This research project is an effort to not only contribute to the content of empirically-based psychological knowledge, but to also support the profession's call to embrace alternative methodologies in the collection and analysis of such knowledge.


Clinical SiWervision of Psychotherapy


Supervision is considered by educators, trainers, and professional regulatory

agencies to be a critical component of psychotherapy training (Holloway and Neufeldt, 1995). The importance of supervised training is underscored by the pre- and post-doctoral practice standards of the American Psychological Association and licensing requirements of most states (American Psychological Association, 1986). While supervision of clinical training has long been considered a significant aspect to the training of professional psychologists, it has generated an inadequate body of research compared to research of psychotherapeutic issues in general. Prefacing a special issue of The Counseling Psychologist devoted to supervision, Bartlett and associates noted the inadequacy of






3

research literature on counseling supervision (Bartlett, Goodyear, and Bradley, 1983). Over a decade later, Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) noted that the body of research on supervision was mediocre considering its importance to the clinical practice of psychology. Robertson (1995) suggests this lack of research is due to the fact that super-vision generates relatively little controversy. He adds that research in the area has increased recently due in part to the increasing pressure of accountability.

Research of the supervision of trainees in clinical and counseling psychology is becoming an area of growing interest. During the past 15 years, there has been an increase in the theoretical discussion of supervision although empirical research testing those theories has been limited (Swanson and O'Saben, 1993; Worthington, 1987). The published empirical research has focused on skills training and supervisor technique (i.e., Russell, Crimmings, and Lent, 1984; Marikas, Russell, and Dell, 1985) with an increasing emphasis on testing developmental models of supervision. The testing of these models builds on the work begun by Stoltenberg (1981) and Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz (1979). Such developmental models have guided the research and, presumably, the training of counseling psychologists.

As supervision is typically provided by individuals trained within a particular

orientation of psychotherapy, the supervision is often provided following the conceptual framework of that theory, whether it is psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioral, humanistic, or family systems in nature. There are, however, cross-theoretical models of supervision, such as the developmental models which are not bound to any particular theory of psychotherapy and may be employed by supervisors from a variety of theoretical






4

orientations. The field of counseling psychology appears to have embraced the developmentally based models of supervision and the research has focused on the testing and enhancement of those models (McNeill, Stoltenberg, and Romans, 1992; Stoltenberg and Delworth, 1988; Wiley and Ray, 1986).

Although empirical research has focused on developmental models of supervision, a review of the literature suggests a growing amount of research on the supervisory relationship and process. Recent papers written on the supervisory relationship include discussions of power and control (Salvendy, 1993; Weisgerber, 1992), stagnation in supervision (Yerushalmi, 1993), resistance (Glickauf-Hughes, 1994), mirroring (Manasis and Traub-Werner, 1994), separation-individuation (Watkins, 1992), and parallel process (Adelson, 1994). Various aspects of the supervisor have been discussed, including the supervisor as a mentor (Vallery, 1992), dimensions of the role (Duci, 1992), the supervisor's devotion (Yerushalmi, 1992), and the experience of supervising (Paskiewicz, 1993; Collett, 1995; Clarkson and Aviram, 1995). The role and perspective of the supervisee has also begun generating interest in the professional literature, including the experience of shame in the supervisory experience (Talbot, 1995), the struggle of perfectionism (Arkowitz, 1994), role ambiguity (Olk and Friedlander, 1992), and trainee anxiety (Udis, 1991). While the scope of this list is impressive, it should be noted that much of this literature is accounted for by Dissertation Abstracts International and specialized journals. Furthermore, many of these studies represent research endeavors that apply non-traditional research methodologies. Perhaps the previously mentioned lack of empirical research in counseling supervision is due not to a lack of interest in the






5

multifaceted process of supervision, but rather to the inadequacy of traditional, i.e., natural science, research methods in handling these meaningful, but experiential, aspects of the supervisory process.


Research Mgthodology in Counseling-Psychology


When psychology was first taught at institutions of higher learning, the teaching professors held appoints in departments of philosophy. As psychology became more applied in focus, however, psychologists strove to become more science-like-adopting research methodologies utilized by the "natural" sciences-biology, physics, chemistryin an effort to become more efficacious in the pursuit of predicting human behavior. While this tact has been effective in promoting the application of psychological principles in the treatment of mental illness, it has also resulted in a departure from studying other areas of psychological interest that are not conducive to being studied by the experimental method. As the strength of psychology's rigor in natural science methodologies has increased, so too has the interest in alternative forms of research methodology. Perhaps psychology is reaching an age where it can critically examine its development, identify its strengths and weaknesses, and return, in part, to an examination of issues originally tossed aside in hopes of becoming accepted by the scientific community. The specialty area of Counseling Psychology is no exception to this developmental progress in psychology. The advancement of counseling psychology's scientific rigor has been hailed, and utilization of natural science methodologies is the






6

accepted norm. Yet, there is a growing voice calling for methodological diversity that has increased in volume and influence during the past two decades.

In 1979, Gelso called for increased methodological diversity, a call that has been increasingly answered throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s. The three major American publications of counseling psychology, the Journal of Counseling Psychology, The Counseling Psychologist, and the Journal of Counseling and Development, have given much attention to the advancement of methodological diversity (Hoshmand, 1989; Gelso, Betz, Friedlander, Helms, Hill, Patton, Super, and Wampold, 1988; Heppner, Gelso, and Dolliver, 1987; Howard, 1984,1985; Fretz, 1986; Gelso, 1979; Gelso and Johnson, 1982; Patton, 1984; Polkinghorne, 1984). A special subsection of the Journal of Counseling Psychology (Volume 31, 1984) was devoted to alternative methodologies and included 3 major papers that examined the philosophical foundations of such research (Howard, 1984; Patton, 1984; Polkinghorne, 1984). In 1988, the Research Group at the Third National Conference for Counseling Psychology reported on prospects and recommendations for research in counseling psychology (see Gelso et al., 1988). Among the fifteen recommendations offered regarding research, three directly supported the trend toward alternative methodologies. The Counseling Psychologist, in 1989, devoted an issue to alternative methodologies, and in 1994, the Journal of Counseling Psychology included a special section on qualitative research in counseling process and outcome. That section in Journal of Counseling Psychology comprised of eight qualitative studies (Friedlander, Heatherington, Johnson, and Skowron, 1994; Elliot, Shapiro, Firth-Cozens, Stiles, Hardy, Llewelyn, and Margison, 1994: Cummings, Hallberg, and Slemon, 1994;






7

Rhodes, Hill, Thompson, and Elliott, 1994; Thompson and Jenal, 1994; Rennie, D.L., 1994; Frontman and Kunkel, 1994; Watson and Rennie, 1994) and a reaction by Polkinghorne (1994), in which he noted that this issue was the first significant compilation of qualitative studies produced, despite the call for increased methodological diversity for over a decade. Polkinghome (1984) also suggests that counseling psychology should not only support the development of alternative methodologies, but should assume a leadership role in training researchers in their use.

Counseling psychology's growing interest in alternative methodologies has not been a spontaneous plunge into diversity for diversity's sake. There has been a growing concern that heavy reliance upon natural science methodology has resulted in inadequacies in addressing the full realm of psychological phenomena of interest to counseling psychologists. Within the movement of methodological diversity has been a commitment to go beyond diversity, to embrace alternative methodologies as a way to compensate for the inadequacies of natural science methodologies. It has been argued that the over reliance on natural science methods has failed counseling psychology research in two fundamental ways.

The first problem is related to the types of questions, in terms of meaning and

language, asked by natural science researchers versus the types of questions pondered by clinicians. Human scientists argue that questions regarding the depth and complexity of human experience cannot be adequately addressed within the limitations of natural science methodologies. This is an important distinction, they argue, as such questions are most often the primary concerns of the practitioner. The human scientist attempts to






8

understand the subject from the perspective of his or her own subjective experience, emphasizing exploration of the whole phenomenon rather than discrete parts. Human science methodologies are offered as a source to address these distinctly different research questions of interest to clinicians.

The second problem, according to the human science perspective, is that the

assumptions of the human scientist regarding human nature are closer to the assumptions of the clinician than are the assumptions of the natural scientist. Specifically, it is argued that most clinicians view their clients as being self-determining. Natural science methodologies, however, conceptualize the individual as an object upon which environmental variables are manipulated which then determine outcome. Human science methodologies, on the other hand, treat the subject from a perspective more familiar to the practitioner, incorporating the assumption of free-will into the data collection and analysis.

Human science methods have developed through the investigations of various researchers who have taken it upon themselves to seek alternative methodologies to the natural science approach in understanding humanistic theoretical positions. Polkinghorne (1982) argues that the development of new methodologies is a result of the humanistic psychologist's commitment to "understanding that human beings exist within an experience of meaning and retain the possibility of acting with self-determined purpose" (p. 48). While humanistic theory does not propose that human action is completely independent of environmental or genetic origins, it does allow that persons can choose to act in ways not predetermined. Polkinghorne describes these alternative methodologies






9


as structural research designs--those which seek underlying themes or patterns of the human experience. While these structural designs are similar to each other in their focus on human experience, they vary in terms specific research questions addressed, types of data required, and specific analytical procedures employed. The scientific method which will be utilized in this study is the phenomenological method, as conceptualized and developed by Giorgi (1989).


Phenomenological Research


Phenomenology, according to Giorgi, is the study of phenomena as experienced. For the phenomenologist, phenomenon refers to what is given in experience, to be understood in direct relationship with awareness (Giorgi, 1976). Therefore the phenomenological researcher is interested in discovering the structure of the phenomena (experience) as experienced. The phenomenologist refers to the context of the lived world as a point of departure and searches for the meaning of the lived experience. Phenomenology goes beyond the collection and analysis of facts to determine the meanings of those facts-facts are important insofar as they have meaning. The focus of human consciousness, going beyond the quantifiable measurement of the experience, phenomenological research can provides a deeper understanding of human experience than natural science methods.

Phenomenology is a process of discovery and it is essential that the phenomenon be examined prior to drawing on pre-existing knowledge of the phenomenon. As it is unlikely that a researcher can ever study a phenomenon without possessing preconceived






10

beliefs about it, the researcher must consciously separate and disregard all known experience of the phenomenon of study. This partitioning off, of prior knowledge, is known as bracketing, and it plays a vital role in the phenomenological research process. Bracketing was first described as epochi by Husserl, in his explanation of psychology in terms of pure phenomenology (Husserl, 1913/1983). Using a contemporary definition, bracketing is the "refraining from accepting the actually existing, real world in the customary sense of being" (Kersten, 1989, p. 23). It is the removal of preconceived ideas and beliefs about the phenomenon of study from the experimenter's conscious thought. Thus bracketing is, for the phenomenologist, experimental control-the effort at limiting the amount of extraneous variables and biases into the scientific method and analysis.

A variety of phenomena have been studied utilizing phenomenological

methodologies, and the quantity of published studies has grown steadily, particularly within recent years. Some of the phenomena studied are: being a supervisor (Clarkson and Aviram, 1995), shame (Ablamowicz, 1992), moral sense (Giorgi, 1992), mutual gaze (Angus, Osborne, and Koziey, 1991), maternal mourning (Brice, 1991), shyness (Guglietti-Kelly and Westcott, 1990), anger (Buehner, 1993; Stevick, 1971), aging (Wondolowski and Davis, 1988), decision and choice (Karlsson, 1988), friendship between women (Becker, 1987), courage in chronically ill adolescents (Haase, 1987), the formation of clinical impressions (Churchill, 1984), the experience of failing to learn (Deegan, 1981), the premenstruum (Montgomery, 1982), tragedy (Carrere, 1989), forgetting (Kral, 1989), intimacy (Register and Henley, 1992), and glaucoma (Kugelmann and Bensinger, 1983).









Summ


The limited production of supervision research may be due, in part, to the

difficulty in applying natural science methodologies to the complex and dynamic nature of clinical supervision. While behaviors can be monitored and self-report surveys can reflect perceived effectiveness of supervisory styles and interventions, they cannot fully describe the process that promotes the evolution of novices into competent therapists. At a time when counseling psychology is increasing its utilization of human science methodologies to better understand the psychotherapeutic process and to evaluate its efficacy, it is appropriate to utilize such methods to examine the training of its psychotherapists.

This study intends to examine the process of supervision using the

phenomenological method as developed by Giorgi. In particular, this study will attempt to understand the experience of being supervised from the perspective of the trainee. By performing a phenomenological analysis on interview data collected from psychologistsin-training, it is anticipated that a structure of meaning can be discovered which will identify the essences of the supervisory experience for trainees. This structure will then be used as a guidepost to understand the meaning of being supervised relative to existing research of supervision.

There are many general aspects of supervision, including, but not limited to,

didactic teaching, behavioral modeling, mentoring, and self-examination. At times, these events may be experienced as anxiety-provoking, comforting, boring, frustrating, angerprovoking, enlightening, educating, threatening, and so on. One's valuation of the






12

supervisory experience, however, is more likely to be broken down into less defined categories, simply as helpful or hurtful, positive or negative, good or bad. Given these gross, yet clinically valuable categorizations of the supervisory experience, it seems a study of experiences that are most indicative of an ideal supervisory process would provide the most beneficial contribution to the professional literature. This study, then, will be a study of good supervision, where "good" is defined by the subject, the supervised.














REVIEW OF LITERATURE


This chapter will discuss several aspects of supervision. After discussing the importance of supervision, there will be a discussion of conflicts regarding supervision theory that have been identified in the literature. There will then be a section on models and theories of supervision which will include developmental models, supervision as a relationship, and the dimensions of super-vision. The discussion of developmental models will include models of supervised development, supervisor development, and a review of the empirical support of developmental models. Finally, there will be a review of what has been identified as "good" supervision.


Importance of Supervisio


The importance of psychotherapy supervision in the training of psychotherapists cannot be understated. It is a fundamental training requirement for accreditation by the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, Social Workers Association, as well as a licensing requirement by state regulatory agencies. It is a key element in the process by which psychotherapy is taught and learned (Ekstein and Wallerstein, 1972; Jacobs, David, and Meyer, 1995) regardless of specialty area, level of training, theoretical orientation, or work setting (Watkins, 1995a). Despite this apparent importance, research on the effectiveness of supervision has been limited.




13






14

Research into the supervisory process has increased significantly during the past decade. Research of supervision is methodologically diverse, reflecting, perhaps the diverse nature of theoretical beliefs regarding supervision. Supervision is a complex process of teaching, modeling, and preparing the supervised for the professional role. Supervision affects not only behaviors designated as "treatment interventions," but attitudes, beliefs toward the practice of psychotherapy and mental health in general. Supervision provides the framework for an individual as one becomes a psychotherapist. Experiences of supervision will likely affect the supervised's professional demeanor for a significant portion of the supervisee's professional life. In considering the effectiveness of supervision, one must consider what is most important, outcomes of supervised change (and how that may be measured) or outcomes to the psychotherapy being performed by the supervised.

While the importance of supervision is typically accepted as self-evident by those who practice, teach, and regulate psychotherapy, its efficacy toward treatment outcomes is largely unproved. In their introduction to a special section on training in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Beutler and Kendall (1995) reported that professional training may enhance clinical efficacy, but there is insufficient knowledge regarding the specifies aspects of professional training and professional experience which most effectively contribute to such a relationship (p. 180). In their paper within the same special section, Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) concluded that there was little evidence of a direct connection between supervision and therapist efficacy, though it is likely that supervision increases the proficiency with which one uses complex therapy procedures,






15

enhances knowledge and role definitions, and increases one's ability to facilitate internal therapeutic processes. Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) concluded that the effects of specific supervisory interventions to therapist and client change in behavior remained largely unknown. Rather than accept the whole of supervision as contributing to improved therapeutic technique, Holloway and Neufeldt argue for the identification of specific behaviors and interventions leading to specific changes. Subsequently, Holloway and Carroll (1996) argue that research on supervision must move from a theoretical approach to the pragmatic application of behaviors. Supervision research must, according to Holloway and Carroll (1996) advance from understanding how supervision is performed to identifying how the effectiveness of supervision may be improved

Given the nature of supervision, however, as a complex process requiring an

interpersonal relationship of at least three individuals (supervisor, supervised, and client) engaged in a process of learning, modeling, and relating, it is possible that specific behaviors to specific outcomes may never be proven. Yet given that possibility, it is unlikely that anyone engaged in the practice of psychotherapy would advocate elimination of training through supervision. Supervision is the mechanism wherein individuals not only learn how to do psychotherapy, but how to be a psychotherapist as well.


CQnflicts in SILpervision heory


Despite one hundred years of psychotherapy, there has not developed one

accepted manner of training psychotherapists. The development of supervision theory is






16

in its infancy when compared to the theoretical development of psychotherapy. Due, in part, to its immature status, there are several issues that must be resolved as theories of supervision develop. One conflict in approaching supervision is the question whether supervision requires a theoretical understanding of its own or whether is it can be sufficiently understood by applying theories adapted from psychotherapy (Hess, 1 987a). Historically, particularly when psychodynamic theories were at their strongest, training has duplicated the processes of the theory and psychotherapy the student was being trained to implement. This traditional course of action may explain, in part, the historical paucity of separate supervision theory. As the theoretical field of psychotherapy has become more eclectic, there has also been an increase in the development of supervision theory unlinked to a specific psychotherapeutic approach. Accepting the need for a separate supervision theory, other conflicts remain.

A second conflict in supervision theory exists in how supervisors should perform supervision. This conflict is whether supervision should be proactive or reactive (Worthington, 1987). In proactive supervision, the supervisor effectively leads the supervisee; in reactive supervision, the supervisor still facilitates growth, but allows the supervisee to determine the course. Some supervision follows an agenda set by the supervisor. Each session has defined goals and the task of the supervisor is to assist the supervisee to attain those goals. In this form of supervision, the trainee is lead by the supervisor toward professional development. Other supervision is lead by the supervisee. Goals are still identified and tracked, but the supervisee is more instrumental in defining those goals as well as the manner they should be attained. The proactive-reactive conflict






17

has been resolved in large part in the developmental models. Almost uniformly these models advocate a more proactive stance by the supervisor during the supervised's early development, and a more reactive stance during the later stages of development.

A third conflict identified in the literature is the question of whether the

supervised should learn the theory of the supervisor or whether the supervisor should adapt supervision to the theoretical stance of the supervised (Worthington, 1987). In the early years of psychotherapy, this was not much of an issue as supervision was sought out to learn the perspective and methods of a particular supervisor. In the contemporary days of eclecticism, as well as a broad range of theories to choose from, this has become more of an issue. While specialty training stills requires the trainee to learn the methods of the supervisor, the generalist approach used in most training programs must account for theoretical differences between supervised and supervisor. If a supervised wishes to learn from the experience of a given supervisor without necessarily adopting the theoretical orientation, there is a question whether it would be effective for that supervisor to use counseling based super-vision for that supervisor. On the other hand, to expect a super-visor to effectively adopt the theoretical perspective of each trainee does not seem to be reasonable. Again, the developmental models step in to provide a solution. The developmental models are, for the most part, theoretical regarding counseling theory. They can be incorporated into a wide range of supervision situations regardless of the theoretical underpinnings of supervisor or supervised.

Another question of supervision involves the amount of counseling that should

take place within the supervision environment. From one perspective some writers argue






18

that it is necessary for supervisors to help supervises identify defenses, overcome resistances, and facilitate personal growth. On the hand, other authors contend that those activities are best saved for another environment. It is generally agreed, however, that extensive psychotherapy should not be a part of the supervision process.


Models and Theories of S=ervisio


In reviewing the current literature of supervision, few broad categories of supervision theory and research can be identified. Theories of supervision can be intuitively classified into three categories: 1) developmental models, 2) supervision which parallels a specific counseling theory, and 3) those that emphasize a particular aspect, or dimension, supervision. As the interest of this paper is the unique process of supervision, this review of theories will exclude those which simply apply counseling principles. On the other hand, the importance of the supervisory relationship is typically underscored by most supervision theorists, and a unique theory regarding that relationship will be presented. There will also be a review of the limited research into the dimensions of supervision. As developmental models have received the most attention in the past twenty years, this chapter will begin with a review of supervised and supervisor development.


Developmental Models


The conceptualization of clinical supervision has become increasingly dominated by thinking in developmental terms. In the words of Holloway (19 8 7), the developmental thrust has constituted "the zeitgeist of supervision thinking and research" (p. 209). While






19

Holloway made her observation ten years ago, the statement remains as true today as it was then (Watkins, 1995a). According to Watkins, these models have proven appealing over the course of the years for three fundamental reasons: 1) they are meta-theoretical; 2) they have direct practice and training implications, and 3) they provide a framework for tracking progress over time (Watkins, 1995a).

Developmental models of supervision conceptualize the supervised and, in some models, the supervisor, as proceeding through a series of developmental stages across time and, presumably, training. These models are often based upon the developmental theories of Piaget, Erikson, and others who have left their mark on human developmental theory. The person becoming a psychotherapist continues through a universal series of stages which predict certain emotional experiences as well as certain needs that require appropriate attention from the trainee's supervisor. The supervises progress from being less developed, i.e., naYve and unskilled, to becoming more developed, i.e., aware and competent. The supervisee's development is largely dependent upon how the supervisor interacts with the supervised at any given point during the trainee's development. It is assumed that the supervised will develop as a natural function of supervision. The supervisor may enhance and encourage growth by providing an appropriate environment and supervisory experience, or conversely, may stunt development by providing an inappropriate environment or engaging in inappropriate behaviors.

There have been many developmental models proposed in the literature. In an 1987 review, Worthington identified sixteen different developmental models in the literature, from 1953 to 1986. In an updated review, Watkins (1995) identified an






20


additional six models proposed between 1986 and 1994. Although these models may vary in the specifics of their language, number of stages, and developmental focus, both researchers concluded the models were more similar than dissimilar. Watkins noted the similarities began with the assumptions inherent in the models.

Watkins (1995) identified four key, identifiable assumptions shared by the developmental models:

1) therapists in training develop and grow, provided they are not exposed to a
pernicious training environment;
2) their development proceeds through a sequence of stages, from less to more
developed;
3) that during those stages, they struggle with various developmental issues and
concerns (e.g. competency, identity);
4) that supervisors would do well to consider the developmental level of their
supervisees and structure supervision accordingly. (p. 647).

Often using the theories of Erikson, Piaget, or other models of human development as their basis, developmental models of supervision and therapist development describe the transformation of an unskilled, nafve novice into a "master psychotherapist." As models of supervisee development have grown in popularity, parallel processes have been noted in supervisor development as well, spawning literature in support of supervisors developing in much the same manner as supervisees. The following sections will describe models of supervisee development, models of supervisor development, and empirical support for those models. Supervisee development

Hogan (1964) proposed four stages in the development of the psychotherapist. His model emphasized the supervisee' s increasing autonomy that culminated in a collaborative relationship with the supervisor. According to Hogan, it is the supervisor's






21

responsibility to provide a supervision environment that fosters the counselor's growth and development. The proper supervisory role is dependent upon the supervisee's stage of development. In the beginning, the supervisee has feelings of insecurity, lacks insight, and is imitative of the supervisor. The supervisee is dependent upon the supervisor to provide interpretation, support, and predictable outcomes to allow the supervisee to begin developing self-confidence as a psychotherapist. In the second stage, Hogan identifies a conflict centered upon dependency-autonomy issues in which the supervisee struggles between overconfidence and feeling overwhelmed. During this stage of development, Hogan recommends that the supervisor should provide support, exemplification, teaching, and clarification of the ambivalence experienced by the trainee. Hogan also recommends the initiation of personal psychotherapy for the trainee (with someone other than the supervisor). The trainee's successful resolution of the conflict in stage two leads to a stage marked by conditional dependency. In this third stage, the supervisee has increased professional confidence which includes greater insight into the supervisee' s neurotic and healthy motivations. During this stage, the supervisor should continue exemplification, begin sharing as a peer, and incorporate confrontation to ensure the trainee's continued development. Finally, the psychotherapist may now reach the fourth, and Hogan's final stage, that of Master Psychologist. This stage is identified when the psychotherapist has gained personal autonomy, insightfulness with motivation, and experiences a need for confrontation for continued and increased expertise. At this stage, the supervisee and supervisor should interact within a mutually sharing relationship, in consultation as well as confrontation. Hogan's stages are expressed in terms of






22


developing within the supervisory relationship-all development is experienced and progresses within the context of the supervisory relationship. Stoltenberg (1981) accepted Hogan's speculations about the development of counselors and further elaborated upon how a supervisor might provide the optimal environment for optimal growth by the supervisee (Worthington, 1987).

Stoltenberg's (198 1) Counselor Complexity Model focused on the supervisee's increasing levels of autonomy and indicated the supervisor's behavior should change according. The Counselor Complexity Model has four stages and is so named because Stoltenberg viewed the trainee as becoming more complex as training progressed and the trainee gained experience. Stoltenberg' s model speaks less to the varying levels of dependency within the supervisory relationship and more to the development of identity by the supervisee. Stoltenberg's model was also more elaborate regarding how a supervisor can promote the most growth. According to Stoltenberg, the novice psychotherapist begins by attempting to define boundaries between the "counselor" and the "person" (Worthington, 1987). During this initial stage, the supervisor should provide a structured environment, encouraging autonomy and risk taking within that structure. During the second stage, the supervisee' s professional identity begins to become defined and the trainee begins to experiment with different styles. The supervisee is no longer satisfied imitating the supervisor and will begin expressing disagreement. At this time the supervisor should provide new skills and advice as necessary, encouraging continued autonomy within a low pressure environment. The acquisition of new skills allows the trainee to tolerate a broader variety of clients,






23


becoming less dependent upon a single doctrine of therapy. In this third stage, Stoltenberg recommends an increased emphasis on sharing, allowing appropriate professional and personal confrontation. In the final stage of Stoltenberg's Counselor Complexity Model, the therapist is capable of practicing independently, integrating the standards of the profession within a personal value system. In 1987, Stoltenberg and Delworth elaborated further on this model, and provided a model of supervisor development within its framework.

In the revised Counselor Complexity Model, Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987) identified three levels of development. The third level, however, has an integrated and non-integrated component to comprise a four-stage model. In Level I, the supervisee is dependent and lacks self-awareness and in-depth understanding of the therapy process. The supervisee experiences anxiety and desires direction and guidance, searching for "the right way" to operate. The supervisor should, at this time, provide structure and direction, acting as a teacher and/or supporter. The dependency-autonomy conflict is a characteristic of Level II. At this time, the supervisee's heightened self-awareness is coupled with confusion as the trainee vacillates between being overly confident and overwhelmed with the increased insight. The supervisor should continue with empathy and encouragement. Teaching should continue, though it plays a smaller role than earlier in the training. As instruction decreases, the supervisor may perform more as a reference source. In Level III, the supervisee experience high, consistent motivation and acts in a more autonomous and confident manner. The psychotherapist possesses increased insight, empathy and sense of professional identity. At this time, the supervisor functions






24

more as a peer with increased sharing and mutuality. A decrease in structure is matched with an increase in appropriate confrontation. Stoltenberg and Delworth's final stage, Level III Integrated is marked by security, insightfulness, and healthy interdependence. The "master practitioner" is aware of professional and personal strengths and weaknesses and possesses integration of skill across many domains of practice. The supervisor's role is one of a collegial consultant. The difference between the non-integrated and integrated phases of Level III is related to the supervisee-supervisor relationship and the supervisee's professional identity. As the supervisee becomes more integrated, there is more insight regarding one's sense of self as a psychotherapist. The supervisee becomes simultaneously less dependent upon the supervisor for role definition as well as the process of supervision.

Blount (1982) proposed a four-stage model that borrows heavily upon Erikson's model of personality development. The four stages identified by Blount are: adequacy versus inadequacy, independence versus dependence, conditional dependency versus individuation, and professional integrity versus personal autonomy. Supervisor behaviors recommended by Blount are similar to those identified by Hogan (1964), Stoltenberg (1981), and Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987), beginning with a supportive "teaching" role and progressing to collegial consultation with greater supervisee autonomy.

Loganbill, Hardy, and Delworth (1982) identified three stages of counselor development. The stages they identified were stagnation, confusion, and awareness. Each of these stages is similar to those identified by Hogan (1964) and Stoltenberg (1981). The focus, however, of the model proposed by Loganbill and associates (1982) is






25

that an individual must resolve eight critical issues before becoming a master psychotherapist. The eight issues are: competence, emotional awareness, autonomy, theoretical identity, respect for individual differences, purpose and direction, personal motivation, and professional ethics. According to Loganbill and his colleagues (1982), each of these issues is resolved separately within the structure of the three stages. Therefore, competence develops following the progression from stagnation through confusion to awareness, as does emotional awareness, autonomy, and the other five critical issues. The trainee does not necessarily progress through each issue at the same pace. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to assess the trainee's development on each of the eight issues, then to promote growth to the next level of development of each issue.

Sansbury (1982) proposed a three-level developmental model based upon the specific training levels of professional training programs. The stages are referred to as prepracticum, practicum, and internship and are identified by the level and sophistication of skills acquired. In the first stage, basic listening skills and the assimilation of the counselor role are fostered by the supervisor who provides evaluative feedback, needs assessment, positive modeling, and support. In the second stage, the trainee broadens the therapeutic repertoire, improves conceptualization, refines one's personal theory, and establishes limits of responsibility. The supervisor, to promote this growth, analyzes cases and promotes the supervised's understanding through confrontation, role reversals, interpretation, and feedback. During internship, the trainee should be broadening and refining understanding of clients, examining one's issues, and learning self-reliance. An






26

intern's supervisor should confront the supervisee in discrepancies between talk and behavior, assist with personal issues, and encourage risk taking.

Friedlander, Dye, Costellos, and Kobos (1984) proposed a model which

emphasizes the trainees' development of their meaning-making and understanding of psychotherapy. The learning and acquisition of skills is dc-emphasized and Friedlander and associates (1984) emphasize the supervisor's responsibility to help the supervisee's meaning-making of psychotherapy as well as the supervisee 's role in it. The first stage is marked by ambiguity in the supervisee. The supervisor's role at this time, is to help the trainee cope with the demands of ambiguity with an emphasis on learning how to learn. During the second stage, the supervisee is able to recognize the limits of the therapeutic condition. During this period the supervisor should help the supervisee see the differences between theory and practice. The supervisor should also help the trainee accept mistakes as well as unanticipated client responses. The supervisor should also assist the supervisee to cope with guilt over failures. Friedlander and associate's (1984) third stage of development is marked by the trainee's discovery of psychotherapy as deep communication. As the communication becomes emphasized, the supervisor should shift the focus from techniques of therapy to the human relationship of therapy. In the final stage, eclecticism relative to the client's need becomes the emphasis as the supervisor helps the trainee develop a repertoire of interventions to apply in the appropriate setting according to the client's need based upon a careful assessment.

Friedman and Kaslow (19 86) identified six developmental stages that the

supervisee must pass through to become a "master" psychotherapist. The first stage is






27


marked with excitement and anticipatory anxiety as the trainee attempts to become acquainted with the training agency. The supervisor is to provide a secure holding environment, empathic to the trainee's anxieties and vulnerabilities. In the second stage, which begins when the supervisee is assigned a case, the supervisee becomes dependent upon, and identifies with, the supervisor. The supervisee's development at this point is dependent upon the supervisor's help in organizing and anticipating the processes of therapy. It is also important for the supervisor to carefully select cases to avoid major management issues. The third stage identified by Friedman and Kaslow is one of activity and continued dependency. This stage begins when the trainee realizes the client is taking therapy seriously. The trainee becomes more active in the psychotherapy process, assuming more professional responsibility. At this point, it is important that the supervisor acknowledges difficulties, limits criticism, and is affectively predictable. When the fourth developmental stage is reached, the supervisee feels exuberant and "takes charge." Identifying oneself as a psychotherapist, the trainee has an increased understanding of the relationship between theory and practice, is able to explore issues related to countertransference, and is more independent. As the supervisee "breaks away" it is important for the supervisor to relinquish control while remaining supportive. The fifth stage of identity and independence is referred to as "professional adolescence." The supervisee has a firmly established internalized frame of reference. The trainee is also well aware of the supervisee's own weaknesses as well as those of the supervisor. During this stage, the supervisee may devalue the supervisor. Despite the potential for devaluation, the supervisor continues to support the trainee's increasing autonomy and






28

being readily available to the trainee. The final stage identified by Friedman and Kaslow is described as calm and collegial. When fully developed, the psychotherapist has a firmly established sense of professional identity, is highly integrated, and experiences less intense self-doubt and affective variability. During this final stage, the supervisor should facilitate growth, challenge the supervisee's inconsistencies, and focus on countertransference.

Hess (1986, 1987) proposed a four-stage model of counselor development that he felt was representative of the development models proposed to date. During the Inception phase, the supervisee feels unanchored, insecure, and anxious. The supervisee is rigid, ambivalent, unaware of therapy's impact upon clients, and is dependent upon the supervisor. As the supervisee moves through the skill development phase, the trainee becomes more comfortable in the therapist role. The supervisee also has increased awareness regarding client dynamics and is more accepting of one's own weaknesses. As awareness and competence increase, the supervisee typically fluctuates between being over-confident and overwhelmed with one's new role and skills. The next phase, consolidation, is marked by an internal sense of mastery. Skills continue to develop and the professional identity becomes solidified. Hess' final phase, Mutuality, is marked by the trainee becoming fully autonomous and able to give and receive consultation. At this time the psychotherapist is also able to be creative and utilize intuition. The supervisory relationship is collegial and consultative.

The four-stage model proposed by Rodenhauser (1994) emphasizes the

developing psychotherapist's understanding of the therapeutic process and the role of the






29


self. The first stage, Restoration, is so named because the trainee attempts to restorer" the client. During the second stage, Interpretation, the trainee adopts a theoretical base, though it is often in a concrete and undifferentiated manner. As the supervisee recognizes the importance of the relational aspects of therapy, the trainee works his way through Rodenhauser's Realization stage. Finally, the psychotherapist becomes fully developed once the self, including one's feelings and reactions, becomes utilized in practicing psychotherapy.

Chazan (1990) proposed a three-stage model based on psychoanalytic theory. At the beginning of training, the trainee feels uncertain and insecure yet is excited and hopeful about becoming a psychotherapist. During the first stage of development, the trainee's effort is toward the creation of a space to provide a grounded psychological environment in which to learn and work. The supervisor's task during this stage is to provide a "home base," a secure holding environment. During the second stage, the supervisee begins building structure within the created space. The supervisee identifies with the supervisor and begins to venture out and explore newly learned techniques and approaches. During this stage, the supervisor must provide empathy, flexibility, tolerance, and tact. The supervisory environment continues to serve as a secure home base while exploration is encouraged. During Chazan's final stage of supervisee development, the supervisee experiences reciprocity and well-being. The supervisee now has a dependable sense of well-being coupled with professional identification. The trainee has become "good enough." Once the supervisee has reached this stage of development, the supervisor acts in a collegial, consultative manner.






30

Watkins (1990) proposed a six-stage model based upon Mahler's theory of

individuation. During the first stage, symbiosis, the supervised is anxious, dependent, and lacks insight. The trainee desires direction and advice while idealizing the supervisor. A primary task for the supervisor during this period is to provide a secure holding environment providing structure, empathy, and facilitating trust. Watkins refers to the next stage of counselor development as differentiation. During this period, the supervised becomes more attentive and discriminating with a more realistic image of the supervisor. The trainee is still anxious but is also excited about the anticipation of becoming a therapist. It is important that the supervisor remain active in providing a secure learning environment with empathy and support. The supervisor should use modeling, role playing, and discussion about the supervisee-supervisor relationship to stimulate thinking about the psychotherapist-client relationship. In the third stage, early practicing, the trainee is open to experimentation. Despite an increase in confidence, there continues to be a need to check back with the supervisor as the trainee's curiosity is mixed with hesitancy and doubt. The supervisor still maintains security within the structure of supervision, provides encouragement, and encourages the trainee to begin measuring the trainee's own feelings and reactions in response to using different techniques. Watkins' fourth stage is practicing proper. The supervised's confidence continues to grow as does excitement at being a therapist. As the therapist identity begins to crystallize, there is a tendency to overestimate one's competence. During this period the supervisor should function as the trainee's alter ego, providing a "reality check" when needed. During the fifth stage, rapprochement, the trainee struggles to individuate. There is a heightened but ambivalent desire for super-vision and the trainee exhibits






31


progressive and regressive behaviors. During this critical period, the supervisor must reinforce gains and offer ego-supportive interventions. While helping the supervisee to become fully aware of the developmental progress made, the supervisor validates the difficulties of being independent and autonomous. Watkins' sixth stage finds the trainee on the way to object constancy. Rather than achieving a status such as "master practitioner" the trainee becomes able to accept that professional development is, and will be, in process throughout the professional career. The trainee perceives the supervisor as an integrated whole, with both strengths and weaknesses, and has a strongly developed sense of professional identity. Supervision now operates with less structure in a collegial and collaborative manner. Responsibility for supervision can now be shared by both the supervisee and the supervisor.

Models proposed by Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz (1979) and Grater (1987) focus on the evolving process of supervision rather than the supervisee's or supervisor's specific needs. Littrell and associates (1979) proposed a model of counselor development where the trainee becomes a psychotherapist through an evolving process of supervision as directed by the supervisor. This model emphasizes how the responsibility of supervision begins with the supervisor and, as the trainee develops, is gradually shifted to the supervisee. During the initial stage of supervision, the supervisor provides goal setting and clarifies the nature of supervision and its components. During the counselortherapeutic stage, the supervisor acts as a counselor to the supervisee. According to Littrell and associates (1979), the teacher stage, the second stage, is when the supervisor teaches the skills of counseling to the supervisee. The supervisee continues developing






32


and reaches the third stage, the consultation stage, in which the supervisor works together with the supervisee in cooperation. Once fully developed, the psychotherapist selfsupervises, seeking to improve counseling skills through self-observation.

Based upon the supervisee development models presented earlier (Stoltenberg,

1981; Loganbill, et al., 1981; Hogan, 1964) Grater (1985) proposed a four-stage model of super-vision. Rather than proposing specific developmental issues for supervisee or supervisor, Grater proposed stages of tasks of developing complexity that should be accomplished by the supervisee with the direction and guidance of the supervisor. He reports his model is based upon the conclusions of several writers (Marmor, 1976; Parloff, 1979; Paul, 1967) that progress in psychotherapy results from an interaction between the client, the presenting problem, the therapy techniques, and the personal interactions of the psychotherapist. With this model, Grater argues that the goals of supervision should seek to promote therapeutic progress. The first stage of supervision proposed by Grater is the development of basic therapy skills and the adoption of the psychotherapist role. The second stage is composed of an expansion of the range of skills and roles to match the client problems and role expectations. The goal in the third stage of supervision is to develop the supervisee's ability to assess the client's habitual and conflicting behavior patterns, paying particular attention to those that occur within the psychotherapy environment. During the third stage the supervisor should also assist the supervisee in learning to select the appropriate intervention methods. During the fourth stage of supervision, the supervisor should help the trainee learn how to use the self in assessment and intervention. Grater points out that the first two stages are devoted to






33

skill development, whereas the last two stages emphasize a skill foundation to perform psychotherapy in an integrated manner.

While the above review does not include every model of supervised development that has been proposed, it includes the most significant proposals to date. It also allows the reader to gain an understanding of the highly similar nature of the models, as well as the variations. Models of supervisor development, reviewed in the next section are similar in stage composition and progression. Supervisor development

As developmental models of supervision have continued to be prevalent in the literature, increased attention has be given to the supervisor behaviors necessary to promote growth. Desirable supervisor behaviors have become more defined. Subsequently, there arose a need to account for the supervisor's acquisition of those behaviors. Models of supervised development were soon accompanied by models of supervisor development as it was acknowledged that ideal supervision does not "just happen." Haber (1996) has identified characteristics of beginning and advanced supervisors (see Table 1) which summarizes his perspective of how supervisors interact according to their development. Developmental models of the supervisor follow paths similar to those laid out by the models of counselor development.

Alonso (1983) proposed a theory of supervisor development which suggests

supervisors must resolve three key issues repetitively throughout their career. The three issues she identified were: self and identity, the relationship between psychotherapist and supervisor, and administration. Alonso (1983) proposed that throughout one's career,







34





TABLE 1: Characteristics of Beginning and Advanced Supervisors Beginning Supervisor Advanced Supervisor

Lacks substantial knowledge of supervision theory Well-informed about supervision theory and
and methodology methodology

Overuses one approach to supervision Implements diverse approaches suitable to specific
instance
Anxious in the role of supervisor; overidentifies Understands role and responsibilities in the
with therapist role supervisory process

Intervenes largely by being the expert clinician More apt to use the resources of the supervisee Engages in power struggles with the supervisee Able to connect and work with the supervisee' s
over the right way world view

Underemphasizes or overemphasizes the person of Discriminantly explores the personal/professional
the therapist in supervision interface when it is relevant for clinical issues

Overreacts to the supervisee More aware of and able to utilize personal reactions
in the supervision process

Experiences diffuse boundaries and inability to Able to use clear boundaries to keep the supervisee
confront supervisee appropriately on task

Ignores cultural differences and learning styles of Respects cultural and learning idiosyncrasies
the supervisee

Works with supervisee in isolation ignoring Considers all of the floors in the professional and
ecological context client houses

Content-oriented Works with process, including the parallel process
between the therapeutic and supervisory
systems

Source: Haber (1996, p.57)

novice to mid-career to late career, the issues remained the same but were perceived and resolved differently due to the perspective change due to experience and demands of life and the profession differing at each life stage. While Alonso's model demonstrates that supervisors do not reach professional stagnation once they assume the supervisory






35

mantle, it does not relate directly to the supervisor's development in regard to role competency or mastery.

Hess (198 6), on the other hand, proposed a three-stage model of supervisor

development that focuses on the supervisor's performance of supervision. The first stage is marked by anxiety as the new supervisor struggles with the change of role. Hess (1986) predicts that the new Ph.D. is frequently thrown into a supervisory role without much preparation. Only one in three interns receives any training in supervision (Hess and Hess, 1983) and the new supervisor struggles in the role change from supervised to supervisor. Hess (1986) suggests new supervisors cope with the self-doubt and ambiguity of their new role by adopting a concrete approach to supervision-focusing on skill development and client diagnosis. In Hess' second stage of supervisor development, exploration, the supervisor has gained competence and confidence and is often able to amaze and baffle the trainee with feats of psychological "magic." Supervision is valued as a professional activity and the supervisor's enthusiasm often promotes increased interest in learning by the student. Hess suggested the existence of two potential pitfalls during this second stage of development: 1) supervision that is too restrictive; and 2) supervision that is too intrusive. Hess' third stage of supervisor development is marked by a continuing increase in respect-the supervisor's respect for the trainee and trainee's respect for the supervisor. Increased attention is given to the trainee's learning and a deeper relationship develops. Supervisors at this stage are sought out by trainees due to their reputation as excellent teachers of psychotherapy. The fully developed supervisor






36

receives gratification when the student excels rather than when the supervisor is recognized as a good supervisor.

Rodenhauser's (1994) model of supervisor development has four stages:

emulation, conceptualization, incorporation, and consolidation. During the first stage, the new supervisor draws upon past role models for guidance and information of what to do. The second stage of conceptualization involves an active search by the supervisor for a systematic approach to super-vision. At this time, alliances can be formed with other supervisors to limit over-identification with supervisees. During the incorporation phase, the supervisor becomes aware of how one's personal style impacts supervision. This phase also includes heightened awareness of differences between one's self and the supervisee, such as gender, ethnicity, and lifestyle. In the consolidation phase of supervisor development, the supervisor is able to use theory, experience, the self, and supervisee countertransference within the supervisory process.

When Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987) revised Stoltenberg's (1981) Counselor Complexity Model, they included a model of supervisor development (Stoltenberg and Delworth, 1987). The supervisor model mirrors their supervisee model-it has four stages defined by three distinct levels, the third level having two components. At Level I, the supervisor is highly anxious and relatively nalve. Wanting to "do the right thing," supervisors at this first stage of development typically provide a structured environment for supervision, often performing as "the expert." As the supervisor develops, the supervisor may become confused and conflicted as supervision becomes perceived as a complex and multidimensional process. During this second stage, Level II, the






37

supervisor may be dependent upon colleagues for guidance. Level III sees the supervisor having resolved earlier conflicts and operating in a more stable manner. The Level III supervisor becomes more autonomous and wishes to improve supervisory skills. This supervisor's comfort level has increased as there is more security in the supervisor role. The integrated phase of Level III is marked by the supervisor becoming fully integrated across many domains. The fully integrated supervisor is able to work with all types of supervises and is willing to seek consultation as needed.

Watkins (1990, 1993, 1994) has proposed a four-stage model of supervisor

development that emphasizes the individual's role development. The four stages of this model are role shock, role recovery and transition, role consolidation, and role mastery. Unlike the other supervisor development models presented here, Watkins also provides us with recommended behaviors by the supervisor's supervisor, recommending that the professional should continue training during development of the supervisor role. During role shock, the new supervisor may feel like an impostor. The new supervisor experiences anxiety, lacks confidence, and feels overwhelmed. The new supervisor has no "supervisor identity" and struggles to provide competent supervision, going through much "soul-searching." It is likely that the new supervisor will be overly structured and concrete in supervision. The supervisor's supervisor performs as a teacher and a guide within a secure holding environment providing encouragement, direction, and teaching.

In role recovery and transition, the supervisor recovers from the shock of being a supervisor. There is an increase in confidence as well as awareness regarding one's strengths and weaknesses although the core of supervisor identity begins to form. It is






38

likely that one feels ambiguous about one's work as a supervisor. During this period the supervisor's supervisor begins to lessen the hold on the secure training environment and teaches and directs less. There is an increase in effort by the supervisor's supervisor toward stimulating an examination of the new supervisor's strengths and weaknesses and their effect on supervision. During the third stage of role consolidation, the new supervisor has a broader and more informed perspective of supervision. One's perceptions of one's own strengths and weaknesses are more realistic and is more trusting in oneself. The core supervisor identity is established and during supervision the supervisor is more able to address the process of supervision. The development of a personal theory of supervision also takes form by this point in development. The supervisor's motivations are driven more by the trainee's and clients' needs rather than narcissistic fulfillment. The supervisor's supervisor now acts as a supportive guide facilitating a focus on process issues and their impact. There is also an increased focus on the supervisor's personal issues and their impact on supervision. The new supervisor's independent thought and action is encouraged and supported.

Finally, the last stage, role mastery, marks the new supervisor's consolidation of skill and supervisor identity. The new supervisor handles all aspects of supervision well, possesses an integrated style and theory, and deals well with process issues. The supervisor's supervision is now sought and received in a collaborative and collegial envirom-nent. The supervisor's supervisor can be more confrontational while encouraging continued examination of the supervision process, personal issues, and the interaction. Supervision of supervision is now received on an as needed basis.






39

Supervisor development has not received as much attention as supervised development in the literature. As the influence of supervisor behavior upon the development of trainees becomes better illustrated, there are more questions as to how a supervisor can best promote growth and development. Questions regarding how a supervisor becomes a supervisor has prompted a discussion in the literature which seeks to describe the developmental stages of becoming a supervisor. These models follow the same developmental pathways delineated by the supervised models-the supervisors begin anxious and nalve to the task and progress toward an internalized professional identity. As the supervisor develops, competence and confidence increase, motivations become more attuned toward the learning of the supervised, professional identity becomes formed and the supervisor values the task of supervision. Empirical support of developmental models

The developmental models described above are more similar than dissimilar. Whether the model focuses on the developing counselor, the developing supervisor, or the process of supervision, each model assumes the beginning trainee to be nalve in regard to the psychotherapy (or supervision). They also assume the trainee will develop over time, with supervision, to become an integrated "master" psychotherapist (or supervisor). The models, for the most part, suggest that the supervisor should facilitate the trainee's growth by providing the environment, instruction, and feedback appropriate to the trainee's level of development. In the beginning, that appropriate environment is seen as a secure "holding" environment, safe and structured. The models recommend that the supervisor provide skills training in a proactive manner to the novice psychotherapist.






40

As the trainee learns and develops, it is suggested that the supervisor allow and encourage increased autonomy while continuing to support the supervised. As the trainee becomes increasingly developed, the supervisee-supervisor relationship is less teacher-student and more consultative and collegial with supervision occurring is a peer-like setting.

To determine the empirical support of these models, Worthington (1987) reviewed the research related to sixteen counselor development models and two supervisor development models proposed through 1985. In a similar review, Watkins (I 995a) reviewed the research related to six counselor development models and four supervisor development models proposed since 1985. Table 2 summarizes the findings of both Worthington and Watkins. According to these summaries, the empirical support has grown significantly during the past 10 years. The findings of these reviews show support of developmental models as a valid way of conceptualizing supervision. Furthermore, the empirical data reviewed by Watkins suggests supervision does indeed change as the supervised gains experience. But while continuing support for developmental models may further entrench them as the dominant way of conceptualizing supervision, Watkins (I 995a) laments the fact that empirical support has not progressed far enough during the last fifteen years. Watkins joins Worthington (1987) and Borders (1989) in suggesting that research needs a more substantial focus on the behaviors of supervised and supervisor to understand what is changing within the development process. They also argue that those behaviors need to be identified to understand how they improve psychotherapist functioning. According to Borders,

There is a need for descriptions of the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of
supervises at various developmental stages that are more detailed than
these global descriptions, as well as more precise depiction of the







41


TABLE 2: Empirical support of supervisee developmental models

Conclusions by Worthington Conclusions by Watkins

a) There is some support for developmental a) The majority of studies found some degree of
models as proposed by Hogan (1964) and support for developmental models or a
others. developmental dimension of supervision.

b) In general, perceptions of supervisors and b) Perceptions of both supervisors and supervisees
supervisees have been broadly consistent with were broadly consistent with developmental
developmental theories, model thinking.

c) The behavior of supervisors changes as c) The supervision relationship and supervisor
counselors gain experience, behaviors were perceived at least by
supervisors to change in developmentally appropriate ways as supervisees gain experience.

d) The supervision relationship changes as d) Beginning supervisees were generally found to
counselors gain experience. The relationship be more in need of structure, direction, and
between supervisor and supervisee is guidance and supervisors were found to
influenced by the supervisee's perceptions of provide that more so for them.
his/her supervisor.

e) Advanced supervisees were found to generally need less structure, direction, and guidance and supervisors were found to act accordingly.

f) Advanced as opposed to beginning supervisees were found to be more willing to consider their own personal issues and their effect on therapy.

g) Some research showed that, with experience, supervisees' needs changed in developmentally appropriate ways and that, over time, supervisees showed increase in developmentally relevant structures.

h) The majority of studies tested Stoltenberg's (198 1) complexity model or tested developmental tenets more generally.

i) Stoltenberg's complexity model received the most support overall.

Source: Worthington (1987, p. 195-201); Watkins (1995a, p. 655 and 668).

supervision environment that 'match' each stage or foster movement
toward higher stages. (1989, p. 17).






42

Worthington (1987) and Watkins (1995a) both found the state of supervisor development theory to be lacking. In his review of supervisor development models, Watkins concluded,

supervisor development models have been fashioned after supervisee
development models; the number of stages, the content of those stages,
and the progression within and across stages are all largely similar for both supervisor and supervised. The main difference seems to be in the foci of the models more than anything else, with the supervisor being the primary
focus in one case and the supervised being the primary focus in the other.
(I 995a, p. 674).

Worthington (1987) reviewed eight research articles that dealt specifically with supervisor development. Watkins reviewed an additional three research articles that dealt with the same issues. A summary of their conclusions is presented in Table 3. After considering these conclusions, Watkins (1 995a) reported that the research in this area has been minimal. In addition, there needs to be more of a focus on behaviors specific to the developing supervisor if much is to be gained. He adds that since the majority of supervisor developmental models simply mirror supervised developmental models, not much more would be gained with the addition of more supervisor developmental models. Watkins also reiterates Worthington's conclusion, "There is little specification of what makes a supervisor effective and thus of how one builds the skills necessary to become effective" (1987, p. 206).

While developmental models continue to be the preferred perspective reported in the supervision literature, little advancement has been made beyond the confirmation that supervision does change as supervises progress through their training. It is likely that supervision is generally more structured for beginning trainees who are typically anxious,







43


unskilled, and naIve regarding the psychotherapeutic process. As trainees gain experience, competence, awareness, and insight, it appears likely that supervisors act in an increasingly collegial and mutually collaborative manner, enforcing less structure and becoming less directive. Despite the prevalence of developmental models, many reviewers argue that the focus of research should not be directed toward the development of new models, but rather the validation and refinement of the existing models (Borders, 1989; Worthington, 1987; Watkins, 1995a). Furthermore, many argue that specific behaviors and processes should be identified that promote growth within the developmental framework.

TABLE 3: Empirical support of supervisor -developmental models Conclusions by Worthington Conclusions by Watkins

a) There are differences in skillfulness in a) Some of the dimensions that define
supervision across supervisors.) supervisors' perceptions or cognitive map of
supervision have been identified.

b) Supervisors do not become more competent as b) Experience level has not been found to affect
they gain experience. supervisors' cognitive maps of supervision.

c) Supervisors change little in other ways [ways c) Some of the issues, such as competency,
other than competence] as they gain critical to supervisor trainees have been
experience. identified.

d) More experience supervisors have been found to be more highly developed with regard to their views of themselves as supervisors." e) The supervised developmental models of Littrell et al. (1979) and Loganbill et al. (1982) have received minimal to no research support [when applied to supervisors].

f) Sansbury's (1982) supervised developmental model or hierarchy of supervisory issues, when applied to supervisors, has been partially supported.

Source: Worthington (1987, p. 203-205); Watkins (1995a, p. 676)






44

Theories of supervisor development also lack empirical support. Although levels of skillfulness has been shown to vary across supervisors (Worthington, 1984; Zucker and Worthington, 1986), it has been demonstrated that supervisors do not necessarily improve across time or experience (Marikas, Russell, and Dell, 1985; Worthington, 1984). There is also no evidence that supervisors actually change over time though they may have a more highly developed sense of self as a supervisor (Watkins, Schneider, Haynes, and Nieberding, 1995). The call for research designed to identify effective supervisor behaviors as well as how those behaviors can be developed has been made (Worthington, 1987; Borders, 1989) and essentially ignored (Watkins, 1995a). SLipervision as Relationship


While the developmental models continue to be the zeitgeist of supervision

theory, there is a small body of literature devoted to the relationship of supervisor and supervised. In the words of Hess, "supervision is a relationship in which one person's skills in conducting psychotherapy and his or her identity as a therapist are intentionally and potentially enhanced by the interaction with another person" (1987, p. 255-256). By developing this relationship, Hess argues, one can transcend the need for theory based on developmental models of supervision. In presenting his argument for a theory of relationship, Hess relates the research and experience of four other writers, Markowitz, Grunebaum, Aldrich, and Swain.

Markowitz (19 5 8), though an accomplished psychotherapist, decided to enter into supervision with six supervisor of different theoretical orientations. Markowitz






45

discovered that the supervisor's ability to relate was the most important factor in being able to provide effective supervision. Grunebaumi (1983) studied the qualities that psychotherapist's look for in their own therapist. Of the four fundamental criteria identified, two were related to personal style and one's ability and/or willingness to interact. The four criteria were: 1) competence; 2) non-overlapping professional and social networks; 3) warmth, caring, and flexibility; and 4) the therapists' willingness to talk rather than remain silent. Aldrich and Swain studied the criteria on which supervisees and supervisors evaluated each other.

Aldrich (198 1; Aldrich and Hess, 1983) found that supervisees appraised

supervisors on: defensiveness (how comfortable is the supervisor with the supervisee's comments); professionalism (modeling); clinical experience (what skills can be provided); theoretical base (how adept conceptually); experience as a teacher; appropriate interest in the student's life; likability; and motivation. While a concern for skills training and what can be learned is evident, so is the quality of the supervisor-supervisee relationship. Swain (1981) found supervisors to judge supervisees on eight criteria: interest in client and client welfare; preparation for supervision; knowledge; selfawareness, self-exploration, self-disclosure and self-esteem; openness to suggestions; clinical and interpersonal skills; boundary management; and decision-making skills. Issues pertaining to the relationship are also present here, though not as prevalent as in Aldrich's (1981; Aldrich and Hess, 1983) findings. Reviewing these findings it appears that the supervisor and supervisee both regard the quality of their relationship an integral component of the supervisory process. The supervisee appears to measure the quality of






46

supervision directly from the quality of the relationship, regardless of the supervisee' s developmental level. Despite the apparent importance of the relationship, few studies have focused on supervisor-supervisee relationship characteristics (Watkins, 1995 a).

Hess (1987) proposed a theory of supervision relationship based on the work of Martin Buber (1970). Buber proposed that the concept of "I," as in one's self, does not stand alone, but exist only in relation to a "You," a "Thou," or an "It." As we each exist in the world, we ("I") can relate to others as a "You," a "Thou," or an "It." Buber pointed out that relationships exist at varying levels of meaningfulness. The levels vary from superficial wherein a person relates to the other as an object rather than a fellow human being, to deeply personal when a person experiences and acknowledges the humanness of the other person. Designating the relationship to be of "I-It," "I-You," or "I-Thou" reflects the understanding of the depth of the relationship. As we order our hamburger at the drive-up window, we are typically engaged in an "I-It," or even "It-It" relationship as we treat each other as an object at the other side of a goal-one to serve and the other to be served. To engage in small talk while waiting for the order, to acknowledge each person as a person, is a deepening of the relationship to "I-You." To feel genuine empathy with the worker's sore feet and frustration of a seemingly never ending line of customers steps toward an "I-Thou" relationship. To acknowledge the humanness of the other and to have the other respond to your acknowledgment further deepens the relationship as it takes on the flavor of "I-Thou." Within the "I-Thou" relationship occurs a dialogue between two people, each recognizing the humanness of the other. The dialogue takes place within what Buber referred to as the "gaze" (Buber, 1970).






47

The gaze can be conceptualized as a specific, molecular, behavioral unit (Hess, 1987). The gaze occurs when a person hears the "I" of another person addressing the "Thou" in the self. In our example, the gaze occurs when the fast food clerk hears the customer express her concerns about his fatigue and frustration. The gaze can occur at any time and any place, whenever and wherever two people may interact. It is a purely psychological event with no requirement of space or time. It is for this reason that Hess argues the gaze is a useful way for a supervisory interaction to occur. In addition to being free of space and time constraints, the gaze is super-theoretical, meaning it can be used within the context of any approach to supervision, whether from within a counseling model or developmental model of training. For the gaze to occur, the supervised and supervisor must connect on a meaningful level, communicating within a meaningful relationship. By attaining an "I-Thou" relationship, the supervisee-supervisor communication transcends the constraints of any specific or given technique. The establishment of such a relationship, Hess argues, should be fundamental within any supervisory, or psychotherapeutic, relationship.

Development of the supervisee-supervisor relationship has received little attention. While the importance of the relationship is almost universally accepted, whether a supervisor can develop or learn how to promote a meaningful relationship has not been demonstrated. Furthermore, it is unclear what components of the relationship or aspects of the supervisor and supervised are most salient to a productive supervisory relationship. The next section will review the limited amount of research that has attempted to identify dimensions of supervision.






48

Dimensions of Supervision


Dimensions of supervision can be thought of as broad-based structures in which supervision occurs. By identifying relevant dimensions it is hypothesized that appropriate behaviors within each dimension can be identified, quantified, and measured. Ellis (Ellis and Dell, 1986; Ellis, Dell, and Good, 1988) has attempted to identify and confirm the dimensions as proposed within a developmental framework. Ellis and Dell (1986) tested the content and dimensionality of Bernard's (1979) dual dimension and Littrell and associate's (1979) singular dimension supervision models from the supervisor's perspective. Using a multidimensional scaling research design, Ellis and Dell found a three-dimensional cognitive map of supervision.

Bernard's (1979) supervision model is a 3x3 matrix defined by two dimensions. The two dimensions identified by Bernard are supervisor roles and supervisor functions. The three supervisor roles identified by Bernard are teacher, counselor, and consultant. The three supervisor functions identified by Bernard relate to process, conceptualization, and personalization skills. The function of supervision is to assist the supervised develop these three types of skills. Process skills focus on the execution of counseling techniques. Conceptualization skills includes those skills that organize and synthesize information about the client. Personalization skills include awareness about one's feelings, values, and beliefs and how they may impact the therapy. The three functions of supervision interact with the three supervisor roles to produce nine categories of supervisor behavior (see Table 4). Each of these nine categories presumably corresponds to supervised needs.







49

TABLE 4: Bernard's 3x3 matrix of supervisor roles and functions.
Supervisor Supervisor Roles
Functions Teacher Counselor Consultant
Process Demonstrates specific Helps trainee determine what Works with trainee to
interpersonal, treatment, or hinders or facilitates their explore different uses of an intervention skills interventions with a specific intervention and jointly
client; focuses on reducing practice them; mutual inhibitions, increase learning of skills
_________________experimentation
Conceptualization D-emonstrates one or more Helps trainee understand how Works with traine-e-to ways to classify', organize, their stereotypes, explore mutually issues
and understand client's conceptualizations, and and implications of
behavior, thoughts, and unresolved issues affect the theories, models, and problems counseling session and provide alternative
alternate perspectives conceptualizations to
counseling
Personalization Demonstrates or describes Helps trainee work through Works with trainee to
the potential importance of personal issues or feelings explore mutually personal trainee's affect and ways of associated with counseling concerns relevant to recognizing and using one's sessions counseling.
own affect during counseling ,______________ I_________I_Source: Ellis and Dell (1986) p. 284; Bernard (1979)

The four-stage unidimensional model proposed by Littrell and associates (1979) is

unidimensional. The dimension identified by Littrell is the control and responsibility for

supervision. Table 5 summarizes this unidimensional approach. As the counselor

develops, the trainee moves along the developmental stages. At the beginning of

training, the nalve supervisee is directed by the supervisor regarding the development of

training goals as well as what to expect within the supervisory relationship. As training,

and presumably development progresses, the supervisor gradually relinquishes control of

the supervisory processes until the supervisee is finally self-sustaining. The supervisee

progresses from complete reliance upon the supervisor to complete self-reliance.

In testing Bernard's and Littrell's models, Ellis and Dell (1986) found partial

support for Bernard's model, but little support for that of Littrell. Ellis and Dell (1979)

found, however, that Bernard's model was better supported when a fourth role was added

to their dimension of supervisor roles. The addition of self-supervision to the matrix







50


TABLE 5: Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz four-stage unidimensional model of supervision

Stage Focus Control/Responsibility of Supervision

1. Establishment of supervisory Supervisor facilitates goal setting and the definition of the
relationship supervisory relationship

2. Counselor-teacher Supervisor teaches the techniques of psychotherapy

3. Consultant Supervisee assumes more responsibility for own leading, using the
supervisor as a consultant is a mutually collaborative role

4. Se If- supervision The supervised is responsible for his/her own leading, operates
independently

Source: adapted from Ellis and Dell (1986).

changed the original 30 matrix (Supervisor Role x Supervisor Function) to a 40 matrix

with twelve identifiable supervisor categories (see Table 6). These new supervisor roles

account for the continued development of the psychotherapist after completing formal

training.

TABLE 6: Three additional supervisor roles added by Ellis, Dell, and Good Self-Supervision Self-supervision Role
Functions
Self-supervision
Process Leaming new interventions, techniques, or diagnostic strategies or
skills; self-exploration to reduce inhibitions, encourage experimentation
Conceptualization Learn new conceptual approaches or models; determining multiple perspectives of client's behaviors, thoughts, affect, and problems, then developing multiple intervention goals and strategies
Personalization Personal issues and feelings related to counseling sessions or
clients; leading new ways to recognize and use one's feelings and intuitions
Source: Ellis, Dell, and Good (1988, p. 318)

Having identified twelve distinct categories of supervisor behaviors, Ellis, Dell,

and Good (198 8) found that the twelve categories could be evaluated along three

additional dimensions of supervision. The three dimensions identified by Ellis and






51

associates (19 88) are bipolar in nature and interact with each other to produce a threedimensional model of supervision. The three bipolar dimensions are:

Process and personal foci Conceptual focus
Directive Non-directive
Behavioral Emotional

According to Ellis and his colleagues (1988), each of the twelve supervisory behavior categories (see Table 4 and Table 6) vary uniquely along the continuum of each of the above three dimensions. For example, Teacher-conceptualization behaviors are high on conceptual focus and directive focus, and toward the midpoint on the behavioralemotional axis. On the other hand, Self-supervisor-personalization behaviors are toward the process, non-directive, and emotional poles (Ellis et al., 1988). Ellis and Dell (1988) have commented on the value of these dimensions as a step toward being able to quantify appropriate and facilitative supervisory behaviors as well as to identify when and how these behaviors should occur during the development of the supervisee.

Regardless of the theoretical stance on supervision, the purpose of supervision is to train aspiring psychotherapists and prepare them to operate independently in a professional manner. It has been demonstrated that supervisors vary in their effectiveness-there is, in effect, "good" supervision as well as "bad" supervision. It is presumed that "good" supervision leads to improved training and subsequently better prepared and more effective psychotherapists.






52

What is GoQd-Supervision?


From a theoretical or intuitive perspective, it is relatively easy to identify the

components of good supervision. Reviewing recommended supervisor behaviors by the authors of counselor development models can provide us with a fairly comprehensive picture of good supervision. On the other hand, research of what makes good supervision is limited to a handful of studies. In attempting to define "good supervision," one must first acknowledge that there is no "ideal formula" for conducting supervision (Bruch, 1974; Fleming and Benedek, 1966). We can acknowledge, however, that, like in psychotherapy, there are general "guideposts" in supervision that can, and should govern its practice (Storm and Heath, 1985; Carifio and Hess, 1987). The search for good supervision leads to the performance of good supervisors.

In their review of the "ideal" supervisor, Cariflo and Hess (1987) divided their quest into three components. The first component is identified by the question, "Who is the ideal supervisor?" This question refers to personal characteristics that make the supervisor a good teacher, educator, mentor, or psychotherapist. The second component and question, "What does the ideal supervisor do?" refers to the activities and techniques such as role modeling and role playing used by the supervisor. The third question, "How does the ideal supervisor perform supervision?" relates to the conditions, styles, and overall environment the supervisor creates and/or uses in conducting supervision. This intuitive categorization will be used in this section of the paper to explore the concept of good supervision.






53

Who is the Good S"ervisor?


According to Rogers (195 7), supervision should be a model of the psychotherapy process. Therefore, he thought supervisors should exhibit empathy, understanding, and unconditional positive regard. Furthermore, Rogers felt that congruence and genuineness should also be demonstrated by supervisors in their interactions with supervises. Coche (1977) agreed with Rogers about the importance of these fundamental characteristics, and added his belief that the supervisor's willingness for self-disclosure is an important characteristic. Research and theory in the area of supervision have generally supported Rogers' notions about supervision (Carifio and Hess, 1987). To this basic foundation of supervisor "musts," other theoreticians and researchers have described additional factors believed to be important in positive supervisory interactions (Albott, 1984; Aldrich, 198 1; Gitterman and Miller, 1977; Hess, 1980). The supervisor characteristics these writers thought were important include flexibility, concern, attention, investment, curiosity, and openness. Unlike the characteristics described by Rogers, however, few of these characteristics have received empirical support (Carifio and Hess, 1987).

While the facilitative conditions of empathy, respect, genuineness, and

concreteness are deemed important in supervisory interactions, it is unknown how much of these aspects is the right amount, or the appropriate amount. Lambert (1980, 1974) investigated this question by comparing levels of facilitative conditions between therapists and their clients as well as between supervisors and their supervises. He found that supervisors generally exhibited less of these conditions than did therapists, and that both groups varied the amount in varying circumstances. While we do not know






54

how much is the appropriate amount, it does appear that the appropriate amount may vary according to specific circumstances.


What Does the Good Supervisor Do?


As noted earlier, supervision is a complex task. The good supervisor must be able to perform a variety of tasks during her interactions with supervisees. A fundamental criteria is that the supervisor should be knowledgeable and experienced in therapy (Albott, 1984; Fox, 1983; Hess, 1980; Windholz, 1970). It has been recommended that early meetings between supervisor and supervisee should be structured with the intention of providing information to the supervisee and supervisor. These early meetings lay the foundation for the developing relationship between supervisor and supervisee. That relationship should involve openness, trust, mutual understanding, two-way communication, and collaboration (Bruch, 1974; Finch, 1977).

An important component in the supervisee's and supervisor's collaborative

relationship is goal-setting. It has been suggested that trainees and their supervisors set specific, explicit, and measurable goals (Archer and Peake, 1984; Fox, 1983). Mutually agreed upon goal setting allows both the supervisor and supervisee mark the supervisee's progress during the course of supervision. It has been suggested that an open discussion of progress on pre-established goals will ease the trainee's inherent anxiety about evaluation (Freeman, 1985).

Another task for the supervisor is disentangling the trainee's report of the events in psychotherapy, and to determine what actually happened (Bruch, 1974; Melchiode,






55


1977; Coche, 1977). This task appears to be a more covert goal of supervision and supervisors appear to be'less explicit in defining it to their trainees (Cariflo and Hess, 1987). In comparing therapists' written summaries with recorded material of psychotherapy sessions, it has been demonstrated that the trainees' recollection of events may not be particularly helpful (Couner, 1944; Chodoff, 1972). The use of audio or video tape to record trainee's psychotherapy sessions has proven to be a more reliable record, though the intrusiveness of such measures may counter-indicate their use, depending upon the goals of supervision (Goldberg, 1985).

It has been suggested that the supervisor should use a variety of teaching methods and modes of data presentation. For example, Brannon (1985) described how a variety of teaching techniques could be used to communicate information and knowledge. Brainstorming, for instance, allows the exploration and exchange of novel ideas in a noncritical environment. Role playing allows the participants to "try out" a variety of techniques therapeutic outcomes, finding new solutions. Modeling behavior by the supervisor allows the demonstration of certain behaviors for the supervisee's later use. Guided reflection allows the replay in supervision of therapist-client interactions that in turn promotes supervisee awareness.

Due to the nature of the supervisory relationship and supervision's often parallel relationship to psychotherapy, the issue of performing psychotherapy as part of supervision is often discussed. Generally, the literature recommends against psychotherapy during supervision. While some authors (i.e. Orzek, 1984; Riorch, 1980) suggest the supervisor should help the supervisee fight inner battles and penetrate the






56


supervisee's own defenses, it appears that this is better suited for a separate therapist in a separate setting (Ekstein and Wallerstein, 1972; Lambert, 1980). How Do Good Supervisors Perform Supervision?


The good supervisor is able to influence the supervisee's behavior through a variety of ways (Cariflo and Hess, 1987). A supervisee's perspective can be significantly altered by a supervisor's personal style (Markowitz, 1958). It has been suggested that to provide a positive supervisory experience, the supervisor will create a trusting and open environment in which two-way communication and collaboration are valued (Bruch, 1974). In their approach, the supervisor should be supportive (Bruch, 1974), noncritical (Melchiode, 1977), confident, enthusiastic, and open to a supervisee' s questions and input (Albott, 1984). Dorn (1985), using a social influence model, suggested that a supervisor's expertness, trust, and attractiveness improve his/her ability to influence supervisees.

A particularly important factor in how the supervisor conducts supervision

appears to be how he/she gives feedback to the trainee. Barth and Gambrill (1984) and Freeman (19 85) have suggested that feedback should be direct, immediate, and closely tied to the trainee's performance. Freeman also identified four characteristics to ideal feedback. To be most effective, feedback should be: 1) systemic, including objective, accurate, consistent, and reliable; 2) timely; 3) clearly understood and based on specific performance criteria; and 4) reciprocal. In addition to the feedback itself, it has been found that how it is delivered can greatly influence the trainee's acceptance. Cherniss






57

and Egnatios (1977) found that didactic, insight-oriented, and feeling oriented styles were better received by trainees than were confrontational or authoritarian styles. In terms of the teaching that occurs in supervision, Goin and Kline (1974) found that a supervisory approach that was neither passive nor directive but "middle ground" was most suitable to most supervises. On the other hand, there is no conclusive evidence that teaching styles should be more didactic or experiential in nature (Cariflo and Hess, 1987). What is Good Supervision?


In attempts to define good supervision, the discussion invariably turns to a

discussion of good supervisors. Good supervision is apparently performed by a good supervisor, and good supervisors apparently provide good supervision. It appears that the good supervisor shows respect, empathy, genuineness, concreteness, and self-disclosure in interactions with supervises. It appears that these characteristics vary in the level in which they are presented. The good supervisor is knowledgeable and experienced in both psychotherapy and supervision. The good supervisor works within a collaborative relationship with the trainee, setting mutually agreed upon goals. The supervisor uses an appropriate variety of teaching methods and tools and avoids doing psychotherapy in supervision despite the development of a meaningful relationship. Good supervision is performed in an open and trusting environment and the supervisory relationship is typically viewed as collaborative involving two-way communication. The good supervisor performs supervision in a supportive and thoughtful manner, being neither too directive nor too passive. Feedback is provided in a manner to enhance learning and






58

acceptance by the trainee. These are all qualities of good supervision that have been identified in the literature.


SUMMM


The primary purpose of the present study is to determine the compatibility of psychological literature research describing good supervision to how the supervised experiences good supervision. The bulk of the literature on supervision is theoretical in nature. Furthermore, the empirical data reflects the measurement of a few characteristics believed to be important in the provision of psychotherapy supervision. The phenomenological method to be used in this project is designed to discover the essential elements of an experience rather than confirm or deny theorized components. Once the essential elements of the supervises' experience have been elicited and identified, they will be reintegrated into a description of good supervision as experienced by the trainees as they develop into professional psychologists. The obtained description will then be compared to the existing research of good supervision.














METHOD


A phenomenological method was used in this study to explicate supervises'

experiences of good supervision. The particular method used was developed by Giorgi (1989). Using the fundamental precepts defined by Husserl (1983/1913) as guidelines and assumptions, Giorgi has developed a specific and rigorous phenomenological method for psychological research (Giorgi, 1989) based, in part, on the model of Merleau-Ponty (1962). The methodology is comprised of four theoretical processes: 1) empirical observation, reduction of the data, search for essences, and synthesis into the whole.

The first "step" of the method is to empirically obtain a description of the

phenomenon to be studied. The goal of the experimenter at this stage is to obtain an experimentally non-biased description of the phenomenon to be studied. To achieve this goal, it should be a candid concrete description obtained from another person, the "subject," without additional explanation or inquiry. Once the description is obtained, the experimenter performs a reduction of the data into psychological terms.

The second step, the reduction of the data, is the transformation of the descriptive narrative provided by the subject into a psychological description of the subject's experience. For the reduction to remain true to the subject's experience, "the experience must be present to what is given precisely as it is given" (Giorgi, 1989, p. 45). To achieve this "presence," Giorgi emphasizes the importance of intuition on the part of the experimenter. Intuition which in part aids the absorption of the uncontaminated and 59






60

meaningful description. To exist at the time of the reduction is not enough; one must be fully present to understand the experience. Additionally, for the absorption to remain uncontaminated, bracketing is vital, as prior knowledge and beliefs of the phenomenon must be disregarded in order to be fully present to the description as obtained. Bracketing is the process of actively partitioning preconceived ideas and beliefs about the phenomenon from conscious thought.

The third "step" of the method calls for a search for the essences of the description. The essences of an experience are the most invariant meaning for a phenomenon within the given context (Giorgi, 1989). These essences are what make up the essential structure of the phenomenon studied. This step involves reflection on the part of the researcher to discover the psychological meaning of the obtained description as it comes forth through the transformed narrative. The narrative, however, is more than the sum of its parts, and each part cannot be understood without an understanding of its relationship to the whole. The phenomenologist labels these parts as constituent elements.

Finally, once the constituent elements of the experience are discovered, they are synthesized into a whole description of the meaning. This description constitutes the structure of the experience, the results of the study. The synthesis, or integration involves reflection on the continual influx of consciousness within the context of the situation as the final step of the analysis of the description.

The four "steps" described above provide a general prototype for

phenomenological research, leading to a number of possible methodologies which may be






61


utilized to answer the type of research questions addressed by phenomenology. The methodology used is this study is the phenomenological method developed by Giorgi (1989).


Subjects


The design of this study, including the number of subjects, is based on several published studies which have utilized phenomenological methodology (Giorgi, 1992; Anjus, Osburne, and Koziey, 1991; Guglietti-Kelly and Westcott, 1990; Stevick, 1971). Five subjects, all predoctoral psychology interns, were selected on the basis that the experimenter anticipated that they would be able to provide full descriptions of their lived experience of being supervised in a clinical setting. So they were able to communicate freely with the experimenter, an additional selection criterion was that they were professional peers, in good standing, of the experimenter.

The subjects ranged in age from 26 years old to 34 years old. Four of the subjects were women, one was a man. All five subjects were in the final month of their predoctoral internship at the same APA-accredited internship site. All five subjects were enrolled in clinical psychology training programs; three were in university programs, two were in professional school programs. Two of the subjects were enrolled in the same university program, but in different specialty tracks. The five subjects had received training in twelve of the fourteen training rotations available at the internship site.






62

Procedure


The phenomenological research process as outlined by Giorgi follows a rigorous process. The qualitative data was collected through the use of interviews in which each subject's experience of supervision was fully explored. The audio recorded interviews were then transcribed verbatim, and these transcripts, hereafter referred to as protocols, comprised the data of the study. The data was then analyzed following Giorgi's method of phenomenological research, a four step method comprised of observation, identification of meaning units, identification of constituent elements, and reintegration of constituent elements into the description of the experience. Prior to engaging in this process, it was necessary for the experimenter to identify his own biases regarding the experience and then bracket them, consciously separating them away from the data collection and analysis procedure.


Self-Reflection and Bracketing


Prior to beginning the data collection, it was necessary for the experimenter to bracket all known experiences and beliefs regarding supervision. To be successful, the experimenter first performed a "self-reflectioif' on the phenomena. This process entailed writing out all thoughts and beliefs regarding supervision, then reducing that written expression to identify previously held beliefs and potential biases. The results of that reduction are presented in the Discussion chapter of this paper so the reader may be informed of potential biases of the researcher. After these biases were identified and bracketed, the experimenter continued with the data collection.






63

Data Collectio


The data was collected by conducting unstructured interviews. All five interviews were conducted by the experimenter. Each interview was scheduled one week in advance. When the interview was scheduled, each subject was told that the nature of the interview would be a discussion of the subject's positive experiences of supervision received throughout professional training. At that time each subject was asked to reflect upon such experiences as a way to prepare for the interview.

Prior to beginning the interview, each subject was asked to read and sign an

informed consent which included information about the audio taping of the interviews. Each interview began with the same question, "Think back to a time when you experienced what you believe to be a positive experience in supervision. Tell me about the experience, what happened, what was said, what was felt, anything you believe was part of that experience." After the subject answered the initial question, the interview proceeded by asking the subject to elaborate upon what was originally introduced into the discussion by the subject. Except for the first question, the interview did not follow any set plan or seek to confin-n pre-established hypotheses, but reflected and followed the subject's lead. The five interviews ranged in length from 50 to 75 minutes. The five interviews were conducted within a ten day period.

After the fifth interview was conducted, each of the five interviews were

transcribed, in the order in which they were completed. The experimenter completed all five transcriptions. The interviews were transcribed verbatim with the exception of names and other identifying data which was changed to protect the anonymity of the






64

subjects as well as any individuals they discussed during the interview. After the accuracy of the protocols was confirmed by the experimenter, the audio tapes were destroyed. The written protocols comprise the data set of the study which was then analyzed as follows.


Data Analysis


The method of analysis for each protocol followed the method for psychological phenomenological analysis as outlined by Giorgi (1989). This method is a specific four step procedure which is based on the general phenomenological model described earlier, and is detailed below. Prior to beginning the analysis, it was essential for the experimenter to continue to bracket all he knew concerning the phenomenon of good supervision. The conscious and purposeful act of bracketing drew upon the selfreflections discovered by the experimenter prior to beginning the interviews. Each protocol was analyzed individually following the procedure described below. A sample protocol with corresponding meaning units is presented in Appendix A.

First, the entire description was read through in its entirety two times. The

purpose of these initial readings was to get a sense of the protocol as a whole. Reading it twice allowed the experimenter to better understand the protocol as a description of one person's lived experience. After a general understanding of the protocol was achieved, the next step was taken, the process of understanding the meaning of the experience.

Since it is difficult, if not impossible to analyze the entire protocol at once, the

second step of the procedure consisted of dividing the protocol into parts. As the goal of






65

the phenomenological method is to discover meaning, the protocol was divided into what Giorgi calls, "meaning units" (Giorgi, 1989). These were delineated by points of transition of meaning within the protocol. In other words, each individual unit contained one individual meaning which revealed something about the subject's experience of supervision. The division into meaning units was accomplished by beginning at the beginning of the protocol, reading until one meaning unit delineated itself, and marking the point of transition on the page. The experimenter then continued reading the protocol from that point, marking each successive meaning unit as it appeared. After completing the protocol, the researcher returned to the beginning of the protocol, testing each meaning unit individually. This "test" determined 1) whether each unit could stand on its own, and 2) if each unit contained only one meaning. If the meaning unit withstood the test, the researcher advanced to the next unit. If not, the meaning unit was corrected. This correction was performed by either adding the unit to an adjacent meaning unit (if the unit failed to stand on its own) or by splitting the meaning unit into two or more units (if the unit contained more than one meaning). This correction procedure was conducted once through the entire protocol, at which time the determination of meaning units was complete.

Once the meaning units were determined, they were transformed to reveal their implicit psychological value to the meaning of good supervision. This step was the transformation of the subject's own words into psychological terms-the transformation of the subject's own narrative description of his/her experience into the generalized psychological meaning of that experience. These psychological meanings were noted in






66

the margins of the protocol to correspond to the meaning unit from which it came. After the psychological meanings were identified for each meaning unit of the protocol, the constituent elements for the protocol were identified. The constituent elements were comprised of psychological meanings which appeared to be most central to the subject's experience. The constituent elements were identified by the experimenter's reflective presence with the data and subsequent understanding. The constituent elements could be conceptualized as the significant themes that emerged from the subject's narrative. After the constituent elements of the protocol were identified, the analysis of the individual protocol was complete. Each of the remaining four protocols were analyzed following the same procedure.

When the five protocols were analyzed, the constituent elements were listed

together. This list formed the constituent elements of the experience of good supervision as determined by the five individuals interviewed. Using all of the constituent elements for the group, the final step of the analysis was undertaken, following a prototype set by Colaizzi (1978) and described by Stevick (1971). The elements of the group were used to obtain an overall structure of being supervised by synthesizing them into a whole. This process began by determining which, if any, of the elements were common among the subjects. Elements that occurred on a less frequent basis were then considered. Common and uncommon elements were integrated to form a whole, unified, description of good supervision, The aim of the integration is to describe common aspects of the experience while allowing for individual elements to be considered. This initial integration of elements is reported as the essential description of good supervised in the Results chapter.






67

This description was then further reduced after reflecting upon the themes of the essential description. This final reduction yielded the structural description of good supervision. This description is also reported in the Results chapter of this paper.














RESULTS


The results of this study is presented at three levels of depth and complexity: the original meaning units; the essential description which is comprised of the constituent elements; and the structural description, which is a reduction of the essential description. The data analysis of the five subject protocols yielded meaning units for each narrative. The meaning units are presented in Table 7 beginning on the next page. The meaning units were then reflected upon to determine the most significant, central, aspects to the experience of being supervised. The central elements are identified as the constituent elements. The constituents elements may be comprised of one or more meaning units. In other words, a meaning unit may be significant enough on its own to be deemed a constituent element. Additionally, a constituent element may be composed of two or more meaning units to comprise a unit of higher and more complex meaning. These constituent elements are reintegrated to produce the essential description of the experience of good supervision. Finally, the essential description was reflected upon and ftirther reduced to produce the structural description. The results of this study are comprised of all three of these types of information.










68







69


TABLE 7: Meaning units derived from the five subject protocols
Subject I Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

1.SPRa experienced Aware of Depth Organized Experience SPR was close in
as personable and of knowledge depends upon the age, allowed
professional interpersonal identification
process between
SPE b and SPR

2. Committed time Love of teaching SPR explicit re: Seriousness of respected due to
to supervisee expectations, responsibilities, competency and
performance evident through organization
requirements organization

3. Provided specific Relationship-- Provided in vivo SPR gave clear SPE actively
feedback SPR's investment, modeling in expectations of sought SPNc
attributed to session what was wanted because of
personality respect, wanting
factors to get info from
her

4. Open Genuineness Assessed current Expectations Invested,
communication, level of ability at implied committed to
allowed the onset of SPN confidence, training and
disagreement maturity, fulfilling SPE's
experience needs

5. Felt free to ask Supportive and Gave confidence Kept scheduled Regular
questions validating when @ beginning, appointments communication
teaching after assessing,
gave approval

6. Informal Growth within Monitored Structure and SPE challenged to
structure, relationship performance consistency is push for own
boundaries periodically with important to learning
minimized, tapes learning new
permitted information
increased
interaction

7. Personality and Relationship Flexible in Structure and Nonthreatening
behavior reflected moves from process of SPN, consistency not as
openness superficial to depending on important when
deeper level, needs of SPE familiar with
bonding, fostered subject
by SPR's
personality style

8. Explicit regarding Process moves Always made Structure may Nonpunitive
process and from info time and gave change--requires
expectations of gathering to attention to SPE, adaptation, more
SPN consulting sense of priority aggressive
behavior by SPE
to have needs met
Note: a refers to supervisee, 'refers to supervisor, 'refers to supervision







70


TABLE 7--continued
Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

9. Process attributed Bond allows for Feedback Implies potential Validating of
to personality discussion of perceived as of being feelings,
deeper issues accurate embarrassed if particularly
need to ask important at
questions difficult times
with patients
10. Although Bond dependent SPR got feedback Trainee actively Understanding of
informal, there upon from other team seeks SPN if SPE's
were boundaries interpersonal members, aware necessary perspective,
style/personality of interactions, confirmingrole, effort allowed increased
openness

11. SPR encouraged Personality Reinforced good Course of SPN is Provided
self-disclosure factors: open, work responsibility of instruction for
genuine SPR growth within a
safe environment
12. Friendly, Self-confident, Identified poor Negative Interested in SPE
empathic centered, and work, made experience when at a personal
honest suggestions for not informative level-invoked a
improvement good feeling in
SPE
13. Likable Being supportive Honest Seeing potential Accurate
important to of SPR increases attentiveness to
decreasing eagerness to seek SPE's state of
anxiety SPN mind and
confronted SPE
14. Interactive, Relationship Impressive as role Structure not as SPN was at a
encouraged works on model important as new personal level,
discussion reciprocal basis: information, SPR personal growth
take something of had positive long which impacted
value from SPR, termi relationship SPE professional
work harder to behavior
give back/repay
15. Reputation among Interpersonal SPR expressed Respect of SPR SPR must be
peers style factors, confidence in knowledge and competent and
behavioral in SPE, increased willingness to good role model
addition to verbal self-confidence acknowledge what they don't
know
16. Was not as Style identified as clarity of SPR's Respect Balanced support
available as being due to who expectations supersedes and validation
desired, due to the person is, provided an scheduling with challenging
her popularity including external measure, structure and identifying
confident, non- helped SPE things to improve
punitive organize her goals upon







71


TABLE 7-coninued
Subject I Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

17. Joint decision SPN as an "art" Organization and SPN form-at Left SPN
making regarding explicitness varied- question knowing I learned
direction of demonstrated and answer, something today
therapy, helped SPR experience review, report
build SPE and knowledge
confidence

18. SPE's judgment SPR Assistance with Interaction varied Able to open up
was trusted communicates integration into and receive
needs, changes, the team feedback on
corrections, SPE increased sense of personal aspects
maintain self- security while maintaining
respect appropriate
boundaries
19. Feedback, Experienced at an Good professional SPR has desire to Genuineness
possibility for affective level reputation with be a SPR, to teach
learning, other disciplines
dependent upon
competency

20. Weakness of SPN In relationship, Training included An intrinsic desire I liked SPRs as
overcome with developed processing of to see another people
SPR's interest in potential through specific person grow,
SPE's growth as a reassurance, interventions and pleasure at
therapist support, suggestions fostering that
understanding growth

21. Relationship SPR's investment Adapted to SPE's Confident and Given opportunity
beyond SPN is shown through professional, secure, wants to to open up,
important, time, energy, interpersonal share knowledge,
whether or enthusiasm; style-built on not fearful of
teacher or socially observed and strengths of SPE competition exchanged with rather than mimic the relationship SPR.

22. Mutual respect SPR appears to Makes specific Format and Trust develops
enjoy what they suggestions for process varies over time, are doing. interventions includes SPR
sharing with SPE

23. Responsiveness Commitment to Provides Positive feedback, Trust required
and support for time appropriate acknowledgment
SPE reinforcement of growth,
including learning
recognition to 3rd
party







72


TABLE 7-continued _____Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

24. Self-disclosure Involvement at an Sets professional Identifies Identification
affective level model individual as with SPR
mentor important in
establishing goals
and establishing
SPR as a role
model
25. Professional SPE experiences Maintains Identified specific Gender aspect
freedom in work at intuitive level professional requirements minimized by
boundaries needed to attain SPE, though
though professional goals gender important
increasingly re: identification
''personable'' over
time.

26. Style of giving Learning in a Respect. Honest SPR competence
feedback is developmental and SPE respect
attributed to building model, is a prerequisite
personality rather than of having +
factors correction. supervisory
experience
27. Important for SPE Time is Professional and Able to overcome No respect equals
to not feel as productive personal personality flaws questionable
though she was reputation. learning equals
wrong, but that why bother with
there are many SPN?
ways to do
therapy

28. No gender related SPE is more Conscientious An understanding No respect, more
differences open, less regarding her of SPR guarded
defensive presentation personality led to
deeper
relationship,
mutual respect

29. Confidence SPE seeks Takes time, Expectations were SPR expresses
built-trusted my suggestions, increases effort at rigid confidence in
judgment, corrections times of increased SPE, particularly
provided varying SPE need. when specifics are
experience to identified
push the training
expertise







73


TABLE 7--continued_____Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

30. Beginning at a Teaching can be SPE learned Experiences SPR Poor SPN results
new site, it is reciprocal-- about boundaries/ at an affective in + learning,
necessary for SPR relationship unprofessionalism level through
to help give dependent through a poor experiencing
confidence SPN experience, anger towards
SPR, how it can
impact
professional
behavior/therapy
3 1. Dedication to SPE's needs Poor boundaries, Despite closeness, Personal and
training-taking change with SPE was scared no experience of professional
some risks, development boundaries disclosure does
providing new crossed not include
challenges emotional
disclosure re:
SPN relationship
32. compromises with As SPE develops Poor boundaries, SPR open to SPE's activity,
SPE to provide as a therapist, SPE lost respect diverse ways of willingness to new experiences becomes more for SPy, thinking participate in
while getting the knowledgeable, important, was
necessary work confident, reinforced
done expectations
change

33. Own willingness Expectations Poor boundaries, SPR open to Instillation of
to participate, include "I know SPE learned diversity--more confidence
expose more of what I'm importance of important later necessary to
weaknesses, to doing" professional when less need to perform and
learn boundaries, more learn new develop
aware of when material professionally
they are being
pressed.

34. SPE's openness SPE has needs, Character traits: Rigidity okay Personal aspects
has increased expects to be self-confident, when learning must be addressed
over time, with fulfilled, organized, new material in SPN, goes
confidence, insightful, warm, beyond skill
personal and caring, empathic training
professional with boundaries.
maturity

35. Maturity may be SPE expectation- Helpful regarding Modeling role not Technician vs.
related to be able SPR shares other professional primary therapistto handle negative experience issues, i.e. office importance in therapist must be
feedback and politics evaluating willing to
perceptions of supervisory face/work through
SPN experience experience personal issues







74


TABLE 7-continued
Subject I Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

36. Felt connected SPE belief. it is Honest-straight Behavior is a To be good
important to still forward function of who therapist personal
be learning the person is issues must be
addressed in SPN
37. Interpersonal trust Identifies warm Positive, even SPE has respect Reach a point in affective when giving for SPR's position relationship able
experience as due negative feedback and to disagree,
to personality responsibilities comes later in
variables development
38. Sense of equality, A guide, mentor SPE expectations Respect- SPR shares own
learn from each of needing to universal training
other, process of improve clinical requirement experiences
change, different skills insecurities
perspectives
39. Relationship Highly Identification of Ethics- Time and
outside SPN trustworthy specifics prerequisite for availability
affects experience illustrated SPR's positive important
and perception, interest and experience
both + and attention

40. Involved as a Expectation of Felt respected by
person, not just a SPR to help- being given SPE give confidence responsibilities
and to teach
41. Roles change, Knowledgeable, Factors required
evolve, but not specific in to be a good SPR:
separable feedback, is interest,
genuine, commitment,
approachable, patience
role model.

42. Flexible within Went out of his
boundaries way to advance
him
professionally

43. Needs of SPE
important

44. Relationship is
experienced as
"special" creates
an extraordinary
experiencebeyond good.

45, Requires a
willingness to be
close, involved







75


TABKE 7-coninued
Subject 1 Subject 2 Subject 3 Subject 4 Subject 5

46, Challenged to
develop/grow as therapist 47. Positive
reinforcement 48. Positive SPR is in
tune with SPE, touching all aspects during SPN

49. SPR, modeling
how to do therapy

50. Knowledge and
competence prerequisite (otherwise no learning) 51. SPR's knowledge
is measured by how much SPE learns
52. Trust developsbeing to SPN on time, how they treat you at difficult times 53. Dynamic and
evolving 54. Development of
relationship mirrors
therapeutic relationship 55. One who is
willing to share one's affective experience 56. SPE likes them as
people

57. Increased trust
allows SPE to expose more of self, develop into a better therapist






76

Essential Description of Good Supervision


The compilation of constituent elements of the five subjects' descriptions of good supervision generated the following essential description of good supervision.

For the five subjects interviewed in this study, good supervision was experienced as a period of learning and professional growth within the context of a meaningful interpersonal relationship. The relationship was experienced as being collaborative between supervisor and supervisee, teacher and student, mentor and novice. As supervisees grow and develop, they expect their supervisors to change with them, matching their interventions and teaching methods to the supervisee's need. The supervisor's commitment to the supervisee's learning was identified as a fundamental component of good supervision.

Supervisees approach supervision anticipating their own professional

development. There is an implicit power differential in the supervisory relationship in which the supervisee initially concedes control and power to the supervisor. On the other hand, the supervisee expects to be treated with respect in addition to being taught by the supervisor. The supervisor is also expected to relinquish power and control to the supervisee as the supervisee develops skills and proficiency at the psychotherapeutic task. The supervisee's evaluation of supervision is dependent in part on how well these expectations are met. The value attributed to supervision by the supervisee is also dependent upon how much the supervisee can and does learn from the supervisor during the course of supervision.






77

In order for ideal learning to occur, the supervisee must feel safe enough to expose weaknesses and open oneself to scrutiny by the supervisor. The supervisee's desire and ability to take more risks, both in therapy as well as in supervision, is a result of developing confidence and feeling safe within the supervisory environment. Supervisee confidence is developed by being trusted, given positive feedback, and being provided with challenging clinical cases to further develop clinical skills. Safety is not experienced unless the supervisee is able to trust the supervisor and the supervisory relationship. Good supervision also draws the supervisee into the process, encouraging the supervisee to be more active in the training process.

Good supervision was attributed directly to the actions and personality of the supervisor. Professional competence of the supervisor is measured by how much the supervisee learns from the supervisor. The extent to which the supervisee values supervision is determined by how much the supervisor has to offer. Supervision with supervisors perceived as competent, knowledgeable, and skilled is actively sought out by supervisees. Good supervisors identified in the study were also described as honest, ethical, genuine, supportive, self-confident, warm, caring, insightful, and empathic. Good supervisors encourage, or at least allow, the supervisory relationship to develop from a superficial task-oriented relationship to a deeper relationship wherein the supervisee can share and better understand affective experience. Good supervisors are also explicit in their expectations and evaluation requirements. Good supervisors are in tune with and responsive to their supervisees. Commitment to training in general as well as






78

commitment to the supervised's training were also identified as important components to good supervision.

Supervisors demonstrate their commitment to training through their commitment of time to their trainees and their attention to the trainees during their allotted time. Supervisors also demonstrate their commitment by being willing to share their own training experiences, particularly difficulties. Supervisors can also demonstrate their interest in the trainees' learning by asking questions about their training expectations, needs, and whether they are being met.

While the supervisor's personality and likability are identified as important, it is more important to maintain a professional relationship; although the relationship may become more informal as the trainee develops. The maintenance of appropriate and professional boundaries was experienced as being the supervisor's responsibility. Boundary concerns were expressed by all five subjects and was experienced as a necessary component to a safe and productive relationship. Mutual respect was also identified as a necessary prerequisite of good supervision.

Feedback was reported to be an important part of good supervision.

Appropriately given feedback was experienced as validating, accurate, and contributing toward the supervised's professional development. Positive feedback contributed to the self-confidence of the trainee and increased the trainee's commitment to work for the supervisor. Negative feedback, when received, was experience by the trainee as an honest effort by the supervisor to contribute to the supervised's development. Helpful






79

negative feedback was described by the subjects as being timely, noncritical, accurate, specific, and focused on behaviors or interventions rather than personal attributes.

The above essential description is a compilation of constituent elements extracted from the meaning units identified in the five subject protocols. This description is a summary of good supervision as experienced by the five subjects interviewed as part of this study. This description is reduced one more time to yield the structural description.


Structural Description of Good Supervision


Further reflection upon the above essential description of good supervision

yielded the following structural description of good supervision as experienced by these five subjects.

Good supervision was expressed by all the subjects to be a highly personal and individualized process. Good supervision was attributed directly to a good supervisorgood supervision is performed by a person with a commitment to the supervised's training. From the trainee's perspective, supervision is not a skills dependent process but rather a person dependent process, where the supervisor's own personality and interpersonal style is identified as the reason supervision is experiences as good or bad.

Important supervisor attributes which were identified by the subjects include

honesty, genuineness, insightfulness, and self-confidence. Good supervisors also support and validate the trainee's experience, are committed to the profession and to professional training, and respected by students and professional peers. Good supervisors exhibit professionalism, are cognizant and respectful of trainee-supervisor boundary issues, and






80

are explicit regarding performance expectations. Nonauthoritarian styles of communication and interpersonal warmth were also identified as desirable, though not necessary, characteristics.

Good supervision is experienced as a period of learning when the trainee is able to invest in the training process through the establishment of a trusting interpersonal relationship with the supervisor. The development of a meaningful and safe interpersonal relationship allows the trainees to become more invested in the training process by permitting themselves to ask more questions, admit to difficulties, and be less defensive in the supervisory process. The trainee enters supervision with expectationsexpectations to learn, expectations to be respected, expectations for the supervisor to commit to the training process. How well the supervisor meets these expectations has a direct impact on how beneficial the trainee experiences the training. Good supervision is experienced as a dynamic process with the supervisor able to track and respond to the trainee's changing needs. Good supervision facilitates growth of the trainee by encouraging the trainee to seek additional supervision and training.














DISCUSSION


The purpose of utilizing the phenomenological method in this study was to

discover a structural account of the experience of good supervision during psychotherapy training. This study strives to understand supervision as experienced in the lived world, related by the subjects in their own words. Supervision was selected as the phenomenon of study due to its nature as a fundamental method in training psychologists. Despite its central role in professional training, clinical supervision has received relatively little empirical research attention (Watkins, 1995a). A discovery oriented approach such as this is particularly useful when applied to phenomena with relatively scarce research findings.

The results of this phenomenological investigation will be discussed in this

chapter. The primary constituent elements of the discovered reductions will be discussed individually and related to appropriate traditional research findings. The reductions in their entirety will then be discussed in a comparative manner to previous phenomenological studies on supervision. Before beginning with the discussion of the results, however, the experimenter's personal reflections regarding supervision are presented. These reflections were written prior to beginning the data collection. They are presented here so the reader may be informed of any potential biases held by the experimenter.






81






82

Personal Reflections


An important aspect of this phenomenological method is the bracketing of preconceived knowledge regarding the phenomenon being studied. To effectively bracket, it is necessary to identify those preconceived beliefs. The following is a written representation of the experimenter's beliefs regarding good supervision prior to beginning the data collection. It is presented here so the reader may be informed of the experimenter's biases prior to beginning the project.

As I was preparing the proposal for this project, a then current supervisor of mine suggested to me that good supervision is nothing more than the provision of a safe and secure environment in which the trainee could learn psychotherapy. I was initially drawn to this elegantly simple conclusion and began to believe that yes, perhaps good supervision could be reduced to such a simple but potentially comprehensive thought. As I began to reflect upon my own experiences of being supervised, however, the matter became a great deal more complex. My first recollections of good supervision began with memories of supportive supervisors who encouraged me, expressed confidence in my work (even when I was not confident in it), and, of course, gave me glowing reviews at the end our training period together. As I attempted to identify specific incidents or experiences in supervision which seemed to have a particular impact upon my growth as a therapist those experiences flattened out into average experiences. Such experiences were experienced as good, as in average. These experiences must have contributed to my development as a psychotherapist, but not in a way that prompted me to identify them as critically important to my professional identity.






83

As I reflected further upon my past experiences, it became more apparent to me that supervision most profoundly affected my professional development when it helped me overcome some form of adversity. The adversity typically took the form of an inner struggle-a crisis of loss of confidence, boredom within a therapeutic context, an interpersonal conflict with another supervisor, peer, or client. In my discovery I found that when I was in a good supervisory relationship, I had assistance in resolving the matter. When I was not, I was left to my own devices to handle the crisis, which at times felt as though I were negotiating a land-mine. So, what was the difference?

When I had "good" supervision I felt I could bring the struggle to the attention of my supervisor who would then share a past experience, insight, or a fresh perspective to help me resolve the issue. I felt, in a word, "safe." When I reflected upon the times when I resisted bringing the issue to supervision, it was, I think, because I was afraid of being "scolded" or penalized for doing something wrong. I determined I would be safer negotiating the land-mine on my own. While my hesitancy clearly falls under the category of personal "issues," of interest here is that there were times when I did take the issue to supervision. It seems, then, that a sense of safety is a fundamental component of good supervision, after all, as supervision may not even take place without it.

As far as other characteristics of good supervision, I expect to learn in supervision and I expect to be treated in a fair manner. While I don't know if likability is a necessary component, I do know that I liked those supervisors from whom I received good supervision. Good supervision has challenged me, supported me, and encouraged me. But most of all, good supervision has taught me new things about psychotherapy-new






84

skills, new processes, new understandings-and has encouraged me to use that knowledge in the psychotherapeutic setting.


Orientation of the Subject


In reviewing the results of this study it becomes clear that experience of good supervision is understood within the context of the supervisee's world. A significant aspect of their "world of supervision" is their understanding of the supervision process. Each of the subjects reported that they approached supervision with expectations. The expectations of these supervisees involved their development as professionals and how they expected to be treated as human beings. These expectations could be summarized as expectations to learn, be supported, and be treated with respect.

As supervision is a context for training, expectations to learn are reasonable and normal. Supervision has been described as primarily a teaching-learning activity (Holloway and Neufeldt, 1995). The learning process in supervision is also well documented, at least theoretically. Developmental models emphasize the learning processes of the supervisee with the assistance of the supervisor (i.e. Stoltenberg and Delworth, 1987; Watkins, 1993, Ronnestad and Skovholt, 1993) and supervisors themselves experience the supervisor role to include the role of teacher (Paskiewicz, 1993). The quality of learning has also been shown to be related to the quality of the supervision (Carifio and Hess, 1987; Shanfield, Matthes, and Hetherly, 1993)

Expectations to be treated with respect are consistent with APA guidelines for ethical conduct. Writing as a supervisor, Pickering (1987) tells us that,






85

students have a right to expect that the supervisory process and
relationship will not wound them to the point of bewilderment, will not
create anxieties that they are given no guidance in handling, and will not
be a place where harmful interpersonal games are played (p. 50).

Supervised expectations and value of respect for self-autonomy and integrity has been documented elsewhere (Hutt, Scott, and King, 1983). Additionally, respect as a necessary component in the supervisor-supervisee relationship was a conclusion of Carifio and Hess (198 7) in their search for the ideal supervisor.

Expectations to be supported may be a reflection of the supervises' needs to be guided through the process of becoming a psychotherapist in a thoughtful and human manner. Such expectations are legitimate (Pickering, 1987). Supervised expectations of support are also consistent with the expectations and intent of supervisors when they are engaged in a supervisory relationship (Paskiewicz, 1993; Pickering, 1987). Furthermore, the relationship qualities of warmth, acceptance, trust, and understanding, the "facilitative conditions," are well-documented in the literature as important dimensions in all helping relationships.

One other significant expectation held by the trainees is the expectation to engage in a meaningful interpersonal relationship with the supervisor. In fact, for the subjects in this study, supervision is not experienced as a process of learning with the assistance of a person, but rather as a relationship in which learning occurs. Supervision is not attributed to learned skills, but rather, who the supervisor is and the relationship between the supervisor and trainee. Identification of the supervisor as the instrument of change suggests trainees do not perceive supervision as a professional skill which may be learned






86

as much as a process of shared learning within the context of an interpersonal relationship.

The perceived quality of the supervisory relationship, and consequently

supervision, is dependent upon the perceived quality of the supervisor, who is evaluated in terms of competence and commitment to training based, in part, on experience and maturity. Experience and maturity of the supervisor was measured by one subject, Karen (all names have been changed), as the supervisor's level of organization and explicitness regarding expectations and evaluation criteria. Karen inferred that since the supervisor was able to verbalize exactly what she expected during the course of training, that the supervisor understood the training process and was able to predict certain outcomes. This could only be accomplished, inferred the supervised, through experience and knowledge. It could not occur, apparently, through training and knowledge about the supervisory process. A significant consequence of this is that trainees do not anticipate the possibility of learning supervision but hold on to the notion that supervision is person dependent and a matter of either "you've got it or you don't." Consequences of this perspective are discussed later in this chapter.


Qualities of Supervisio


As stated earlier, it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the quality of

supervision from the quality of the supervisor. In fact, in the present study, the benefits of good supervision were attributed directly to the personal characteristics and professional behaviors of the supervisor. For practical purposes, good supervision is a






87

good supervisor, and visa versa. Studies of supervision invariably include aspects of the supervisor, whether it is what they do, how they do it, or who they are. As it would not be reasonable to attempt to remove the supervisor from the process of supervision, the following discussion of qualities of supervision will include all aspects of supervision, including the supervisor.

While the facilitative conditions have been well-documented in the literature, other proposed important characteristics have received less empirical support. These intuitively derived characteristics include flexibility, concern, attention, investment, curiosity, and openness (Albott, 1984; Aldrich, 198 1; Gitterman and Miller, 1977). Despite the lack of previous empirical support, all of these characteristics were present in the subjects' protocols. Concern, attention, investment, and openness all appear to be significant supervisor characteristics present in good supervisory experiences while curiosity may be reflected in the supervises' perceptions of the supervisor's interest in the supervised. Perhaps the addition of these types of characteristics to the "facilitative conditions" is what delineates the supervisor from other helping roles. Super-visor investment in the supervisee's training seems to be a particularly important characteristic when fulfilling the mentoring aspect of the supervisory role,

The development of supervised confidence and trust was reported by the subjects to be related to self-disclosure by the supervisor. The importance of self-disclosure is consistent with the findings of Hutt and her associates (1983) although the desirability of supervisor self-disclosure has not been emphasized in the literature in general. Hutt and associates (1983) also proposed that self-disclosure by the supervisor is the link between






88

the supervisory relationship and the content of supervision, moving the process of supervision forward when the supervisee may otherwise be inhibited or reluctant to move forward. Carkhuff (1969) proposed that self-disclosure is an extension of genuineness and a necessary part of any helping relationship. According to Carkhuff (1969), the supervisor's self-disclosure relates to the supervisee's concerns and provides a model for increasingly deeper levels of self-exploration by the supervisee. The present findings suggest that self-disclosure represents an intimate sharing by the supervisor which in turn opens the door for similar sharing by the supervisee. These explanations do not seem mutually exclusive but complement each other nicely. Supervisor self-disclosure can dissolve blockages in supervision by increasing risk taking by the supervisee through the instillation of trust and commitment by the supervisor. This would also be consistent with the findings in this study that trust develops by how the supervisor treats the supervisee at difficult times.

Supervisee trust in the supervisor was described as a necessary component of good supervision.. These findings in the present study support similar findings elsewhere. Allen, Szollos, and Williams (1986) found that perceived expertise and trustworthiness of the supervisor were the best discriminators of quality according to supervisees. Other phenomenological investigations of good supervision found trust to be a central component of a positive experience (Worthen and McNeill, 1996; Hutt et al., 1983). Cariflo and Hess (1987) also concluded that trust is a necessary component of the supervisory didactic relationship.






89


Like trust, perceived competence of the supervisor is a prerequisite to a positive supervisory experience. It was stated that the supervisor's competence was a driving force in motivating the supervisee to seek supervision. Furthermore, the supervisor's competency was directly related to how much the supervision was valued by the supervisee. In the words of one subject, Manny,

She was very competent, she's really organized, which made me really respect her and want to seek out supervision even more because I knew
she knew a lot and I knew that she was competent so I wanted to learn, get
that information from her.

It is interesting to note that another subject evaluated the supervisor's competence by measuring how much she learned, suggesting the supervisor must always have something to offer the supervisee.

Trust, competence, facilitative qualities-all of these aspects of supervision are components of the supervisory relationship. The relationship between supervisee and supervisor has been proposed as the single most important aspect of effective supervision (Worthen and McNeill, 1996; Cariflo and Hess, 1987; Hess, 1987). In the present study, all positive aspects of supervision are experienced to occur within or as a direct consequence of the supervisory relationship. But is the relationship actually as important as it is perceived? In a recent study by Patton and Kivlighan (1997), the working alliance of the supervisory relationship had a differential impact upon the types of learning that occur in supervision. Patton and Kivlighan (1997) found that the working alliance had no impact upon the technical functioning of the supervisee but did impacted positively upon the trainee's comfort in supervision. More importantly, however, they found that the working alliance between supervisee and supervisor was related to the supervisee' s






90

performance in counseling sessions, as measured by independent raters. This appears to be the first empirical support that the quality of the supervisory relationship has an impact upon the professional performance of the trainee, validating years of speculation and theorizing.

Although the subjects in this study valued a collaborative supervisory

relationship, they also placed the responsibility of supervision upon the supervisor. This appears contradictory to the idea of establishing a collaborative relationship, but consistent with the supervisee' s implied deference to the supervisor as an authority figure. This suggests a tension between establishing a peer-like relationship with someone who has evaluative power over the supervisee. The supervisee's demand for respect and maintenance of professional boundaries may be a way of negotiating what could become an ambiguous and potentially harmful relationship. By maintaining boundaries, supervisees establish a structure in which they are able to learn, grow, and relate to the supervisor while being protected from arbitrary acts that may occur in a less structured or defined relationship.

While the responsibility of the supervision is perceived to be in the supervisor's hands, the supervisees do acknowledge that their active participation is required to make supervision work. In the words of another subject, Catherine,

part of the positive experience has been because of my willingness to learn
and expose myself ..to learn and receive the training and n ot be afraid to
have things dissected and pointed out.

Pickering (1987) states that it is likely that supervisors expect their supervisees to be active in the supervisory process.






91

Although this project did not intend to explore negative supervision, experiences of "bad" supervision were related by the subjects as a way of contrasting the positive experiences. The most significant expression of "bad" supervision was related to the breakdown of professional boundaries by the supervisor. One subject, Karen described her experiences with crossed boundaries as scary and unprofessional.

It was scary. It was unnerving for me, because here's this person [crying
to her about her personal problems] who's supposed to be my mentor ... I'd
hope they'd have some kind of professional sense ... I was scared. I was
overwhelmed ... I lost respect for her.

In such experiences, the supervised experiences anxiety, anger, and frustration and the supervisory relationship is burdened with mistrust, disrespect, and a lack of honest disclosure (Hutt et al., 1983). When supervision falls into a category somewhere between good and bad, it is likely that both the supervised and supervisor discount its value. Though it may not be harmful toward the supervised, when supervision fails, the relationship is dulled and an air of tolerance prevails (Paskiewicz, 1993). Hutt and associates (1983) report such an experience is likely to result in anger and anxiety in the supervised as a result of frustrated professional needs.

Boundary issues were identified by the subjects to be an issue which is necessary to a good supervision experience as well as being a primary contributor to a negative experience. Boundaries were experienced as a dynamic process rather than a static wall. Trainees experience the boundaries to become more flexible as the relationship develops. As the supervisory relationship deepened, the supervisor was experienced on a more personal level. All subjects reported, however, that a professional relationship with appropriate boundaries was maintained, even when interacting with the supervisor on a






92

social level. The boundaries were a desired and welcomed aspect to the relationship. In no instances did the subjects report frustration at wanting to be closer to the supervisor than was permitted. It was as though the trainees experienced the boundaries as a protective mechanism for themselves, and they were able to apply their experience with supervisory boundaries to counseling situations.

Another characteristic of good supervision is the supervisor's ability to track, attend to, and respond to the needs of the supervised. The subjects experienced this aspect as attention and responsiveness-attention to their needs and emotional states followed by appropriate responses and interventions. In a study of psychiatry resident training, supervisors with the highest ratings identified and tracked the residents' central and effectively charged concerns about the client (Shanfield et al., 1993). This is attentiveness in a direct sense, and can be illustrated by Manny's experiences.

The one thing that I've had with her that I haven't had with most of my supervisors, is that she would really key in on my attitude, or what was
going on in the moment. And she would confront me with it.

Another aspect of the attentiveness is how a supervisor tracks unidentified supervised needs and tailors the supervision to match it. The types of needs a supervised can have in supervision can vary. Some needs vary according to developmental level, as in what type of learning is most appropriate for the trainee. Other needs are context sensitive, such as difficulties with a client, spoken or unspoken. Still other needs may be related to the interactions with the supervisor as when the trainee needs more direction or more autonomy. Appropriate interventions at times of difficulty were described as being instrumental in developing a trusting relationship with the supervisor.






93

It has been suggested that the most significant interventions provided by

supervisors is feedback (Cariflo and Hess, 1987). Feedback is anticipated, expected, and closely tied to a trainee's performance (Barth and Gambrill, 1984). Supervisees in this study experienced feedback as an instrumental aspect of their development as psychotherapists. According to Freeman (1985), feedback should be systematic, timely, clearly understood, and reciprocal. According to the subjects in this study, it is most important for feedback to be accurate (part of being systematic), noncritical, and relevant to what the supervisee is doing. Both of these guideline address the fact the feedback must be received and accepted by the trainee before any behavioral and attitudinal change will take place. In this study, negative feedback given within the context of a good supervisory relationship was experienced as the supervisor's contributions toward improving the skills of the trainee. While the content of the feedback was aimed at changing a supervisee' s behavior, the manner in which it was presented was experienced as supportive, encouraging, and building upon the supervisee's strengths and knowledge. Positive feedback was experienced as a motivating force for continued development by the trainee. Positive feedback let the trainee know that the supervisor was paying attention and interested in the trainee's growth. It also increased trainee confidence and, in some cases, motivated the trainee to work harder for the appreciative supervisor.


How Does This Relate to Developmental Models?


It was not the intent of this project to support or not support hypotheses proposed by the various developmental models of supervisee and supervisor development. Some




Full Text

PAGE 1

21 %(&20,1* $ 36<&+27+(5$3,67 $1 (;3(5,(1&( 2) *22' 683(59,6,21 %< 7,027+< 0$5. %8(+1(5 $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

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fSKHQRPHQRORJLVWf ZRXOG DOVR OLNH WR DFNQRZOHGJH P\ ZLIH 5DQGL DQG P\ FKLOGUHQ $QMD /LQQHD 1DWKDQLHO DQG 7\UD :LWKRXW WKHLU SHUSHWXDO ORYH VXSSRUW DQG IDLWK LQ PH WKLV SURMHFW DQG WKLV PDQXVFULSW ZRXOG QHYHU KDYH EHFRPH FRPSOHWH

PAGE 3

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

PAGE 4

$33(1',; $ 6$03/( 35272&2/ :,7+ 0($1,1* 81,76 $33(1',; % )81'$0(17$/ 678&785( 2) 326,7,9( 683(59,6,21 /,67 2) 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+

PAGE 5

/,67 2) 7$%/(6 7DEOH 3DJH &KDUDFWHULVWLFV RI %HJLQQLQJ DQG $GYDQFHG 6XSHUYLVRUV (PSLULFDO VXSSRUW RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV (PSLULFDO VXSSRUW RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV %HUQDUGfV [ PDWUL[ RI VXSHUYLVRU UROHV DQG IXQFWLRQV /LWWUHOO /HH%RUGHQ DQG /RUHQ] IRXUVWDJH XQLGLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KUHH DGGLWLRQDO VXSHUYLVRU UROHV DGGHG E\ (OOLV 'HOO DQG *RRG 0HDQLQJ XQLWV GHULYHG IURP WKH ILYH VXEMHFW SURWRFROV )RXU SKDVHV RI D *RRG 6XSHUYLVLRQ ([SHULHQFH IRU $GYDQFHG 6XSHUYLVHHV Y

PAGE 6

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

PAGE 7

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f§EXLOGLQJ XSRQ WKHLU H[LVWLQJ VWUHQJWKV UDWKHU WKDQ EHLQJ FRUUHFWLYH RU FULWLFDO 2WKHU QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQWV RI D JRRG VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LQFOXGH WUXVW FRQILGHQFH DQG OLNDELOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH UHOHYDQFH RI WKHVH UHVXOWV WR H[LVWLQJ HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV GLVFXVVHG 9OO

PAGE 8

,1752'8&7,21 6LQFH )UHXG EHJDQ GHOYLQJ LQWR WKH XQFRQVFLRXV RYHU RQH KXQGUHG \HDUV DJR SV\FKRWKHUDS\ KDV EHFRPH DQ LPSRUWDQW WUHDWPHQW PRGDOLW\ LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV DQG WKURXJKRXW WKH ZRUOG 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ KDV EHHQ UHIHUUHG WR DV DQ DUW D FUDIW DQG D VFLHQFH 5HJDUGOHVV RI KRZ LW LV FODVVLILHG SV\FKRWKHUDS\ LV LQ HVVHQFH D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WZR RU PRUHf SHUVRQV VWULYLQJ WRZDUGV WKH PXWXDO JRDO RI WKH UHVWRUDWLRQ RI D SHUVRQfV PHQWDO KHDOWK DQGRU ZHOOEHLQJ +RZ RQH RI WKRVH SHUVRQV EHFRPHV TXDOLILHG WR DVVLVW WKH RWKHUVf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

PAGE 9

$3$f 5HVHDUFK LQWR KRZ SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQV LWV SURIHVVLRQDOV KDV EHFRPH DQ DUHD RI LQFUHDVHG LQWHUHVW GXULQJ WKH SDVW \HDUV 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV UHVHDUFK SURMHFW LV WR H[DPLQH WZR DUHDV WKDW DUH HVVHQWLDO LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ RI SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJLVWV FOLQLFDO VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG UHVHDUFK PHWKRGRORJ\ 7KH SURFHVV RI FOLQLFDO VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLOO EH HPSLULFDOO\ VWXGLHG IURP WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI WKH SV\FKRORJLVW WUDLQHH 7KH H[DPLQDWLRQ RI UHVHDUFK PHWKRGRORJ\ ZLOO EH H[SHULHQWLDO LQ QDWXUHf§WKLV SURMHFW LQWHQGV WR XWLOL]H D KXPDQ VFLHQFH PHWKRGRORJ\ WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG WR SHUIRUP WKH HPSLULFDO DQDO\VLV 7KLV UHVHDUFK SURMHFW LV DQ HIIRUW WR QRW RQO\ FRQWULEXWH WR WKH FRQWHQW RI HPSLULFDOO\EDVHG SV\FKRORJLFDO NQRZOHGJH EXW WR DOVR VXSSRUW WKH SURIHVVLRQfV FDOO WR HPEUDFH DOWHUQDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLHV LQ WKH FROOHFWLRQ DQG DQDO\VLV RI VXFK NQRZOHGJH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVLRQ RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 6XSHUYLVLRQ LV FRQVLGHUHG E\ HGXFDWRUV WUDLQHUV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO UHJXODWRU\ DJHQFLHV WR EH D FULWLFDO FRPSRQHQW RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WUDLQLQJ +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW f 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI VXSHUYLVHG WUDLQLQJ LV XQGHUVFRUHG E\ WKH SUH DQG SRVWGRFWRUDO SUDFWLFH VWDQGDUGV RI WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ DQG OLFHQVLQJ UHTXLUHPHQWV RI PRVW VWDWHV $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ f :KLOH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI FOLQLFDO WUDLQLQJ KDV ORQJ EHHQ FRQVLGHUHG D VLJQLILFDQW DVSHFW WR WKH WUDLQLQJ RI SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJLVWV LW KDV JHQHUDWHG DQ LQDGHTXDWH ERG\ RI UHVHDUFK FRPSDUHG WR UHVHDUFK RI SV\FKRWKHUDSHXWLF LVVXHV LQ JHQHUDO 3UHIDFLQJ D VSHFLDO LVVXH RI 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW GHYRWHG WR VXSHUYLVLRQ %DUWOHWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV QRWHG WKH LQDGHTXDF\ RI

PAGE 10

UHVHDUFK OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRXQVHOLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ %DUWOHWW *RRG\HDU DQG %UDGOH\ f 2YHU D GHFDGH ODWHU +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW f QRWHG WKDW WKH ERG\ RI UHVHDUFK RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV PHGLRFUH FRQVLGHULQJ LWV LPSRUWDQFH WR WKH FOLQLFDO SUDFWLFH RI SV\FKRORJ\ 5REHUWVRQ f VXJJHVWV WKLV ODFN RI UHVHDUFK LV GXH WR WKH IDFW WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ JHQHUDWHV UHODWLYHO\ OLWWOH FRQWURYHUV\ +H DGGV WKDW UHVHDUFK LQ WKH DUHD KDV LQFUHDVHG UHFHQWO\ GXH LQ SDUW WR WKH LQFUHDVLQJ SUHVVXUH RI DFFRXQWDELOLW\ 5HVHDUFK RI WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WUDLQHHV LQ FOLQLFDO DQG FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ LV EHFRPLQJ DQ DUHD RI JURZLQJ LQWHUHVW 'XULQJ WKH SDVW \HDUV WKHUH KDV EHHQ DQ LQFUHDVH LQ WKH WKHRUHWLFDO GLVFXVVLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DOWKRXJK HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK WHVWLQJ WKRVH WKHRULHV KDV EHHQ OLPLWHG 6ZDQVRQ DQG 2f6DEHQ :RUWKLQJWRQ f 7KH SXEOLVKHG HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK KDV IRFXVHG RQ VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ DQG VXSHUYLVRU WHFKQLTXH LH 5XVVHOO &ULPPLQJV DQG /HQW 0DULNDV 5XVVHOO DQG 'HOO f ZLWK DQ LQFUHDVLQJ HPSKDVLV RQ WHVWLQJ GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH WHVWLQJ RI WKHVH PRGHOV EXLOGV RQ WKH ZRUN EHJXQ E\ 6WROWHQEHUJ f DQG /LWWUHOO /HH%RUGHQ DQG /RUHQ] f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

PAGE 11

RULHQWDWLRQV 7KH ILHOG RI FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ DSSHDUV WR KDYH HPEUDFHG WKH GHYHORSPHQWDOO\ EDVHG PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKH UHVHDUFK KDV IRFXVHG RQ WKH WHVWLQJ DQG HQKDQFHPHQW RI WKRVH PRGHOV 0F1HLOO 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 5RPDQV 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK :LOH\ DQG 5D\ f $OWKRXJK HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK KDV IRFXVHG RQ GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ D UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV D JURZLQJ DPRXQW RI UHVHDUFK RQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG SURFHVV 5HFHQW SDSHUV ZULWWHQ RQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LQFOXGH GLVFXVVLRQV RI SRZHU DQG FRQWURO 6DOYHQG\ :HLVJHUEHU f VWDJQDWLRQ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ
PAGE 12

PXOWLIDFHWHG SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ EXW UDWKHU WR WKH LQDGHTXDF\ RI WUDGLWLRQDO LH QDWXUDO VFLHQFH UHVHDUFK PHWKRGV LQ KDQGOLQJ WKHVH PHDQLQJIXO EXW H[SHULHQWLDO DVSHFWV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV 5HVHDUFK 0HWKRGRORJ\ LQ &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ :KHQ SV\FKRORJ\ ZDV ILUVW WDXJKW DW LQVWLWXWLRQV RI KLJKHU OHDUQLQJ WKH WHDFKLQJ SURIHVVRUV KHOG DSSRLQWV LQ GHSDUWPHQWV RI SKLORVRSK\ $V SV\FKRORJ\ EHFDPH PRUH DSSOLHG LQ IRFXV KRZHYHU SV\FKRORJLVWV VWURYH WR EHFRPH PRUH VFLHQFHOLNHf§DGRSWLQJ UHVHDUFK PHWKRGRORJLHV XWLOL]HG E\ WKH fQDWXUDOf VFLHQFHVf§ELRORJ\ SK\VLFV FKHPLVWU\f§ LQ DQ HIIRUW WR EHFRPH PRUH HIILFDFLRXV LQ WKH SXUVXLW RI SUHGLFWLQJ KXPDQ EHKDYLRU :KLOH WKLV WDFW KDV EHHQ HIIHFWLYH LQ SURPRWLQJ WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI SV\FKRORJLFDO SULQFLSOHV LQ WKH WUHDWPHQW RI PHQWDO LOOQHVV LW KDV DOVR UHVXOWHG LQ D GHSDUWXUH IURP VWXG\LQJ RWKHU DUHDV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO LQWHUHVW WKDW DUH QRW FRQGXFLYH WR EHLQJ VWXGLHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWDO PHWKRG $V WKH VWUHQJWK RI SV\FKRORJ\f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fV VFLHQWLILF ULJRU KDV EHHQ KDLOHG DQG XWLOL]DWLRQ RI QDWXUDO VFLHQFH PHWKRGRORJLHV LV WKH

PAGE 13

DFFHSWHG QRUP
PAGE 14

5KRGHV +LOO 7KRPSVRQ DQG (OOLRWW 7KRPSVRQ DQG -HQDO 5HQQLH '/ )URQWPDQ DQG .XQNHO :DWVRQ DQG 5HQQLH f DQG D UHDFWLRQ E\ 3RONLQJKRUQH f LQ ZKLFK KH QRWHG WKDW WKLV LVVXH ZDV WKH ILUVW VLJQLILFDQW FRPSLODWLRQ RI TXDOLWDWLYH VWXGLHV SURGXFHG GHVSLWH WKH FDOO IRU LQFUHDVHG PHWKRGRORJLFDO GLYHUVLW\ IRU RYHU D GHFDGH 3RONLQJKRUQH f DOVR VXJJHVWV WKDW FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ VKRXOG QRW RQO\ VXSSRUW WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI DOWHUQDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLHV EXW VKRXOG DVVXPH D OHDGHUVKLS UROH LQ WUDLQLQJ UHVHDUFKHUV LQ WKHLU XVH &RXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\nV JURZLQJ LQWHUHVW LQ DOWHUQDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLHV KDV QRW EHHQ D VSRQWDQHRXV SOXQJH LQWR GLYHUVLW\ IRU GLYHUVLW\n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

PAGE 15

XQGHUVWDQG WKH VXEMHFW IURP WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI KLV RU KHU RZQ VXEMHFWLYH H[SHULHQFH HPSKDVL]LQJ H[SORUDWLRQ RI WKH ZKROH SKHQRPHQRQ UDWKHU WKDQ GLVFUHWH SDUWV +XPDQ VFLHQFH PHWKRGRORJLHV DUH RIIHUHG DV D VRXUFH WR DGGUHVV WKHVH GLVWLQFWO\ GLIIHUHQW UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV RI LQWHUHVW WR FOLQLFLDQV 7KH VHFRQG SUREOHP DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH KXPDQ VFLHQFH SHUVSHFWLYH LV WKDW WKH DVVXPSWLRQV RI WKH KXPDQ VFLHQWLVW UHJDUGLQJ KXPDQ QDWXUH DUH FORVHU WR WKH DVVXPSWLRQV RI WKH FOLQLFLDQ WKDQ DUH WKH DVVXPSWLRQV RI WKH QDWXUDO VFLHQWLVW 6SHFLILFDOO\ LW LV DUJXHG WKDW PRVW FOLQLFLDQV YLHZ WKHLU FOLHQWV DV EHLQJ VHOIGHWHUPLQLQJ 1DWXUDO VFLHQFH PHWKRGRORJLHV KRZHYHU FRQFHSWXDOL]H WKH LQGLYLGXDO DV DQ REMHFW XSRQ ZKLFK HQYLURQPHQWDO YDULDEOHV DUH PDQLSXODWHG ZKLFK WKHQ GHWHUPLQH RXWFRPH +XPDQ VFLHQFH PHWKRGRORJLHV RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG WUHDW WKH VXEMHFW IURP D SHUVSHFWLYH PRUH IDPLOLDU WR WKH SUDFWLWLRQHU LQFRUSRUDWLQJ WKH DVVXPSWLRQ RI IUHHZLOO LQWR WKH GDWD FROOHFWLRQ DQG DQDO\VLV +XPDQ VFLHQFH PHWKRGV KDYH GHYHORSHG WKURXJK WKH LQYHVWLJDWLRQV RI YDULRXV UHVHDUFKHUV ZKR KDYH WDNHQ LW XSRQ WKHPVHOYHV WR VHHN DOWHUQDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLHV WR WKH QDWXUDO VFLHQFH DSSURDFK LQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ KXPDQLVWLF WKHRUHWLFDO SRVLWLRQV 3RONLQJKRUQH f DUJXHV WKDW WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI QHZ PHWKRGRORJLHV LV D UHVXOW RI WKH KXPDQLVWLF SV\FKRORJLVWnV FRPPLWPHQW WR XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKDW KXPDQ EHLQJV H[LVW ZLWKLQ DQ H[SHULHQFH RI PHDQLQJ DQG UHWDLQ WKH SRVVLELOLW\ RI DFWLQJ ZLWK VHOIGHWHUPLQHG SXUSRVH S f :KLOH KXPDQLVWLF WKHRU\ GRHV QRW SURSRVH WKDW KXPDQ DFWLRQ LV FRPSOHWHO\ LQGHSHQGHQW RI HQYLURQPHQWDO RU JHQHWLF RULJLQV LW GRHV DOORZ WKDW SHUVRQV FDQ FKRRVH WR DFW LQ ZD\V QRW SUHGHWHUPLQHG 3RONLQJKRUQH GHVFULEHV WKHVH DOWHUQDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLHV

PAGE 16

DV VWUXFWXUDO UHVHDUFK GHVLJQVWKRVH ZKLFK VHHN XQGHUO\LQJ WKHPHV RU SDWWHUQV RI WKH KXPDQ H[SHULHQFH :KLOH WKHVH VWUXFWXUDO GHVLJQV DUH VLPLODU WR HDFK RWKHU LQ WKHLU IRFXV RQ KXPDQ H[SHULHQFH WKH\ YDU\ LQ WHUPV VSHFLILF UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV DGGUHVVHG W\SHV RI GDWD UHTXLUHG DQG VSHFLILF DQDO\WLFDO SURFHGXUHV HPSOR\HG 7KH VFLHQWLILF PHWKRG ZKLFK ZLOO EH XWLOL]HG LQ WKLV VWXG\ LV WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG DV FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DQG GHYHORSHG E\ *LRUJL f 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO 5HVHDUFK 3KHQRPHQRORJ\ DFFRUGLQJ WR *LRUJL LV WKH VWXG\ RI SKHQRPHQD DV H[SHULHQFHG )RU WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLVW SKHQRPHQRQ UHIHUV WR ZKDW LV JLYHQ LQ H[SHULHQFH WR EH XQGHUVWRRG LQ GLUHFW UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK DZDUHQHVV *LRUJL f 7KHUHIRUH WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO UHVHDUFKHU LV LQWHUHVWHG LQ GLVFRYHULQJ WKH VWUXFWXUH RI WKH SKHQRPHQD H[SHULHQFHf DV H[SHULHQFHG 7KH SKHQRPHQRORJLVW UHIHUV WR WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH OLYHG ZRUOG DV D SRLQW RI GHSDUWXUH DQG VHDUFKHV IRU WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKH OLYHG H[SHULHQFH 3KHQRPHQRORJ\ JRHV EH\RQG WKH FROOHFWLRQ DQG DQDO\VLV RI IDFWV WR GHWHUPLQH WKH PHDQLQJV RI WKRVH IDFWVf§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

PAGE 17

EHOLHIV DERXW LW WKH UHVHDUFKHU PXVW FRQVFLRXVO\ VHSDUDWH DQG GLVUHJDUG DOO NQRZQ H[SHULHQFH RI WKH SKHQRPHQRQ RI VWXG\ 7KLV SDUWLWLRQLQJ RII RI SULRU NQRZOHGJH LV NQRZQ DV EUDFNHWLQJ DQG LW SOD\V D YLWDO UROH LQ WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK SURFHVV %UDFNHWLQJ ZDV ILUVW GHVFULEHG DV HSRFKV E\ +XVVHUO LQ KLV H[SODQDWLRQ RI SV\FKRORJ\ LQ WHUPV RI SXUH SKHQRPHQRORJ\ +XVVHUO f 8VLQJ D FRQWHPSRUDU\ GHILQLWLRQ EUDFNHWLQJ LV WKH UHIUDLQLQJ IURP DFFHSWLQJ WKH DFWXDOO\ H[LVWLQJ UHDO ZRUOG LQ WKH FXVWRPDU\ VHQVH RI EHLQJ .HUVWHQ S f ,W LV WKH UHPRYDO RI SUHFRQFHLYHG LGHDV DQG EHOLHIV DERXW WKH SKHQRPHQRQ RI VWXG\ IURP WKH H[SHULPHQWHUnV FRQVFLRXV WKRXJKW 7KXV EUDFNHWLQJ LV IRU WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLVW H[SHULPHQWDO FRQWUROf§WKH HIIRUW DW OLPLWLQJ WKH DPRXQW RI H[WUDQHRXV YDULDEOHV DQG ELDVHV LQWR WKH VFLHQWLILF PHWKRG DQG DQDO\VLV $ YDULHW\ RI SKHQRPHQD KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG XWLOL]LQJ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRGRORJLHV DQG WKH TXDQWLW\ RI SXEOLVKHG VWXGLHV KDV JURZQ VWHDGLO\ SDUWLFXODUO\ ZLWKLQ UHFHQW \HDUV 6RPH RI WKH SKHQRPHQD VWXGLHG DUH EHLQJ D VXSHUYLVRU &ODUNVRQ DQG $YLUDP f VKDPH $EODPRZLF] f PRUDO VHQVH *LRUJL f PXWXDO JD]H $QJXV 2VERUQH DQG .R]LH\ f PDWHUQDO PRXUQLQJ %ULFH f VK\QHVV *XJOLHWWL.HOO\ DQG :HVWFRWW f DQJHU %XHKQHU 6WHYLFN f DJLQJ :RQGRORZVNL DQG 'DYLV f GHFLVLRQ DQG FKRLFH .DUOVVRQ f IULHQGVKLS EHWZHHQ ZRPHQ %HFNHU f FRXUDJH LQ FKURQLFDOO\ LOO DGROHVFHQWV +DDVH f WKH IRUPDWLRQ RI FOLQLFDO LPSUHVVLRQV &KXUFKLOO f WKH H[SHULHQFH RI IDLOLQJ WR OHDUQ 'HHJDQ f WKH SUHPHQVWUXXP 0RQWJRPHU\ f WUDJHG\ &DUUHUH f IRUJHWWLQJ .UDL f LQWLPDF\ 5HJLVWHU DQG +HQOH\ f DQG JODXFRPD .XJHOPDQQ DQG %HQVLQJHU f

PAGE 18

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fV YDOXDWLRQ RI WKH

PAGE 19

VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH KRZHYHU LV PRUH OLNHO\ WR EH EURNHQ GRZQ LQWR OHVV GHILQHG FDWHJRULHV VLPSO\ DV KHOSIXO RU KXUWIXO SRVLWLYH RU QHJDWLYH JRRG RU EDG *LYHQ WKHVH JURVV \HW FOLQLFDOO\ YDOXDEOH FDWHJRUL]DWLRQV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH LW VHHPV D VWXG\ RI H[SHULHQFHV WKDW DUH PRVW LQGLFDWLYH RI DQ LGHDO VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV ZRXOG SURYLGH WKH PRVW EHQHILFLDO FRQWULEXWLRQ WR WKH SURIHVVLRQDO OLWHUDWXUH 7KLV VWXG\ WKHQ ZLOO EH D VWXG\ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ ZKHUH fJRRGf LV GHILQHG E\ WKH VXEMHFW WKH VXSHUYLVHH

PAGE 20

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fJRRGf VXSHUYLVLRQ ,PSRUWDQFH RI 6XSHUYLVLRQ 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ RI SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV FDQQRW EH XQGHUVWDWHG ,W LV D IXQGDPHQWDO WUDLQLQJ UHTXLUHPHQW IRU DFFUHGLWDWLRQ E\ WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKLDWULF $VVRFLDWLRQ 6RFLDO :RUNHUV $VVRFLDWLRQ DV ZHOO DV D OLFHQVLQJ UHTXLUHPHQW E\ VWDWH UHJXODWRU\ DJHQFLHV ,W LV D NH\ HOHPHQW LQ WKH SURFHVV E\ ZKLFK SV\FKRWKHUDS\ LV WDXJKW DQG OHDUQHG (NVWHLQ DQG :DOOHUVWHLQ -DFREV 'DYLG DQG 0H\HU f UHJDUGOHVV RI VSHFLDOW\ DUHD OHYHO RI WUDLQLQJ WKHRUHWLFDO RULHQWDWLRQ RU ZRUN VHWWLQJ :DWNLQV Df 'HVSLWH WKLV DSSDUHQW LPSRUWDQFH UHVHDUFK RQ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ KDV EHHQ OLPLWHG

PAGE 21

5HVHDUFK LQWR WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV KDV LQFUHDVHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ GXULQJ WKH SDVW GHFDGH 5HVHDUFK RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV PHWKRGRORJLFDOO\ GLYHUVH UHIOHFWLQJ SHUKDSV WKH GLYHUVH QDWXUH RI WKHRUHWLFDO EHOLHIV UHJDUGLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ 6XSHUYLVLRQ LV D FRPSOH[ SURFHVV RI WHDFKLQJ PRGHOLQJ DQG SUHSDULQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHH IRU WKH SURIHVVLRQDO UROH 6XSHUYLVLRQ DIIHFWV QRW RQO\ EHKDYLRUV GHVLJQDWHG DV fWUHDWPHQW LQWHUYHQWLRQV EXW DWWLWXGHV EHOLHIV WRZDUG WKH SUDFWLFH RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG PHQWDO KHDOWK LQ JHQHUDO 6XSHUYLVLRQ SURYLGHV WKH IUDPHZRUN IRU DQ LQGLYLGXDO DV RQH EHFRPHV D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW ([SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLOO OLNHO\ DIIHFW WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURIHVVLRQDO GHPHDQRU IRU D VLJQLILFDQW SRUWLRQ RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURIHVVLRQDO OLIH ,Q FRQVLGHULQJ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ RQH PXVW FRQVLGHU ZKDW LV PRVW LPSRUWDQW RXWFRPHV RI VXSHUYLVHH FKDQJH DQG KRZ WKDW PD\ EH PHDVXUHGf RU RXWFRPHV WR WKH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ EHLQJ SHUIRUPHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH :KLOH WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV W\SLFDOO\ DFFHSWHG DV VHOIHYLGHQW E\ WKRVH ZKR SUDFWLFH WHDFK DQG UHJXODWH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ LWV HIILFDF\ WRZDUG WUHDWPHQW RXWFRPHV LV ODUJHO\ XQSURYHG ,Q WKHLU LQWURGXFWLRQ WR D VSHFLDO VHFWLRQ RQ WUDLQLQJ LQ WKH -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ %HXWOHU DQG .HQGDOO f UHSRUWHG WKDW SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ PD\ HQKDQFH FOLQLFDO HIILFDF\ EXW WKHUH LV LQVXIILFLHQW NQRZOHGJH UHJDUGLQJ WKH VSHFLILFV DVSHFWV RI SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO H[SHULHQFH ZKLFK PRVW HIIHFWLYHO\ FRQWULEXWH WR VXFK D UHODWLRQVKLS S f ,Q WKHLU SDSHU ZLWKLQ WKH VDPH VSHFLDO VHFWLRQ +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW f FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKHUH ZDV OLWWOH HYLGHQFH RI D GLUHFW FRQQHFWLRQ EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKHUDSLVW HIILFDF\ WKRXJK LW LV OLNHO\ WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ LQFUHDVHV WKH SURILFLHQF\ ZLWK ZKLFK RQH XVHV FRPSOH[ WKHUDS\ SURFHGXUHV

PAGE 22

HQKDQFHV NQRZOHGJH DQG UROH GHILQLWLRQV DQG LQFUHDVHV RQHfV DELOLW\ WR IDFLOLWDWH LQWHUQDO WKHUDSHXWLF SURFHVVHV +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW f FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH HIIHFWV RI VSHFLILF VXSHUYLVRU\ LQWHUYHQWLRQV WR WKHUDSLVW DQG FOLHQW FKDQJH LQ EHKDYLRU UHPDLQHG ODUJHO\ XQNQRZQ 5DWKHU WKDQ DFFHSW WKH ZKROH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR LPSURYHG WKHUDSHXWLF WHFKQLTXH +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW DUJXH IRU WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV DQG LQWHUYHQWLRQV OHDGLQJ WR VSHFLILF FKDQJHV 6XEVHTXHQWO\ +ROORZD\ DQG &DUUROO f DUJXH WKDW UHVHDUFK RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ PXVW PRYH IURP D WKHRUHWLFDO DSSURDFK WR WKH SUDJPDWLF DSSOLFDWLRQ RI EHKDYLRUV 6XSHUYLVLRQ UHVHDUFK PXVW DFFRUGLQJ WR +ROORZD\ DQG &DUUROO f DGYDQFH IURP XQGHUVWDQGLQJ KRZ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV SHUIRUPHG WR LGHQWLI\LQJ KRZ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ PD\ EH LPSURYHG *LYHQ WKH QDWXUH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ KRZHYHU DV D FRPSOH[ SURFHVV UHTXLULQJ DQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS RI DW OHDVW WKUHH LQGLYLGXDOV VXSHUYLVRU VXSHUYLVHH DQG FOLHQWf HQJDJHG LQ D SURFHVV RI OHDUQLQJ PRGHOLQJ DQG UHODWLQJ LW LV SRVVLEOH WKDW VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV WR VSHFLILF RXWFRPHV PD\ QHYHU EH SURYHQ
PAGE 23

LQ LWV LQIDQF\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH WKHRUHWLFDO GHYHORSPHQW RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 'XH LQ SDUW WR LWV LPPDWXUH VWDWXV WKHUH DUH VHYHUDO LVVXHV WKDW PXVW EH UHVROYHG DV WKHRULHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ GHYHORS 2QH FRQIOLFW LQ DSSURDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV WKH TXHVWLRQ ZKHWKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ UHTXLUHV D WKHRUHWLFDO XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI LWV RZQ RU ZKHWKHU LV LW FDQ EH VXIILFLHQWO\ XQGHUVWRRG E\ DSSO\LQJ WKHRULHV DGDSWHG IURP SV\FKRWKHUDS\ +HVV Df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f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

PAGE 24

KDV EHHQ UHVROYHG LQ ODUJH SDUW LQ WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV $OPRVW XQLIRUPO\ WKHVH PRGHOV DGYRFDWH D PRUH SURDFWLYH VWDQFH E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU GXULQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV HDUO\ GHYHORSPHQW DQG D PRUH UHDFWLYH VWDQFH GXULQJ WKH ODWHU VWDJHV RI GHYHORSPHQW $ WKLUG FRQIOLFW LGHQWLILHG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH LV WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZKHWKHU WKH VXSHUYLVHH VKRXOG OHDUQ WKH WKHRU\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU RU ZKHWKHU WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG DGDSW VXSHUYLVLRQ WR WKH WKHRUHWLFDO VWDQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVHH :RUWKLQJWRQ f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

PAGE 25

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f GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV f VXSHUYLVLRQ ZKLFK SDUDOOHOV D VSHFLILF FRXQVHOLQJ WKHRU\ DQG f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f WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO WKUXVW KDV FRQVWLWXWHG fWKH =HLWJHLVW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKLQNLQJ DQG UHVHDUFKf S f :KLOH

PAGE 26

+ROORZD\ PDGH KHU REVHUYDWLRQ WHQ \HDUV DJR WKH VWDWHPHQW UHPDLQV DV WUXH WRGD\ DV LW ZDV WKHQ :DWNLQV Df $FFRUGLQJ WR :DWNLQV WKHVH PRGHOV KDYH SURYHQ DSSHDOLQJ RYHU WKH FRXUVH RI WKH \HDUV IRU WKUHH IXQGDPHQWDO UHDVRQV f WKH\ DUH PHWDWKHRUHWLFDO f WKH\ KDYH GLUHFW SUDFWLFH DQG WUDLQLQJ LPSOLFDWLRQV DQG f WKH\ SURYLGH D IUDPHZRUN IRU WUDFNLQJ SURJUHVV RYHU WLPH :DWNLQV Df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fV VXSHUYLVRU 7KH VXSHUYLVHHV SURJUHVV IURP EHLQJ OHVV GHYHORSHG LH QDLYH DQG XQVNLOOHG WR EHFRPLQJ PRUH GHYHORSHG LH DZDUH DQG FRPSHWHQW 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHYHORSPHQW LV ODUJHO\ GHSHQGHQW XSRQ KRZ WKH VXSHUYLVRU LQWHUDFWV ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVHH DW DQ\ JLYHQ SRLQW GXULQJ WKH WUDLQHHf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f LGHQWLILHG DQ

PAGE 27

DGGLWLRQDO VL[ PRGHOV SURSRVHG EHWZHHQ DQG $OWKRXJK WKHVH PRGHOV PD\ YDU\ LQ WKH VSHFLILFV RI WKHLU ODQJXDJH QXPEHU RI VWDJHV DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO IRFXV ERWK UHVHDUFKHUV FRQFOXGHG WKH PRGHOV ZHUH PRUH VLPLODU WKDQ GLVVLPLODU :DWNLQV QRWHG WKH VLPLODULWLHV EHJDQ ZLWK WKH DVVXPSWLRQV LQKHUHQW LQ WKH PRGHOV :DWNLQV f LGHQWLILHG IRXU NH\ LGHQWLILDEOH DVVXPSWLRQV VKDUHG E\ WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV f WKHUDSLVWV LQ WUDLQLQJ GHYHORS DQG JURZ SURYLGHG WKH\ DUH QRW H[SRVHG WR D SHUQLFLRXV WUDLQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW f WKHLU GHYHORSPHQW SURFHHGV WKURXJK D VHTXHQFH RI VWDJHV IURP OHVV WR PRUH GHYHORSHG f WKDW GXULQJ WKRVH VWDJHV WKH\ VWUXJJOH ZLWK YDULRXV GHYHORSPHQWDO LVVXHV DQG FRQFHUQV HJ FRPSHWHQF\ LGHQWLW\f f WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV ZRXOG GR ZHOO WR FRQVLGHU WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO OHYHO RI WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHV DQG VWUXFWXUH VXSHUYLVLRQ DFFRUGLQJO\ S f 2IWHQ XVLQJ WKH WKHRULHV RI (ULNVRQ 3LDJHW RU RWKHU PRGHOV RI KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW DV WKHLU EDVLV GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKHUDSLVW GHYHORSPHQW GHVFULEH WKH WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI DQ XQVNLOOHG QDLYH QRYLFH LQWR D fPDVWHU SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWf $V PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW KDYH JURZQ LQ SRSXODULW\ SDUDOOHO SURFHVVHV KDYH EHHQ QRWHG LQ VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW DV ZHOO VSDZQLQJ OLWHUDWXUH LQ VXSSRUW RI VXSHUYLVRUV GHYHORSLQJ LQ PXFK WKH VDPH PDQQHU DV VXSHUYLVHHV 7KH IROORZLQJ VHFWLRQV ZLOO GHVFULEH PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW DQG HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW IRU WKRVH PRGHOV 6XSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW +RJDQ f SURSRVHG IRXU VWDJHV LQ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW +LV PRGHO HPSKDVL]HG WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV LQFUHDVLQJ DXWRQRP\ WKDW FXOPLQDWHG LQ D FROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU $FFRUGLQJ WR +RJDQ LW LV WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV

PAGE 28

UHVSRQVLELOLW\ WR SURYLGH D VXSHUYLVLRQ HQYLURQPHQW WKDW IRVWHUV WKH FRXQVHORUfV JURZWK DQG GHYHORSPHQW 7KH SURSHU VXSHUYLVRU\ UROH LV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHf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f 7KH WUDLQHHfV VXFFHVVIXO UHVROXWLRQ RI WKH FRQIOLFW LQ VWDJH WZR OHDGV WR D VWDJH PDUNHG E\ FRQGLWLRQDO GHSHQGHQF\ ,Q WKLV WKLUG VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHH KDV LQFUHDVHG SURIHVVLRQDO FRQILGHQFH ZKLFK LQFOXGHV JUHDWHU LQVLJKW LQWR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV QHXURWLF DQG KHDOWK\ PRWLYDWLRQV 'XULQJ WKLV VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG FRQWLQXH H[HPSOLILFDWLRQ EHJLQ VKDULQJ DV D SHHU DQG LQFRUSRUDWH FRQIURQWDWLRQ WR HQVXUH WKH WUDLQHHfV FRQWLQXHG GHYHORSPHQW )LQDOO\ WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW PD\ QRZ UHDFK WKH IRXUWK DQG +RJDQfV ILQDO VWDJH WKDW RI 0DVWHU 3V\FKRORJLVW 7KLV VWDJH LV LGHQWLILHG ZKHQ WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW KDV JDLQHG SHUVRQDO DXWRQRP\ LQVLJKWIXOQHVV ZLWK PRWLYDWLRQ DQG H[SHULHQFHV D QHHG IRU FRQIURQWDWLRQ IRU FRQWLQXHG DQG LQFUHDVHG H[SHUWLVH $W WKLV VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG LQWHUDFW ZLWKLQ D PXWXDOO\ VKDULQJ UHODWLRQVKLS LQ FRQVXOWDWLRQ DV ZHOO DV FRQIURQWDWLRQ +RJDQfV VWDJHV DUH H[SUHVVHG LQ WHUPV RI

PAGE 29

GHYHORSLQJ ZLWKLQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLSf§DOO GHYHORSPHQW LV H[SHULHQFHG DQG SURJUHVVHV ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS 6WROWHQEHUJ f DFFHSWHG +RJDQfV VSHFXODWLRQV DERXW WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI FRXQVHORUV DQG IXUWKHU HODERUDWHG XSRQ KRZ D VXSHUYLVRU PLJKW SURYLGH WKH RSWLPDO HQYLURQPHQW IRU RSWLPDO JURZWK E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH :RUWKLQJWRQ f 6WROWHQEHUJfV f &RXQVHORU &RPSOH[LW\ 0RGHO IRFXVHG RQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV LQFUHDVLQJ OHYHOV RI DXWRQRP\ DQG LQGLFDWHG WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV EHKDYLRU VKRXOG FKDQJH DFFRUGLQJ 7KH &RXQVHORU &RPSOH[LW\ 0RGHO KDV IRXU VWDJHV DQG LV VR QDPHG EHFDXVH 6WROWHQEHUJ YLHZHG WKH WUDLQHH DV EHFRPLQJ PRUH FRPSOH[ DV WUDLQLQJ SURJUHVVHG DQG WKH WUDLQHH JDLQHG H[SHULHQFH 6WROWHQEHUJfV PRGHO VSHDNV OHVV WR WKH YDU\LQJ OHYHOV RI GHSHQGHQF\ ZLWKLQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG PRUH WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI LGHQWLW\ E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH 6WROWHQEHUJfV PRGHO ZDV DOVR PRUH HODERUDWH UHJDUGLQJ KRZ D VXSHUYLVRU FDQ SURPRWH WKH PRVW JURZWK $FFRUGLQJ WR 6WROWHQEHUJ WKH QRYLFH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW EHJLQV E\ DWWHPSWLQJ WR GHILQH ERXQGDULHV EHWZHHQ WKH fFRXQVHORUf DQG WKH fSHUVRQf :RUWKLQJWRQ f 'XULQJ WKLV LQLWLDO VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG SURYLGH D VWUXFWXUHG HQYLURQPHQW HQFRXUDJLQJ DXWRQRP\ DQG ULVN WDNLQJ ZLWKLQ WKDW VWUXFWXUH 'XULQJ WKH VHFRQG VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ EHJLQV WR EHFRPH GHILQHG DQG WKH WUDLQHH EHJLQV WR H[SHULPHQW ZLWK GLIIHUHQW VW\OHV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH LV QR ORQJHU VDWLVILHG LPLWDWLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG ZLOO EHJLQ H[SUHVVLQJ GLVDJUHHPHQW $W WKLV WLPH WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG SURYLGH QHZ VNLOOV DQG DGYLFH DV QHFHVVDU\ HQFRXUDJLQJ FRQWLQXHG DXWRQRP\ ZLWKLQ D ORZ SUHVVXUH HQYLURQPHQW 7KH DFTXLVLWLRQ RI QHZ VNLOOV DOORZV WKH WUDLQHH WR WROHUDWH D EURDGHU YDULHW\ RI FOLHQWV

PAGE 30

EHFRPLQJ OHVV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ D VLQJOH GRFWULQH RI WKHUDS\ ,Q WKLV WKLUG VWDJH 6WROWHQEHUJ UHFRPPHQGV DQ LQFUHDVHG HPSKDVLV RQ VKDULQJ DOORZLQJ DSSURSULDWH SURIHVVLRQDO DQG SHUVRQDO FRQIURQWDWLRQ ,Q WKH ILQDO VWDJH RI 6WROWHQEHUJfV &RXQVHORU &RPSOH[LW\ 0RGHO WKH WKHUDSLVW LV FDSDEOH RI SUDFWLFLQJ LQGHSHQGHQWO\ LQWHJUDWLQJ WKH VWDQGDUGV RI WKH SURIHVVLRQ ZLWKLQ D SHUVRQDO YDOXH V\VWHP ,Q 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK HODERUDWHG IXUWKHU RQ WKLV PRGHO DQG SURYLGHG D PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW ZLWKLQ LWV IUDPHZRUN ,Q WKH UHYLVHG &RXQVHORU &RPSOH[LW\ 0RGHO 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK f LGHQWLILHG WKUHH OHYHOV RI GHYHORSPHQW 7KH WKLUG OHYHO KRZHYHU KDV DQ LQWHJUDWHG DQG QRQLQWHJUDWHG FRPSRQHQW WR FRPSULVH D IRXUVWDJH PRGHO ,Q /HYHO WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV GHSHQGHQW DQG ODFNV VHOIDZDUHQHVV DQG LQGHSWK XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH WKHUDS\ SURFHVV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH H[SHULHQFHV DQ[LHW\ DQG GHVLUHV GLUHFWLRQ DQG JXLGDQFH VHDUFKLQJ IRU fWKH ULJKW ZD\f WR RSHUDWH 7KH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG DW WKLV WLPH SURYLGH VWUXFWXUH DQG GLUHFWLRQ DFWLQJ DV D WHDFKHU DQGRU VXSSRUWHU 7KH GHSHQGHQF\DXWRQRP\ FRQIOLFW LV D FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI /HYHO ,, $W WKLV WLPH WKH VXSHUYLVHHf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

PAGE 31

PRUH DV D SHHU ZLWK LQFUHDVHG VKDULQJ DQG PXWXDOLW\ $ GHFUHDVH LQ VWUXFWXUH LV PDWFKHG ZLWK DQ LQFUHDVH LQ DSSURSULDWH FRQIURQWDWLRQ 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWKfV ILQDO VWDJH /HYHO ,,, ,QWHJUDWHG LV PDUNHG E\ VHFXULW\ LQVLJKWIXOQHVV DQG KHDOWK\ LQWHUGHSHQGHQFH 7KH fPDVWHU SUDFWLWLRQHUf LV DZDUH RI SURIHVVLRQDO DQG SHUVRQDO VWUHQJWKV DQG ZHDNQHVVHV DQG SRVVHVVHV LQWHJUDWLRQ RI VNLOO DFURVV PDQ\ GRPDLQV RI SUDFWLFH 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV UROH LV RQH RI D FROOHJLDO FRQVXOWDQW 7KH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH QRQLQWHJUDWHG DQG LQWHJUDWHG SKDVHV RI /HYHO ,,, LV UHODWHG WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHVXSHUYLVRU UHODWLRQVKLS DQG WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ $V WKH VXSHUYLVHH EHFRPHV PRUH LQWHJUDWHG WKHUH LV PRUH LQVLJKW UHJDUGLQJ RQHfV VHQVH RI VHOI DV D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW 7KH VXSHUYLVHH EHFRPHV VLPXOWDQHRXVO\ OHVV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU IRU UROH GHILQLWLRQ DV ZHOO DV WKH SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ %ORXQW f SURSRVHG D IRXUVWDJH PRGHO WKDW ERUURZV KHDYLO\ XSRQ (ULNVRQfV PRGHO RI SHUVRQDOLW\ GHYHORSPHQW 7KH IRXU VWDJHV LGHQWLILHG E\ %ORXQW DUH DGHTXDF\ YHUVXV LQDGHTXDF\ LQGHSHQGHQFH YHUVXV GHSHQGHQFH FRQGLWLRQDO GHSHQGHQF\ YHUVXV LQGLYLGXDWLRQ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO LQWHJULW\ YHUVXV SHUVRQDO DXWRQRP\ 6XSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV UHFRPPHQGHG E\ %ORXQW DUH VLPLODU WR WKRVH LGHQWLILHG E\ +RJDQ f 6WROWHQEHUJ f DQG 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK f EHJLQQLQJ ZLWK D VXSSRUWLYH fWHDFKLQJf UROH DQG SURJUHVVLQJ WR FROOHJLDO FRQVXOWDWLRQ ZLWK JUHDWHU VXSHUYLVHH DXWRQRP\ /RJDQELOO +DUG\ DQG 'HOZRUWK f LGHQWLILHG WKUHH VWDJHV RI FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW 7KH VWDJHV WKH\ LGHQWLILHG ZHUH VWDJQDWLRQ FRQIXVLRQ DQG DZDUHQHVV (DFK RI WKHVH VWDJHV LV VLPLODU WR WKRVH LGHQWLILHG E\ +RJDQ f DQG 6WROWHQEHUJ f 7KH IRFXV KRZHYHU RI WKH PRGHO SURSRVHG E\ /RJDQELOO DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LV

PAGE 32

WKDW DQ LQGLYLGXDO PXVW UHVROYH HLJKW FULWLFDO LVVXHV EHIRUH EHFRPLQJ D PDVWHU SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW 7KH HLJKW LVVXHV DUH FRPSHWHQFH HPRWLRQDO DZDUHQHVV DXWRQRP\ WKHRUHWLFDO LGHQWLW\ UHVSHFW IRU LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV SXUSRVH DQG GLUHFWLRQ SHUVRQDO PRWLYDWLRQ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO HWKLFV $FFRUGLQJ WR /RJDQELOO DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV f HDFK RI WKHVH LVVXHV LV UHVROYHG VHSDUDWHO\ ZLWKLQ WKH VWUXFWXUH RI WKH WKUHH VWDJHV 7KHUHIRUH FRPSHWHQFH GHYHORSV IROORZLQJ WKH SURJUHVVLRQ IURP VWDJQDWLRQ WKURXJK FRQIXVLRQ WR DZDUHQHVV DV GRHV HPRWLRQDO DZDUHQHVV DXWRQRP\ DQG WKH RWKHU ILYH FULWLFDO LVVXHV 7KH WUDLQHH GRHV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ SURJUHVV WKURXJK HDFK LVVXH DW WKH VDPH SDFH ,W LV WKH UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU WR DVVHVV WKH WUDLQHHfV GHYHORSPHQW RQ HDFK RI WKH HLJKW LVVXHV WKHQ WR SURPRWH JURZWK WR WKH QH[W OHYHO RI GHYHORSPHQW RI HDFK LVVXH 6DQVEXU\ f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fV SHUVRQDO WKHRU\ DQG HVWDEOLVKHV OLPLWV RI UHVSRQVLELOLW\ 7KH VXSHUYLVRU WR SURPRWH WKLV JURZWK DQDO\]HV FDVHV DQG SURPRWHV WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKURXJK FRQIURQWDWLRQ UROH UHYHUVDOV LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ DQG IHHGEDFN 'XULQJ LQWHUQVKLS WKH WUDLQHH VKRXOG EH EURDGHQLQJ DQG UHILQLQJ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI FOLHQWV H[DPLQLQJ RQHfV LVVXHV DQG OHDUQLQJ VHOIUHOLDQFH $Q

PAGE 33

LQWHUQfV VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG FRQIURQW WKH VXSHUYLVHH LQ GLVFUHSDQFLHV EHWZHHQ WDON DQG EHKDYLRU DVVLVW ZLWK SHUVRQDO LVVXHV DQG HQFRXUDJH ULVN WDNLQJ )ULHGODQGHU '\H &RVWHOORV DQG .RERV f SURSRVHG D PRGHO ZKLFK HPSKDVL]HV WKH WUDLQHHVf GHYHORSPHQW RI WKHLU PHDQLQJPDNLQJ DQG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 7KH OHDUQLQJ DQG DFTXLVLWLRQ RI VNLOOV LV GHHPSKDVL]HG DQG )ULHGODQGHU DQG DVVRFLDWHV f HPSKDVL]H WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV UHVSRQVLELOLW\ WR KHOS WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV PHDQLQJPDNLQJ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DV ZHOO DV WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV UROH LQ LW 7KH ILUVW VWDJH LV PDUNHG E\ DPELJXLW\ LQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV UROH DW WKLV WLPH LV WR KHOS WKH WUDLQHH FRSH ZLWK WKH GHPDQGV RI DPELJXLW\ ZLWK DQ HPSKDVLV RQ OHDUQLQJ KRZ WR OHDUQ 'XULQJ WKH VHFRQG VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV DEOH WR UHFRJQL]H WKH OLPLWV RI WKH WKHUDSHXWLF FRQGLWLRQ 'XULQJ WKLV SHULRG WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG KHOS WKH VXSHUYLVHH VHH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH 7KH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG DOVR KHOS WKH WUDLQHH DFFHSW PLVWDNHV DV ZHOO DV XQDQWLFLSDWHG FOLHQW UHVSRQVHV 7KH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG DOVR DVVLVW WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR FRSH ZLWK JXLOW RYHU IDLOXUHV )ULHGODQGHU DQG DVVRFLDWHnV f WKLUG VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW LV PDUNHG E\ WKH WUDLQHHfV GLVFRYHU\ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DV GHHS FRPPXQLFDWLRQ $V WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHFRPHV HPSKDVL]HG WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG VKLIW WKH IRFXV IURP WHFKQLTXHV RI WKHUDS\ WR WKH KXPDQ UHODWLRQVKLS RI WKHUDS\ ,Q WKH ILQDO VWDJH HFOHFWLFLVP UHODWLYH WR WKH FOLHQWfV QHHG EHFRPHV WKH HPSKDVLV DV WKH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSV WKH WUDLQHH GHYHORS D UHSHUWRLUH RI LQWHUYHQWLRQV WR DSSO\ LQ WKH DSSURSULDWH VHWWLQJ DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH FOLHQWfV QHHG EDVHG XSRQ D FDUHIXO DVVHVVPHQW )ULHGPDQ DQG .DVORZ f LGHQWLILHG VL[ GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJHV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVHH PXVW SDVV WKURXJK WR EHFRPH D fPDVWHUf SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW 7KH ILUVW VWDJH LV

PAGE 34

PDUNHG ZLWK H[FLWHPHQW DQG DQWLFLSDWRU\ DQ[LHW\ DV WKH WUDLQHH DWWHPSWV WR EHFRPH DFTXDLQWHG ZLWK WKH WUDLQLQJ DJHQF\ 7KH VXSHUYLVRU LV WR SURYLGH D VHFXUH KROGLQJ HQYLURQPHQW HPSDWKLF WR WKH WUDLQHHfV DQ[LHWLHV DQG YXOQHUDELOLWLHV ,Q WKH VHFRQG VWDJH ZKLFK EHJLQV ZKHQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV DVVLJQHG D FDVH WKH VXSHUYLVHH EHFRPHV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ DQG LGHQWLILHV ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHYHORSPHQW DW WKLV SRLQW LV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRUf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fWDNHV FKDUJHf ,GHQWLI\LQJ RQHVHOI DV D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW WKH WUDLQHH KDV DQ LQFUHDVHG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH LV DEOH WR H[SORUH LVVXHV UHODWHG WR FRXQWHUWUDQVIHUHQFH DQG LV PRUH LQGHSHQGHQW $V WKH VXSHUYLVHH fEUHDNV DZD\f LW LV LPSRUWDQW IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRU WR UHOLQTXLVK FRQWURO ZKLOH UHPDLQLQJ VXSSRUWLYH 7KH ILIWK VWDJH RI LGHQWLW\ DQG LQGHSHQGHQFH LV UHIHUUHG WR DV fSURIHVVLRQDO DGROHVFHQFHf 7KH VXSHUYLVHH KDV D ILUPO\ HVWDEOLVKHG LQWHUQDOL]HG IUDPH RI UHIHUHQFH 7KH WUDLQHH LV DOVR ZHOO DZDUH RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV RZQ ZHDNQHVVHV DV ZHOO DV WKRVH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU 'XULQJ WKLV VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHH PD\ GHYDOXH WKH VXSHUYLVRU 'HVSLWH WKH SRWHQWLDO IRU GHYDOXDWLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU FRQWLQXHV WR VXSSRUW WKH WUDLQHHfV LQFUHDVLQJ DXWRQRP\ DQG

PAGE 35

EHLQJ UHDGLO\ DYDLODEOH WR WKH WUDLQHH 7KH ILQDO VWDJH LGHQWLILHG E\ )ULHGPDQ DQG .DVORZ LV GHVFULEHG DV FDOP DQG FROOHJLDO :KHQ IXOO\ GHYHORSHG WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW KDV D ILUPO\ HVWDEOLVKHG VHQVH RI SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ LV KLJKO\ LQWHJUDWHG DQG H[SHULHQFHV OHVV LQWHQVH VHOIGRXEW DQG DIIHFWLYH YDULDELOLW\ 'XULQJ WKLV ILQDO VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG IDFLOLWDWH JURZWK FKDOOHQJH WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV LQFRQVLVWHQFLHV DQG IRFXV RQ FRXQWHUWUDQVIHUHQFH +HVV f SURSRVHG D IRXUVWDJH PRGHO RI FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW WKDW KH IHOW ZDV UHSUHVHQWDWLYH RI WKH GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV SURSRVHG WR GDWH 'XULQJ WKH ,QFHSWLRQ SKDVH WKH VXSHUYLVHH IHHOV XQDQFKRUHG LQVHFXUH DQG DQ[LRXV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH LV ULJLG DPELYDOHQW XQDZDUH RI WKHUDS\fV LPSDFW XSRQ FOLHQWV DQG LV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU $V WKH VXSHUYLVHH PRYHV WKURXJK WKH VNLOO GHYHORSPHQW SKDVH WKH WUDLQHH EHFRPHV PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH LQ WKH WKHUDSLVW UROH 7KH VXSHUYLVHH DOVR KDV LQFUHDVHG DZDUHQHVV UHJDUGLQJ FOLHQW G\QDPLFV DQG LV PRUH DFFHSWLQJ RI RQHfV RZQ ZHDNQHVVHV $V DZDUHQHVV DQG FRPSHWHQFH LQFUHDVH WKH VXSHUYLVHH W\SLFDOO\ IOXFWXDWHV EHWZHHQ EHLQJ RYHUFRQILGHQW DQG RYHUZKHOPHG ZLWK RQHfV QHZ UROH DQG VNLOOV 7KH QH[W SKDVH FRQVROLGDWLRQ LV PDUNHG E\ DQ LQWHUQDO VHQVH RI PDVWHU\ 6NLOOV FRQWLQXH WR GHYHORS DQG WKH SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ EHFRPHV VROLGLILHG +HVVf ILQDO SKDVH 0XWXDOLW\ LV PDUNHG E\ WKH WUDLQHH EHFRPLQJ IXOO\ DXWRQRPRXV DQG DEOH WR JLYH DQG UHFHLYH FRQVXOWDWLRQ $W WKLV WLPH WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW LV DOVR DEOH WR EH FUHDWLYH DQG XWLOL]H LQWXLWLRQ 7KH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV FROOHJLDO DQG FRQVXOWDWLYH 7KH IRXUVWDJH PRGHO SURSRVHG E\ 5RGHQKDXVHU f HPSKDVL]HV WKH GHYHORSLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWfV XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH WKHUDSHXWLF SURFHVV DQG WKH UROH RI WKH

PAGE 36

VHOI 7KH ILUVW VWDJH 5HVWRUDWLRQ LV VR QDPHG EHFDXVH WKH WUDLQHH DWWHPSWV WR fUHVWRUHf WKH FOLHQW 'XULQJ WKH VHFRQG VWDJH ,QWHUSUHWDWLRQ WKH WUDLQHH DGRSWV D WKHRUHWLFDO EDVH WKRXJK LW LV RIWHQ LQ D FRQFUHWH DQG XQGLIIHUHQWLDWHG PDQQHU $V WKH VXSHUYLVHH UHFRJQL]HV WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI WKH UHODWLRQDO DVSHFWV RI WKHUDS\ WKH WUDLQHH ZRUNV KLV ZD\ WKURXJK 5RGHQKDXVHUfV 5HDOL]DWLRQ VWDJH )LQDOO\ WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW EHFRPHV IXOO\ GHYHORSHG RQFH WKH VHOI LQFOXGLQJ RQHfV IHHOLQJV DQG UHDFWLRQV EHFRPHV XWLOL]HG LQ SUDFWLFLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ &KD]DQ f SURSRVHG D WKUHHVWDJH PRGHO EDVHG RQ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF WKHRU\ $W WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WUDLQLQJ WKH WUDLQHH IHHOV XQFHUWDLQ DQG LQVHFXUH \HW LV H[FLWHG DQG KRSHIXO DERXW EHFRPLQJ D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW 'XULQJ WKH ILUVW VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW WKH WUDLQHHfV HIIRUW LV WRZDUG WKH FUHDWLRQ RI D VSDFH WR SURYLGH D JURXQGHG SV\FKRORJLFDO HQYLURQPHQW LQ ZKLFK WR OHDUQ DQG ZRUN 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV WDVN GXULQJ WKLV VWDJH LV WR SURYLGH D fKRPH EDVHf D VHFXUH KROGLQJ HQYLURQPHQW 'XULQJ WKH VHFRQG VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVHH EHJLQV EXLOGLQJ VWUXFWXUH ZLWKLQ WKH FUHDWHG VSDFH 7KH VXSHUYLVHH LGHQWLILHV ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG EHJLQV WR YHQWXUH RXW DQG H[SORUH QHZO\ OHDUQHG WHFKQLTXHV DQG DSSURDFKHV 'XULQJ WKLV VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVRU PXVW SURYLGH HPSDWK\ IOH[LELOLW\ WROHUDQFH DQG WDFW 7KH VXSHUYLVRU\ HQYLURQPHQW FRQWLQXHV WR VHUYH DV D VHFXUH KRPH EDVH ZKLOH H[SORUDWLRQ LV HQFRXUDJHG 'XULQJ &KD]DQfV ILQDO VWDJH RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW WKH VXSHUYLVHH H[SHULHQFHV UHFLSURFLW\ DQG ZHOOEHLQJ 7KH VXSHUYLVHH QRZ KDV D GHSHQGDEOH VHQVH RI ZHOOEHLQJ FRXSOHG ZLWK SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ 7KH WUDLQHH KDV EHFRPH fJRRG HQRXJKf 2QFH WKH VXSHUYLVHH KDV UHDFKHG WKLV VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW WKH VXSHUYLVRU DFWV LQ D FROOHJLDO FRQVXOWDWLYH PDQQHU

PAGE 37

:DWNLQV f SURSRVHG D VL[VWDJH PRGHO EDVHG XSRQ 0DKOHUf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fV FXULRVLW\ LV PL[HG ZLWK KHVLWDQF\ DQG GRXEW 7KH VXSHUYLVRU VWLOO PDLQWDLQV VHFXULW\ ZLWKLQ WKH VWUXFWXUH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ SURYLGHV HQFRXUDJHPHQW DQG HQFRXUDJHV WKH WUDLQHH WR EHJLQ PHDVXULQJ WKH WUDLQHHfV RZQ IHHOLQJV DQG UHDFWLRQV LQ UHVSRQVH WR XVLQJ GLIIHUHQW WHFKQLTXHV :DWNLQVf IRXUWK VWDJH LV SUDFWLFLQJ SURSHU 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV FRQILGHQFH FRQWLQXHV WR JURZ DV GRHV H[FLWHPHQW DW EHLQJ D WKHUDSLVW $V WKH WKHUDSLVW LGHQWLW\ EHJLQV WR FU\VWDOOL]H WKHUH LV D WHQGHQF\ WR RYHUHVWLPDWH RQHfV FRPSHWHQFH 'XULQJ WKLV SHULRG WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG IXQFWLRQ DV WKH WUDLQHHfV DOWHU HJR SURYLGLQJ D fUHDOLW\ FKHFNf ZKHQ QHHGHG 'XULQJ WKH ILIWK VWDJH UDSSURFKHPHQW WKH WUDLQHH VWUXJJOHV WR LQGLYLGXDWH 7KHUH LV D KHLJKWHQHG EXW DPELYDOHQW GHVLUH IRU VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKH WUDLQHH H[KLELWV

PAGE 38

SURJUHVVLYH DQG UHJUHVVLYH EHKDYLRUV 'XULQJ WKLV FULWLFDO SHULRG WKH VXSHUYLVRU PXVW UHLQIRUFH JDLQV DQG RIIHU HJRVXSSRUWLYH LQWHUYHQWLRQV :KLOH KHOSLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR EHFRPH IXOO\ DZDUH RI WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO SURJUHVV PDGH WKH VXSHUYLVRU YDOLGDWHV WKH GLIILFXOWLHV RI EHLQJ LQGHSHQGHQW DQG DXWRQRPRXV :DWNLQVf VL[WK VWDJH ILQGV WKH WUDLQHH RQ WKH ZD\ WR REMHFW FRQVWDQF\ 5DWKHU WKDQ DFKLHYLQJ D VWDWXV VXFK DV fPDVWHU SUDFWLWLRQHUf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f DQG *UDWHU f IRFXV RQ WKH HYROYLQJ SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ UDWKHU WKDQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV RU VXSHUYLVRUfV VSHFLILF QHHGV /LWWUHOO DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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f WKH WHDFKHU VWDJH WKH VHFRQG VWDJH LV ZKHQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU WHDFKHV WKH VNLOOV RI FRXQVHOLQJ WR WKH VXSHUYLVHH 7KH VXSHUYLVHH FRQWLQXHV GHYHORSLQJ

PAGE 39

DQG UHDFKHV WKH WKLUG VWDJH WKH FRQVXOWDWLRQ VWDJH LQ ZKLFK WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZRUNV WRJHWKHU ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVHH LQ FRRSHUDWLRQ 2QFH IXOO\ GHYHORSHG WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW VHOIn VXSHUYLVHV VHHNLQJ WR LPSURYH FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV WKURXJK VHOIREVHUYDWLRQ %DVHG XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV SUHVHQWHG HDUOLHU 6WROWHQEHUJ /RJDQELOO HW DK +RJDQ f *UDWHU f SURSRVHG D IRXUVWDJH PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 5DWKHU WKDQ SURSRVLQJ VSHFLILF GHYHORSPHQWDO LVVXHV IRU VXSHUYLVHH RU VXSHUYLVRU *UDWHU SURSRVHG VWDJHV RI WDVNV RI GHYHORSLQJ FRPSOH[LW\ WKDW VKRXOG EH DFFRPSOLVKHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH ZLWK WKH GLUHFWLRQ DQG JXLGDQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU +H UHSRUWV KLV PRGHO LV EDVHG XSRQ WKH FRQFOXVLRQV RI VHYHUDO ZULWHUV 0DUPRU 3DUORII 3DXO f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fV DELOLW\ WR DVVHVV WKH FOLHQWfV KDELWXDO DQG FRQIOLFWLQJ EHKDYLRU SDWWHUQV SD\LQJ SDUWLFXODU DWWHQWLRQ WR WKRVH WKDW RFFXU ZLWKLQ WKH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ HQYLURQPHQW 'XULQJ WKH WKLUG VWDJH WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG DOVR DVVLVW WKH VXSHUYLVHH LQ OHDUQLQJ WR VHOHFW WKH DSSURSULDWH LQWHUYHQWLRQ PHWKRGV 'XULQJ WKH IRXUWK VWDJH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG KHOS WKH WUDLQHH OHDUQ KRZ WR XVH WKH VHOI LQ DVVHVVPHQW DQG LQWHUYHQWLRQ *UDWHU SRLQWV RXW WKDW WKH ILUVW WZR VWDJHV DUH GHYRWHG WR

PAGE 40

VNLOO GHYHORSPHQW ZKHUHDV WKH ODVW WZR VWDJHV HPSKDVL]H D VNLOO IRXQGDWLRQ WR SHUIRUP SV\FKRWKHUDS\ LQ DQ LQWHJUDWHG PDQQHU :KLOH WKH DERYH UHYLHZ GRHV QRW LQFOXGH HYHU\ PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW WKDW KDV EHHQ SURSRVHG LW LQFOXGHV WKH PRVW VLJQLILFDQW SURSRVDOV WR GDWH ,W DOVR DOORZV WKH UHDGHU WR JDLQ DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH KLJKO\ VLPLODU QDWXUH RI WKH PRGHOV DV ZHOO DV WKH YDULDWLRQV 0RGHOV RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW UHYLHZHG LQ WKH QH[W VHFWLRQ DUH VLPLODU LQ VWDJH FRPSRVLWLRQ DQG SURJUHVVLRQ 6XSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW $V GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ KDYH FRQWLQXHG WR EH SUHYDOHQW LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQFUHDVHG DWWHQWLRQ KDV EH JLYHQ WR WKH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV QHFHVVDU\ WR SURPRWH JURZWK 'HVLUDEOH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV KDYH EHFRPH PRUH GHILQHG 6XEVHTXHQWO\ WKHUH DURVH D QHHG WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV DFTXLVLWLRQ RI WKRVH EHKDYLRUV 0RGHOV RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW ZHUH VRRQ DFFRPSDQLHG E\ PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW DV LW ZDV DFNQRZOHGJHG WKDW LGHDO VXSHUYLVLRQ GRHV QRW fMXVW KDSSHQf +DEHU f KDV LGHQWLILHG FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI EHJLQQLQJ DQG DGYDQFHG VXSHUYLVRUV VHH 7DEOH f ZKLFK VXPPDUL]HV KLV SHUVSHFWLYH RI KRZ VXSHUYLVRUV LQWHUDFW DFFRUGLQJ WR WKHLU GHYHORSPHQW 'HYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU IROORZ SDWKV VLPLODU WR WKRVH ODLG RXW E\ WKH PRGHOV RI FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW $ORQVR f SURSRVHG D WKHRU\ RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW ZKLFK VXJJHVWV VXSHUYLVRUV PXVW UHVROYH WKUHH NH\ LVVXHV UHSHWLWLYHO\ WKURXJKRXW WKHLU FDUHHU 7KH WKUHH LVVXHV VKH LGHQWLILHG ZHUH VHOI DQG LGHQWLW\ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW DQG VXSHUYLVRU DQG DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ $ORQVR f SURSRVHG WKDW WKURXJKRXW RQHfV FDUHHU

PAGE 41

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f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f QRYLFH WR PLGFDUHHU WR ODWH FDUHHU WKH LVVXHV UHPDLQHG WKH VDPH EXW ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DQG UHVROYHG GLIIHUHQWO\ GXH WR WKH SHUVSHFWLYH FKDQJH GXH WR H[SHULHQFH DQG GHPDQGV RI OLIH DQG WKH SURIHVVLRQ GLIIHULQJ DW HDFK OLIH VWDJH :KLOH $ORQVRfV PRGHO GHPRQVWUDWHV WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV GR QRW UHDFK SURIHVVLRQDO VWDJQDWLRQ RQFH WKH\ DVVXPH WKH VXSHUYLVRU\

PAGE 42

PDQWOH LW GRHV QRW UHODWH GLUHFWO\ WR WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV GHYHORSPHQW LQ UHJDUG WR UROH FRPSHWHQF\ RU PDVWHU\ +HVV f RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG SURSRVHG D WKUHHVWDJH PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW WKDW IRFXVHV RQ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUIRUPDQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH ILUVW VWDJH LV PDUNHG E\ DQ[LHW\ DV WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU VWUXJJOHV ZLWK WKH FKDQJH RI UROH +HVV f SUHGLFWV WKDW WKH QHZ 3K' LV IUHTXHQWO\ WKURZQ LQWR D VXSHUYLVRU\ UROH ZLWKRXW PXFK SUHSDUDWLRQ 2QO\ RQH LQ WKUHH LQWHUQV UHFHLYHV DQ\ WUDLQLQJ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ +HVV DQG +HVV f DQG WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU VWUXJJOHV LQ WKH UROH FKDQJH IURP VXSHUYLVHH WR VXSHUYLVRU +HVV f VXJJHVWV QHZ VXSHUYLVRUV FRSH ZLWK WKH VHOIGRXEW DQG DPELJXLW\ RI WKHLU QHZ UROH E\ DGRSWLQJ D FRQFUHWH DSSURDFK WR VXSHUYLVLRQf§IRFXVLQJ RQ VNLOO GHYHORSPHQW DQG FOLHQW GLDJQRVLV ,Q +HVVf VHFRQG VWDJH RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW H[SORUDWLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU KDV JDLQHG FRPSHWHQFH DQG FRQILGHQFH DQG LV RIWHQ DEOH WR DPD]H DQG EDIIOH WKH WUDLQHH ZLWK IHDWV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO fPDJLFf 6XSHUYLVLRQ LV YDOXHG DV D SURIHVVLRQDO DFWLYLW\ DQG WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV HQWKXVLDVP RIWHQ SURPRWHV LQFUHDVHG LQWHUHVW LQ OHDUQLQJ E\ WKH VWXGHQW +HVV VXJJHVWHG WKH H[LVWHQFH RI WZR SRWHQWLDO SLWIDOOV GXULQJ WKLV VHFRQG VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW f VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW LV WRR UHVWULFWLYH DQG f VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW LV WRR LQWUXVLYH +HVVf WKLUG VWDJH RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW LV PDUNHG E\ D FRQWLQXLQJ LQFUHDVH LQ UHVSHFWf§WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV UHVSHFW IRU WKH WUDLQHH DQG WUDLQHHfV UHVSHFW IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRU ,QFUHDVHG DWWHQWLRQ LV JLYHQ WR WKH WUDLQHHfV OHDUQLQJ DQG D GHHSHU UHODWLRQVKLS GHYHORSV 6XSHUYLVRUV DW WKLV VWDJH DUH VRXJKW RXW E\ WUDLQHHV GXH WR WKHLU UHSXWDWLRQ DV H[FHOOHQW WHDFKHUV RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 7KH IXOO\ GHYHORSHG VXSHUYLVRU

PAGE 43

UHFHLYHV JUDWLILFDWLRQ ZKHQ WKH VWXGHQW H[FHOV UDWKHU WKDQ ZKHQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV UHFRJQL]HG DV D JRRG VXSHUYLVRU 5RGHQKDXVHUfV f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fV SHUVRQDO VW\OH LPSDFWV VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV SKDVH DOVR LQFOXGHV KHLJKWHQHG DZDUHQHVV RI GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ RQHfV VHOI DQG WKH VXSHUYLVHH VXFK DV JHQGHU HWKQLFLW\ DQG OLIHVW\OH ,Q WKH FRQVROLGDWLRQ SKDVH RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV DEOH WR XVH WKHRU\ H[SHULHQFH WKH VHOI DQG VXSHUYLVHH FRXQWHUWUDQVIHUHQFH ZLWKLQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV :KHQ 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK f UHYLVHG 6WROWHQEHUJfV f &RXQVHORU &RPSOH[LW\ 0RGHO WKH\ LQFOXGHG D PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK f 7KH VXSHUYLVRU PRGHO PLUURUV WKHLU VXSHUYLVHH PRGHOf§LW KDV IRXU VWDJHV GHILQHG E\ WKUHH GLVWLQFW OHYHOV WKH WKLUG OHYHO KDYLQJ WZR FRPSRQHQWV $W /HYHO WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV KLJKO\ DQ[LRXV DQG UHODWLYHO\ QDLYH :DQWLQJ WR fGR WKH ULJKW WKLQJf VXSHUYLVRUV DW WKLV ILUVW VWDJH RI GHYHORSPHQW W\SLFDOO\ SURYLGH D VWUXFWXUHG HQYLURQPHQW IRU VXSHUYLVLRQ RIWHQ SHUIRUPLQJ DV fWKH H[SHUWf $V WKH VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSV WKH VXSHUYLVRU PD\ EHFRPH FRQIXVHG DQG FRQIOLFWHG DV VXSHUYLVLRQ EHFRPHV SHUFHLYHG DV D FRPSOH[ DQG PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO SURFHVV 'XULQJ WKLV VHFRQG VWDJH /HYHO ,, WKH

PAGE 44

VXSHUYLVRU PD\ EH GHSHQGHQW XSRQ FROOHDJXHV IRU JXLGDQFH /HYHO ,,, VHHV WKH VXSHUYLVRU KDYLQJ UHVROYHG HDUOLHU FRQIOLFWV DQG RSHUDWLQJ LQ D PRUH VWDEOH PDQQHU 7KH /HYHO ,,, VXSHUYLVRU EHFRPHV PRUH DXWRQRPRXV DQG ZLVKHV WR LPSURYH VXSHUYLVRU\ VNLOOV 7KLV VXSHUYLVRUfV FRPIRUW OHYHO KDV LQFUHDVHG DV WKHUH LV PRUH VHFXULW\ LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU UROH 7KH LQWHJUDWHG SKDVH RI /HYHO ,,, LV PDUNHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU EHFRPLQJ IXOO\ LQWHJUDWHG DFURVV PDQ\ GRPDLQV 7KH IXOO\ LQWHJUDWHG VXSHUYLVRU LV DEOH WR ZRUN ZLWK DOO W\SHV RI VXSHUYLVHHV DQG LV ZLOOLQJ WR VHHN FRQVXOWDWLRQ DV QHHGHG :DWNLQV f KDV SURSRVHG D IRXUVWDJH PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW WKDW HPSKDVL]HV WKH LQGLYLGXDOfV UROH GHYHORSPHQW 7KH IRXU VWDJHV RI WKLV PRGHO DUH UROH VKRFN UROH UHFRYHU\ DQG WUDQVLWLRQ UROH FRQVROLGDWLRQ DQG UROH PDVWHU\ 8QOLNH WKH RWKHU VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV SUHVHQWHG KHUH :DWNLQV DOVR SURYLGHV XV ZLWK UHFRPPHQGHG EHKDYLRUV E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU UHFRPPHQGLQJ WKDW WKH SURIHVVLRQDO VKRXOG FRQWLQXH WUDLQLQJ GXULQJ GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU UROH 'XULQJ UROH VKRFN WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU PD\ IHHO OLNH DQ LPSRVWRU 7KH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU H[SHULHQFHV DQ[LHW\ ODFNV FRQILGHQFH DQG IHHOV RYHUZKHOPHG 7KH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU KDV QR fVXSHUYLVRU LGHQWLW\f DQG VWUXJJOHV WR SURYLGH FRPSHWHQW VXSHUYLVLRQ JRLQJ WKURXJK PXFK fVRXOVHDUFKLQJf ,W LV OLNHO\ WKDW WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU ZLOO EH RYHUO\ VWUXFWXUHG DQG FRQFUHWH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU SHUIRUPV DV D WHDFKHU DQG D JXLGH ZLWKLQ D VHFXUH KROGLQJ HQYLURQPHQW SURYLGLQJ HQFRXUDJHPHQW GLUHFWLRQ DQG WHDFKLQJ ,Q UROH UHFRYHU\ DQG WUDQVLWLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU UHFRYHUV IURP WKH VKRFN RI EHLQJ D VXSHUYLVRU 7KHUH LV DQ LQFUHDVH LQ FRQILGHQFH DV ZHOO DV DZDUHQHVV UHJDUGLQJ RQHfV VWUHQJWKV DQG ZHDNQHVVHV DOWKRXJK WKH FRUH RI VXSHUYLVRU LGHQWLW\ EHJLQV WR IRUP ,W LV

PAGE 45

OLNHO\ WKDW RQH IHHOV DPELJXRXV DERXW RQHfV ZRUN DV D VXSHUYLVRU 'XULQJ WKLV SHULRG WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU EHJLQV WR OHVVHQ WKH KROG RQ WKH VHFXUH WUDLQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW DQG WHDFKHV DQG GLUHFWV OHVV 7KHUH LV DQ LQFUHDVH LQ HIIRUW E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU WRZDUG VWLPXODWLQJ DQ H[DPLQDWLRQ RI WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRUfV VWUHQJWKV DQG ZHDNQHVVHV DQG WKHLU HIIHFW RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 'XULQJ WKH WKLUG VWDJH RI UROH FRQVROLGDWLRQ WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU KDV D EURDGHU DQG PRUH LQIRUPHG SHUVSHFWLYH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 2QHfV SHUFHSWLRQV RI RQHfV RZQ VWUHQJWKV DQG ZHDNQHVVHV DUH PRUH UHDOLVWLF DQG LV PRUH WUXVWLQJ LQ RQHVHOI 7KH FRUH VXSHUYLVRU LGHQWLW\ LV HVWDEOLVKHG DQG GXULQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV PRUH DEOH WR DGGUHVV WKH SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI D SHUVRQDO WKHRU\ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DOVR WDNHV IRUP E\ WKLV SRLQW LQ GHYHORSPHQW 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV PRWLYDWLRQV DUH GULYHQ PRUH E\ WKH WUDLQHHfV DQG FOLHQWVf QHHGV UDWKHU WKDQ QDUFLVVLVWLF IXOILOOPHQW 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU QRZ DFWV DV D VXSSRUWLYH JXLGH IDFLOLWDWLQJ D IRFXV RQ SURFHVV LVVXHV DQG WKHLU LPSDFW 7KHUH LV DOVR DQ LQFUHDVHG IRFXV RQ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVRQDO LVVXHV DQG WKHLU LPSDFW RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH QHZ VXSHUYLVRUfV LQGHSHQGHQW WKRXJKW DQG DFWLRQ LV HQFRXUDJHG DQG VXSSRUWHG )LQDOO\ WKH ODVW VWDJH UROH PDVWHU\ PDUNV WKH QHZ VXSHUYLVRUfV FRQVROLGDWLRQ RI VNLOO DQG VXSHUYLVRU LGHQWLW\ 7KH QHZ VXSHUYLVRU KDQGOHV DOO DVSHFWV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZHOO SRVVHVVHV DQ LQWHJUDWHG VW\OH DQG WKHRU\ DQG GHDOV ZHOO ZLWK SURFHVV LVVXHV 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVLRQ LV QRZ VRXJKW DQG UHFHLYHG LQ D FROODERUDWLYH DQG FROOHJLDO HQYLURQPHQW 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV VXSHUYLVRU FDQ EH PRUH FRQIURQWDWLRQDO ZKLOH HQFRXUDJLQJ FRQWLQXHG H[DPLQDWLRQ RI WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ SURFHVV SHUVRQDO LVVXHV DQG WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ 6XSHUYLVLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV QRZ UHFHLYHG RQ DQ DV QHHGHG EDVLV

PAGE 46

6XSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW KDV QRW UHFHLYHG DV PXFK DWWHQWLRQ DV VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQW LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH $V WKH LQIOXHQFH RI VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU XSRQ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WUDLQHHV EHFRPHV EHWWHU LOOXVWUDWHG WKHUH DUH PRUH TXHVWLRQV DV WR KRZ D VXSHUYLVRU FDQ EHVW SURPRWH JURZWK DQG GHYHORSPHQW 4XHVWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ KRZ D VXSHUYLVRU EHFRPHV D VXSHUYLVRU KDV SURPSWHG D GLVFXVVLRQ LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH ZKLFK VHHNV WR GHVFULEH WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJHV RI EHFRPLQJ D VXSHUYLVRU 7KHVH PRGHOV IROORZ WKH VDPH GHYHORSPHQWDO SDWKZD\V GHOLQHDWHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH PRGHOVf§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f 7KH\ DOVR DVVXPH WKH WUDLQHH ZLOO GHYHORS RYHU WLPH ZLWK VXSHUYLVLRQ WR EHFRPH DQ LQWHJUDWHG fPDVWHUf SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW RU VXSHUYLVRUf 7KH PRGHOV IRU WKH PRVW SDUW VXJJHVW WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG IDFLOLWDWH WKH WUDLQHHfV JURZWK E\ SURYLGLQJ WKH HQYLURQPHQW LQVWUXFWLRQ DQG IHHGEDFN DSSURSULDWH WR WKH WUDLQHHfV OHYHO RI GHYHORSPHQW ,Q WKH EHJLQQLQJ WKDW DSSURSULDWH HQYLURQPHQW LV VHHQ DV D VHFXUH fKROGLQJf HQYLURQPHQW VDIH DQG VWUXFWXUHG 7KH PRGHOV UHFRPPHQG WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU SURYLGH VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ LQ D SURDFWLYH PDQQHU WR WKH QRYLFH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW

PAGE 47

$V WKH WUDLQHH OHDUQV DQG GHYHORSV LW LV VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU DOORZ DQG HQFRXUDJH LQFUHDVHG DXWRQRP\ ZKLOH FRQWLQXLQJ WR VXSSRUW WKH VXSHUYLVHH $V WKH WUDLQHH EHFRPHV LQFUHDVLQJO\ GHYHORSHG WKH VXSHUYLVHHVXSHUYLVRU UHODWLRQVKLS LV OHVV WHDFKHUVWXGHQW DQG PRUH FRQVXOWDWLYH DQG FROOHJLDO ZLWK VXSHUYLVLRQ RFFXUULQJ LV D SHHUOLNH VHWWLQJ 7R GHWHUPLQH WKH HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW RI WKHVH PRGHOV :RUWKLQJWRQ f UHYLHZHG WKH UHVHDUFK UHODWHG WR VL[WHHQ FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV DQG WZR VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV SURSRVHG WKURXJK ,Q D VLPLODU UHYLHZ :DWNLQV Df UHYLHZHG WKH UHVHDUFK UHODWHG WR VL[ FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV DQG IRXU VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV SURSRVHG VLQFH 7DEOH VXPPDUL]HV WKH ILQGLQJV RI ERWK :RUWKLQJWRQ DQG :DWNLQV $FFRUGLQJ WR WKHVH VXPPDULHV WKH HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW KDV JURZQ VLJQLILFDQWO\ GXULQJ WKH SDVW \HDUV 7KH ILQGLQJV RI WKHVH UHYLHZV VKRZ VXSSRUW RI GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV DV D YDOLG ZD\ RI FRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ )XUWKHUPRUH WKH HPSLULFDO GDWD UHYLHZHG E\ :DWNLQV VXJJHVWV VXSHUYLVLRQ GRHV LQGHHG FKDQJH DV WKH VXSHUYLVHH JDLQV H[SHULHQFH %XW ZKLOH FRQWLQXLQJ VXSSRUW IRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV PD\ IXUWKHU HQWUHQFK WKHP DV WKH GRPLQDQW ZD\ RI FRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ :DWNLQV Df ODPHQWV WKH IDFW WKDW HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW KDV QRW SURJUHVVHG IDU HQRXJK GXULQJ WKH ODVW ILIWHHQ \HDUV :DWNLQV MRLQV :RUWKLQJWRQ f DQG %RUGHUV f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

PAGE 48

7$%/( (PSLULFDO VXSSRUW RI VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV &RQFOXVLRQV E\ :RUWKLQJWRQ Df 7KHUH LV VRPH VXSSRUW IRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV DV SURSRVHG E\ +RJDQ f DQG RWKHUV Ef ,Q JHQHUDO SHUFHSWLRQV RI VXSHUYLVRUV DQG VXSHUYLVHHV KDYH EHHQ EURDGO\ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK GHYHORSPHQWDO WKHRULHV Ff 7KH EHKDYLRU RI VXSHUYLVRUV FKDQJHV DV FRXQVHORUV JDLQ H[SHULHQFH Gf 7KH VXSHUYLVLRQ UHODWLRQVKLS FKDQJHV DV FRXQVHORUV JDLQ H[SHULHQFH 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH LV LQIOXHQFHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SHUFHSWLRQV RI KLVKHU VXSHUYLVRU &RQFOXVLRQV E\ :DWNLQV Df 7KH PDMRULW\ RI VWXGLHV IRXQG VRPH GHJUHH RI VXSSRUW IRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RU D GHYHORSPHQWDO GLPHQVLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ Ef 3HUFHSWLRQV RI ERWK VXSHUYLVRUV DQG VXSHUYLVHHV ZHUH EURDGO\ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHO WKLQNLQJ Ff 7KH VXSHUYLVLRQ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DW OHDVW E\ VXSHUYLVRUV WR FKDQJH LQ GHYHORSPHQWDOO\ DSSURSULDWH ZD\V DV VXSHUYLVHHV JDLQ H[SHULHQFH Gf %HJLQQLQJ VXSHUYLVHHV ZHUH JHQHUDOO\ IRXQG WR EH PRUH LQ QHHG RI VWUXFWXUH GLUHFWLRQ DQG JXLGDQFH DQG VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH IRXQG WR SURYLGH WKDW PRUH VR IRU WKHP Hf $GYDQFHG VXSHUYLVHHV ZHUH IRXQG WR JHQHUDOO\ QHHG OHVV VWUXFWXUH GLUHFWLRQ DQG JXLGDQFH DQG VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH IRXQG WR DFW DFFRUGLQJO\ If $GYDQFHG DV RSSRVHG WR EHJLQQLQJ VXSHUYLVHHV ZHUH IRXQG WR EH PRUH ZLOOLQJ WR FRQVLGHU WKHLU RZQ SHUVRQDO LVVXHV DQG WKHLU HIIHFW RQ WKHUDS\ Jf 6RPH UHVHDUFK VKRZHG WKDW ZLWK H[SHULHQFH VXSHUYLVHHVf QHHGV FKDQJHG LQ GHYHORSPHQWDOO\ DSSURSULDWH ZD\V DQG WKDW RYHU WLPH VXSHUYLVHHV VKRZHG LQFUHDVH LQ GHYHORSPHQWDOO\ UHOHYDQW VWUXFWXUHV Kf 7KH PDMRULW\ RI VWXGLHV WHVWHG 6WROWHQEHUJfV f FRPSOH[LW\ PRGHO RU WHVWHG GHYHORSPHQWDO WHQHWV PRUH JHQHUDOO\ Lf 6WROWHQEHUJfV FRPSOH[LW\ PRGHO UHFHLYHG WKH PRVW VXSSRUW RYHUDOO 6RXUFH :RUWKLQJWRQ S f :DWNLQV D S DQG f VXSHUYLVLRQ HQYLURQPHQW WKDW fPDWFKf HDFK VWDJH RU IRVWHU PRYHPHQW WRZDUG KLJKHU VWDJHV S f

PAGE 49

:RUWKLQJWRQ f DQG :DWNLQV Df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f :RUWKLQJWRQ f UHYLHZHG HLJKW UHVHDUFK DUWLFOHV WKDW GHDOW VSHFLILFDOO\ ZLWK VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW :DWNLQV UHYLHZHG DQ DGGLWLRQDO WKUHH UHVHDUFK DUWLFOHV WKDW GHDOW ZLWK WKH VDPH LVVXHV $ VXPPDU\ RI WKHLU FRQFOXVLRQV LV SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH $IWHU FRQVLGHULQJ WKHVH FRQFOXVLRQV :DWNLQV Df UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH UHVHDUFK LQ WKLV DUHD KDV EHHQ PLQLPDO ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKHUH QHHGV WR EH PRUH RI D IRFXV RQ EHKDYLRUV VSHFLILF WR WKH GHYHORSLQJ VXSHUYLVRU LI PXFK LV WR EH JDLQHG +H DGGV WKDW VLQFH WKH PDMRULW\ RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV VLPSO\ PLUURU VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV QRW PXFK PRUH ZRXOG EH JDLQHG ZLWK WKH DGGLWLRQ RI PRUH VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV :DWNLQV DOVR UHLWHUDWHV :RUWKLQJWRQfV FRQFOXVLRQ f7KHUH LV OLWWOH VSHFLILFDWLRQ RI ZKDW PDNHV D VXSHUYLVRU HIIHFWLYH DQG WKXV RI KRZ RQH EXLOGV WKH VNLOOV QHFHVVDU\ WR EHFRPH HIIHFWLYHf S f :KLOH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV FRQWLQXH WR EH WKH SUHIHUUHG SHUVSHFWLYH UHSRUWHG LQ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ OLWHUDWXUH OLWWOH DGYDQFHPHQW KDV EHHQ PDGH EH\RQG WKH FRQILUPDWLRQ WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ GRHV FKDQJH DV VXSHUYLVHHV SURJUHVV WKURXJK WKHLU WUDLQLQJ ,W LV OLNHO\ WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ LV JHQHUDOO\ PRUH VWUXFWXUHG IRU EHJLQQLQJ WUDLQHHV ZKR DUH W\SLFDOO\ DQ[LRXV

PAGE 50

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f )XUWKHUPRUH PDQ\ DUJXH WKDW VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV DQG SURFHVVHV VKRXOG EH LGHQWLILHG WKDW SURPRWH JURZWK ZLWKLQ WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO IUDPHZRUN 7$%/( (PSLULFDO VXSSRUW RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV &RQFOXVLRQV E\ :RUWKLQJWRQ &RQFOXVLRQV E\ :DWNLQV Df 7KHUH DUH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ VNLOOIXOQHVV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DFURVV VXSHUYLVRUVf Ef 6XSHUYLVRUV GR QRW EHFRPH PRUH FRPSHWHQW DV WKH\ JDLQ H[SHULHQFH Ff 6XSHUYLVRUV FKDQJH OLWWOH LQ RWKHU ZD\V >ZD\V RWKHU WKDQ FRPSHWHQFH@ DV WKH\ JDLQ H[SHULHQFH Df 6RPH RI WKH GLPHQVLRQV WKDW GHILQH VXSHUYLVRUVf SHUFHSWLRQV RU FRJQLWLYH PDS RI VXSHUYLVLRQ KDYH EHHQ LGHQWLILHG Ef ([SHULHQFH OHYHO KDV QRW EHHQ IRXQG WR DIIHFW VXSHUYLVRUVf FRJQLWLYH PDSV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ Ff 6RPH RI WKH LVVXHV VXFK DV FRPSHWHQF\ FULWLFDO WR VXSHUYLVRU WUDLQHHV KDYH EHHQ LGHQWLILHG Gf 0RUH H[SHULHQFH VXSHUYLVRUV KDYH EHHQ IRXQG WR EH PRUH KLJKO\ GHYHORSHG ZLWK UHJDUG WR WKHLU YLHZV RI WKHPVHOYHV DV VXSHUYLVRUVf Hf 7KH VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI /LWWUHOO HW DO f DQG /RJDQELOO HW DO f KDYH UHFHLYHG PLQLPDO WR QR UHVHDUFK VXSSRUW >ZKHQ DSSOLHG WR VXSHUYLVRUV@ If 6DQVEXU\fV f VXSHUYLVHH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHO RU KLHUDUFK\ RI VXSHUYLVRU\ LVVXHV ZKHQ DSSOLHG WR VXSHUYLVRUV KDV EHHQ SDUWLDOO\ VXSSRUWHG 6RXUFH :RUWKLQJWRQ S f :DWNLQV D S f

PAGE 51

7KHRULHV RI VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW DOVR ODFN HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW $OWKRXJK OHYHOV RI VNLOOIXOQHVV KDV EHHQ VKRZQ WR YDU\ DFURVV VXSHUYLVRUV :RUWKLQJWRQ =XFNHU DQG :RUWKLQJWRQ f LW KDV EHHQ GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV GR QRW QHFHVVDULO\ LPSURYH DFURVV WLPH RU H[SHULHQFH 0DULNDV 5XVVHOO DQG 'HOO :RUWKLQJWRQ f 7KHUH LV DOVR QR HYLGHQFH WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV DFWXDOO\ FKDQJH RYHU WLPH WKRXJK WKH\ PD\ KDYH D PRUH KLJKO\ GHYHORSHG VHQVH RI VHOI DV D VXSHUYLVRU :DWNLQV 6FKQHLGHU +D\QHV DQG 1LHEHUGLQJ f 7KH FDOO IRU UHVHDUFK GHVLJQHG WR LGHQWLI\ HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV DV ZHOO DV KRZ WKRVH EHKDYLRUV FDQ EH GHYHORSHG KDV EHHQ PDGH :RUWKLQJWRQ %RUGHUV f DQG HVVHQWLDOO\ LJQRUHG :DWNLQV Df 6XSHUYLVLRQ DV 5HODWLRQVKLS :KLOH WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV FRQWLQXH WR EH WKH =HLWJHLVW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKHRU\ WKHUH LV D VPDOO ERG\ RI OLWHUDWXUH GHYRWHG WR WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH ,Q WKH ZRUGV RI +HVV fVXSHUYLVLRQ LV D UHODWLRQVKLS LQ ZKLFK RQH SHUVRQfV VNLOOV LQ FRQGXFWLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG KLV RU KHU LGHQWLW\ DV D WKHUDSLVW DUH LQWHQWLRQDOO\ DQG SRWHQWLDOO\ HQKDQFHG E\ WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ ZLWK DQRWKHU SHUVRQf S f %\ GHYHORSLQJ WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS +HVV DUJXHV RQH FDQ WUDQVFHQG WKH QHHG IRU WKHRU\ EDVHG RQ GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ,Q SUHVHQWLQJ KLV DUJXPHQW IRU D WKHRU\ RI UHODWLRQVKLS +HVV UHODWHV WKH UHVHDUFK DQG H[SHULHQFH RI IRXU RWKHU ZULWHUV 0DUNRZLW] *UXQHEDXP $OGULFK DQG 6ZDLQ 0DUNRZLW] f WKRXJK DQ DFFRPSOLVKHG SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW GHFLGHG WR HQWHU LQWR VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLWK VL[ VXSHUYLVRU RI GLIIHUHQW WKHRUHWLFDO RULHQWDWLRQV 0DUNRZLW]

PAGE 52

GLVFRYHUHG WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV DELOLW\ WR UHODWH ZDV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW IDFWRU LQ EHLQJ DEOH WR SURYLGH HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ *UXQHEDXP f VWXGLHG WKH TXDOLWLHV WKDW SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWfV ORRN IRU LQ WKHLU RZQ WKHUDSLVW 2I WKH IRXU IXQGDPHQWDO FULWHULD LGHQWLILHG WZR ZHUH UHODWHG WR SHUVRQDO VW\OH DQG RQHfV DELOLW\ DQGRU ZLOOLQJQHVV WR LQWHUDFW 7KH IRXU FULWHULD ZHUH f FRPSHWHQFH f QRQRYHUODSSLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO DQG VRFLDO QHWZRUNV f ZDUPWK FDULQJ DQG IOH[LELOLW\ DQG f WKH WKHUDSLVWVf ZLOOLQJQHVV WR WDON UDWKHU WKDQ UHPDLQ VLOHQW $OGULFK DQG 6ZDLQ VWXGLHG WKH FULWHULD RQ ZKLFK VXSHUYLVHHV DQG VXSHUYLVRUV HYDOXDWHG HDFK RWKHU $OGULFK $OGULFK DQG +HVV f IRXQG WKDW VXSHUYLVHHV DSSUDLVHG VXSHUYLVRUV RQ GHIHQVLYHQHVV KRZ FRPIRUWDEOH LV WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV FRPPHQWVf SURIHVVLRQDOLVP PRGHOLQJf FOLQLFDO H[SHULHQFH ZKDW VNLOOV FDQ EH SURYLGHGf WKHRUHWLFDO EDVH KRZ DGHSW FRQFHSWXDOO\f H[SHULHQFH DV D WHDFKHU DSSURSULDWH LQWHUHVW LQ WKH VWXGHQWfV OLIH OLNDELOLW\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQ :KLOH D FRQFHUQ IRU VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ DQG ZKDW FDQ EH OHDUQHG LV HYLGHQW VR LV WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRUVXSHUYLVHH UHODWLRQVKLS 6ZDLQ f IRXQG VXSHUYLVRUV WR MXGJH VXSHUYLVHHV RQ HLJKW FULWHULD LQWHUHVW LQ FOLHQW DQG FOLHQW ZHOIDUH SUHSDUDWLRQ IRU VXSHUYLVLRQ NQRZOHGJH VHOI DZDUHQHVV VHOIH[SORUDWLRQ VHOIGLVFORVXUH DQG VHOIHVWHHP RSHQQHVV WR VXJJHVWLRQV FOLQLFDO DQG LQWHUSHUVRQDO VNLOOV ERXQGDU\ PDQDJHPHQW DQG GHFLVLRQPDNLQJ VNLOOV ,VVXHV SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH UHODWLRQVKLS DUH DOVR SUHVHQW KHUH WKRXJK QRW DV SUHYDOHQW DV LQ $OGULFKfV $OGULFK DQG +HVV f ILQGLQJV 5HYLHZLQJ WKHVH ILQGLQJV LW DSSHDUV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH ERWK UHJDUG WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS DQ LQWHJUDO FRPSRQHQW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH DSSHDUV WR PHDVXUH WKH TXDOLW\ RI

PAGE 53

VXSHUYLVLRQ GLUHFWO\ IURP WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS UHJDUGOHVV RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHYHORSPHQWDO OHYHO 'HVSLWH WKH DSSDUHQW LPSRUWDQFH RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH IRFXVHG RQ VXSHUYLVRUVXSHUYLVHH UHODWLRQVKLS FKDUDFWHULVWLFV :DWNLQV Df +HVV f SURSRVHG D WKHRU\ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ UHODWLRQVKLS EDVHG RQ WKH ZRUN RI 0DUWLQ %XEHU f %XEHU SURSRVHG WKDW WKH FRQFHSW RI f,f DV LQ RQHfV VHOI GRHV QRW VWDQG DORQH EXW H[LVW RQO\ LQ UHODWLRQ WR D f
PAGE 54

7KH JD]H FDQ EH FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV D VSHFLILF PROHFXODU EHKDYLRUDO XQLW +HVV f 7KH JD]H RFFXUV ZKHQ D SHUVRQ KHDUV WKH f,f RI DQRWKHU SHUVRQ DGGUHVVLQJ WKH f7KRXf LQ WKH VHOI ,Q RXU H[DPSOH WKH JD]H RFFXUV ZKHQ WKH IDVW IRRG FOHUN KHDUV WKH FXVWRPHU H[SUHVV KHU FRQFHUQV DERXW KLV IDWLJXH DQG IUXVWUDWLRQ 7KH JD]H FDQ RFFXU DW DQ\ WLPH DQG DQ\ SODFH ZKHQHYHU DQG ZKHUHYHU WZR SHRSOH PD\ LQWHUDFW ,W LV D SXUHO\ SV\FKRORJLFDO HYHQW ZLWK QR UHTXLUHPHQW RI VSDFH RU WLPH ,W LV IRU WKLV UHDVRQ WKDW +HVV DUJXHV WKH JD]H LV D XVHIXO ZD\ IRU D VXSHUYLVRU\ LQWHUDFWLRQ WR RFFXU ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR EHLQJ IUHH RI VSDFH DQG WLPH FRQVWUDLQWV WKH JD]H LV VXSHUWKHRUHWLFDO PHDQLQJ LW FDQ EH XVHG ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI DQ\ DSSURDFK WR VXSHUYLVLRQ ZKHWKHU IURP ZLWKLQ D FRXQVHOLQJ PRGHO RU GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHO RI WUDLQLQJ )RU WKH JD]H WR RFFXU WKH VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU PXVW FRQQHFW RQ D PHDQLQJIXO OHYHO FRPPXQLFDWLQJ ZLWKLQ D PHDQLQJIXO UHODWLRQVKLS %\ DWWDLQLQJ DQ f,7KRXf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

PAGE 55

'LPHQVLRQV RI 6XSHUYLVLRQ 'LPHQVLRQV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ FDQ EH WKRXJKW RI DV EURDGEDVHG VWUXFWXUHV LQ ZKLFK VXSHUYLVLRQ RFFXUV %\ LGHQWLI\LQJ UHOHYDQW GLPHQVLRQV LW LV K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW DSSURSULDWH EHKDYLRUV ZLWKLQ HDFK GLPHQVLRQ FDQ EH LGHQWLILHG TXDQWLILHG DQG PHDVXUHG (OOLV (OOLV DQG 'HOO (OOLV 'HOO DQG *RRG f KDV DWWHPSWHG WR LGHQWLI\ DQG FRQILUP WKH GLPHQVLRQV DV SURSRVHG ZLWKLQ D GHYHORSPHQWDO IUDPHZRUN (OOLV DQG 'HOO f WHVWHG WKH FRQWHQW DQG GLPHQVLRQDOLW\ RI %HUQDUGfV f GXDO GLPHQVLRQ DQG /LWWUHOO DQG DVVRFLDWHfV f VLQJXODU GLPHQVLRQ VXSHUYLVLRQ PRGHOV IURP WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVSHFWLYH 8VLQJ D PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO VFDOLQJ UHVHDUFK GHVLJQ (OOLV DQG 'HOO IRXQG D WKUHHGLPHQVLRQDO FRJQLWLYH PDS RI VXSHUYLVLRQ %HUQDUGfV f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fV IHHOLQJV YDOXHV DQG EHOLHIV DQG KRZ WKH\ PD\ LPSDFW WKH WKHUDS\ 7KH WKUHH IXQFWLRQV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQWHUDFW ZLWK WKH WKUHH VXSHUYLVRU UROHV WR SURGXFH QLQH FDWHJRULHV RI VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU VHH 7DEOH f (DFK RI WKHVH QLQH FDWHJRULHV SUHVXPDEO\ FRUUHVSRQGV WR VXSHUYLVHH QHHGV

PAGE 56

7$%/( %HUQDUGf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fV EHKDYLRU WKRXJKWV DQG SUREOHPV +HOSV WUDLQHH XQGHUVWDQG KRZ WKHLU VWHUHRW\SHV FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQV DQG XQUHVROYHG LVVXHV DIIHFW WKH FRXQVHOLQJ VHVVLRQ DQG SURYLGH DOWHUQDWH SHUVSHFWLYHV :RUNV ZLWK WUDLQHH WR H[SORUH PXWXDOO\ LVVXHV DQG LPSOLFDWLRQV RI WKHRULHV PRGHOV DQG DOWHUQDWLYH FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQV WR FRXQVHOLQJ 3HUVRQDOL]DWLRQ 'HPRQVWUDWHV RU GHVFULEHV WKH SRWHQWLDO LPSRUWDQFH RI WUDLQHHfV DIIHFW DQG ZD\V RI UHFRJQL]LQJ DQG XVLQJ RQHfV RZQ DIIHFW GXULQJ FRXQVHOLQJ +HOSV WUDLQHH ZRUN WKURXJK SHUVRQDO LVVXHV RU IHHOLQJV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK FRXQVHOLQJ VHVVLRQV :RUNV ZLWK WUDLQHH WR H[SORUH PXWXDOO\ SHUVRQDO FRQFHUQV UHOHYDQW WR FRXQVHOLQJ 6RXUFH (OOLV DQG 'HOO f S %HUQDUG f 7KH IRXUVWDJH XQLGLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO SURSRVHG E\ /LWWUHOO DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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fV DQG /LWWUHOOfV PRGHOV (OOLV DQG 'HOO f IRXQG SDUWLDO VXSSRUW IRU %HUQDUGfV PRGHO EXW OLWWOH VXSSRUW IRU WKDW RI /LWWUHOO (OOLV DQG 'HOO f IRXQG KRZHYHU WKDW %HUQDUGfV PRGHO ZDV EHWWHU VXSSRUWHG ZKHQ D IRXUWK UROH ZDV DGGHG WR WKHLU GLPHQVLRQ RI VXSHUYLVRU UROHV 7KH DGGLWLRQ RI VHOIVXSHUYLVLRQ WR WKH PDWUL[

PAGE 57

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f FKDQJHG WKH RULJLQDO [ PDWUL[ 6XSHUYLVRU 5ROH [ 6XSHUYLVRU )XQFWLRQf WR D [ PDWUL[ ZLWK WZHOYH LGHQWLILDEOH VXSHUYLVRU FDWHJRULHV VHH 7DEOH f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fV EHKDYLRUV WKRXJKWV DIIHFW DQG SUREOHPV WKHQ GHYHORSLQJ PXOWLSOH LQWHUYHQWLRQ JRDOV DQG VWUDWHJLHV 3HUVRQDOL]DWLRQ 3HUVRQDO LVVXHV DQG IHHOLQJV UHODWHG WR FRXQVHOLQJ VHVVLRQV RU FOLHQWV OHDUQLQJ QHZ ZD\V WR UHFRJQL]H DQG XVH RQHfV IHHOLQJV DQG LQWXLWLRQV 6RXUFH (OOLV 'HOO DQG *RRG S f +DYLQJ LGHQWLILHG WZHOYH GLVWLQFW FDWHJRULHV RI VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV (OOLV 'HOO DQG *RRG f IRXQG WKDW WKH WZHOYH FDWHJRULHV FRXOG EH HYDOXDWHG DORQJ WKUHH DGGLWLRQDO GLPHQVLRQV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV LGHQWLILHG E\ (OOLV DQG

PAGE 58

DVVRFLDWHV f DUH ELSRODU LQ QDWXUH DQG LQWHUDFW ZLWK HDFK RWKHU WR SURGXFH D WKUHH GLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH WKUHH ELSRODU GLPHQVLRQV DUH 3URFHVV DQG SHUVRQDO IRFL &RQFHSWXDO IRFXV 1RQGLUHFWLYH (PRWLRQDO 'LUHFWLYH %HKDYLRUDO $FFRUGLQJ WR (OOLV DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV f HDFK RI WKH WZHOYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRU FDWHJRULHV VHH 7DEOH DQG 7DEOH f YDU\ XQLTXHO\ DORQJ WKH FRQWLQXXP RI HDFK RI WKH DERYH WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV )RU H[DPSOH 7HDFKHUFRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQ EHKDYLRUV DUH KLJK RQ FRQFHSWXDO IRFXV DQG GLUHFWLYH IRFXV DQG WRZDUG WKH PLGSRLQW RQ WKH EHKDYLRUDOf§ HPRWLRQDO D[LV 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG 6HOIVXSHUYLVRUSHUVRQDOL]DWLRQ EHKDYLRUV DUH WRZDUG WKH SURFHVV QRQGLUHFWLYH DQG HPRWLRQDO SROHV (OOLV HW DO f (OOLV DQG 'HOO f KDYH FRPPHQWHG RQ WKH YDOXH RI WKHVH GLPHQVLRQV DV D VWHS WRZDUG EHLQJ DEOH WR TXDQWLI\ DSSURSULDWH DQG IDFLOLWDWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV DV ZHOO DV WR LGHQWLI\ ZKHQ DQG KRZ WKHVH EHKDYLRUV VKRXOG RFFXU GXULQJ WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VXSHUYLVHH 5HJDUGOHVV RI WKH WKHRUHWLFDO VWDQFH RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH SXUSRVH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV WR WUDLQ DVSLULQJ SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV DQG SUHSDUH WKHP WR RSHUDWH LQGHSHQGHQWO\ LQ D SURIHVVLRQDO PDQQHU ,W KDV EHHQ GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV YDU\ LQ WKHLU HIIHFWLYHQHVVf§WKHUH LV LQ HIIHFW fJRRGf VXSHUYLVLRQ DV ZHOO DV fEDGf VXSHUYLVLRQ ,W LV SUHVXPHG WKDW fJRRGf VXSHUYLVLRQ OHDGV WR LPSURYHG WUDLQLQJ DQG VXEVHTXHQWO\ EHWWHU SUHSDUHG DQG PRUH HIIHFWLYH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV

PAGE 59

:KDW LV *RRG 6XSHUYLVLRQ" )URP D WKHRUHWLFDO RU LQWXLWLYH SHUVSHFWLYH LW LV UHODWLYHO\ HDV\ WR LGHQWLI\ WKH FRPSRQHQWV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 5HYLHZLQJ UHFRPPHQGHG VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV E\ WKH DXWKRUV RI FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW PRGHOV FDQ SURYLGH XV ZLWK D IDLUO\ FRPSUHKHQVLYH SLFWXUH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG UHVHDUFK RI ZKDW PDNHV JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV OLPLWHG WR D KDQGIXO RI VWXGLHV ,Q DWWHPSWLQJ WR GHILQH fJRRG VXSHUYLVLRQf RQH PXVW ILUVW DFNQRZOHGJH WKDW WKHUH LV QR fLGHDO IRUPXODf IRU FRQGXFWLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ %UXFK )OHPLQJ DQG %HQHGHN f :H FDQ DFNQRZOHGJH KRZHYHU WKDW OLNH LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WKHUH DUH JHQHUDO fJXLGHSRVWVf LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW FDQ DQG VKRXOG JRYHUQ LWV SUDFWLFH 6WRUP DQG +HDWK &DULILR DQG +HVV f 7KH VHDUFK IRU JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ OHDGV WR WKH SHUIRUPDQFH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVRUV ,Q WKHLU UHYLHZ RI WKH fLGHDOf VXSHUYLVRU &DULILR DQG +HVV f GLYLGHG WKHLU TXHVW LQWR WKUHH FRPSRQHQWV 7KH ILUVW FRPSRQHQW LV LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH TXHVWLRQ f:KR LV WKH LGHDO VXSHUYLVRU"f 7KLV TXHVWLRQ UHIHUV WR SHUVRQDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV WKDW PDNH WKH VXSHUYLVRU D JRRG WHDFKHU HGXFDWRU PHQWRU RU SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW 7KH VHFRQG FRPSRQHQW DQG TXHVWLRQ f:KDW GRHV WKH LGHDO VXSHUYLVRU GR"f UHIHUV WR WKH DFWLYLWLHV DQG WHFKQLTXHV VXFK DV UROH PRGHOLQJ DQG UROH SOD\LQJ XVHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH WKLUG TXHVWLRQ f+RZ GRHV WKH LGHDO VXSHUYLVRU SHUIRUP VXSHUYLVLRQ"f UHODWHV WR WKH FRQGLWLRQV VW\OHV DQG RYHUDOO HQYLURQPHQW WKH VXSHUYLVRU FUHDWHV DQGRU XVHV LQ FRQGXFWLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV LQWXLWLYH FDWHJRUL]DWLRQ ZLOO EH XVHG LQ WKLV VHFWLRQ RI WKH SDSHU WR H[SORUH WKH FRQFHSW RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 60

:KR LV WKH *RRG 6XSHUYLVRU" $FFRUGLQJ WR 5RJHUV f VXSHUYLVLRQ VKRXOG EH D PRGHO RI WKH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ SURFHVV 7KHUHIRUH KH WKRXJKW VXSHUYLVRUV VKRXOG H[KLELW HPSDWK\ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG XQFRQGLWLRQDO SRVLWLYH UHJDUG )XUWKHUPRUH 5RJHUV IHOW WKDW FRQJUXHQFH DQG JHQXLQHQHVV VKRXOG DOVR EH GHPRQVWUDWHG E\ VXSHUYLVRUV LQ WKHLU LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK VXSHUYLVHHV &RFKH f DJUHHG ZLWK 5RJHUV DERXW WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI WKHVH IXQGDPHQWDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG DGGHG KLV EHOLHI WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV ZLOOLQJQHVV IRU VHOIGLVFORVXUH LV DQ LPSRUWDQW FKDUDFWHULVWLF 5HVHDUFK DQG WKHRU\ LQ WKH DUHD RI VXSHUYLVLRQ KDYH JHQHUDOO\ VXSSRUWHG 5RJHUVf QRWLRQV DERXW VXSHUYLVLRQ &DULR DQG +HVV f 7R WKLV EDVLF IRXQGDWLRQ RI VXSHUYLVRU fPXVWVf RWKHU WKHRUHWLFLDQV DQG UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH GHVFULEHG DGGLWLRQDO IDFWRUV EHOLHYHG WR EH LPSRUWDQW LQ SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ LQWHUDFWLRQV $OERWW $OGULFK *LWWHUPDQ DQG 0LOOHU +HVV f 7KH VXSHUYLVRU FKDUDFWHULVWLFV WKHVH ZULWHUV WKRXJKW ZHUH LPSRUWDQW LQFOXGH IOH[LELOLW\ FRQFHUQ DWWHQWLRQ LQYHVWPHQW FXULRVLW\ DQG RSHQQHVV 8QOLNH WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV GHVFULEHG E\ 5RJHUV KRZHYHU IHZ RI WKHVH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV KDYH UHFHLYHG HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW &DULILR DQG +HVV f :KLOH WKH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV RI HPSDWK\ UHVSHFW JHQXLQHQHVV DQG FRQFUHWHQHVV DUH GHHPHG LPSRUWDQW LQ VXSHUYLVRU\ LQWHUDFWLRQV LW LV XQNQRZQ KRZ PXFK RI WKHVH DVSHFWV LV WKH ULJKW DPRXQW RU WKH DSSURSULDWH DPRXQW /DPEHUW f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKLV TXHVWLRQ E\ FRPSDULQJ OHYHOV RI IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKHUDSLVWV DQG WKHLU FOLHQWV DV ZHOO DV EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVRUV DQG WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHV +H IRXQG WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV JHQHUDOO\ H[KLELWHG OHVV RI WKHVH FRQGLWLRQV WKDQ GLG WKHUDSLVWV DQG WKDW ERWK JURXSV YDULHG WKH DPRXQW LQ YDU\LQJ FLUFXPVWDQFHV :KLOH ZH GR QRW NQRZ

PAGE 61

KRZ PXFK LV WKH DSSURSULDWH DPRXQW LW GRHV DSSHDU WKDW WKH DSSURSULDWH DPRXQW PD\ YDU\ DFFRUGLQJ WR VSHFLILF FLUFXPVWDQFHV :KDW 'RHV WKH *RRG 6XSHUYLVRU 'R" $V QRWHG HDUOLHU VXSHUYLVLRQ LV D FRPSOH[ WDVN 7KH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU PXVW EH DEOH WR SHUIRUP D YDULHW\ RI WDVNV GXULQJ KHU LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK VXSHUYLVHHV $ IXQGDPHQWDO FULWHULD LV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG EH NQRZOHGJHDEOH DQG H[SHULHQFHG LQ WKHUDS\ $OERWW )R[ +HVV :LQGKRO] f ,W KDV EHHQ UHFRPPHQGHG WKDW HDUO\ PHHWLQJV EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH VKRXOG EH VWUXFWXUHG ZLWK WKH LQWHQWLRQ RI SURYLGLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ WR WKH VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU 7KHVH HDUO\ PHHWLQJV OD\ WKH IRXQGDWLRQ IRU WKH GHYHORSLQJ UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH 7KDW UHODWLRQVKLS VKRXOG LQYROYH RSHQQHVV WUXVW PXWXDO XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WZRZD\ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG FROODERUDWLRQ %UXFK )LQFK f $Q LPSRUWDQW FRPSRQHQW LQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV DQG VXSHUYLVRUfV FROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS LV JRDOVHWWLQJ ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW WUDLQHHV DQG WKHLU VXSHUYLVRUV VHW VSHFLILF H[SOLFLW DQG PHDVXUDEOH JRDOV $UFKHU DQG 3HDNH )R[ f 0XWXDOO\ DJUHHG XSRQ JRDO VHWWLQJ DOORZV ERWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH PDUN WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURJUHVV GXULQJ WKH FRXUVH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW DQ RSHQ GLVFXVVLRQ RI SURJUHVV RQ SUHHVWDEOLVKHG JRDOV ZLOO HDVH WKH WUDLQHHfV LQKHUHQW DQ[LHW\ DERXW HYDOXDWLRQ )UHHPDQ f $QRWKHU WDVN IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV GLVHQWDQJOLQJ WKH WUDLQHHfV UHSRUW RI WKH HYHQWV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKDW DFWXDOO\ KDSSHQHG %UXFK 0HOFKLRGH

PAGE 62

&RFKH f 7KLV WDVN DSSHDUV WR EH D PRUH FRYHUW JRDO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG VXSHUYLVRUV DSSHDU WR EH OHVV H[SOLFLW LQ GHILQLQJ LW WR WKHLU WUDLQHHV &DULILR DQG +HVV f ,Q FRPSDULQJ WKHUDSLVWVf ZULWWHQ VXPPDULHV ZLWK UHFRUGHG PDWHULDO RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VHVVLRQV LW KDV EHHQ GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW WKH WUDLQHHVf UHFROOHFWLRQ RI HYHQWV PD\ QRW EH SDUWLFXODUO\ KHOSIXO &RXQHU &KRGRII f 7KH XVH RI DXGLR RU YLGHR WDSH WR UHFRUG WUDLQHHfV SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VHVVLRQV KDV SURYHQ WR EH D PRUH UHOLDEOH UHFRUG WKRXJK WKH LQWUXVLYHQHVV RI VXFK PHDVXUHV PD\ FRXQWHULQGLFDWH WKHLU XVH GHSHQGLQJ XSRQ WKH JRDOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ *ROGEHUJ f ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG XVH D YDULHW\ RI WHDFKLQJ PHWKRGV DQG PRGHV RI GDWD SUHVHQWDWLRQ )RU H[DPSOH %UDQQRQ f GHVFULEHG KRZ D YDULHW\ RI WHDFKLQJ WHFKQLTXHV FRXOG EH XVHG WR FRPPXQLFDWH LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG NQRZOHGJH %UDLQVWRUPLQJ IRU LQVWDQFH DOORZV WKH H[SORUDWLRQ DQG H[FKDQJH RI QRYHO LGHDV LQ D QRQFULWLFDO HQYLURQPHQW 5ROH SOD\LQJ DOORZV WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV WR fWU\ RXWf D YDULHW\ RI WHFKQLTXHV WKHUDSHXWLF RXWFRPHV ILQGLQJ QHZ VROXWLRQV 0RGHOLQJ EHKDYLRU E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU DOORZV WKH GHPRQVWUDWLRQ RI FHUWDLQ EHKDYLRUV IRU WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV ODWHU XVH *XLGHG UHIOHFWLRQ DOORZV WKH UHSOD\ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WKHUDSLVWFOLHQW LQWHUDFWLRQV WKDW LQ WXUQ SURPRWHV VXSHUYLVHH DZDUHQHVV 'XH WR WKH QDWXUH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG VXSHUYLVLRQfV RIWHQ SDUDOOHO UHODWLRQVKLS WR SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WKH LVVXH RI SHUIRUPLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DV SDUW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV RIWHQ GLVFXVVHG *HQHUDOO\ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHFRPPHQGV DJDLQVW SV\FKRWKHUDS\ GXULQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ :KLOH VRPH DXWKRUV LH 2U]HN 5LRUFK f VXJJHVW WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG KHOS WKH VXSHUYLVHH ILJKW LQQHU EDWWOHV DQG SHQHWUDWH WKH

PAGE 63

VXSHUYLVHHfV RZQ GHIHQVHV LW DSSHDUV WKDW WKLV LV EHWWHU VXLWHG IRU D VHSDUDWH WKHUDSLVW LQ D VHSDUDWH VHWWLQJ (NVWHLQ DQG :DOOHUVWHLQ /DPEHUW f +RZ 'R *RRG 6XSHUYLVRUV 3HUIRUP 6XSHUYLVLRQ" 7KH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU LV DEOH WR LQIOXHQFH WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV EHKDYLRU WKURXJK D YDULHW\ RI ZD\V &DULILR DQG +HVV f $ VXSHUYLVHHfV SHUVSHFWLYH FDQ EH VLJQLILFDQWO\ DOWHUHG E\ D VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVRQDO VW\OH 0DUNRZLW] f ,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW WR SURYLGH D SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZLOO FUHDWH D WUXVWLQJ DQG RSHQ HQYLURQPHQW LQ ZKLFK WZRZD\ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG FROODERUDWLRQ DUH YDOXHG %UXFK f ,Q WKHLU DSSURDFK WKH VXSHUYLVRU VKRXOG EH VXSSRUWLYH %UXFK f QRQFULWLFDO 0HOFKLRGH f FRQILGHQW HQWKXVLDVWLF DQG RSHQ WR D VXSHUYLVHHfV TXHVWLRQV DQG LQSXW $OERWW f 'RUQ f XVLQJ D VRFLDO LQIOXHQFH PRGHO VXJJHVWHG WKDW D VXSHUYLVRUfV H[SHUWQHVV WUXVW DQG DWWUDFWLYHQHVV LPSURYH KLVKHU DELOLW\ WR LQIOXHQFH VXSHUYLVHHV $ SDUWLFXODUO\ LPSRUWDQW IDFWRU LQ KRZ WKH VXSHUYLVRU FRQGXFWV VXSHUYLVLRQ DSSHDUV WR EH KRZ KHVKH JLYHV IHHGEDFN WR WKH WUDLQHH %DUWK DQG *DPEULOO f DQG )UHHPDQ f KDYH VXJJHVWHG WKDW IHHGEDFN VKRXOG EH GLUHFW LPPHGLDWH DQG FORVHO\ WLHG WR WKH WUDLQHHfV SHUIRUPDQFH )UHHPDQ DOVR LGHQWLILHG IRXU FKDUDFWHULVWLFV WR LGHDO IHHGEDFN 7R EH PRVW HIIHFWLYH IHHGEDFN VKRXOG EH f V\VWHPLF LQFOXGLQJ REMHFWLYH DFFXUDWH FRQVLVWHQW DQG UHOLDEOH f WLPHO\ f FOHDUO\ XQGHUVWRRG DQG EDVHG RQ VSHFLILF SHUIRUPDQFH FULWHULD DQG f UHFLSURFDO ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKH IHHGEDFN LWVHOI LW KDV EHHQ IRXQG WKDW KRZ LW LV GHOLYHUHG FDQ JUHDWO\ LQIOXHQFH WKH WUDLQHHfV DFFHSWDQFH &KHUQLVV

PAGE 64

DQG (JQDWLRV f IRXQG WKDW GLGDFWLF LQVLJKWRULHQWHG DQG IHHOLQJ RULHQWHG VW\OHV ZHUH EHWWHU UHFHLYHG E\ WUDLQHHV WKDQ ZHUH FRQIURQWDWLRQDO RU DXWKRULWDULDQ VW\OHV ,Q WHUPV RI WKH WHDFKLQJ WKDW RFFXUV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ *RLQ DQG .OLQH f IRXQG WKDW D VXSHUYLVRU\ DSSURDFK WKDW ZDV QHLWKHU SDVVLYH QRU GLUHFWLYH EXW fPLGGOH JURXQGf ZDV PRVW VXLWDEOH WR PRVW VXSHUYLVHHV 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG WKHUH LV QR FRQFOXVLYH HYLGHQFH WKDW WHDFKLQJ VW\OHV VKRXOG EH PRUH GLGDFWLF RU H[SHULHQWLDO LQ QDWXUH &DULR DQG +HVV f :KDW LV *RRG 6XSHUYLVLRQ" ,Q DWWHPSWV WR GHILQH JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQ LQYDULDEO\ WXUQV WR D GLVFXVVLRQ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVRUV *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV DSSDUHQWO\ SHUIRUPHG E\ D JRRG VXSHUYLVRU DQG JRRG VXSHUYLVRUV DSSDUHQWO\ SURYLGH JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ ,W DSSHDUV WKDW WKH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU VKRZV UHVSHFW HPSDWK\ JHQXLQHQHVV FRQFUHWHQHVV DQG VHOIGLVFORVXUH LQ LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK VXSHUYLVHHV ,W DSSHDUV WKDW WKHVH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV YDU\ LQ WKH OHYHO LQ ZKLFK WKH\ DUH SUHVHQWHG 7KH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU LV NQRZOHGJHDEOH DQG H[SHULHQFHG LQ ERWK SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU ZRUNV ZLWKLQ D FROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH WUDLQHH VHWWLQJ PXWXDOO\ DJUHHG XSRQ JRDOV 7KH VXSHUYLVRU XVHV DQ DSSURSULDWH YDULHW\ RI WHDFKLQJ PHWKRGV DQG WRROV DQG DYRLGV GRLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ GHVSLWH WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI D PHDQLQJIXO UHODWLRQVKLS *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV SHUIRUPHG LQ DQ RSHQ DQG WUXVWLQJ HQYLURQPHQW DQG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV W\SLFDOO\ YLHZHG DV FROODERUDWLYH LQYROYLQJ WZRZD\ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ 7KH JRRG VXSHUYLVRU SHUIRUPV VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ D VXSSRUWLYH DQG WKRXJKWIXO PDQQHU EHLQJ QHLWKHU WRR GLUHFWLYH QRU WRR SDVVLYH )HHGEDFN LV SURYLGHG LQ D PDQQHU WR HQKDQFH OHDUQLQJ DQG

PAGE 65

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f H[SHULHQFH KDYH EHHQ HOLFLWHG DQG LGHQWLILHG WKH\ ZLOO EH UHLQWHJUDWHG LQWR D GHVFULSWLRQ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ DV H[SHULHQFHG E\ WKH WUDLQHHV DV WKH\ GHYHORS LQWR SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJLVWV 7KH REWDLQHG GHVFULSWLRQ ZLOO WKHQ EH FRPSDUHG WR WKH H[LVWLQJ UHVHDUFK RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 66

0(7+2' $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG ZDV XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ WR H[SOLFDWH VXSHUYLVHHVf H[SHULHQFHV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH SDUWLFXODU PHWKRG XVHG ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ *LRUJL f 8VLQJ WKH IXQGDPHQWDO SUHFHSWV GHILQHG E\ +XVVHUO f DV JXLGHOLQHV DQG DVVXPSWLRQV *LRUJL KDV GHYHORSHG D VSHFLILF DQG ULJRURXV SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG IRU SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK *LRUJL f EDVHG LQ SDUW RQ WKH PRGHO RI 0HUOHDX3RQW\ f 7KH PHWKRGRORJ\ LV FRPSULVHG RI IRXU WKHRUHWLFDO SURFHVVHV f HPSLULFDO REVHUYDWLRQ UHGXFWLRQ RI WKH GDWD VHDUFK IRU HVVHQFHV DQG V\QWKHVLV LQWR WKH ZKROH 7KH ILUVW fVWHSf RI WKH PHWKRG LV WR HPSLULFDOO\ REWDLQ D GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH SKHQRPHQRQ WR EH VWXGLHG 7KH JRDO RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHU DW WKLV VWDJH LV WR REWDLQ DQ H[SHULPHQWDOO\ QRQELDVHG GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH SKHQRPHQRQ WR EH VWXGLHG 7R DFKLHYH WKLV JRDO LW VKRXOG EH D FDQGLG FRQFUHWH GHVFULSWLRQ REWDLQHG IURP DQRWKHU SHUVRQ WKH fVXEMHFWf ZLWKRXW DGGLWLRQDO H[SODQDWLRQ RU LQTXLU\ 2QFH WKH GHVFULSWLRQ LV REWDLQHG WKH H[SHULPHQWHU SHUIRUPV D UHGXFWLRQ RI WKH GDWD LQWR SV\FKRORJLFDO WHUPV 7KH VHFRQG VWHS WKH UHGXFWLRQ RI WKH GDWD LV WKH WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI WKH GHVFULSWLYH QDUUDWLYH SURYLGHG E\ WKH VXEMHFW LQWR D SV\FKRORJLFDO GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH VXEMHFWnV H[SHULHQFH )RU WKH UHGXFWLRQ WR UHPDLQ WUXH WR WKH VXEMHFWnV H[SHULHQFH fWKH H[SHULHQFHU PXVW EH SUHVHQW WR ZKDW LV JLYHQ SUHFLVHO\ DV LW LV JLYHQf *LRUJL S f 7R DFKLHYH WKLV fSUHVHQFHf *LRUJL HPSKDVL]HV WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI LQWXLWLRQ RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHU ,QWXLWLRQ ZKLFK LQ SDUW DLGV WKH DEVRUSWLRQ RI WKH XQFRQWDPLQDWHG DQG

PAGE 67

PHDQLQJIXO GHVFULSWLRQ 7R H[LVW DW WKH WLPH RI WKH UHGXFWLRQ LV QRW HQRXJK RQH PXVW EH IXOO\ SUHVHQW WR XQGHUVWDQG WKH H[SHULHQFH $GGLWLRQDOO\ IRU WKH DEVRUSWLRQ WR UHPDLQ XQFRQWDPLQDWHG EUDFNHWLQJ LV YLWDO DV SULRU NQRZOHGJH DQG EHOLHIV RI WKH SKHQRPHQRQ PXVW EH GLVUHJDUGHG LQ RUGHU WR EH IXOO\ SUHVHQW WR WKH GHVFULSWLRQ DV REWDLQHG %UDFNHWLQJ LV WKH SURFHVV RI DFWLYHO\ SDUWLWLRQLQJ SUHFRQFHLYHG LGHDV DQG EHOLHIV DERXW WKH SKHQRPHQRQ IURP FRQVFLRXV WKRXJKW 7KH WKLUG fVWHSf RI WKH PHWKRG FDOOV IRU D VHDUFK IRU WKH HVVHQFHV RI WKH GHVFULSWLRQ 7KH HVVHQFHV RI DQ H[SHULHQFH DUH WKH PRVW LQYDULDQW PHDQLQJ IRU D SKHQRPHQRQ ZLWKLQ WKH JLYHQ FRQWH[W *LRUJL f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fVWHSVf GHVFULEHG DERYH SURYLGH D JHQHUDO SURWRW\SH IRU SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK OHDGLQJ WR D QXPEHU RI SRVVLEOH PHWKRGRORJLHV ZKLFK PD\ EH

PAGE 68

XWLOL]HG WR DQVZHU WKH W\SH RI UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV DGGUHVVHG E\ SKHQRPHQRORJ\ 7KH PHWKRGRORJ\ XVHG LV WKLV VWXG\ LV WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG GHYHORSHG E\ *LRUJL f 6XEMHFWV 7KH GHVLJQ RI WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGLQJ WKH QXPEHU RI VXEMHFWV LV EDVHG RQ VHYHUDO SXEOLVKHG VWXGLHV ZKLFK KDYH XWLOL]HG SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRGRORJ\ *LRUJL $QMXV 2VEXUQH DQG .R]LH\ *XJOLHWWL.HOO\ DQG :HVWFRWW 6WHYLFN f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

PAGE 69

3URFHGXUH 7KH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK SURFHVV DV RXWOLQHG E\ *LRUJL IROORZV D ULJRURXV SURFHVV 7KH TXDOLWDWLYH GDWD ZDV FROOHFWHG WKURXJK WKH XVH RI LQWHUYLHZV LQ ZKLFK HDFK VXEMHFWfV H[SHULHQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV IXOO\ H[SORUHG 7KH DXGLR UHFRUGHG LQWHUYLHZV ZHUH WKHQ WUDQVFULEHG YHUEDWLP DQG WKHVH WUDQVFULSWV KHUHDIWHU UHIHUUHG WR DV SURWRFROV FRPSULVHG WKH GDWD RI WKH VWXG\ 7KH GDWD ZDV WKHQ DQDO\]HG IROORZLQJ *LRUJLf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fVHOIUHIOHFWLRQf RQ WKH SKHQRPHQD 7KLV SURFHVV HQWDLOHG ZULWLQJ RXW DOO WKRXJKWV DQG EHOLHIV UHJDUGLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKHQ UHGXFLQJ WKDW ZULWWHQ H[SUHVVLRQ WR LGHQWLI\ SUHYLRXVO\ KHOG EHOLHIV DQG SRWHQWLDO ELDVHV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKDW UHGXFWLRQ DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH 'LVFXVVLRQ FKDSWHU RI WKLV SDSHU VR WKH UHDGHU PD\ EH LQIRUPHG RI SRWHQWLDO ELDVHV RI WKH UHVHDUFKHU $IWHU WKHVH ELDVHV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DQG EUDFNHWHG WKH H[SHULPHQWHU FRQWLQXHG ZLWK WKH GDWD FROOHFWLRQ

PAGE 70

'DWD &ROOHFWLRQ 7KH GDWD ZDV FROOHFWHG E\ FRQGXFWLQJ XQVWUXFWXUHG LQWHUYLHZV $OO ILYH LQWHUYLHZV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHU (DFK LQWHUYLHZ ZDV VFKHGXOHG RQH ZHHN LQ DGYDQFH :KHQ WKH LQWHUYLHZ ZDV VFKHGXOHG HDFK VXEMHFW ZDV WROG WKDW WKH QDWXUH RI WKH LQWHUYLHZ ZRXOG EH D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH VXEMHFWfV SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ UHFHLYHG WKURXJKRXW SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ $W WKDW WLPH HDFK VXEMHFW ZDV DVNHG WR UHIOHFW XSRQ VXFK H[SHULHQFHV DV D ZD\ WR SUHSDUH IRU WKH LQWHUYLHZ 3ULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WKH LQWHUYLHZ HDFK VXEMHFW ZDV DVNHG WR UHDG DQG VLJQ DQ LQIRUPHG FRQVHQW ZKLFK LQFOXGHG LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH DXGLR WDSLQJ RI WKH LQWHUYLHZV (DFK LQWHUYLHZ EHJDQ ZLWK WKH VDPH TXHVWLRQ f7KLQN EDFN WR D WLPH ZKHQ \RX H[SHULHQFHG ZKDW \RX EHOLHYH WR EH D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7HOO PH DERXW WKH H[SHULHQFH ZKDW KDSSHQHG ZKDW ZDV VDLG ZKDW ZDV IHOW DQ\WKLQJ \RX EHOLHYH ZDV SDUW RI WKDW H[SHULHQFHf $IWHU WKH VXEMHFW DQVZHUHG WKH LQLWLDO TXHVWLRQ WKH LQWHUYLHZ SURFHHGHG E\ DVNLQJ WKH VXEMHFW WR HODERUDWH XSRQ ZKDW ZDV RULJLQDOO\ LQWURGXFHG LQWR WKH GLVFXVVLRQ E\ WKH VXEMHFW ([FHSW IRU WKH ILUVW TXHVWLRQ WKH LQWHUYLHZ GLG QRW IROORZ DQ\ VHW SODQ RU VHHN WR FRQILUP SUHHVWDEOLVKHG K\SRWKHVHV EXW UHIOHFWHG DQG IROORZHG WKH VXEMHFWfV OHDG 7KH ILYH LQWHUYLHZV UDQJHG LQ OHQJWK IURP WR PLQXWHV 7KH ILYH LQWHUYLHZV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG ZLWKLQ D WHQ GD\ SHULRG $IWHU WKH ILIWK LQWHUYLHZ ZDV FRQGXFWHG HDFK RI WKH ILYH LQWHUYLHZV ZHUH WUDQVFULEHG LQ WKH RUGHU LQ ZKLFK WKH\ ZHUH FRPSOHWHG 7KH H[SHULPHQWHU FRPSOHWHG DOO ILYH WUDQVFULSWLRQV 7KH LQWHUYLHZV ZHUH WUDQVFULEHG YHUEDWLP ZLWK WKH H[FHSWLRQ RI QDPHV DQG RWKHU LGHQWLI\LQJ GDWD ZKLFK ZDV FKDQJHG WR SURWHFW WKH DQRQ\PLW\ RI WKH

PAGE 71

VXEMHFWV DV ZHOO DV DQ\ LQGLYLGXDOV WKH\ GLVFXVVHG GXULQJ WKH LQWHUYLHZ $IWHU WKH DFFXUDF\ RI WKH SURWRFROV ZDV FRQILUPHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHU WKH DXGLR WDSHV ZHUH GHVWUR\HG 7KH ZULWWHQ SURWRFROV FRPSULVH WKH GDWD VHW RI WKH VWXG\ ZKLFK ZDV WKHQ DQDO\]HG DV IROORZV 'DWD $QDO\VLV 7KH PHWKRG RI DQDO\VLV IRU HDFK SURWRFRO IROORZHG WKH PHWKRG IRU SV\FKRORJLFDO SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO DQDO\VLV DV RXWOLQHG E\ *LRUJL f 7KLV PHWKRG LV D VSHFLILF IRXU VWHS SURFHGXUH ZKLFK LV EDVHG RQ WKH JHQHUDO SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PRGHO GHVFULEHG HDUOLHU DQG LV GHWDLOHG EHORZ 3ULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WKH DQDO\VLV LW ZDV HVVHQWLDO IRU WKH H[SHULPHQWHU WR FRQWLQXH WR EUDFNHW DOO KH NQHZ FRQFHUQLQJ WKH SKHQRPHQRQ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH FRQVFLRXV DQG SXUSRVHIXO DFW RI EUDFNHWLQJ GUHZ XSRQ WKH VHOIn UHIOHFWLRQV GLVFRYHUHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHU SULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WKH LQWHUYLHZV (DFK SURWRFRO ZDV DQDO\]HG LQGLYLGXDOO\ IROORZLQJ WKH SURFHGXUH GHVFULEHG EHORZ $ VDPSOH SURWRFRO ZLWK FRUUHVSRQGLQJ PHDQLQJ XQLWV LV SUHVHQWHG LQ $SSHQGL[ $ )LUVW WKH HQWLUH GHVFULSWLRQ ZDV UHDG WKURXJK LQ LWV HQWLUHW\ WZR WLPHV 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKHVH LQLWLDO UHDGLQJV ZDV WR JHW D VHQVH RI WKH SURWRFRO DV D ZKROH 5HDGLQJ LW WZLFH DOORZHG WKH H[SHULPHQWHU WR EHWWHU XQGHUVWDQG WKH SURWRFRO DV D GHVFULSWLRQ RI RQH SHUVRQnV OLYHG H[SHULHQFH $IWHU D JHQHUDO XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH SURWRFRO ZDV DFKLHYHG WKH QH[W VWHS ZDV WDNHQ WKH SURFHVV RI XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKH H[SHULHQFH 6LQFH LW LV GLIILFXOW LI QRW LPSRVVLEOH WR DQDO\]H WKH HQWLUH SURWRFRO DW RQFH WKH VHFRQG VWHS RI WKH SURFHGXUH FRQVLVWHG RI GLYLGLQJ WKH SURWRFRO LQWR SDUWV $V WKH JRDO RI

PAGE 72

WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG LV WR GLVFRYHU PHDQLQJ WKH SURWRFRO ZDV GLYLGHG LQWR ZKDW *LRUJL FDOOV fPHDQLQJ XQLWVf *LRUJL f 7KHVH ZHUH GHOLQHDWHG E\ SRLQWV RI WUDQVLWLRQ RI PHDQLQJ ZLWKLQ WKH SURWRFRO ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV HDFK LQGLYLGXDO XQLW FRQWDLQHG RQH LQGLYLGXDO PHDQLQJ ZKLFK UHYHDOHG VRPHWKLQJ DERXW WKH VXEMHFWnV H[SHULHQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH GLYLVLRQ LQWR PHDQLQJ XQLWV ZDV DFFRPSOLVKHG E\ EHJLQQLQJ DW WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH SURWRFRO UHDGLQJ XQWLO RQH PHDQLQJ XQLW GHOLQHDWHG LWVHOI DQG PDUNLQJ WKH SRLQW RI WUDQVLWLRQ RQ WKH SDJH 7KH H[SHULPHQWHU WKHQ FRQWLQXHG UHDGLQJ WKH SURWRFRO IURP WKDW SRLQW PDUNLQJ HDFK VXFFHVVLYH PHDQLQJ XQLW DV LW DSSHDUHG $IWHU FRPSOHWLQJ WKH SURWRFRO WKH UHVHDUFKHU UHWXUQHG WR WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH SURWRFRO WHVWLQJ HDFK PHDQLQJ XQLW LQGLYLGXDOO\ 7KLV fWHVWf GHWHUPLQHG f ZKHWKHU HDFK XQLW FRXOG VWDQG RQ LWV RZQ DQG f LI HDFK XQLW FRQWDLQHG RQO\ RQH PHDQLQJ ,I WKH PHDQLQJ XQLW ZLWKVWRRG WKH WHVW WKH UHVHDUFKHU DGYDQFHG WR WKH QH[W XQLW ,I QRW WKH PHDQLQJ XQLW ZDV FRUUHFWHG 7KLV FRUUHFWLRQ ZDV SHUIRUPHG E\ HLWKHU DGGLQJ WKH XQLW WR DQ DGMDFHQW PHDQLQJ XQLW LI WKH XQLW IDLOHG WR VWDQG RQ LWV RZQf RU E\ VSOLWWLQJ WKH PHDQLQJ XQLW LQWR WZR RU PRUH XQLWV LI WKH XQLW FRQWDLQHG PRUH WKDQ RQH PHDQLQJf 7KLV FRUUHFWLRQ SURFHGXUH ZDV FRQGXFWHG RQFH WKURXJK WKH HQWLUH SURWRFRO DW ZKLFK WLPH WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI PHDQLQJ XQLWV ZDV FRPSOHWH 2QFH WKH PHDQLQJ XQLWV ZHUH GHWHUPLQHG WKH\ ZHUH WUDQVIRUPHG WR UHYHDO WKHLU LPSOLFLW SV\FKRORJLFDO YDOXH WR WKH PHDQLQJ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV VWHS ZDV WKH WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI WKH VXEMHFWnV RZQ ZRUGV LQWR SV\FKRORJLFDO WHUPVf§WKH WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI WKH VXEMHFWnV RZQ QDUUDWLYH GHVFULSWLRQ RI KLVKHU H[SHULHQFH LQWR WKH JHQHUDOL]HG SV\FKRORJLFDO PHDQLQJ RI WKDW H[SHULHQFH 7KHVH SV\FKRORJLFDO PHDQLQJV ZHUH QRWHG LQ

PAGE 73

WKH PDUJLQV RI WKH SURWRFRO WR FRUUHVSRQG WR WKH PHDQLQJ XQLW IURP ZKLFK LW FDPH $IWHU WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO PHDQLQJV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG IRU HDFK PHDQLQJ XQLW RI WKH SURWRFRO WKH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV IRU WKH SURWRFRO ZHUH LGHQWLILHG 7KH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV ZHUH FRPSULVHG RI SV\FKRORJLFDO PHDQLQJV ZKLFK DSSHDUHG WR EH PRVW FHQWUDO WR WKH VXEMHFWfV H[SHULHQFH 7KH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHUfV UHIOHFWLYH SUHVHQFH ZLWK WKH GDWD DQG VXEVHTXHQW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ 7KH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV FRXOG EH FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV WKH VLJQLILFDQW WKHPHV WKDW HPHUJHG IURP WKH VXEMHFWf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f DQG GHVFULEHG E\ 6WHYLFN f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

PAGE 74

7KLV GHVFULSWLRQ ZDV WKHQ IXUWKHU UHGXFHG DIWHU UHIOHFWLQJ XSRQ WKH WKHPHV RI WKH HVVHQWLDO GHVFULSWLRQ 7KLV ILQDO UHGXFWLRQ \LHOGHG WKH VWUXFWXUDO GHVFULSWLRQ RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV GHVFULSWLRQ LV DOVR UHSRUWHG LQ WKH 5HVXOWV FKDSWHU RI WKLV SDSHU

PAGE 75

5(68/76 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ LV SUHVHQWHG DW WKUHH OHYHOV RI GHSWK DQG FRPSOH[LW\ WKH RULJLQDO PHDQLQJ XQLWV WKH HVVHQWLDO GHVFULSWLRQ ZKLFK LV FRPSULVHG RI WKH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV DQG WKH VWUXFWXUDO GHVFULSWLRQ ZKLFK LV D UHGXFWLRQ RI WKH HVVHQWLDO GHVFULSWLRQ 7KH GDWD DQDO\VLV RI WKH ILYH VXEMHFW SURWRFROV \LHOGHG PHDQLQJ XQLWV IRU HDFK QDUUDWLYH 7KH PHDQLQJ XQLWV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH EHJLQQLQJ RQ WKH QH[W SDJH 7KH PHDQLQJ XQLWV ZHUH WKHQ UHIOHFWHG XSRQ WR GHWHUPLQH WKH PRVW VLJQLILFDQW FHQWUDO DVSHFWV WR WKH H[SHULHQFH RI EHLQJ VXSHUYLVHG 7KH FHQWUDO HOHPHQWV DUH LGHQWLILHG DV WKH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV 7KH FRQVWLWXHQWV HOHPHQWV PD\ EH FRPSULVHG RI RQH RU PRUH PHDQLQJ XQLWV ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV D PHDQLQJ XQLW PD\ EH VLJQLILFDQW HQRXJK RQ LWV RZQ WR EH GHHPHG D FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQW $GGLWLRQDOO\ D FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQW PD\ EH FRPSRVHG RI WZR RU PRUH PHDQLQJ XQLWV WR FRPSULVH D XQLW RI KLJKHU DQG PRUH FRPSOH[ PHDQLQJ 7KHVH FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV DUH UHLQWHJUDWHG WR SURGXFH WKH HVVHQWLDO GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULHQFH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ )LQDOO\ WKH HVVHQWLDO GHVFULSWLRQ ZDV UHIOHFWHG XSRQ DQG IXUWKHU UHGXFHG WR SURGXFH WKH VWUXFWXUDO GHVFULSWLRQ 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ DUH FRPSULVHG RI DOO WKUHH RI WKHVH W\SHV RI LQIRUPDWLRQ

PAGE 76

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f§ 635fV LQYHVWPHQW DWWULEXWHG WR SHUVRQDOLW\ IDFWRUV 3URYLGHG LQ YLYR PRGHOLQJ LQ VHVVLRQ 635 JDYH FOHDU H[SHFWDWLRQV RI ZKDW ZDV ZDQWHG 63( DFWLYHO\ VRXJKW 631& EHFDXVH RI UHVSHFW ZDQWLQJ WR JHW LQIR IURP KHU 2SHQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DOORZHG GLVDJUHHPHQW *HQXLQHQHVV $VVHVVHG FXUUHQW OHYHO RI DELOLW\ DW WKH RQVHW RI 631 ([SHFWDWLRQV LPSOLHG FRQILGHQFH PDWXULW\ H[SHULHQFH ,QYHVWHG FRPPLWWHG WR WUDLQLQJ DQG IXOILOOLQJ 63(f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fV SHUVRQDOLW\ VW\OH )OH[LEOH LQ SURFHVV RI 631 GHSHQGLQJ RQ QHHGV RI 63( 6WUXFWXUH DQG FRQVLVWHQF\ QRW DV LPSRUWDQW ZKHQ IDPLOLDU ZLWK VXEMHFW 1RQWKUHDWHQLQJ ([SOLFLW UHJDUGLQJ SURFHVV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV RI 631 3URFHVV PRYHV IURP LQIR JDWKHULQJ WR FRQVXOWLQJ $OZD\V PDGH WLPH DQG JDYH DWWHQWLRQ WR 63( VHQVH RI SULRULW\ 6WUXFWXUH PD\ FKDQJHUHTXLUHV DGDSWDWLRQ PRUH DJJUHVVLYH EHKDYLRU E\ 63( WR KDYH QHHGV PHW 1RQSXQLWLYH 1RWH D UHIHUV WR VXSHUYLVHH UHIHUV WR VXSHUYLVRUF UHIHUV WR VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 77

7$%/( f§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fV SHUVSHFWLYH FRQILUPLQJf§ DOORZHG LQFUHDVHG RSHQQHVV 635 HQFRXUDJHG VHOIGLVFORVXUH 3HUVRQDOLW\ IDFWRUV RSHQ JHQXLQH 5HLQIRUFHG JRRG ZRUN &RXUVH RI 631 LV UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI 635 3URYLGHG LQVWUXFWLRQ IRU JURZWK ZLWKLQ D VDIH HQYLURQPHQW )ULHQGO\ HPSDWKLF 6HOIFRQILGHQW FHQWHUHG DQG KRQHVW ,GHQWLILHG SRRU ZRUN PDGH VXJJHVWLRQV IRU LPSURYHPHQW 1HJDWLYH H[SHULHQFH ZKHQ QRW LQIRUPDWLYH ,QWHUHVWHG LQ 63( DW D SHUVRQDO OHYHOf§LQYRNHG D JRRG IHHOLQJ LQ 63( /LNDEOH %HLQJ VXSSRUWLYH LPSRUWDQW WR GHFUHDVLQJ DQ[LHW\ +RQHVW 6HHLQJ SRWHQWLDO RI 635 LQFUHDVHV HDJHUQHVV WR VHHN 631 $FFXUDWH DWWHQWLYHQHVV WR 63(f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fW NQRZ 635 PXVW EH FRPSHWHQW DQG JRRG UROH PRGHO :DV QRW DV DYDLODEOH DV GHVLUHG GXH WR KHU SRSXODULW\ 6W\OH LGHQWLILHG DV EHLQJ GXH WR ZKR WKH SHUVRQ LV LQFOXGLQJ FRQILGHQW QRQ SXQLWLYH FODULW\ RI 635fV H[SHFWDWLRQV SURYLGHG DQ H[WHUQDO PHDVXUH KHOSHG 63( RUJDQL]H KHU JRDOV 5HVSHFW VXSHUVHGHV VFKHGXOLQJ VWUXFWXUH %DODQFHG VXSSRUW DQG YDOLGDWLRQ ZLWK FKDOOHQJLQJ DQG LGHQWLI\LQJ WKLQJV WR LPSURYH XSRQ

PAGE 78

7$%/( f§FRQWLQXHG 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW -RLQW GHFLVLRQ PDNLQJ UHJDUGLQJ GLUHFWLRQ RI WKHUDS\ KHOSHG EXLOG 63( FRQILGHQFH 631 DV DQ fDUWf 2UJDQL]DWLRQ DQG H[SOLFLWQHVV GHPRQVWUDWHG 635 H[SHULHQFH DQG NQRZOHGJH 631 IRUPDW YDULHG TXHVWLRQ DQG DQVZHU UHYLHZ UHSRUW /HIW 631 NQRZLQJ OHDUQHG VRPHWKLQJ WRGD\ 63(f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fV LQWHUHVW LQ 63(fV JURZWK DV D WKHUDSLVW ,Q UHODWLRQVKLS GHYHORSHG SRWHQWLDO WKURXJK UHDVVXUDQFH VXSSRUW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ 7UDLQLQJ LQFOXGHG SURFHVVLQJ RI VSHFLILF LQWHUYHQWLRQV DQG VXJJHVWLRQV $Q LQWULQVLF GHVLUH WR VHH DQRWKHU SHUVRQ JURZ SOHDVXUH DW IRVWHULQJ WKDW JURZWK OLNHG 635V DV SHRSOH 5HODWLRQVKLS EH\RQG 631 LV LPSRUWDQW ZKHWKHU RU WHDFKHU RU VRFLDOO\ 635fV LQYHVWPHQW VKRZQ WKURXJK WLPH HQHUJ\ HQWKXVLDVP REVHUYHG DQG H[FKDQJHG ZLWK WKH UHODWLRQVKLS $GDSWHG WR 63(fV SURIHVVLRQDO LQWHUSHUVRQDO VW\OHf§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

PAGE 79

7$%/( f§FRQWLQXHG 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6HOIGLVFORVXUH ,QYROYHPHQW DW DQ DIIHFWLYH OHYHO 6HWV SURIHVVLRQDO PRGHO ,GHQWLILHV LQGLYLGXDO DV PHQWRU ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ ZLWK 635 LPSRUWDQW LQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ JRDOV DQG HVWDEOLVKLQJ 635 DV D UROH PRGHO 3URIHVVLRQDO IUHHGRP LQ ZRUN 63( H[SHULHQFHV DW LQWXLWLYH OHYHO 0DLQWDLQV SURIHVVLRQDO ERXQGDULHV WKRXJK LQFUHDVLQJO\ fSHUVRQDEOHf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f§WUXVWHG P\ MXGJPHQW SURYLGHG YDU\LQJ H[SHULHQFH WR SXVK WKH WUDLQLQJ H[SHUWLVH 63( VHHNV VXJJHVWLRQV FRUUHFWLRQV 7DNHV WLPH LQFUHDVHV HIIRUW DW WLPHV RI LQFUHDVHG 63( QHHG ([SHFWDWLRQV ZHUH ULJLG 635 H[SUHVVHV FRQILGHQFH LQ 63( SDUWLFXODUO\ ZKHQ VSHFLILFV DUH LGHQWLILHG

PAGE 80

7$%/( f§FRQWLQXHG 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW %HJLQQLQJ DW D QHZ VLWH LW LV QHFHVVDU\ IRU 635 WR KHOS JLYH FRQILGHQFH 7HDFKLQJ FDQ EH UHFLSURFDO UHODWLRQVKLS GHSHQGHQW 63( OHDUQHG DERXW ERXQGDULHV XQSURIHVVLRQDOLVP WKURXJK D SRRU 631 H[SHULHQFH ([SHULHQFHV 635 DW DQ DIIHFWLYH OHYHO 3RRU 631 UHVXOWV LQ OHDUQLQJ WKURXJK H[SHULHQFLQJ DQJHU WRZDUGV 635 KRZ LW FDQ LPSDFW SURIHVVLRQDO EHKDYLRUWKHUDS\ 'HGLFDWLRQ WR WUDLQLQJf§WDNLQJ VRPH ULVNV SURYLGLQJ QHZ FKDOOHQJHV 63(fV QHHGV FKDQJH ZLWK GHYHORSPHQW 3RRU ERXQGDULHV 63( ZDV VFDUHG 'HVSLWH FORVHQHVV QR H[SHULHQFH RI ERXQGDULHV FURVVHG 3HUVRQDO DQG SURIHVVLRQDO GLVFORVXUH GRHV QRW LQFOXGH HPRWLRQDO GLVFORVXUH UH 631 UHODWLRQVKLS FRPSURPLVHV ZLWK 63( WR SURYLGH QHZ H[SHULHQFHV ZKLOH JHWWLQJ WKH QHFHVVDU\ ZRUN GRQH $V 63( GHYHORSV DV D WKHUDSLVW EHFRPHV PRUH NQRZOHGJHDEOH FRQILGHQW H[SHFWDWLRQV FKDQJH 3RRU ERXQGDULHV 63( ORVW UHVSHFW IRU 639 635 RSHQ WR GLYHUVH ZD\V RI WKLQNLQJ 63(fV DFWLYLW\ ZLOOLQJQHVV WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ LPSRUWDQW ZDV UHLQIRUFHG 2ZQ ZLOOLQJQHVV WR SDUWLFLSDWH H[SRVH ZHDNQHVVHV WR OHDUQ ([SHFWDWLRQV LQFOXGH f, NQRZ PRUH RI ZKDW ,fP GRLQJf 3RRU ERXQGDULHV 63( OHDUQHG LPSRUWDQFH RI SURIHVVLRQDO ERXQGDULHV PRUH DZDUH RI ZKHQ WKH\ DUH EHLQJ SUHVVHG 635 RSHQ WR GLYHUVLW\PRUH LPSRUWDQW ODWHU ZKHQ OHVV QHHG WR OHDUQ QHZ PDWHULDO ,QVWLOODWLRQ RI FRQILGHQFH QHFHVVDU\ WR SHUIRUP DQG GHYHORS SURIHVVLRQDOO\ 63(f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f§ WKHUDSLVW PXVW EH ZLOOLQJ WR IDFHZRUN WKURXJK SHUVRQDO LVVXHV

PAGE 81

7$%/( f§FRQWLQXHG 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW )HOW FRQQHFWHG 63( EHOLHI LW LV LPSRUWDQW WR VWLOO EH OHDUQLQJ +RQHVWf§VWUDLJKW IRUZDUG %HKDYLRU LV D IXQFWLRQ RI ZKR WKH SHUVRQ LV 7R EH JRRG WKHUDSLVW SHUVRQDO LVVXHV PXVW EH DGGUHVVHG LQ 631 ,QWHUSHUVRQDO WUXVW ,GHQWLILHV ZDUP DIIHFWLYH H[SHULHQFH DV GXH WR SHUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOHV 3RVLWLYH HYHQ ZKHQ JLYLQJ QHJDWLYH IHHGEDFN 63( KDV UHVSHFW IRU 635fV SRVLWLRQ DQG UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV 5HDFK D SRLQW LQ UHODWLRQVKLS DEOH WR GLVDJUHH FRPHV ODWHU LQ GHYHORSPHQW 6HQVH RI HTXDOLW\ OHDUQ IURP HDFK RWKHU SURFHVV RI FKDQJH GLIIHUHQW SHUVSHFWLYHV $ JXLGH PHQWRU 63( H[SHFWDWLRQV RI QHHGLQJ WR LPSURYH FOLQLFDO VNLOOV 5HVSHFWf§ XQLYHUVDO UHTXLUHPHQW 635 VKDUHV RZQ WUDLQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV LQVHFXULWLHV 5HODWLRQVKLS RXWVLGH 631 DIIHFWV H[SHULHQFH DQG SHUFHSWLRQ ERWK DQG +LJKO\ WUXVWZRUWK\ ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ RI VSHFLILFV LOOXVWUDWHG 635fV LQWHUHVW DQG DWWHQWLRQ (WKLFVf§ SUHUHTXLVLWH IRU SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH 7LPH DQG DYDLODELOLW\ LPSRUWDQW ,QYROYHG DV D SHUVRQ QRW MXVW D 63( ([SHFWDWLRQ RI 635 WR KHOSf§ JLYH FRQILGHQFH DQG WR WHDFK )HOW UHVSHFWHG E\ EHLQJ JLYHQ UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV 5ROHV FKDQJH HYROYH EXW QRW VHSDUDEOH .QRZOHGJHDEOH VSHFLILF LQ IHHGEDFN LV JHQXLQH DSSURDFKDEOH UROH PRGHO )DFWRUV UHTXLUHG WR EH D JRRG 635 LQWHUHVW FRPPLWPHQW SDWLHQFH )OH[LEOH ZLWKLQ ERXQGDULHV :HQW RXW RI KLV ZD\ WR DGYDQFH KLP SURIHVVLRQDOO\ 1HHGV RI 63( LPSRUWDQW 5HODWLRQVKLS LV H[SHULHQFHG DV fVSHFLDOf FUHDWHV DQ H[WUDRUGLQDU\ H[SHULHQFH EH\RQG JRRG 5HTXLUHV D ZLOOLQJQHVV WR EH FORVH LQYROYHG

PAGE 82

7$%.( f§FRQWLQXHG 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW 6XEMHFW &KDOOHQJHG WR GHYHORSJURZ DV WKHUDSLVW 3RVLWLYH UHLQIRUFHPHQW 3RVLWLYH 635 LV LQ WXQH ZLWK 63( WRXFKLQJ DOO DVSHFWV GXULQJ 631 635 PRGHOLQJ KRZ WR GR WKHUDS\ .QRZOHGJH DQG FRPSHWHQFH SUHUHTXLVLWH RWKHUZLVH QR OHDUQLQJf 635fV NQRZOHGJH LV PHDVXUHG E\ KRZ PXFK 63( OHDUQV 7UXVW GHYHORSV EHLQJ WR 631 RQ WLPH KRZ WKH\ WUHDW \RX DW GLIILFXOW WLPHV '\QDPLF DQG HYROYLQJ 'HYHORSPHQW RI UHODWLRQVKLS PLUURUV WKHUDSHXWLF UHODWLRQVKLS 2QH ZKR LV ZLOOLQJ WR VKDUH RQHfV DIIHFWLYH H[SHULHQFH 63( OLNHV WKHP DV SHRSOH ,QFUHDVHG WUXVW DOORZV 63( WR H[SRVH PRUH RI VHOI GHYHORS LQWR D EHWWHU WKHUDSLVW

PAGE 83

(VVHQWLDO 'HVFULSWLRQ RI *RRG 6XSHUYLVLRQ 7KH FRPSLODWLRQ RI FRQVWLWXHQW HOHPHQWV RI WKH ILYH VXEMHFWVf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fV QHHG 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHf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fV HYDOXDWLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV GHSHQGHQW LQ SDUW RQ KRZ ZHOO WKHVH H[SHFWDWLRQV DUH PHW 7KH YDOXH DWWULEXWHG WR VXSHUYLVLRQ E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV DOVR GHSHQGHQW XSRQ KRZ PXFK WKH VXSHUYLVHH FDQ DQG GRHV OHDUQ IURP WKH VXSHUYLVRU GXULQJ WKH FRXUVH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 84

,Q RUGHU IRU LGHDO OHDUQLQJ WR RFFXU WKH VXSHUYLVHH PXVW IHHO VDIH HQRXJK WR H[SRVH ZHDNQHVVHV DQG RSHQ RQHVHOI WR VFUXWLQ\ E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHVLUH DQG DELOLW\ WR WDNH PRUH ULVNV ERWK LQ WKHUDS\ DV ZHOO DV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV D UHVXOW RI GHYHORSLQJ FRQILGHQFH DQG IHHOLQJ VDIH ZLWKLQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ HQYLURQPHQW 6XSHUYLVHH FRQILGHQFH LV GHYHORSHG E\ EHLQJ WUXVWHG JLYHQ SRVLWLYH IHHGEDFN DQG EHLQJ SURYLGHG ZLWK FKDOOHQJLQJ FOLQLFDO FDVHV WR IXUWKHU GHYHORS FOLQLFDO VNLOOV 6DIHW\ LV QRW H[SHULHQFHG XQOHVV WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV DEOH WR WUXVW WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ DOVR GUDZV WKH VXSHUYLVHH LQWR WKH SURFHVV HQFRXUDJLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR EH PRUH DFWLYH LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ SURFHVV *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV DWWULEXWHG GLUHFWO\ WR WKH DFWLRQV DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU 3URIHVVLRQDO FRPSHWHQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV PHDVXUHG E\ KRZ PXFK WKH VXSHUYLVHH OHDUQV IURP WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK WKH VXSHUYLVHH YDOXHV VXSHUYLVLRQ LV GHWHUPLQHG E\ KRZ PXFK WKH VXSHUYLVRU KDV WR RIIHU 6XSHUYLVLRQ ZLWK VXSHUYLVRUV SHUFHLYHG DV FRPSHWHQW NQRZOHGJHDEOH DQG VNLOOHG LV DFWLYHO\ VRXJKW RXW E\ VXSHUYLVHHV *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV LGHQWLILHG LQ WKH VWXG\ ZHUH DOVR GHVFULEHG DV KRQHVW HWKLFDO JHQXLQH VXSSRUWLYH VHOIFRQILGHQW ZDUP FDULQJ LQVLJKWIXO DQG HPSDWKLF *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV HQFRXUDJH RU DW OHDVW DOORZ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS WR GHYHORS IURP D VXSHUILFLDO WDVNRULHQWHG UHODWLRQVKLS WR D GHHSHU UHODWLRQVKLS ZKHUHLQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH FDQ VKDUH DQG EHWWHU XQGHUVWDQG DIIHFWLYH H[SHULHQFH *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV DUH DOVR H[SOLFLW LQ WKHLU H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG HYDOXDWLRQ UHTXLUHPHQWV *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV DUH LQ WXQH ZLWK DQG UHVSRQVLYH WR WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHV &RPPLWPHQW WR WUDLQLQJ LQ JHQHUDO DV ZHOO DV

PAGE 85

FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV WUDLQLQJ ZHUH DOVR LGHQWLILHG DV LPSRUWDQW FRPSRQHQWV WR JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 6XSHUYLVRUV GHPRQVWUDWH WKHLU FRPPLWPHQW WR WUDLQLQJ WKURXJK WKHLU FRPPLWPHQW RI WLPH WR WKHLU WUDLQHHV DQG WKHLU DWWHQWLRQ WR WKH WUDLQHHV GXULQJ WKHLU DOORWWHG WLPH 6XSHUYLVRUV DOVR GHPRQVWUDWH WKHLU FRPPLWPHQW E\ EHLQJ ZLOOLQJ WR VKDUH WKHLU RZQ WUDLQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV SDUWLFXODUO\ GLIILFXOWLHV 6XSHUYLVRUV FDQ DOVR GHPRQVWUDWH WKHLU LQWHUHVW LQ WKH WUDLQHHVf OHDUQLQJ E\ DVNLQJ TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKHLU WUDLQLQJ H[SHFWDWLRQV QHHGV DQG ZKHWKHU WKH\ DUH EHLQJ PHW :KLOH WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG OLNDELOLW\ DUH LGHQWLILHG DV LPSRUWDQW LW LV PRUH LPSRUWDQW WR PDLQWDLQ D SURIHVVLRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS DOWKRXJK WKH UHODWLRQVKLS PD\ EHFRPH PRUH LQIRUPDO DV WKH WUDLQHH GHYHORSV 7KH PDLQWHQDQFH RI DSSURSULDWH DQG SURIHVVLRQDO ERXQGDULHV ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV EHLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV UHVSRQVLELOLW\ %RXQGDU\ FRQFHUQV ZHUH H[SUHVVHG E\ DOO ILYH VXEMHFWV DQG ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV D QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQW WR D VDIH DQG SURGXFWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS 0XWXDO UHVSHFW ZDV DOVR LGHQWLILHG DV D QHFHVVDU\ SUHUHTXLVLWH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ )HHGEDFN ZDV UHSRUWHG WR EH DQ LPSRUWDQW SDUW RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ $SSURSULDWHO\ JLYHQ IHHGEDFN ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV YDOLGDWLQJ DFFXUDWH DQG FRQWULEXWLQJ WRZDUG WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW 3RVLWLYH IHHGEDFN FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH VHOIFRQILGHQFH RI WKH WUDLQHH DQG LQFUHDVHG WKH WUDLQHHfV FRPPLWPHQW WR ZRUN IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRU 1HJDWLYH IHHGEDFN ZKHQ UHFHLYHG ZDV H[SHULHQFH E\ WKH WUDLQHH DV DQ KRQHVW HIIRUW E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU WR FRQWULEXWH WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHYHORSPHQW +HOSIXO

PAGE 86

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f§ JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV SHUIRUPHG E\ D SHUVRQ ZLWK D FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV WUDLQLQJ )URP WKH WUDLQHHfV SHUVSHFWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ LV QRW D VNLOOV GHSHQGHQW SURFHVV EXW UDWKHU D SHUVRQ GHSHQGHQW SURFHVV ZKHUH WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV RZQ SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG LQWHUSHUVRQDO VW\OH LV LGHQWLILHG DV WKH UHDVRQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV H[SHULHQFHV DV JRRG RU EDG ,PSRUWDQW VXSHUYLVRU DWWULEXWHV ZKLFK ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV LQFOXGH KRQHVW\ JHQXLQHQHVV LQVLJKWIXOQHVV DQG VHOIFRQILGHQFH *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV DOVR VXSSRUW DQG YDOLGDWH WKH WUDLQHHfV H[SHULHQFH DUH FRPPLWWHG WR WKH SURIHVVLRQ DQG WR SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ DQG UHVSHFWHG E\ VWXGHQWV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO SHHUV *RRG VXSHUYLVRUV H[KLELW SURIHVVLRQDOLVP DUH FRJQL]DQW DQG UHVSHFWIXO RI WUDLQHHVXSHUYLVRU ERXQGDU\ LVVXHV DQG

PAGE 87

DUH H[SOLFLW UHJDUGLQJ SHUIRUPDQFH H[SHFWDWLRQV 1RQDXWKRULWDULDQ VW\OHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG LQWHUSHUVRQDO ZDUPWK ZHUH DOVR LGHQWLILHG DV GHVLUDEOH WKRXJK QRW QHFHVVDU\ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV H[SHULHQFHG DV D SHULRG RI OHDUQLQJ ZKHQ WKH WUDLQHH LV DEOH WR LQYHVW LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ SURFHVV WKURXJK WKH HVWDEOLVKPHQW RI D WUXVWLQJ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI D PHDQLQJIXO DQG VDIH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS DOORZV WKH WUDLQHHV WR EHFRPH PRUH LQYHVWHG LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ SURFHVV E\ SHUPLWWLQJ WKHPVHOYHV WR DVN PRUH TXHVWLRQV DGPLW WR GLIILFXOWLHV DQG EH OHVV GHIHQVLYH LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV 7KH WUDLQHH HQWHUV VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLWK H[SHFWDWLRQVf§ H[SHFWDWLRQV WR OHDUQ H[SHFWDWLRQV WR EH UHVSHFWHG H[SHFWDWLRQV IRU WKH VXSHUYLVRU WR FRPPLW WR WKH WUDLQLQJ SURFHVV +RZ ZHOO WKH VXSHUYLVRU PHHWV WKHVH H[SHFWDWLRQV KDV D GLUHFW LPSDFW RQ KRZ EHQHILFLDO WKH WUDLQHH H[SHULHQFHV WKH WUDLQLQJ *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV H[SHULHQFHG DV D G\QDPLF SURFHVV ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU DEOH WR WUDFN DQG UHVSRQG WR WKH WUDLQHHfV FKDQJLQJ QHHGV *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ IDFLOLWDWHV JURZWK RI WKH WUDLQHH E\ HQFRXUDJLQJ WKH WUDLQHH WR VHHN DGGLWLRQDO VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ

PAGE 88

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f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fV SHUVRQDO UHIOHFWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ DUH SUHVHQWHG 7KHVH UHIOHFWLRQV ZHUH ZULWWHQ SULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WKH GDWD FROOHFWLRQ 7KH\ DUH SUHVHQWHG KHUH VR WKH UHDGHU PD\ EH LQIRUPHG RI DQ\ SRWHQWLDO ELDVHV KHOG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWHU

PAGE 89

3HUVRQDO 5HIOHFWLRQV $Q LPSRUWDQW DVSHFW RI WKLV SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG LV WKH EUDFNHWLQJ RI SUHFRQFHLYHG NQRZOHGJH UHJDUGLQJ WKH SKHQRPHQRQ EHLQJ VWXGLHG 7R HIIHFWLYHO\ EUDFNHW LW LV QHFHVVDU\ WR LGHQWLI\ WKRVH SUHFRQFHLYHG EHOLHIV 7KH IROORZLQJ LV D ZULWWHQ UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHUfV EHOLHIV UHJDUGLQJ JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ SULRU WR EHJLQQLQJ WKH GDWD FROOHFWLRQ ,W LV SUHVHQWHG KHUH VR WKH UHDGHU PD\ EH LQIRUPHG RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHUf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f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

PAGE 90

$V UHIOHFWHG IXUWKHU XSRQ P\ SDVW H[SHULHQFHV LW EHFDPH PRUH DSSDUHQW WR PH WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ PRVW SURIRXQGO\ DIIHFWHG P\ SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW ZKHQ LW KHOSHG PH RYHUFRPH VRPH IRUP RI DGYHUVLW\ 7KH DGYHUVLW\ W\SLFDOO\ WRRN WKH IRUP RI DQ LQQHU VWUXJJOHf§D FULVLV RI ORVV RI FRQILGHQFH ERUHGRP ZLWKLQ D WKHUDSHXWLF FRQWH[W DQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW ZLWK DQRWKHU VXSHUYLVRU SHHU RU FOLHQW ,Q P\ GLVFRYHU\ IRXQG WKDW ZKHQ ZDV LQ D JRRG VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS KDG DVVLVWDQFH LQ UHVROYLQJ WKH PDWWHU :KHQ ZDV QRW ZDV OHIW WR P\ RZQ GHYLFHV WR KDQGOH WKH FULVLV ZKLFK DW WLPHV IHOW DV WKRXJK ZHUH QHJRWLDWLQJ D ODQGPLQH 6R ZKDW ZDV WKH GLIIHUHQFH" :KHQ KDG fJRRGf VXSHUYLVLRQ IHOW FRXOG EULQJ WKH VWUXJJOH WR WKH DWWHQWLRQ RI P\ VXSHUYLVRU ZKR ZRXOG WKHQ VKDUH D SDVW H[SHULHQFH LQVLJKW RU D IUHVK SHUVSHFWLYH WR KHOS PH UHVROYH WKH LVVXH IHOW LQ D ZRUG fVDIHf :KHQ UHIOHFWHG XSRQ WKH WLPHV ZKHQ UHVLVWHG EULQJLQJ WKH LVVXH WR VXSHUYLVLRQ LW ZDV WKLQN EHFDXVH ZDV DIUDLG RI EHLQJ fVFROGHGf RU SHQDOL]HG IRU GRLQJ VRPHWKLQJ ZURQJ GHWHUPLQHG ZRXOG EH VDIHU QHJRWLDWLQJ WKH ODQGPLQH RQ P\ RZQ :KLOH P\ KHVLWDQF\ FOHDUO\ IDOOV XQGHU WKH FDWHJRU\ RI SHUVRQDO fLVVXHVf RI LQWHUHVW KHUH LV WKDW WKHUH ZHUH WLPHV ZKHQ GLG WDNH WKH LVVXH WR VXSHUYLVLRQ ,W VHHPV WKHQ WKDW D VHQVH RI VDIHW\ LV D IXQGDPHQWDO FRPSRQHQW RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ DIWHU DOO DV VXSHUYLVLRQ PD\ QRW HYHQ WDNH SODFH ZLWKRXW LW $V IDU DV RWKHU FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ H[SHFW WR OHDUQ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG H[SHFW WR EH WUHDWHG LQ D IDLU PDQQHU :KLOH GRQfW NQRZ LI OLNDELOLW\ LV D QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQW GR NQRZ WKDW OLNHG WKRVH VXSHUYLVRUV IURP ZKRP UHFHLYHG JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ KDV FKDOOHQJHG PH VXSSRUWHG PH DQG HQFRXUDJHG PH %XW PRVW RI DOO JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ KDV WDXJKW PH QHZ WKLQJV DERXW SV\FKRWKHUDS\f§QHZ

PAGE 91

VNLOOV QHZ SURFHVVHV QHZ XQGHUVWDQGLQJVf§DQG KDV HQFRXUDJHG PH WR XVH WKDW NQRZOHGJH LQ WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSHXWLF VHWWLQJ 2ULHQWDWLRQ RI WKH 6XEMHFW ,Q UHYLHZLQJ WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ LW EHFRPHV FOHDU WKDW H[SHULHQFH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV XQGHUVWRRG ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV ZRUOG $ VLJQLILFDQW DVSHFW RI WKHLU fZRUOG RI VXSHUYLVLRQf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f 7KH OHDUQLQJ SURFHVV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV DOVR ZHOO GRFXPHQWHG DW OHDVW WKHRUHWLFDOO\ 'HYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV HPSKDVL]H WKH OHDUQLQJ SURFHVVHV RI WKH VXSHUYLVHH ZLWK WKH DVVLVWDQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU LH 6WROWHQEHUJ DQG 'HOZRUWK :DWNLQV 5RQQHVWDG DQG 6NRYKROW f DQG VXSHUYLVRUV WKHPVHOYHV H[SHULHQFH WKH VXSHUYLVRU UROH WR LQFOXGH WKH UROH RI WHDFKHU 3DVNLHZLF] f 7KH TXDOLW\ RI OHDUQLQJ KDV DOVR EHHQ VKRZQ WR EH UHODWHG WR WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ &DULILR DQG +HVV 6KDQILHOG 0DWWKHV DQG +HWKHUO\ f ([SHFWDWLRQV WR EH WUHDWHG ZLWK UHVSHFW DUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK $3$ JXLGHOLQHV IRU HWKLFDO FRQGXFW :ULWLQJ DV D VXSHUYLVRU 3LFNHULQJ f WHOOV XV WKDW

PAGE 92

VWXGHQWV KDYH D ULJKW WR H[SHFW WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV DQG UHODWLRQVKLS ZLOO QRW ZRXQG WKHP WR WKH SRLQW RI EHZLOGHUPHQW ZLOO QRW FUHDWH DQ[LHWLHV WKDW WKH\ DUH JLYHQ QR JXLGDQFH LQ KDQGOLQJ DQG ZLOO QRW EH D SODFH ZKHUH KDUPIXO LQWHUSHUVRQDO JDPHV DUH SOD\HG S f 6XSHUYLVHH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG YDOXH RI UHVSHFW IRU VHOIDXWRQRP\ DQG LQWHJULW\ KDV EHHQ GRFXPHQWHG HOVHZKHUH +XWW 6FRWW DQG .LQJ f $GGLWLRQDOO\ UHVSHFW DV D QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQW LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRUVXSHUYLVHH UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV D FRQFOXVLRQ RI &DULILR DQG +HVV f LQ WKHLU VHDUFK IRU WKH LGHDO VXSHUYLVRU ([SHFWDWLRQV WR EH VXSSRUWHG PD\ EH D UHIOHFWLRQ RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf QHHGV WR EH JXLGHG WKURXJK WKH SURFHVV RI EHFRPLQJ D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW LQ D WKRXJKWIXO DQG KXPDQ PDQQHU 6XFK H[SHFWDWLRQV DUH OHJLWLPDWH 3LFNHULQJ f 6XSHUYLVHH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI VXSSRUW DUH DOVR FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG LQWHQW RI VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHQ WKH\ DUH HQJDJHG LQ D VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS 3DVNLHZLF] 3LFNHULQJ f )XUWKHUPRUH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS TXDOLWLHV RI ZDUPWK DFFHSWDQFH WUXVW DQG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH fIDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQVf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

PAGE 93

DV PXFK DV D SURFHVV RI VKDUHG OHDUQLQJ ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI DQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH SHUFHLYHG TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG FRQVHTXHQWO\ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV GHSHQGHQW XSRQ WKH SHUFHLYHG TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZKR LV HYDOXDWHG LQ WHUPV RI FRPSHWHQFH DQG FRPPLWPHQW WR WUDLQLQJ EDVHG LQ SDUW RQ H[SHULHQFH DQG PDWXULW\ ([SHULHQFH DQG PDWXULW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ RQH VXEMHFW .DUHQ DOO QDPHV KDYH EHHQ FKDQJHGf DV WKH VXSHUYLVRUf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f\RXfYH JRW LW RU \RX GRQfWf &RQVHTXHQFHV RI WKLV SHUVSHFWLYH DUH GLVFXVVHG ODWHU LQ WKLV FKDSWHU 4XDOLWLHV RI 6XSHUYLVLRQ $V VWDWHG HDUOLHU LW LV GLIILFXOW LI QRW LPSRVVLEOH WR VHSDUDWH WKH TXDOLW\ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ IURP WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU ,Q IDFW LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WKH EHQHILWV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ ZHUH DWWULEXWHG GLUHFWO\ WR WKH SHUVRQDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO EHKDYLRUV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU )RU SUDFWLFDO SXUSRVHV JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV D

PAGE 94

JRRG VXSHUYLVRU DQG YLVD YHUVD 6WXGLHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQYDULDEO\ LQFOXGH DVSHFWV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZKHWKHU LW LV ZKDW WKH\ GR KRZ WKH\ GR LW RU ZKR WKH\ DUH $V LW ZRXOG QRW EH UHDVRQDEOH WR DWWHPSW WR UHPRYH WKH VXSHUYLVRU IURP WKH SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH IROORZLQJ GLVFXVVLRQ RI TXDOLWLHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLOO LQFOXGH DOO DVSHFWV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQFOXGLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRU :KLOH WKH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV KDYH EHHQ ZHOOGRFXPHQWHG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RWKHU SURSRVHG LPSRUWDQW FKDUDFWHULVWLFV KDYH UHFHLYHG OHVV HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW 7KHVH LQWXLWLYHO\ GHULYHG FKDUDFWHULVWLFV LQFOXGH IOH[LELOLW\ FRQFHUQ DWWHQWLRQ LQYHVWPHQW FXULRVLW\ DQG RSHQQHVV $OERWW $OGULFK *LWWHUPDQ DQG 0LOOHU f 'HVSLWH WKH ODFN RI SUHYLRXV HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW DOO RI WKHVH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV ZHUH SUHVHQW LQ WKH VXEMHFWVf SURWRFROV &RQFHUQ DWWHQWLRQ LQYHVWPHQW DQG RSHQQHVV DOO DSSHDU WR EH VLJQLILFDQW VXSHUYLVRU FKDUDFWHULVWLFV SUHVHQW LQ JRRG VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFHV ZKLOH FXULRVLW\ PD\ EH UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV LQWHUHVW LQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH 3HUKDSV WKH DGGLWLRQ RI WKHVH W\SHV RI FKDUDFWHULVWLFV WR WKH fIDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQVf LV ZKDW GHOLQHDWHV WKH VXSHUYLVRU IURP RWKHU KHOSLQJ UROHV 6XSHUYLVRU LQYHVWPHQW LQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV WUDLQLQJ VHHPV WR EH D SDUWLFXODUO\ LPSRUWDQW FKDUDFWHULVWLF ZKHQ IXOILOOLQJ WKH PHQWRULQJ DVSHFW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UROH 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI VXSHUYLVHH FRQILGHQFH DQG WUXVW ZDV UHSRUWHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV WR EH UHODWHG WR VHOIGLVFORVXUH E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI VHOIGLVFORVXUH LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH ILQGLQJV RI +XWW DQG KHU DVVRFLDWHV f DOWKRXJK WKH GHVLUDELOLW\ RI VXSHUYLVRU VHOIGLVFORVXUH KDV QRW EHHQ HPSKDVL]HG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQ JHQHUDO +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f DOVR SURSRVHG WKDW VHOIGLVFORVXUH E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV WKH OLQN EHWZHHQ

PAGE 95

WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DQG WKH FRQWHQW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ PRYLQJ WKH SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ IRUZDUG ZKHQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH PD\ RWKHUZLVH EH LQKLELWHG RU UHOXFWDQW WR PRYH IRUZDUG &DUNKXII f SURSRVHG WKDW VHOIGLVFORVXUH LV DQ H[WHQVLRQ RI JHQXLQHQHVV DQG D QHFHVVDU\ SDUW RI DQ\ KHOSLQJ UHODWLRQVKLS $FFRUGLQJ WR &DUNKXII f WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV VHOIGLVFORVXUH UHODWHV WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHf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f IRXQG WKDW SHUFHLYHG H[SHUWLVH DQG WUXVWZRUWKLQHVV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZHUH WKH EHVW GLVFULPLQDWRUV RI TXDOLW\ DFFRUGLQJ WR VXSHUYLVHHV 2WKHU SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ IRXQG WUXVW WR EH D FHQWUDO FRPSRQHQW RI D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO +XWW HW DK f &DULR DQG +HVV f DOVR FRQFOXGHG WKDW WUXVW LV D QHFHVVDU\ FRPSRQHQW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ GLGDFWLF UHODWLRQVKLS

PAGE 96

/LNH WUXVW SHUFHLYHG FRPSHWHQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV D SUHUHTXLVLWH WR D SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH ,W ZDV VWDWHG WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV FRPSHWHQFH ZDV D GULYLQJ IRUFH LQ PRWLYDWLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR VHHN VXSHUYLVLRQ )XUWKHUPRUH WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV FRPSHWHQF\ ZDV GLUHFWO\ UHODWHG WR KRZ PXFK WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV YDOXHG E\ WKH VXSHUYLVHH ,Q WKH ZRUGV RI RQH VXEMHFW 0DQQ\ 6KH ZDV YHU\ FRPSHWHQW VKHfV UHDOO\ RUJDQL]HG ZKLFK PDGH PH UHDOO\ UHVSHFW KHU DQG ZDQW WR VHHN RXW VXSHUYLVLRQ HYHQ PRUH EHFDXVH NQHZ VKH NQHZ D ORW DQG NQHZ WKDW VKH ZDV FRPSHWHQW VR ZDQWHG WR OHDUQ JHW WKDW LQIRUPDWLRQ IURP KHU ,W LV LQWHUHVWLQJ WR QRWH WKDW DQRWKHU VXEMHFW HYDOXDWHG WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV FRPSHWHQFH E\ PHDVXULQJ KRZ PXFK VKH OHDUQHG VXJJHVWLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRU PXVW DOZD\V KDYH VRPHWKLQJ WR RIIHU WKH VXSHUYLVHH 7UXVW FRPSHWHQFH IDFLOLWDWLYH TXDOLWLHVf§DOO RI WKHVH DVSHFWV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DUH FRPSRQHQWV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU KDV EHHQ SURSRVHG DV WKH VLQJOH PRVW LPSRUWDQW DVSHFW RI HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO &DULILR DQG +HVV +HVV f ,Q WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ DOO SRVLWLYH DVSHFWV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DUH H[SHULHQFHG WR RFFXU ZLWKLQ RU DV D GLUHFW FRQVHTXHQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS %XW LV WKH UHODWLRQVKLS DFWXDOO\ DV LPSRUWDQW DV LW LV SHUFHLYHG" ,Q D UHFHQW VWXG\ E\ 3DWWRQ DQG .LYOLJKDQ f WKH ZRUNLQJ DOOLDQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS KDG D GLIIHUHQWLDO LPSDFW XSRQ WKH W\SHV RI OHDUQLQJ WKDW RFFXU LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3DWWRQ DQG .LYOLJKDQ f IRXQG WKDW WKH ZRUNLQJ DOOLDQFH KDG QR LPSDFW XSRQ WKH WHFKQLFDO IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH VXSHUYLVHH EXW GLG LPSDFWHG SRVLWLYHO\ XSRQ WKH WUDLQHHfV FRPIRUW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 0RUH LPSRUWDQWO\ KRZHYHU WKH\ IRXQG WKDW WKH ZRUNLQJ DOOLDQFH EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU ZDV UHODWHG WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV

PAGE 97

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fV LPSOLHG GHIHUHQFH WR WKH VXSHUYLVRU DV DQ DXWKRULW\ ILJXUH 7KLV VXJJHVWV D WHQVLRQ EHWZHHQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ D SHHUOLNH UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK VRPHRQH ZKR KDV HYDOXDWLYH SRZHU RYHU WKH VXSHUYLVHH 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV GHPDQG IRU UHVSHFW DQG PDLQWHQDQFH RI SURIHVVLRQDO ERXQGDULHV PD\ EH D ZD\ RI QHJRWLDWLQJ ZKDW FRXOG EHFRPH DQ DPELJXRXV DQG SRWHQWLDOO\ KDUPIXO UHODWLRQVKLS %\ PDLQWDLQLQJ ERXQGDULHV VXSHUYLVHHV HVWDEOLVK D VWUXFWXUH LQ ZKLFK WKH\ DUH DEOH WR OHDUQ JURZ DQG UHODWH WR WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZKLOH EHLQJ SURWHFWHG IURP DUELWUDU\ DFWV WKDW PD\ RFFXU LQ D OHVV VWUXFWXUHG RU GHILQHG UHODWLRQVKLS :KLOH WKH UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ LV SHUFHLYHG WR EH LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV KDQGV WKH VXSHUYLVHHV GR DFNQRZOHGJH WKDW WKHLU DFWLYH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LV UHTXLUHG WR PDNH VXSHUYLVLRQ ZRUN ,Q WKH ZRUGV RI DQRWKHU VXEMHFW &DWKHULQH SDUW RI WKH SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH KDV EHHQ EHFDXVH RI P\ ZLOOLQJQHVV WR OHDUQ DQG H[SRVH P\VHOI WR OHDUQ DQG UHFHLYH WKH WUDLQLQJ DQG QRW EH DIUDLG WR KDYH WKLQJV GLVVHFWHG DQG SRLQWHG RXW 3LFNHULQJ f VWDWHV WKDW LW LV OLNHO\ WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV H[SHFW WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHV WR EH DFWLYH LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV

PAGE 98

$OWKRXJK WKLV SURMHFW GLG QRW LQWHQG WR H[SORUH QHJDWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ H[SHULHQFHV RI fEDGf VXSHUYLVLRQ ZHUH UHODWHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV DV D ZD\ RI FRQWUDVWLQJ WKH SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFHV 7KH PRVW VLJQLILFDQW H[SUHVVLRQ RI fEDGf VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV UHODWHG WR WKH EUHDNGRZQ RI SURIHVVLRQDO ERXQGDULHV E\ WKH VXSHUYLVRU 2QH VXEMHFW .DUHQ GHVFULEHG KHU H[SHULHQFHV ZLWK FURVVHG ERXQGDULHV DV VFDU\ DQG XQSURIHVVLRQDO ,W ZDV VFDU\ ,W ZDV XQQHUYLQJ IRU PH EHFDXVH KHUHfV WKLV SHUVRQ >FU\LQJ WR KHU DERXW KHU SHUVRQDO SUREOHPV@ ZKRfV VXSSRVHG WR EH P\ PHQWRU ,fG KRSH WKH\fG KDYH VRPH NLQG RI SURIHVVLRQDO VHQVH ZDV VFDUHG ZDV RYHUZKHOPHG ORVW UHVSHFW IRU KHU ,Q VXFK H[SHULHQFHV WKH VXSHUYLVHH H[SHULHQFHV DQ[LHW\ DQJHU DQG IUXVWUDWLRQ DQG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV EXUGHQHG ZLWK PLVWUXVW GLVUHVSHFW DQG D ODFN RI KRQHVW GLVFORVXUH +XWW HW DO f :KHQ VXSHUYLVLRQ IDOOV LQWR D FDWHJRU\ VRPHZKHUH EHWZHHQ JRRG DQG EDG LW LV OLNHO\ WKDW ERWK WKH VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU GLVFRXQW LWV YDOXH 7KRXJK LW PD\ QRW EH KDUPIXO WRZDUG WKH VXSHUYLVHH ZKHQ VXSHUYLVLRQ IDLOV WKH UHODWLRQVKLS LV GXOOHG DQG DQ DLU RI WROHUDQFH SUHYDLOV 3DVNLHZLF] f +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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

PAGE 99

VRFLDO OHYHO 7KH ERXQGDULHV ZHUH D GHVLUHG DQG ZHOFRPHG DVSHFW WR WKH UHODWLRQVKLS ,Q QR LQVWDQFHV GLG WKH VXEMHFWV UHSRUW IUXVWUDWLRQ DW ZDQWLQJ WR EH FORVHU WR WKH VXSHUYLVRU WKDQ ZDV SHUPLWWHG ,W ZDV DV WKRXJK WKH WUDLQHHV H[SHULHQFHG WKH ERXQGDULHV DV D SURWHFWLYH PHFKDQLVP IRU WKHPVHOYHV DQG WKH\ ZHUH DEOH WR DSSO\ WKHLU H[SHULHQFH ZLWK VXSHUYLVRU\ ERXQGDULHV WR FRXQVHOLQJ VLWXDWLRQV $QRWKHU FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV DELOLW\ WR WUDFN DWWHQG WR DQG UHVSRQG WR WKH QHHGV RI WKH VXSHUYLVHH 7KH VXEMHFWV H[SHULHQFHG WKLV DVSHFW DV DWWHQWLRQ DQG UHVSRQVLYHQHVVf§DWWHQWLRQ WR WKHLU QHHGV DQG HPRWLRQDO VWDWHV IROORZHG E\ DSSURSULDWH UHVSRQVHV DQG LQWHUYHQWLRQV ,Q D VWXG\ RI SV\FKLDWU\ UHVLGHQW WUDLQLQJ VXSHUYLVRUV ZLWK WKH KLJKHVW UDWLQJV LGHQWLILHG DQG WUDFNHG WKH UHVLGHQWVf FHQWUDO DQG DIIHFWLYHO\ FKDUJHG FRQFHUQV DERXW WKH FOLHQW 6KDQILHOG HW DO f 7KLV LV DWWHQWLYHQHVV LQ D GLUHFW VHQVH DQG FDQ EH LOOXVWUDWHG E\ 0DQQ\fV H[SHULHQFHV 7KH RQH WKLQJ WKDW ,fYH KDG ZLWK KHU WKDW KDYHQf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

PAGE 100

,W KDV EHHQ VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH PRVW VLJQLILFDQW LQWHUYHQWLRQV SURYLGHG E\ VXSHUYLVRUV LV IHHGEDFN &DULILR DQG +HVV f )HHGEDFN LV DQWLFLSDWHG H[SHFWHG DQG FORVHO\ WLHG WR D WUDLQHHfV SHUIRUPDQFH %DUWK DQG *DPEULOO f 6XSHUYLVHHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ H[SHULHQFHG IHHGEDFN DV DQ LQVWUXPHQWDO DVSHFW RI WKHLU GHYHORSPHQW DV SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV $FFRUGLQJ WR )UHHPDQ f IHHGEDFN VKRXOG EH V\VWHPDWLF WLPHO\ FOHDUO\ XQGHUVWRRG DQG UHFLSURFDO $FFRUGLQJ WR WKH VXEMHFWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ LW LV PRVW LPSRUWDQW IRU IHHGEDFN WR EH DFFXUDWH SDUW RI EHLQJ V\VWHPDWLFf QRQFULWLFDO DQG UHOHYDQW WR ZKDW WKH VXSHUYLVHH LV GRLQJ %RWK RI WKHVH JXLGHOLQH DGGUHVV WKH IDFW WKH IHHGEDFN PXVW EH UHFHLYHG DQG DFFHSWHG E\ WKH WUDLQHH EHIRUH DQ\ EHKDYLRUDO DQG DWWLWXGLQDO FKDQJH ZLOO WDNH SODFH ,Q WKLV VWXG\ QHJDWLYH IHHGEDFN JLYHQ ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI D JRRG VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV FRQWULEXWLRQV WRZDUG LPSURYLQJ WKH VNLOOV RI WKH WUDLQHH :KLOH WKH FRQWHQW RI WKH IHHGEDFN ZDV DLPHG DW FKDQJLQJ D VXSHUYLVHHfV EHKDYLRU WKH PDQQHU LQ ZKLFK LW ZDV SUHVHQWHG ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV VXSSRUWLYH HQFRXUDJLQJ DQG EXLOGLQJ XSRQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV VWUHQJWKV DQG NQRZOHGJH 3RVLWLYH IHHGEDFN ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV D PRWLYDWLQJ IRUFH IRU FRQWLQXHG GHYHORSPHQW E\ WKH WUDLQHH 3RVLWLYH IHHGEDFN OHW WKH WUDLQHH NQRZ WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV SD\LQJ DWWHQWLRQ DQG LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH WUDLQHHfV JURZWK ,W DOVR LQFUHDVHG WUDLQHH FRQILGHQFH DQG LQ VRPH FDVHV PRWLYDWHG WKH WUDLQHH WR ZRUN KDUGHU IRU WKH DSSUHFLDWLYH VXSHUYLVRU +RZ 'RHV 7KLV 5HODWH WR 'HYHORSPHQWDO 0RGHOV" ,W ZDV QRW WKH LQWHQW RI WKLV SURMHFW WR VXSSRUW RU QRW VXSSRUW K\SRWKHVHV SURSRVHG E\ WKH YDULRXV GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW 6RPH

PAGE 101

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fW OLNH ZDONHG DZD\ IHHOLQJ OLNH KDG PDGH WKLV KRUULEOH PLVWDNH RU DP D EDG FOLQLFLDQ ZDV OLNH \HDK MXVW PRUH LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG ,f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f§

PAGE 102

VRPH WUDLQHHV PD\ VLPSO\ YDOXH LQVLJKWRULHQWHG VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG DFWLYHO\ VHHN LW RXW DQG RWKHUV PD\ QRW 2QH ILQDO FRPPHQW DERXW GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV VKRXOG EH PDGH UHJDUGLQJ WKHLU DFFXUDF\ LQ DVVXPLQJ VXSHUYLVHG H[SHULHQFH XQWLO EHFRPLQJ D fPDVWHU SV\FKRORJLVWf 7KH VXEMHFWV LQWHUYLHZHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH QHDU WKH WHUPLQDWLRQ RI WKHLU IRUPDO VXSHUYLVHG H[SHULHQFH DV UHTXLUHG E\ WKH $3$
PAGE 103

$FFRUGLQJ WR 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG f FRXQVHORU GHYHORSPHQW LV DQ HLJKW VWDJH SURFHVV ZKLFK VSDQV WKH SURIHVVLRQDOfV FDUHHU 7KH ILUVW VWDJH DGGUHVVHV WKH LQGLYLGXDOfV LQLWLDO PRWLYDWLRQ fWR KHOSf SULRU WR WKH LQLWLDWLRQ RI IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ 7KH ILQDO VWDJH LV D SURFHVV RI GHILQLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO LQWHJULW\ ZKLFK FRQWLQXHV XQWLO WKH HQG RI WKH SHUVRQfV SURIHVVLRQDO OLIH 2I WKH HLJKW VWDJHV SURSRVHG E\ 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG f RQO\ WKUHH DUH GLUHFWO\ DSSOLFDEOH WR WKH SURIHVVLRQDOfV IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ 7KRVH WKUHH VWDJHV DUH f WUDQVLWLRQ WR SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ f LPLWDWLRQ RI H[SHUWV DQG f FRQGLWLRQDO DXWRQRP\ $FFRUGLQJ WR 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG f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fV SHUVSHFWLYH :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO +XWW HW DO f DQG WKH RWKHU H[DPLQHG VXSHUYLVLRQ IURP WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVSHFWLYH 3DVNLHZLF] f :KLOH WKH GHVFULSWLRQV DQG ILQGLQJV RI WKHVH VWXGLHV DUH YHU\ VLPLODU WR WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WKHUH DUH VRPH LQWHUHVWLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV 6R

PAGE 104

WKH UHDGHU PD\ FRPSDUH WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WR WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH RWKHU WZR SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQV RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf H[SHULHQFH D VXPPDU\ WDEOH IURP :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f LV SUHVHQWHG KHUH DV 7DEOH DQG WKH HQWLUH IXQGDPHQWDO GHVFULSWLRQ IURP +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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n SURWHFWLYHQHVV DQG UHFHSWLYLW\ WR VXSHUYLVRU\ LQSXW QRQGHIHQVLYH DQDO\VLV UHH[DPLQDWLRQ RI DVVXPSWLRQV DFTXLVLWLRQ RI D PHWDSHUVSHFWLYH 2XWFRPHV RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 6WUHQJWKHQHG FRQILGHQFH UHILQHG SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ LQFUHDVHG WKHUDSHXWLF SHUFHSWLRQ H[SDQGHG DELOLW\ WR FRQFHSWXDOL]H DQG LQWHUYHQH SRVLWLYH DQWLFLSDWLRQ WR UHHQJDJH LQ WKH VWUXJJOH VWUHQJWKHQHG VXSHUYLVRU\ DOOLDQFH 6RXUFH :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO S f 7ZR 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO ,QYHVWLJDWLRQV RI WKH 6XSHUYLVHHfV ([SHULHQFH :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f DQG +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH H[SHULHQFH RI EHLQJ VXSHUYLVHG XVLQJ D SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG VLPLODU WR WKH RQH XVHG KHUH 7KH PRVW REYLRXV GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH SUHVHQW GHVFULSWLRQ DQG WKH GHVFULSWLRQV RI :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f DQG +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LV WKH VSHFLILFLW\ RI WKH GHVFULSWLRQV 7KH GHVFULSWLRQV HOLFLWHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f DQG +XWW DQG

PAGE 105

DVVRFLDWHV f DSSHDU WR EH IRFXVHG RQ RQH VXSHUYLVRU\ HYHQW WKDW ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV JRRG RU SRVLWLYHf 7KH GHVFULSWLRQV REWDLQHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ZHUH EURDGHU LQ FRQWH[W LQFRUSRUDWLQJ DQ HQWLUH WUDLQLQJ H[SHULHQFH ZLWK RQH RU PRUH JRRG VXSHUYLVRUV &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKH GHVFULSWLRQV IURP WKH RWKHU LQYHVWLJDWRUV DSSHDU PRUH G\QDPLF LQ QDWXUH DQG LQFOXGH DQWHFHGHQW FRQGLWLRQV DQG RXWFRPHV RI WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ H[SHULHQFH 7KH GHVFULSWLRQV REWDLQHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f DQG +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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f7U\ WR UHFDOO D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH \RX KDYH KDG LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG GHVFULEH LW LQ DV PXFK GHWDLO DV \RX FDQf +XWW HW DO S f 7KH ILUVW TXHVWLRQ SRVHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO ZDV f3OHDVH GHVFULEH IRU PH DV FRPSOHWHO\ FOHDUO\ DQG FRQFUHWHO\ DV \RX FDQ DQ H[SHULHQFH GXULQJ WKLV VHPHVWHU ZKHQ \RX IHOW \RX UHFHLYHG JRRG SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQf :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO S f 7KH RSHQLQJ TXHVWLRQ LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ZDV f7KLQN EDFN WR D WLPH ZKHQ \RX

PAGE 106

H[SHULHQFHG ZKDW \RX EHOLHYH WR EH D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7HOO PH DERXW WKH H[SHULHQFH ZKDW KDSSHQHG ZKDW ZDV VDLG ZKDW ZDV IHOW DQ\WKLQJ \RX EHOLHYH ZDV SDUW RI WKDW H[SHULHQFHf 7KH OHQJWK RI WKH ODVW TXHVWLRQ RU SHUKDSV WKH LQFOXVLYH RI WKH SKUDVH fDQ\WKLQJ \RX EHOLHYH ZDV SDUW RI WKH H[SHULHQFHf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f2K *RG WKLV LV ZKDW KDSSHQHG ZLWK WKLV SDWLHQW DQG WKLV LV ZKDW GLGf DQG \RXfUH QRW H[DFWO\ VXUH KRZ WKH\fUH JRLQJ WR UHVSRQG :KLOH WKH QDUUDWLYHV HOLFLWHG IURP WKH VXEMHFWV LQFOXGHG LQIHUHQFHV WR DQ[LHW\ H[SHULHQFHG RU DQWLFLSDWHG LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ RQO\ RQH RI WKH ILYH VXEMHFWV PDGH D VSHFLILF UHIHUHQFH WR H[SHULHQFLQJ DQ[LHW\ UHODWHG WR SHUIRUPDQFH RU HYDOXDWLRQ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ )URP WKH VXEMHFWVf GHVFULSWLRQV RI WUXVWLQJ DQG UHVSHFWIXO VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLSV RQH PD\ LQIHU XQGHUO\LQJ DQ[LHW\ RU IHDU ZKLFK SURPSWHG WKH QHHG IRU VXFK D UHODWLRQVKLS HYHQ LI QRW H[SOLFLWO\ VWDWHG 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG WKH QDUUDWLYHV VXJJHVW WKDW VXFK UHODWLRQVKLSV DUH QHFHVVDU\ WR SUHYHQW DQ[LHW\ UDWKHU WKDQ DOOHYLDWH H[LVWLQJ DQ[LHW\ 7KH ODFN RI D GHVFULSWLRQ RI IHOW DQ[LHW\ LV FRQWUDGLFWRU\ WR PRVW WKHRULHV PRGHOV DQG VWXGLHV

PAGE 107

RI WUDLQHH VXSHUYLVLRQ ,Q WKH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV IRU LQVWDQFH PRVW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV WDVN SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ WKH HDUOLHU VWDJHV LV WKHRUL]HG WR EH DFWLYHO\ VHHNLQJ WR UHGXFH WUDLQHH DQ[LHW\ WKURXJK WKH XVH RI VWUXFWXUH VXSSRUW DQG HPSDWK\ $FFRUGLQJ WR 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG f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fW OHDUQHG HYHU\WKLQJ WKH\ ZHUH VXSSRVHG WR OHDUQ EHIRUH JUDGXDWLQJ 2WKHU WKDQ WKH PLVVLQJ DQ[LHW\ WKH IXQGDPHQWDO VWUXFWXUH RI SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ UHSRUWHG E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LV YHU\ VLPLODU WR WKH HVVHQWLDO DQG VWUXFWXUDO GHVFULSWLRQV IRXQG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ 2QH RWKHU GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKLV GHVFULSWLRQ DQG WKDW RI +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LV WKH HPSKDVLV RQ FROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV :KLOH FROODERUDWLRQ ZDV UHSHDWHGO\ HPSKDVL]HG WKURXJKRXW WKH GHVFULSWLRQ E\ +XWW DQG

PAGE 108

DVVRFLDWHV f LW ZDV QRW VR SUHYDOHQW LQ WKH SUHVHQW GHVFULSWLRQ 6HYHUDO IDFWRUV PD\ DFFRXQW IRU WKLV GLVFUHSDQF\ 2QH IDFWRU PD\ EH OHVV RI DQ HPSKDVLV RQ FROODERUDWLRQ GXH WR VXEMHFW VHOHFWLRQ 6ZDQVRQ DQG 2f6DEHQ f IRXQG WKDW WUDLQHHV LQ FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV H[SHFWHG OHVV PXWXDOLW\ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ DQG FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ WUDLQHHV 0XWXDOLW\ ZDV GHVFULEHG DV D VKDULQJ RI SHUVRQDO YXOQHUDELOLWLHV DQG WR VKRZ FRQILGHQFH DQG UHVSHFW LQ WKH WUDLQHH 6ZDQVRQ DQG 2f6DEHQ S f 7KH VWXG\ E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f XVHG FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ VRFLDO ZRUN DQG FRXQVHORU HGXFDWLRQ WUDLQHHV ZKHUHDV DOO WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ZHUH HQUROOHG LQ FOLQLFDO SV\FKRORJ\ SURJUDPV 7KHUH PD\ KDYH EHHQ OHVV H[SHFWDWLRQ IRU PXWXDOLW\ DQG FROODERUDWLRQ LQ WKH VXEMHFWV RI WKLV VWXG\ WKDQ LQ WKH VXEMHFWV RI WKH +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f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

PAGE 109

H[SHULPHQWHU ZKR VXEVHTXHQWO\ PLQLPL]HG WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI FROODERUDWLRQ GXULQJ WKH DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD )LQDOO\ RQH DGGLWLRQDO H[SODQDWLRQ PD\ EH UHODWHG WR WKH OHYHO RI GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VXEMHFWV ,W LV SRVVLEOH WKDW WKH WUDLQHHV LQWHUYLHZHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ KDG QRW GHYHORSHG DV SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV DV IXOO\ DV WKH VXEMHFWV LQ WKH VWXG\ E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f ,I WKH IXQGDPHQWDO DVVXPSWLRQV RI GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV DUH FRUUHFW WKDW LV WUDLQHHV GHYHORS RYHU WLPH DQG EHFRPH OHVV IRFXVHG RQ VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ WKDQ RQ SURFHVV LVVXHV DV WKH\ GHYHORSf WKH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH SUHVHQW GHVFULSWLRQ DQG WKH RQH SURGXFHG E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV FRXOG EH DFFRXQWHG IRU GHYHORSPHQWDOO\ 7KH WUDLQHHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ PD\ VWLOO EH FRQFHUQHG ZLWK VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ DQG WKHUHIRUH DQWLFLSDWLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRU WR EH PRUH SURDFWLYH DQG LQVWUXFWLQJ 7KH VXEMHFWV LQ WKH +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f VWXG\ RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG PD\ KDYH EHHQ OHVV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK VNLOOV GHYHORSPHQW DQG KDG KLJKHU H[SHFWDWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ FROODERUDWLRQ $QRWKHU GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH WZR VWXGLHV LV WKH LGHQWLILHG JRDO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WKH DQWLFLSDWHG RXWFRPH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV OHDUQLQJ DQG JURZWK DV D SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW ,Q WKH VWXG\ E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV VXSHUYLVLRQ LV GHVFULEHG DV fDQ H[SORUDWLRQ RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK FOLHQWVf S f 7KLV GLIIHUHQFH LQ SHUVSHFWLYH LV UHIOHFWHG WKURXJKRXW WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ OLWHUDWXUH 6RPH ZULWHUV HPSKDVL]H WKH GLGDFWLF UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU ZKLOH RWKHUV GHVFULEH WKH WULDQJXODWHG UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVHH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FOLHQW 7KH ODWHU DSSHDUV WR UHIOHFW WKH GRPLQDWLQJ YLHZ LQ FXUUHQW VXSHUYLVLRQ OLWHUDWXUH DQG PD\ EH LQVWUXPHQWDO LQ IXWXUH DWWHPSWV WR OLQN FOLHQW FKDQJH WR WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ SURFHVV ,Q WKLV LQVWDQFH WKH

PAGE 110

GHVFULSWLRQ LQ WKLV VWXG\ PD\ UHIOHFW DQ RXWGDWHG RU SHUKDSV XQHGXFDWHG YLHZ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH PLQLPL]DWLRQ RI WKH FOLHQWfV UROH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ PD\ EH DQ DGGLWLRQDO IDFWRU WR FRQVLGHU ZKHQ FRQWHPSODWLQJ WKH VWDWH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WUDLQLQJ 'HVSLWH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV GHVFULEHG DERYH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH VWXG\ E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f DQG WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ LV PLQLPDO 7KH GHVFULSWLRQ SUHVHQWHG E\ +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f LV FOHDUO\ VXSSRUWHG E\ WKH GDWD DQG WKH GHVFULSWLRQV REWDLQHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ,Q FRPSDULQJ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WR WKH LQYHVWLJDWLRQ E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f WKHUH DUH DJDLQ PRUH VLPLODULWLHV WKDQ GLVVLPLODULWLHV $VLGH IURP WKH DQWHFHGHQW FRQGLWLRQV DQG FRQVHTXHQFHV WKH GHVFULEHG H[SHULHQFHV RI WKH :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f VWXG\ DQG WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ DUH VLPLODU 7KH ODQJXDJH XVHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f KDV D PRUH SKLORVRSKLFDO EDVLV WKDQ WKH ODQJXDJH XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ EXW WKH PHDQLQJ VWUXFWXUHV DSSHDU WKH VDPH 7KH GHVFULSWLRQ SUHVHQWHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f DSSHDUV WR UHIOHFW WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf LQQHU SUHYHUEDO H[SHULHQFH 7KH SUHVHQW GHVFULSWLRQ RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG UHIOHFWV WKH YHUEDO H[SHULHQFH ZKLOH FODULI\LQJ DQG FRQGHQVLQJ WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf H[SHULHQFH 7KH ODQJXDJH XVHG E\ :RUWKHQ DQG 0F1HLOO f LV PRUH FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH H[LVWHQWLDO EDVLV IURP ZKLFK WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG LV GHULYHG 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG WKH ODQJXDJH LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ PD\ EH PRUH DFFHVVLEOH WR UHVHDUFKHUV DQG RWKHU LQWHUHVWHG SDUWLHV ZKR PD\ QRW KDYH SDVW H[SHULHQFH RI H[LVWHQWLDO SULQFLSOHV $JDLQ DV LQ WKH FDVH RI WKH +XWW DQG DVVRFLDWHV f VWXG\ WKH VLPLODULWLHV RI WKH GHVFULSWLRQV RXWZHLJK WKH GLVVLPLODULWLHV

PAGE 111

$ 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO ,QYHVWLJDWLRQ RI WKH 6XSHUYLVRUfV ([SHULHQFH 3DVNLHZLF]fV f SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI VXSHUYLVRUVf H[SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV DQ DSSURSULDWH DQG DFFXUDWH FRPSOHPHQW WR WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ 3DVNLHZLF] f IRXQG WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV YDOXH WKHLU VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLSV ILQGLQJ WKHP HQMR\DEOH HQULFKLQJ DQG D ZD\ RI PDNLQJ D PHDQLQJIXO FRQWULEXWLRQ WR WKH SURIHVVLRQ DQG SUDFWLFH RI SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH\ DOVR VHH WKHPVHOYHV DV WHDFKHUV PHQWRUV DQG VXSSRUWLYH IDFLOLWDWRUV RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHVf HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KH VXSHUYLVRUV LQWHUYLHZHG E\ 3DVNLHZLF] f DOVR ZRUN WR FUHDWH D VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS WKDW SURYLGHV DQ LPSRUWDQW VXSSRUWLYH VSDFH IRU VXSHUYLVHH OHDUQLQJ 7KH VXSHUYLVRUV UHSRUW WKDW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS GHYHORSV RYHU WLPH GHHSHQLQJ ZLWK LQFUHDVHG FRPIRUW RSHQQHVV DQG IULHQGVKLS 7KH DERYH UHSRUW FRPSOHPHQWV WKH ILQGLQJV LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ VR ZHOO RQH ZRXOG WKLQN WKH VXSHUYLVHHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ WUDLQHG XQGHU WKH VXSHUYLVRUV LQ 3DVNLHZLF]fV VWXG\ f 7KHUH DUH DGGLWLRQDO HOHPHQWV KRZHYHU WKDW H[LVW LQ KHU VWXG\ GXH WR WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV WKDW GRQfW H[LVW LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ )LUVW RI DOO WKH VXSHUYLVRUV YDOXH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS IRU WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ LW EULQJV IRU DQ LQWHQVH FUHDWLYH VKDULQJ UHODWLRQVKLS $QRWKHU XQLTXH DVSHFW LV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRUV IHHO UHVSRQVLEOH DQG SURWHFWLYH RI WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHV DV ZHOO DV WKHLU VXSHUYLVHHVf FOLHQWV 7KHVH WZR DVSHFWV DUH IXQFWLRQ RI YDU\LQJ SHUVSHFWLYHV 7KH SUHVHQW VWXG\ DQG WKH 3DVNLHZLF] f VWXG\ LOOXVWUDWH WKH FDSDELOLW\ RI WKH SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG WR FOHDUO\ GHOLQHDWH YDU\LQJ SHUVSHFWLYHV RI WKH VDPH HYHQW 7KH 3DVNLHZLF] f VWXG\ LV DOVR HQFRXUDJLQJ DV LW GHPRQVWUDWHV WKDW VXSHUYLVRUV KDYH LQWHQW WR SHUIRUP WKHLU WDVNV ZHOO )URP WKH

PAGE 112

VXSHUYLVRUfV SHUVSHFWLYH DW OHDVW VXSHUYLVLRQ LV D SURIHVVLRQDO DFWLYLW\ WKDW FDQ EH OHDUQHG PXFK OLNH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 7UDLQLQJ LQ 6XSHUYLVLRQ 'HVSLWH WKH UHFRJQL]HG LPSRUWDQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WR SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQLQJ LQ KRZ WR VXSHUYLVH LV QRW SURYLGHG LQ WKH YDVW PDMRULW\ RI SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV :DWNLQV Ef +HVV DQG +HVV f UHSRUWHG WKDW RQO\ RQHWKLUG RI SV\FKRORJ\ LQWHUQVKLS VLWHV RIIHUHG WUDLQLQJ LQ KRZ WR VXSHUYLVH ,Q D PRUH UHFHQW VXUYH\ %DUDFKRN DQG .XQNHO f IRXQG WKDW IHZ GRFWRUDO OHYHO FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SURJUDPV RIIHUHG VXSHUYLVLRQ FRXUVH ZRUN :DWNLQV Ef SRLQWV RXW WKDW VXUYH\V RQ WKH VWDWH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WUDLQLQJ LQ SV\FKRORJ\ FRQVLVWHQWO\ UHSRUW WKDW WUDLQLQJ LV QRW RIIHUHG DW WKH OHYHO LW VKRXOG EH :KLOH WKH SURIHVVLRQDO OLWHUDWXUH KDV H[SUHVVHG D QHHG IRU LPSURYHG WUDLQLQJ SUDFWLFHV WKH FDOO KDV EHHQ ODUJHO\ XQKHHGHG E\ WKRVH ZKR SUDFWLFH 7KH GDQJHUV RI VXFK D ODFNDGDLVLFDO DSSURDFK WR VXSHUYLVLRQ WUDLQLQJ LV SRLQWHG RXW E\ %HUQDUG DQG *RRG\HDU f 2QH KLQGUDQFH WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI PRUH XQLYHUVDO WUDLQLQJ RI VXSHUYLVRUV KDV EHHQ WKH IDFW WKDW VR PDQ\ PHQWDO KHDOWK SURIHVVLRQDOV KDYH WDNHQ RQ WKH UROH RI VXSHUYLVRU ZLWKRXW IRUPDO SUHSDUDWLRQ $OWKRXJK WKH\ ODFN VSHFLILF WUDLQLQJ LQ LW WKH\ DUH GRLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQf§W\SLFDOO\ EHOLHYLQJ WKH\ DUH SUHWW\ JRRG DW LW &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKH\ DUH PRUH LQFOLQHG WR EHOLHYH WKDW LI WKH\ KDYH OHDUQHG LW ZLWKRXW IRUPDO SUHSDUDWLRQ WKHQ WKHLU VWXGHQWV DQG WUDLQHHV FDQ DV HDVLO\ GR VR 7KHVH IDFXOW\ DQG ILHOG VXSHUYLVRUV RIWHQ VHUYH DV UROH PRGHOV IRU WUDLQHHV ZKR PD\ UHFHLYH PL[HG PHVVDJHV DERXW WKH DFWXDO LPSRUWDQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WUDLQLQJ Sf 7KLV LV WKH PHVVDJH WKDW WKH VXEMHFWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ KDYH VRPHKRZ DFTXLUHG HYHQ WKRXJK WKH\ KDYH QRW VWHSSHG RQWR WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ VWDJH 7KHUH ZDV QR LQGLFDWLRQ E\ DQ\ RI WKH

PAGE 113

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f WUDLQHHV ZHUH OHDUQLQJ D VSHFLDOL]DWLRQ ZKLFK UHTXLUHG D IRFXV RQ VNLOOV DQG VSHFLILF LQWHUYHQWLRQV f WUDLQHHV ZHUH RULHQWHG IURP D WHFKQLFDO WUDLQLQJ EDFNJURXQG

PAGE 114

WKHUHIRUH H[SHFWLQJ D FRQWLQXDWLRQ RI WKH VDPH f WUDLQHHV KDG UHFHLYHG SRRU WUDLQLQJ LQ WKH SDVW DQG ZHUH QRW DV GHYHORSHG DV ZRXOG KDYH EHHQ SUHGLFWHG :KLOH WKH GDWD LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ GRHV QRW IXOO\ VXSSRUW WKH SUHGLFWLRQV RI GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV LW LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK PXFK RI WKH UHVHDUFK WKDW KDV DWWHPSWHG WR YDOLGDWH VSHFLILF PRGHOV 7KH HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK WR GDWH KDV VXSSRUWHG WKH LQWXLWLYHO\ VWURQJ QRWLRQ RI GHYHORSPHQW EXW LW KDV EHHQ LQFRQVLVWHQW LQ VXSSRUWLQJ VSHFLILF VWDJHV RU SURFHVVHV SUHGLFWHG E\ WKH YDULRXV PRGHOV 3RVVLEOH H[SODQDWLRQV IRU WKH ODFN RI HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW PD\ EH WKDW WKH PRGHOV DUH f WRR QDUURZ LQ WKHLU WLPH IUDPH RU f WRR VSHFLILF DV WR ZKDW W\SH RI OHDUQLQJ VKRXOG EH RFFXUULQJ DW D JLYHQ WLPH SRLQW ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV WKH PRGHOV PD\ SUHGLFW WRR PXFK GHYHORSPHQW ZLWKLQ WKH IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ SHULRG DQG WKH\ PD\ EH WRR OLQHDU LQ WKH SUHGLFWLRQ WKDW VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ RFFXUV ILUVW IROORZHG E\ SURFHVV WUDLQLQJ 7KH GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ JHQHUDOO\ EHJLQ ZLWK D QDLYH QRYLFH DQG HQG ZLWK D PDVWHU SUDFWLWLRQHU $W WKH VDPH WLPH PDQ\ DWWHPSW WR SURYLGH VSHFLILF GLUHFWLRQ WR WKH WUDLQHHVf VXSHUYLVRUV VR WKH VXSHUYLVRUV PD\ IDFLOLWDWH WKH WUDLQHHVf JURZWK ,Q RUGHU WR DFFRXQW IRU WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI QRYLFH WR PDVWHU ZLWKLQ IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ WKHVH PRGHOV PD\ H[SHFW WRR PXFK JURZWK WR RFFXU ZLWKLQ WRR VKRUW RI D WLPH IUDPH 0RGHOV GHYHORSHG PRUH UHFHQWO\ KDYH DGGUHVVHG WKLV LVVXH E\ H[WHQGLQJ VXSHUYLVHG H[SHULHQFH EH\RQG JUDGXDWLRQ WKHQ EH\RQG OLFHQVXUH 0RVW UHFHQWO\ SURSRVHG PRGHOV DFNQRZOHGJH WKDW WKH SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJLVW ZLOO FRQWLQXH WR EH fLQ SURFHVVf LH :DWNLQV f DQG WKHUHIRUH SUHVXPDEO\ LQ GHYHORSPHQW

PAGE 115

7KH FRQFHSW RI FRQWLQXDOO\ EHLQJ fLQ SURFHVVf LV WDNHQ D VWHS IXUWKHU LQ WKH HPSLULFDOO\GHULYHG PRGHO RI SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW SURSRVHG E\ 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG f 6NRYKROW DQG 5RQQHVWDG LGHQWLILHG HLJKW VSHFLILF VWDJHV DQG SURFHVVHV WKDW RFFXUV WKURXJKRXW WKH SURIHVVLRQDOfV FDUHHU 2I WKH HLJKW VWDJHV LQ WKH PRGHO RQO\ WKUHH RFFXU ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI IRUPDO WUDLQLQJ SULRU WR JUDGXDWLRQ 7KH WUDLQHH RQO\ UHDFKHV D VWDJH RI FRQGLWLRQDO DXWRQRP\ SULRU WR VHHNLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO HPSOR\PHQW VXJJHVWLQJ D FRQWLQXLQJ GHSHQGHQF\ XSRQ VXSHUYLVLRQ ZKHWKHU LW LV IRU VNLOO RU SURFHVV DVVLVWDQFH 7KLV SUHGLFWLRQ RI FRQGLWLRQDO DXWRQRP\ LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH GDWD DQG UHVXOWV RI WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ VXJJHVWLQJ WKDW PRGHOV ZLWK D EURDGHU IRFXV VKRXOG EH WKH IRFXV RI IXWXUH UHVHDUFK ,I GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV DUH WR EH XVHG DV JXLGHV LQ WKH SURYLVLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LW LV QHFHVVDU\ WKDW WKH\ DFFXUDWHO\ UHIOHFW WKH FXUUHQW VWDWXV RI WUDLQLQJ DQG GHYHORSPHQW 7KHUHIRUH PRGHOV PXVW EH FRQWLQXDOO\ XSGDWHG WR FXUUHQW VWDQGDUGV LI WKH\ DUH WR EH HIIHFWLYH 0RGHOV FDQ EH SDUWLFXODUO\ KHOSIXO WR EHJLQQLQJ VXSHUYLVRUV FRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ WKH SURFHVV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7R EH KHOSIXO KRZHYHU WKH PRGHOV PXVW DOVR EH UHDOLVWLF LQ WKHLU SUHGLFWLRQV RI VXSHUYLVHH QHHGV DQG EHKDYLRUV %DVHG RQ WKH FRQFOXVLRQV RI WKLV VWXG\ WKH PRGHOV VKRXOG DOVR DGGUHVV WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS $QRWKHU FRQFOXVLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WKDW JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV D FULWLFDO FRPSRQHQW RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOfV SURFHVV RI EHFRPLQJ D SV\FKRORJLVW )XUWKHUPRUH D TXDOLW\ VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV D SUHUHTXLVLWH RI JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH VXEMHFWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ LGHQWLILHG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DV WKH FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WKH\ H[SHULHQFHG JURZWK DV D SURIHVVLRQDO DQG DV D SHUVRQ 7KH WUDLQHHVf H[SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 116

ZHUH LQVHSDUDEOH 7KLV LGHQWLILFDWLRQ VXJJHVWV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS VKRXOG UHFHLYH JUHDWHU DWWHQWLRQ LQ WKH HPSLULFDO OLWHUDWXUH :KLOH WKH GHVLUDELOLW\ RI fIDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQVf LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV ZHOO GRFXPHQWHG LW ZRXOG EH ZRUWK NQRZLQJ LI WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS DFWXDOO\ DIIHFWV WKH SHUIRUPDQFH RI WKH WUDLQHH +ROORZD\ DQG 1HXIHOGW f FRQFOXGHG WKDW VLQFH WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH WKHUDSHXWLF DOOLDQFH DIIHFWV WKHUDSHXWLF RXWFRPHV LH 2UOLQVN\ *UDZH DQG 3DUNV f LW LV OLNHO\ WKDW WKH VDPH KROGV WUXH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ ,Q D UHFHQW VWXG\ E\ 3DWWRQ DQG .LYOLJKDQ f WUDLQHHVf FRPIRUW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK SHUIRUPDQFH LQ WKHLU FRXQVHOLQJ VHVVLRQV DV PHDVXUHG E\ H[WHUQDO REVHUYHUV :KHWKHU WKH TXDOLW\ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DIIHFWHG SHUIRUPDQFH RU ZKHWKHU KLJK IXQFWLRQLQJ WUDLQHHV DUH PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV QRW FOHDU DQG VKRXOG EH WKH VXEMHFW RI IXWXUH UHVHDUFK /LNHZLVH WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ VXJJHVWV WKH WUDLQHHVf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

PAGE 117

,Q WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ QRW RQO\ GLG WKH VXEMHFWV KLJKO\ YDOXH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ EXW WKH\ LGHQWLILHG JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ DV EHLQJ D IXQFWLRQ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRUf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fKRZ WR VXSHUYLVHf VKRXOG EH LQFOXGHG LQ SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV
PAGE 118

,OO WKDW VXSHUYLVRU\ VNLOOV WUDLQLQJ FDQ LPSURYH KRZ RQH HYDOXDWHV RQHfV RZQ SHUIRUPDQFH DV D VXSHUYLVRU LH %HUQDUG f 7KH GDWD LV LQFRQFOXVLYH KRZHYHU DV WR ZKHWKHU WUDLQLQJ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ VHSDUDWH IURP H[SHULHQFH KDV D EHQHILFLDO LPSDFW XSRQ VXSHUYLVLRQ RXWFRPHV 7KH GLVFLSOLQH RI SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ UHIOHFWV WKLV ODFN RI HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW LQ WKH DSSDUHQW DPELJXLW\ LQ SURYLGLQJ WUDLQLQJ IRU WRPRUURZf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

PAGE 119

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

PAGE 120

SRVVLEOH FHQVRULQJ LQ WKHLU UHSRUW LI WKH\ DQWLFLSDWH D FRQWLQXHG UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH H[SHULPHQWHU $ JUHDWHU SUREOHP LQ WKLV FDVH KRZHYHU LV UHODWHG WR WKH H[SHULPHQWHUfV EHOLHI WKDW KH VHOHFWHG KLJK IXQFWLRQLQJ WUDLQHHV ZKR FRXOG LQ WXUQ SURYLGH FRJHQW WKRXJKWIXO DQG FRPSOHWH QDUUDWLYHV :KHQ GLVFXVVLQJ WKLV SURMHFW ZLWK D SV\FKRORJLVW ZKR VXSHUYLVRUV RQ D UHJXODU EDVLV WKH VXSHUYLVRU UHPDUNHG WR WKH H[SHULPHQWHU WKDW fVXSHUYLVLQJ WKH JRRG RQHV LV HDV\ LWfV WKH VWUXJJOLQJ WUDLQHHV ZKR UHTXLUH D JUHDW GHDO RI SDWLHQFH DQG FRQVLGHUDWLRQf ,I WKH VXEMHFWV VHOHFWHG IRU WKH VWXG\ ZHUH LQGHHG fWKH JRRG RQHVf LW LV SRVVLEOH WKDW D IXOO UDQJH RI VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFHV ZHUHQfW REWDLQHG ,W ZRXOG EH LQWHUHVWLQJ WR LQWHUYLHZ ORZHU IXQFWLRQLQJ WUDLQHHV WR GHWHUPLQH LI WKHUH DUH DQ\ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ KRZ JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV H[SHULHQFHG RU ZKHWKHU JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV JRRG VXSHUYLVLRQ )LQDOO\ LW LV LPSRVVLEOH WR NQRZ H[DFWO\ KRZ VXFFHVVIXO WKH H[SHULPHQWHU ZDV LQ EUDFNHWLQJ KLV SUHFRQFHLYHG EHOLHIV DERXW VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV LV SDUWLFXODUO\ WKH FDVH VLQFH KH KDV KDG KLV RZQ H[SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ $OWKRXJK WKH UHOLDELOLW\ LV GHPRQVWUDWHG E\ WKH VLPLODULW\ WR RWKHU SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXGLHV ZKLFK ZHUHQfW LGHQWLILHG XQWLO DIWHU WKH GDWD DQDO\VLV DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ RI WKH GHVFULSWLRQVf WKH ILQDO WHVW RI YDOLGLW\ OLHV ZLWK WKH UHDGHU )RU WKLV UHDVRQ WKH UHVXOWV RI RWKHU VLPLODU VWXGLHV KDYH EHHQ LQFOXGHG DV ZHOO DV D GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH H[SHULPHQWHUfV RZQ H[SHULHQFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 121

$33(1',; $ 6$03/( 35272&2/ :,7+ 0($1,1* 81,76 7KH IROORZLQJ LV DQ H[DPSOH RI D SURWRFRO ZLWK WKH GLVFRYHUHG PHDQLQJ XQLWV 7KH YHUEDWLP WUDQVFULSW LV RQ WKH ULJKW VLGH RI WKH SDJH DQG WKH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ PHDQLQJ XQLWV DUH OLVWHG RQ WKH OHIW VLGH RI WKH SDJH $OO QDPHV DQG RWKHU LGHQWLI\LQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ KDYH EHHQ FKDQJHG 0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 7KLQN EDFN WR D WLPH ZKHQ \RX H[SHULHQFHG ZKDW \RX EHOLHYH WR EH D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7HOO PH DERXW WKH H[SHULHQFH ZKDW KDSSHQHG ZKDW ZDV VDLG ZKDW ZDV IHOW DQ\WKLQJ \RX EHOLHYH ZDV SDUW RI WKDW H[SHULHQFH 6XSHUYLVRU ZDV FORVH 6 :HOO D ORW RI P\ WUDLQLQJ KDV EHHQ LQ WHVWLQJ ,fYH LQ DJH DOORZHG WKRXJKW DERXW WKLV D OLWWOH ELW DQG FRXOGQfW WKLQN RI RQH SHUVRQDO LGHQWLILFDWLRQ SHUVRQ ,W ZDVQfW OLNH KDG WKLV UROH PRGHO WKDW FDPH WR PLQG ULJKW DZD\ WKRXJKW DERXW LW D OLWWOH PRUH DQG WKRXJKW SUREDEO\ RQH RI WKH PRVW SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFHV ,fYH KDG ZDV ZLWK RQH RI P\ VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR DFWXDOO\ KDGQfW EHHQ LQ WKH ILHOG WKDW ORQJf§VKH ZDV SUREDEO\ VL[ \HDUV SRVW JUDGXDWH 0D\EH LW ZDV WKH IDFW WKDW VKH ZDV FORVHU LQ DJH WR PH IRU VRPH UHDVRQ LGHQWLILHG ZLWK KHU PRUH WKDQ P\ RWKHU VXSHUYLVRUV 5HVSHFWHG VXSHUYLVRU WKLQN RQH RI WKH WKLQJV WKDW PDGH LW SRVLWLYH IRU PH ZDV GXH WR FRPSHWHQF\ DQG RQH WKDW UHDOO\ UHVSHFWHG KHU 6KH ZDV YHU\ FRPSHWHQW RUJDQL]DWLRQ VKHfV UHDOO\ RUJDQL]HG ZKLFK PDGH PH UHDOO\ UHVSHFW KHU

PAGE 122

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVHH DFWLYHO\ DQG ZDQW PH WR VHHN RXW VXSHUYLVLRQ HYHU PRUH EHFDXVH VRXJKW VXSHUYLVLRQ WR NQHZ VKH NQHZ D ORW DQG NQHZ WKDW VKH ZDV FRPSHWHQW OHDUQ DV PXFK DV VR ZDQWHG WR OHDUQ JHW WKDW LQIRUPDWLRQ IURP KHU SRVVLEOH IURP FRPSHWHQW VXSHUYLVRU 6XSHUYLVRU LQYHVWHG 7KH RWKHU SDUW RI LW LV MXVW KRZ VKH UHODWHG WR PH -XVW WR FRPPLWWHG WR WUDLQLQJ WKH VWDII DV D ZKROH 6KH ZDV UHDOO\ LQYHVWHG LQ WKH DQG IXOILOOLQJ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP ZH ZHUHQfW SDLG WKLV ZDV D SUDFWLFXP VXSHUYLVHHfV QHHGV SRVLWLRQ RU FRPSHQVDWHG LQ DQ\ ZD\ $QG VKH DOZD\V FKHFNHG LQ ZLWK PH DV ZHOO DV WKH RWKHU SHRSOHf§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fW WKUHDWHQLQJ ZD\ VR \RX GLGQfW IHHO LI \RX JDYH DQ DQVZHU PDNH VXSHUYLVHH IHHO WKDW ZDV UHDOO\ ZD\ RII WKDW \RX ZRXOG IHHO HPEDUUDVVHG XQFRPIRUWDEOH RU VWXSLG +HU DSSURDFK ZDV VXFK WKDW GLGQfW IHHO XQFRPIRUWDEOH DW DOO HYHQ LI WKRXJKW PLJKW EH ZD\ RII RQ VRPHWKLQJ

PAGE 123

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 9DOLGDWHG VXSHUYLVHHfV IHHOLQJV DQG 6KH DOVR ZRXOG YDOLGDWH PH LI ZDV KDYLQJ WURXEOH ZLWK D SDWLHQW KDG WKLV RQH SDWLHQW DQG KH ZDV GULYLQJ PH H[SHULHQFH FUD]\ +H KDG D ORW RI SHUVRQDOLW\ SUREOHPV DQG ZDV MXVW LQYROYHG ZLWK KLP LQ WHUPV RI WHVWLQJ LW ZDVQfW OLNH ZDV GRLQJ WKHUDS\ ZLWK KLP
PAGE 124

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVRU ZDV 5HFHQWO\ EHLQJ KHUH P\ VXSHUYLVRU DOZD\V IHOW WKDW DWWXQHG WR VXSHUYLVHH PD\EH ZDVQfW JHWWLQJ HQRXJK VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV DFFXUDWH DWWHQWLYHQHVV WKLQNLQJ DERXW P\ VXSHUYLVLRQ ZLWK KHU DQG UHDOL]HG WR VXSHUYLVHHfV VWDWH RI WKH RQH WKLQJ WKDW ,fYH KDG ZLWK KHU WKDW KDYHQfW KDG PLQG DQG FRQIURQWHG ZLWK PRVW RI P\ VXSHUYLVRUV LV WKDW VKH ZRXOG UHDOO\ VXSHUYLVHH ZLWK TXHXH LQ RQ P\ DWWLWXGH RU ZKDW ZDV JRLQJ RQ LQ WKH REVHUYDWLRQV PRPHQW $QG VKH ZRXOG FRQIURQW PH ZLWK LW 6KHfG ORRN DW PH DQG VD\ f
PAGE 125

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f
PAGE 126

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVLRQ LV WKH JXHVV WKH RWKHU SDUW DQG PD\ KDYH KLJKOLJKWHG LW D UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH OLWWOH ELW LV WKDW VXSHUYLVLRQ LVQfW MXVW DERXW WKH SDWLHQW VXSHUYLVRU WKH SURFHVV \RXfUH ZRUNLQJ ZLWK LVQfW MXVW DERXW WKH WHFKQLFDO WKLQJV WR OHDUQ DERXW RQHVHOI \RX QHHG WR NQRZ DERXW WHVWLQJ RU WKH WKHRULHV RI WKURXJK JRRG WKHUDS\f§EXW WKDW SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS \RX KDYH ZLWK VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW RWKHU SHUVRQ EHFDXVH WKH\fUH \RXU PHQWRU WKH\fUH DOORZLQJ \RX ZKHWKHU \RX ZDQW WR FDOO LW FRXQWHUWUDQVIHUHQFH ZKDWHYHU \RX ZDQW WR FDOO LW EXW DOORZLQJ \RX WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR EULQJ XS \RXU SHUVRQDO LVVXHV ([SHULHQFLQJ HQRXJK 1RW WKDW LW EHFRPHV WKHUDS\ EHFDXVH WKDWfV QRW ZKDW LW LV WUXVW LQ WKH %XW EHLQJ DEOH WR EH FRPIRUWDEOH HQRXJK DQG WUXVW WKHP UHODWLRQVKLS WR H[SRVH HQRXJK WKDW \RX FDQ RSHQ XS DQG VKDUH WKRVH WKLQJV DQG RQHVHOI IRU SHUVRQDO WKH IHHGEDFN \RX JHW LV UHDOO\ DERXW f+RZfV WKLV JURZWK WR DLG DIIHFWLQJ \RXU ZRUNf RU f+RZfV WKLV DIIHFWLQJ \RXU SURIHVVLRQDO VNLOOVf RU ZKDWHYHU LW PD\ EH ZRXOGQfW ZDQW D GHYHORSPHQW ZKLOH VXSHUYLVRU WR JLYH PH WKHUDS\ DERXW P\ SHUVRQDO OLIH PDLQWDLQLQJ WKDWfV QRW ZKDW PHDQ 7KLV SDUWLFXODU VXSHUYLVRU ERWK DSSURSULDWH RI WKHP GLG WKDW NQHZ WKH\ ZHUH LQWHUHVWHG DQG NQHZ SURIHVVLRQDO WKDW ZDV LPSRUWDQW WR WKHP ERXQGDULHV OLNHG WKHVH $QG WKLQN WKH LPSRUWDQW WKLQJ WRR ZDV JRW DORQJ ZHOO VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHRSOH ZLWK WKHP 7KHUH DUH SHRSOH ZRXOGfYH ZDQWHG WR VRFLDOL]H ZLWK DIWHUZDUG HYHQ LI WKH\ ZHUHQfW P\ VXSHUYLVRU
PAGE 127

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVRU 6 )RU WKHP DVNLQJ RSHQ HQGHG TXHVWLRQV DERXW PH GHPRQVWUDWHG LQWHUHVW SHUVRQDOO\ 7KH ILUVW VXSHUYLVRU ZDV WDONLQJ DERXW VKH LQ VXSHUYLVHH E\ DVNLQJ ZRXOG VD\ fZKDW DUH \RXU SODQV IRU QH[W \HDU"f RU DERXW LVVXHV RWKHU f+RZfV WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ SURFHVV JRLQJ"f f+DV LW EHHQ WKDQ WKRVH GLUHFWO\ VWUHVVIXO IRU \RX"f 6KH ZRXOG DVN D ORW RI RSHQ HQGHG DSSOLFDEOH WR TXHVWLRQV DQG LI ZDV XQFRPIRUWDEOH ZRXOG VD\ VXSHUYLVLRQ f(YHU\WKLQJ ZDV RND\f DQG VKH ZRXOG KDYH GURSSHG LW %XW LW QHYHU JRW WR WKHUH ,W ZDV DOZD\V DV LI WKHUH ZDV D UHDVRQ IRU WKHP WR DVN WKDW EHFDXVH WKH\ VHQVHG VRPHWKLQJ :LWK P\ VXSHUYLVRU LW ZDV QRW VXEWOH VKH ZRXOG ORRN DW PH DQG VD\ f/HWfV JR LQ P\ RIILFHf DQG ZHfG JR LQ DQG VKHfG VD\ f:KDWfV ZURQJ"f 2U f,fYH VHQVHG VXFK DQG VXFKf fRSSRUWXQLW\ f WR RSHQ 7KHQ LW ZRXOG JLYH PH WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR RSHQ XS XS LPSOLHV GHVLUHQHHG %HFDXVH WKH\ DVNHG DERXW LW RI VXSHUYLVHH WR RSHQ XS +RZ DERXW WKH WUXVW FRPSRQHQW" 7UXVWV GHYHORSV RYHU 6 ,fP QRW VXUH LI LWV D WDQJLEOH WKLQJ RU LI WKHUHfV VRPHWKLQJ WLPH FDQ SLQSRLQW DQG VD\ WKDWfV ZKDW PDGH PH WUXVW WKLV SHUVRQ WKLQN LW GHYHORSHG RYHU WLPH 7KH ILUVW VXSHUYLVRU ZRUNHG ZLWK RYHU D \HDU 2EYLRXVO\ DW ILUVW \RX IHHO \RXU ZD\

PAGE 128

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 7UXVWV GHYHORSV GXH WR ,Q ERWK VLWXDWLRQV ZKDW ZDV VLPLODU ZDV WKDW WKHUH ZDV KRZ VXSHUYLVRU HLWKHU VWDII RU VRPHRQH DQ HPSOR\HH WKDW KDG HLWKHU KDQGOHV GLIILFXOWLHV WURXEOH ZLWK OHW PH IRFXV RQ WKH ILUVW RQH 7KHUH ZDV EURXJKW WR VXSHUYLVLRQ DQRWKHU VXSHUYLVRU DQG ZH W\SLFDOO\ GLGQfW JHW E\ WUDLQHH VXSHUYLVLRQ IURP KLP %XW RQ SDUWLFXODU FDVHV ZH GLG $W ILUVW KHOG LW EDFN GLG QRW OLNH KLP DV D VXSHUYLVRU ,W ZDV QRW SRVLWLYH LQ DQ\ ZD\ 6KH DVNHG PH DERXW WKLQJV DUH JRLQJ DQG DW ILUVW ZDVQfW VXUH DERXW KRZ PXFK WR RSHQ XS WR KHU EHFDXVH WKH\ ZRUNHG WRJHWKHU DQG GLGQfW NQRZ LI WKH\ ZHUH JRLQJ WR EH GLVFXVVLQJ WKLV ZLWK HDFK RWKHU :H QHYHU VDLG WKLV LV FRQILGHQWLDO %XW DV VRRQ DV VDLG LWV EHHQ D OLWWOH ELW GLIILFXOW DQG GRQfW UHPHPEHU KHU H[DFW ZRUGV EXW UHPHPEHU VKH VDLG f:HOO OHW PH MXVW WHOO \RX WKDW \RXfUH QRW WKH ILUVW SHUVRQ ZKRfV WROG PH WKDW $QG LW DOORZHG PH WR RSHQ XS DQG WDON WR KHU DERXW LW %XW WKLV ZDV ODWHU LQ WKH \HDU WRR 6R KDG ZRUNHG ZLWK KHU DQG JRWWHQ WR NQRZ KHU D OLWWOH ELW PRUH 7UXVW GHYHORSV WKURXJK :LWK WKLV VXSHUYLVRU VKH GRQfW ZDQW WR VD\ VKH VXSHUYLVRUnV GLVFORVXUH WUHDWHG PH DV D FROOHDJXH EXW VKH ZRXOG VKDUH ZLWK PH EHIRUH ZRXOG VKDUH ZLWK KHU DERXW D QXUVH RU VRPHRQH ZDV KDYLQJ D KDUG WLPH JHWWLQJ DORQJ ZLWK VKH ZRXOG WHOO PH DERXW KHU RZQ H[SHULHQFH $QG ,fP WKLQNLQJ ZHOO LI WUXVWV PH WKDW VKHfV VKDULQJ WKDW ZLWK PH WKHQ IHHO FDQ GR WKH VDPH 6R LW ZDV NLQG RI GLIIHUHQW ZKDW LV LW WKDW \RXfUH WUXVWLQJ WKHP ZLWK" 7UHDWLQJ VXSHUYLVRU DV 6 ZDV WHOOLQJ WKHP WKLQJV DERXW FROOHDJXHV ZRUNHG ZLWK D FRQILGDQW WKDW ZRXOG QRW ZDQW WKHP WR GLVFXVV ZLWK WKH SHUVRQ RU GLVFXVV ZLWK VRPHRQH HOVH

PAGE 129

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6R \RXfUH WUXVWLQJ WKHP ZLWK LQIRUPDWLRQ 6
PAGE 130

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f )HPDOH VXSHUYLVRUV 6 )LUVW RI DOO ,fYH RQO\ KDG PDOH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG KDYH DOORZHG VXSHUYLVHH WR KDG PRUH WKDQ IHPDOH VXSHUYLVRUV VR ULJKW RII WKH EDW LGHQWLI\ VXSHUYLVRU DV ,fYH KDG PRUH H[SHULHQFH ZLWK IHPDOH VXSHUYLVRUV D UROH PRGHO JXHVV WKDWfV MXVW WKH QDWXUH RI WKH SURIHVVLRQ QRW DV PDQ\ PHQ DV ZRPHQ DW OHDVW QRZ GHILQLWHO\ KDYH EHHQ DEOH WR LGHQWLI\ PRUH ZLWK WKH ZRPHQ EHFDXVH WKH\ KDYH EHHQ WKH SHRSOH ZKR KDYH EHHQ UROH PRGHOV WR PH $W OHDVW WKH ILUVW RQH ZDV FORVHU LQ DJH ZLWK PH DQG KDGQfW EHHQ WRR ORQJ VLQFH VKH KDG JUDGXDWHG DQG LW JDYH PH WKH VHQVH WKDW FRXOG EH D KHU OHYHO LQ VR PDQ\ \HDUV GHILQLWHO\ LGHQWLILHG ZLWK KHU PRUH QRW RQO\ EHFDXVH VKH ZDV IHPDOH EXW DOVR EHFDXVH KHU VWDJH LQ KHU FDUHHU $FWXDOO\ WKH VHFRQG VXSHUYLVRU WKH VDPH LV WUXH 7KH ZRUGV \RX KDYH PHQWLRQHG PHQWRU DQG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS WKDW ZDV HVWDEOLVKHG ZRQGHULQJ LI WKH JHQGHU KDG DQ\ LPSDFW RQ WKDW 6DPH JHQGHU 6 WKLQN VR GRQfW WKLQN LW SUHFOXGHG PH KDYLQJ D SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVRU IDFLOLWDWHG UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK D PDOH VXSHUYLVRU EXW WKLQN LW LGHQWLILFDWLRQ GHILQLWHO\ KHOSHG LQ WHUPV RI PH LGHQWLI\LQJ ZLWK WKHP PRUH RU JXHVV ,W VRXQGV OLNH WKHUH LV D VWURQJ FRPSRQHQW RI LGHQWLILFDWLRQ 6
PAGE 131

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG 6 WKLQN SUREDEO\ D ORW EHFDXVH WKLQN LQ MXVW DQ\ W\SH RI UHVSHFW DGGV WR ZKDW VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH \RXfUH OHDUQLQJ IURP WKHP DQG FDQ EH OHDUQHG IURP KRSHIXOO\ DW OHDVW LI LWfV D SRVLWLYH RQH \RX UHVSHFW WKHLU VXSHUYLVRU ZRUN
PAGE 132

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f /DFN RI UHVSHFW OLPLWV 6 :HOO LI GRQfW WKLQN RU WKHUH LV VRPHWKLQJ DERXW WKHLU YDOXH VXSHUYLVHH ZRUN RU WKHLU ZD\ RI DSSURDFKLQJ LW RU ZKDWHYHU LW PD\ SODFHV RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ EH WKDW GRQfW SDUWLFXODUO\ OLNH RU YDOXH 7KHQ ZRXOG SUHFOXGHV WKH WKLQN ZKDW LV LW WKDW DP OHDUQLQJ IURP WKLV SHUVRQ" RFFXUUHQFH RI WKLQN WKDW ZRXOG PD\EH VKXW PH RII D OLWWOH ELW DQG PD\EH OHDUQLQJ VXSHUYLVHH QRW JR WR WKH SHUVRQ DV PXFK RU QRW DVN DV PDQ\ EHFRPHV OHVV DFWLYH TXHVWLRQV RU QRW EULQJ XS DV PDQ\ LVVXHV ,I GLGQfW IHHO WKDW WKH\ ZHUH FRPSHWHQW DQG NQHZ WKHLU ILHOG DV ZHOO WR KHOS PH WR GHYHORS WKRVH VNLOOV LQ PH WKHQ ZRXOGQfW WKLQN WKH\ ZRXOG EH DV JRRG RI D VXSHUYLVRU H[SHULHQFH ZRXOGQfW OHDUQ DV PXFK IURP WKHP IHHO OLNH LQLWLDOO\ \RX KDYH WR EH WKLQN WKDWf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

PAGE 133

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3RVLWLYH OHDUQLQJ WKURXJK SRRU VXSHUYLVLRQf§EHFDPH DZDUH RI SDUDOOHO SURFHVVLQJ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKHUDS\ KRZ RQH VLWXDWLRQ VHW RI LVVXHV FDQ HIIHFW SHUIRUPDQFH LQ WKH RWKHU 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 7KLQN DERXW WKH VXSHUYLVRU WKDW \RX GLGQfW OLNH 'LG DQ\ DVSHFW RI WKDW H[SHULHQFH ZLWKLQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU UROH RU SURFHVV FRQWULEXWH WR \RXU GHYHORSPHQW DV D SV\FKRORJLVW" 6 7KDWfV LQWHUHVWLQJ
PAGE 134

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f *RRG VXSHUYLVRU ZDV GLGQfW UHDOL]H WKLV XQWLO DIWHUZDUG 7KDW ZDV RQH WKLQJ DEOH WR JLYH LQVLJKW WR ZDV GHILQLWHO\ QRW DZDUH RI WKDW \RX FDQ EH UHDOO\ SLVVHG VXSHUYLVHH UHJDUGLQJ DW \RXU VXSHUYLVRU DQG \RX FRXOG WDNH LW RXW RQ WKH SDVW QHJDWLYH SDWLHQW LI \RXfUH QRW DZDUH RI LW 7KDWfV GHILQLWHO\ H[SHULHQFHV VRPHWKLQJ WKDW DOORZHG PH WR FKHFN WKRVH WKLQJV RXW ZLWKLQ P\VHOI +H QHYHU SRLQWHG WKDW RXW WR PH RWKHUZLVH LW ZRXOG KDYH EHHQ D YHU\ SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LI KH ZDV RSHQ DERXW LW DQG DOORZHG PH WR WDON DERXW PH H[SHULHQFH DQG ZKDW ZDV JRLQJ RQ ZLWK WKLV SDWLHQW LQVWHDG LW ZDV f
PAGE 135

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVHH UHOLHV RQ 6 WKLQN WRZDUGV WKH HQG 0\ FXUUHQW RQH GRQfW WKLQN LQIRUPDO LQIRUPDWLRQ VR WKLQN SUREDEO\ WKURXJKRXW WKH VL[ PRQWKV VKHfV WR VXSHUYLVRU WR LQIRUP SUREDEO\ SLFNHG LW XS EHFDXVH WKHUH KDYH EHHQ WLPHV ,fYH KHU RI VDWLVIDFWLRQ RI VDLG f+RZ LV LW \RX NQRZ WKLV DQG WKLVf f:KHQ GLG \RX WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ OHDUQ WKLV"f IHHO WKDW VKH SUREDEO\ LQ D VXEWOH ZD\ UHODWLRQVKLS SLFNHG XS WKDW UHDOO\ WKLQN VKHfV FRPSHWHQW WKDW VKH NQRZV D ORW DQG ZDQW WR OHDUQ IURP KHU ,fP VXUH VKHfV SLFNHG WKDW XS %XW QHYHU RSHQO\ VDLG f
PAGE 136

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVHH GLVFORVXUH 6 GHILQLWHO\ GLGQfW IHHO ZLWK WKH ILUVW VXSHUYLVRU GRHV QRW LQFOXGH GRQfW WKLQN HYHU KDG D QHJDWLYH H[SHULHQFH ZLWK KHU \RX GLVFORVXUH UHJDUGLQJ NQRZ" 6R WKDW GLGQfW FRPH XS :LWK WKLV RQH WKHUH KDYH WKH VDWLVIDFWLRQ RU EHHQ WLPHV WKDW ,fYH EHHQ GLVDSSRLQWHG ZLWK QRW JHWWLQJ GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ RI WKH HQRXJK VXSHUYLVLRQ RU ,fYH EHHQ DQJU\ HYHQ VRPHWLPHV VXSHUYLVRU\ IRU KHU QRW PDNLQJ D FRPPLWPHQW IRU QRW SURYLGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS WUDLQLQJ RSSRUWXQLW\ WKDW ILUVW WDONHG WR KHU DERXW NQRZ VKHfV EXV\ DQG HYHU\WKLQJ EXW NQRZ GLGQfW WHOO KHU WKDW $QG WKDWfV SDUWO\ P\ LVVXH KDYH D KDUG WLPH HVSHFLDOO\ ZLWK SHRSOH WKDW NLQG RI SXW RQ D OLWWOH SHGHVWDO ,WV KDUG IRU PH WR GR WKDW GRQfW WKLQN LW ZDV UHDOO\ GRQfW WKLQN LW ZDV FRPLQJ IURP WKHP LW ZDV PH 6R LW VRXQGV OLNH \RXU DFWLYH UROH LQ WKLV LV LPSRUWDQW WRR 6XSHUYLVHH WDNHV DQ 6
PAGE 137

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f *RRG VXSHUYLVLRQ LV 6 7KDW LWV ERWK ZD\V"
PAGE 138

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f $Q\ SHUVRQDO LVVXHV 7KRVH LVVXHV KDYH WR EH DGGUHVVHG LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW PD\ LPSDFW EHFDXVH WKH\ GHILQLWHO\ LQIOXHQFH \RXU SURIHVVLRQDO FRQILGHQFH RU GHYHORSPHQW MXVW WKLQN WKH\ JR KDQG LQ KDQG ,fYH KDG SURIHVVLRQDO UROH PXVW VXSHUYLVRUV WKDW KDYHQfW DGGUHVVHG WKDW DQG \HV ,fYH EH DGGUHVVHG LQ JDLQHG ,fYH OHDUQHG IURP WKHP %XW ZKHQ WKLQN RI D VXSHUYLVLRQ DV WKH\ UHDOO\ SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH VRPHWKLQJ WKDW ZLOO DIIHFW SURIHVVLRQDO UHPHPEHU IRU D ORQJ WLPH DQG LI ,fP HYHU LQ D SHUIRUPDQFH VXSHUYLVRU\ UROH VRPHWKLQJ WKDW ZDQW WR JLYH WR WKH SHRSOH ,fP WUDLQLQJ LV WR EH LQ WXQH ZLWK WKHLU SHUVRQDO GHYHORSPHQW WRR 6R LI \RX KDG D FRXUVH RI DOO WKHVH W\SHV RI VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHUH \RX OHDUQHG WKH fEXVLQHVVf DVSHFW RQO\ KRZ DUH \RX D EHWWHU FOLQLFLDQ WRGD\ E\ KDYLQJ WKH H[SHULHQFHV \RXfYH KDG"

PAGE 139

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 3HUVRQDO JURZWK LQ 6 FDQ RQO\ JXHVV 0D\EH ZRXOG IHHO PRUH OLNH EHLQJ D VXSHUYLVLRQ DOORZV WHFKQLFLDQ RU WHFKQLFDO DERXW WKLQJV WKLQN EHLQJ D GHYHORSPHQW RI WKHUDSLVW \RXU SHUVRQDOLW\ \RXU SHUVRQDO LVVXHVf§DOO WKHUDSLVW EH\RQG MXVW D WKRVH WKLQJV DIIHFW WKH TXDOLW\ RI WUHDWPHQW \RX DUH WHFKQLFLDQ SURYLGLQJ 7KURXJK VXSHUYLVLRQ LI WKRVH WKLQJV ZHUH VHSDUDWHG OHWfV MXVW WDON DERXW WKH WHFKQLFDO SDUW RI LW WKH WKHRU\ DOO RI WKDW 7KHQ PD\ EH D JUHDW WHFKQLFLDQ EXW PLJKW QRW EH D UHDOO\ JRRG WKHUDSLVW 0D\EH ,fP MXVW DVVXPLQJ WKDWfV KRZ LW ZRXOG EH %HFDXVH DV D WKHUDSLVW DQG WKH ZRUN ZH GR \RX KDYH WR EH VR DWWXQHG WR WKRVH VXEWOH WKLQJV LQ WKH SDWLHQWV WKDW \RX ZRUN ZLWK WKDW \RX NLQG RI QHHG WR ZRUN WKRVH WKLQJV RXW ZLWK \RXUVHOI 7KH\ FDQ VWLOO EH SUREOHPV EXW WKDW \RXfUH NLQG RI ZRUNLQJ RQ WKHP ,I QR RQH SRLQWV WKRVH WKLQJV RXW WR \RX GXULQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ LI QRERG\ NLQG RI KLJKOLJKWV WKH IDFW WKDW PD\EH WKLV LV LQIOXHQFLQJ \RXU ZRUN WKHQ WKLQN LW PLJKW UHDOO\ LPSHGH \RXU ZRUN ZLWK SDWLHQWV :LWK DQRWKHU SURIHVVLRQ PD\EH LW ZRXOG EH GLIIHUHQW

PAGE 140

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVLRQ PXVW PDNH %XW LQ RXU SURIHVVLRQ PHDQ ZHfUH ZRUNLQJ ZLWK RWKHU XV DZDUH RI RXU RZQ SHRSOH ZKRVH LVVXHV PLJKW EH WKH VDPH DV RXUV RU WKH\ LVVXHV VR ZH DUH DZDUH PLJKW EULQJ XS D ORW RI LVVXHV XS ZLWKLQ RXUVHOYHV ,I ZH RI KRZ WKH\ PD\ GRQfW SD\ DWWHQWLRQ WR WKDW DQG WKURXJK WKHVH UROH PRGHOV LPSDFW RXU WKHVH SHRSOH ZHfYH OHDUQHG IURP VKRZ XV WKDW WKRVH UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK RXU WKLQJV GRQfW PDWWHU WKHQ WKLQN \RXfUH PLVVLQJ D ZKROH FOLHQWV ORW WKHUH :KDW NLQG RI WKHUDSLVW ZRXOG \RX EH LI \RXfUH QRW SD\LQJ DWWHQWLRQ WR WKRVH WKLQJV" JXHVV LW JRHV EDFN WR P\ SHUVRQDO EHOLHI DERXW WKHUDS\ DQG WKHUDSLVWV DQG EHOLHYH WKDW \RXU SHUVRQDO LVVXHV WRWDOO\ DIIHFW \RXU ZRUN $QG SDWLHQWV UHDFW WR WKDW VR KDYLQJ WKDW ELDV RU ZKDWHYHU \RX ZDQW WR FDOO LW WKHQ ZRXOG VD\ LI WKDW ZDVQfW DYDLODEOH WR PH GXULQJ VXSHUYLVLRQf§WKDW VFUXWLQ\ WKDW ZKDWHYHU LW LVf§, WKLQN ZRXOG EH PLVVLQJ D ELJ SDUW 1RW RQO\ SDUW RI P\ GHYHORSPHQW EXW PLVVLQJ D ELJ SDUW RI WKH SDWLHQWV PD\EH DQG KRZ WKH\fUH DIIHFWLQJ PH DQG KRZ ,fP DIIHFWLQJ WKHP $Q\ RWKHU WKRXJKWV"

PAGE 141

0HDQLQJ 8QLWV 3URWRFRO ,QWHUYLHZ WUDQVFULSW RI 6XEMHFW f 6XSHUYLVRU PXVW EH 6 :KDW JRHV DORQJ DERXW EHLQJ FRPIRUWDEOH DERXW EULQJLQJ RSHQ WR GLVDJUHHPHQW XS LVVXHV DERXW RWKHU HPSOR\HHV WKDWfV MXVW SDUW RI LW DQG GLVFXVVLRQ 7KH RWKHU SDUW RI LW LV EHLQJ DEOH WR VD\ WR \RXU SDUWLFXODUO\ DV VXSHUYLVRU f7KDWfV \RXU RSLQLRQ EXW WKLV LV P\ RSLQLRQf VXSHUYLVHH VNLOOV 7KDW \RX JHW WR D SRLQW WKDW \RX IHHO FRQILGHQW HQRXJK GHYHORS DQG ZLWK \RXU VNLOOV DQG \RX WUXVW WKH SHUVRQ HQRXJK WKDW FRQILGHQFH EXLOGV \RXfUH DEOH WR VD\ f\HDK EXW GLVDJUHHf WKLQN LW WDNHV D ORQJ WLPH EHIRUH WKH VXSHUYLVHH FDQ VD\ WKDW 3UREDEO\ QRW WKH ILUVW RQH EXW ZLWK WKH VHFRQG RQH ,fYH JRWWHQ WR D SRLQW ZKHUH ,fOO VD\ f1R GRQfW WKLQN WKLV LV WKH ULJKW WLPH WR JLYH WKLV WHVW WR WKLV SHUVRQf RU f, WKLQN WKH\fUH JRLQJ WR IDOO DSDUW LI EULQJ WKLV XSf *UHDW $UH WKHUH DQ\ RWKHU WKRXJKWV UHODWHG WR VXSHUYLVLRQ FRQWULEXWLQJ WR \RXU GHYHORSPHQW DV D SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJLVW" 6XSHUYLVRU VKDUHV RZQ 6 2QH RI WKH RWKHU WKLQJV LV WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRUV KDYH WUDLQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV VKDUHG ZLWK PH WKHLU SURFHVV WRR f, UHPHPEHU MXVW YDOLGDWHV VXSHUYLVHHnV ZKHQ ZDV LQ \RXU SODFHf DQG LW ZDV VR UHDVVXULQJ WKDW RZQ SRVLWLRQ WKH\fYH EHHQ KHUH WRR 2U WKDW WKH\fYH IHOW WKLV ZD\ ,W GLGQfW VHHP OLNH ZDV WKH RQO\ RQH ZKRfV QRW FDWFKLQJ RQ WKDW WKH\fYH EHHQ WKHUH WRR 6R DQ\ZD\ RND\ 7LPH FRPPLWPHQW DQG 6RPHWKLQJ HOVH DQG GRQfW NQRZ LI WKLV FDPH WKURXJK DYDLODELOLW\ EXW WKH IDFW WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV DYDLODEOH LV UHDOO\ LPSRUWDQW DQG PRVW RI P\ VXSHUYLVRUV KDYH EHHQ DYDLODEOH 1RW MXVW IRU WKH WLPH \RX VHW ZLWK WKHP EXW NQRZLQJ WKDW LI VRPHWKLQJ FRPHV XS \RX FDQ JR WR WKHP 3XOO WKHP DVLGH RU WKH\fOO EH WKHUH ,W WKDWfV DOZD\V EHHQ ,fYH EHHQ OXFN\ ZLWK WKDW WRR RND\ WKDWfV LW 2ND\ 7KDQNV IRU \RXU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ

PAGE 142

$33(1',; % )81'$0(17$/ 678&785( 2) 326,7,9( 683(59,6,21 7KH IROORZLQJ LV WKH IXQGDPHQWDO VWUXFWXUH RI SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ DV UHSRUWHG E\ +XWW 6FRWW DQG .LQJ S f ,W LV SUHVHQWHG YHUEDWLP DQG XQHGLWHG ,Q D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH WDVN HPHUJHV DV DQ H[SORUDWLRQ ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVRU RI WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK FOLHQWV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH DSSURDFKHV WKH H[SHULHQFH ZLWK DQ[LHW\ VWLUUHG XS E\ WKH H[SHFWDWLRQ RI EHLQJ MXGJHG 7KH VXSHUYLVRU LV SHUFHSWLYH DQG VXSSRUWLYH ZKLOH DFWLYHO\ HQJDJLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVHH LQ H[SORULQJ WKH WKHUDSHXWLF SURFHVV DQG UHVROYLQJ FRQFHUQV ZKLFK LQWHUIHUH ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV VHDUFK IRU PRUH KHOSIXO ZD\V RI LQWHUDFWLQJ ZLWK FOLHQWV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH FRPHV WR YDOXH VXSHUYLVLRQ ZKLFK IDFLOLWDWHV ZRUNLQJ WKURXJK FRQIOLFWV DQG IUHHV WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR UHVSRQG PRUH VHQVLWLYHO\ DQG FUHDWLYHO\ WR FOLHQWVf QHHGV 'XULQJ WKH VDPH WLPH WKDW WKH WDVN RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV HPHUJLQJ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LV GHYHORSLQJ DQG VXSSRUWLQJ WKH ZRUN 7KLV UHODWLRQVKLS HPERGLHV ZDUPWK DFFHSWDQFH UHVSHFW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG WUXVW 7KH LQWHUSHUVRQDO FOLPDWH IDFLOLWDWHV JURZWK DQG OHDUQLQJ f0LVWDNHVf FDQ EH PDGH ZLWKRXW fIDLOXUHf DQG EHKDYLRU DWWLWXGHV DQG IHHOLQJV FDQ EH H[SORUHG ZLWKRXW TXHVWLRQLQJ WKH ZRUWK RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV DQ[LHW\ LV VXEVWDQWLDOO\ LI QRW DOWRJHWKHU UHGXFHG VR WKDW LW GRHV QRW LQWHUIHUH VHULRXVO\ ZLWK WKH ZRUN RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ,I FRQIOLFWV DULVH EHWZHHQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH WKHVH DUH RSHQO\ UHVROYHG WKXV DGYDQFLQJ ERWK WKH WDVN DQG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH TXDOLW\ RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS HQFRXUDJHV WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR GLVFORVH DFWLRQV IHHOLQJV DWWLWXGHV DQG FRQIOLFWV ZKLFK RFFXU LQ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO ZRUN 7KH

PAGE 143

VXSHUYLVRU DOVR UHYHDOV SHUVRQDO IHHOLQJV DQG H[SHULHQFHVf§ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYHf§ ZKLFK UHODWH WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV FRQFHUQV $V WKH VXSHUYLVHH DQG VXSHUYLVRU UHYHDO WKHPVHOYHV WR HDFK RWKHU WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS GHHSHQV DORQJ ZLWK WKHLU LQYROYHPHQW LQ WKH H[SORUDWLRQ SURFHVV 5HVSHFW IRU SHUVRQDO LQWHJULW\ DQG DXWRQRP\ FKDUDFWHUL]HV SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ LQWHUDFWLRQV 7KH H[SORUDWRU\ SURFHVV LV D PXWXDO RQH DOWKRXJK WKH IRFXV LV RQ WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV HPHUJLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO FRQFHUQV DQG QHHGV 7KH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS PHHWV LQGLYLGXDO QHHGV IRU VWUXFWXUH DQG VXSSRUW DV ZHOO DV DXWRQRP\ 7KH VXSHUYLVRU GLVFORVHV SURIHVVLRQDO NQRZOHGJH DQG H[SHUWLVH WR WKH VXSHUYLVHH DV QHHGV DULVH 7KH VXSHUYLVHH PD\ FKRRVH WR LQFRUSRUDWH VRPH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRUfV EHKDYLRU LQWR LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK FOLHQWV 7KH VXSHUYLVRU LQLWLDWHV LQTXLU\ DQG RWKHU DFWLYH LQWHUYHQWLRQV DV ZHOO DV UHVSRQGLQJ WR VXSHUYLVHH UHTXHVWV IRU LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG IHHGEDFN 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV LQWHUYHQWLRQV UHIOHFW D XQLTXH SHUVRQDO VW\OH DQG DUH PDGH ZLWK VHQVLWLYLW\ WR WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV FXUUHQW QHHGV DQG UHDGLQHVV WR DFFHSW QHZ OHDUQLQJ 'XULQJ WKH FRXUVH RI SRVLWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH VXSHUYLVHH H[SHULHQFHV FKDQJHV LQ VHOISHUFHSWLRQV DV ZHOO DV LQFUHDVHV LQ VNLOO DQG NQRZOHGJH $ZDUHQHVV RI KRZ VSHFLILF IHHOLQJV EHKDYLRUV DQG DWWLWXGHV FDQ LQWHUIHUH ZLWK RU IDFLOLWDWH WKHUDSHXWLF LQWHUDFWLRQV ZLWK FOLHQWV DOVR GHYHORSV 7KH VXSHUYLVHH H[SHULHQFHV LQFUHDVLQJ FRPSHWHQFH VHOI FRQILGHQFH DQG WUXVW LQ KLVKHU SURIHVVLRQDO MXGJPHQW 6XSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH HYDOXDWH WRJHWKHU WKH VXSHUYLVHHfV SURJUHVV DQG LGHQWLI\ DUHDV IRU IXUWKHU GHYHORSPHQW 7KH VXSHUYLVHH OHDUQV WR DVVHVV LQWHUYHQWLRQV LQ WHUPV RI WKHUDSHXWLF LPSDFW RQ FOLHQWV UDWKHU WKDQ LQ WHUPV RI VXSHUYLVRU\ DSSURYDO 7KH

PAGE 144

WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ ZKLFK RFFXUV WKURXJK D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ HQDEOHV WKH VXSHUYLVHH WR LQWHUDFW LQ PRUH WKHUDSHXWLF ZD\V ZLWK FOLHQWV

PAGE 145

/,67 2) 5()(5(1&(6 $EODPRZLF] + f 6KDPH DV DQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO GLPHQVLRQ RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DPRQJ GRFWRUDO VWXGHQWV $Q HPSLULFDO SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXG\ -RXUQDO RI 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ $GHOVRQ 0f &OLQLFDO VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WKHUDSLVWV ZLWK GLIILFXOWWRWUHDW SDWLHQWV %XOOHWLQ RI WKH 0HQQLQJHU &OLQLF $OERWW : f 6XSHUYLVRU\ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG RWKHU VRXUFHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ YDULDQFH 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU $OGULFK / f &RQVWUXFWLRQ RI PL[HG VWDQGDUG VFDOHV IRU WKH UDWLQJ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRUV 8QSXEOLVKHG PDVWHUfV WKHVLV $XEXUQ 8QLYHUVLW\ $OGULFK / DQG +HVV $. f 7KH SDUDOOHO SURFHVV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3DSHU SUHVHQWHG DW WKH DQQXDO 6RXWKHDVWHUQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ FRQYHQWLRQ $WODQWD *$ $OOHQ *6]ROORV 6DQG :LOOLDPV %( f 'RFWRUDO VWXGHQWVf FRPSDUDWLYH HYDOXDWLRQV RI EHVW DQG ZRUVW SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH $ORQVR $ f $ GHYHORSPHQWDO WKHRU\ RI SV\FKRG\QDPLF VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ &RPPLWWHH RQ $FFUHGLWDWLRQ f $FFUHGLWDWLRQ KDQGERRN :DVKLQJWRQ '& $XWKRU $QJXV 10 2VERUQH -: DQG .R]LH\ 3: f :LQGRZ WR WKH VRXO $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI PXWXDO JD]H -RXUQDO RI 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ $UFKHU 5 DQG 3HDNH 7 f /HDUQLQJ DQG WHDFKLQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 6LJQSRVWV DQG JURZWK VWDJHV 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU $UNRZLW] 6: f 0HGLDWLQJ WKH VWUXJJOH RI SHUIHFWLRQLVP $ GHYHORSPHQWDO FKDOOHQJH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ LQ 3ULYDWH 3UDFWLFH

PAGE 146

%DUDFKRN -6 DQG .XQNHO 0$ f &OLQLFDO VXSHUYLVLRQ WUDLQLQJ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW %DUWK 5 DQG *DPEULOO ( f /HDUQLQJ WR LQWHUYLHZ 7KH TXDOLW\ RI WUDLQLQJ RSSRUWXQLWLHV 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU %DUWOHWW :( *RRG\HDU 5. %UDGOH\ ) (GVf f 6XSHUYLVLRQ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ ,, &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW %DVFXH /2 DQG
PAGE 147

&DUNKXII 55 f +HOSLQJ DQG +XPDQ 5HODWLRQV $ 3ULPHU IRU /D\ DQG 3URIHVVLRQDO +HOSHUV 9RO f 1HZ
PAGE 148

'XFL -) f 7KH fJRRG HQRXJKf VXSHUYLVRU 5HODWLRQDO GLPHQVLRQV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO (NVWHLQ 5 DQG :DOOHUVWHLQ 56 f 7KH WHDFKLQJ DQG OHDUQLQJ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 1HZ 6SHFLDO ,VVXH@ 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW )ULHGODQGHU 0/ +HDWKHULQJWRQ / -RKQVRQ % DQG 6NRZURQ ($ f 6XVWDLQLQJ HQJDJHPHQW D FKDQJH HYHQW LQ IDPLO\ WKHUDS\ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ )ULHGODQGHU 65 '\H 1: &RVWHOORV 50 DQG .RERV -& f $ GHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHO IRU WHDFKLQJ DQG OHDUQLQJ LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\

PAGE 149

)ULHGPDQ DQG .DVORZ 1f 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI SURIHVVLRQDO LGHQWLW\ LQ SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV 6L[ VWDJHV LQ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ SURFHVV 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU )URQWPDQ .& DQG .XQNHO 0$ f $ JURXQGHG WKHRU\ RI FRXQVHORUV FRQVWUXDO RI VXFFHVV LQ WKH LQLWLDO VHVVLRQ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ *HOVR &f 5HVHDUFK LQ FRXQVHOLQJ PHWKRGRORJLFDO DQG SURIHVVLRQDO LVVXHV 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW *HOVR &%HW] 1( )ULHGODQGHU 0/ )OHOPV -( +LOO &( 3DWWRQ 06XSHU '( DQG :DPSROG %( f 5HVHDUFK LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ SURVSHFWV DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW *HOVR &DQG -RKQVRQ '+ f 5HVHDUFK LQ &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ ,, >6SHFLDO ,VVXH@ 7KH &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW *LRUJL $ f $Q H[SORUDWRU\ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO SV\FKRORJLFDO DSSURDFK WR WKH H[SHULHQFH RI WKH PRUDO VHQVH -RXUQDO RI 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ *LRUJL $ f 2QH W\SH RI DQDO\VLV RI GHVFULSWLYH GDWD 3URFHGXUHV LQYROYHG LQ IROORZLQJ D VFLHQWLILF SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO PHWKRG 0HWKRGV *LRUJL $ f 3KHQRPHQRORJ\ DQG WKH IRXQGDWLRQV RI SV\FKRORJ\ ,Q -. &ROH DQG :' $UQROG (GVf 1HEUDVND 6\PSRVLXP RQ 0RWLYDWLRQ Sf /LQFROQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1HEUDVND 3UHVV *LWWHUPDQ $ DQG 0LOOHU f 6XSHUYLVRUV DV HGXFDWRUV ,Q ): .DVORZ (Gf 6XSHUYLVLRQ FRQVXOWDWLRQ DQG VWDII WUDLQLQJ LQ WKH KHOSLQJ SURIHVVLRQV S f 6DQ )UDQFLVFR -RVVH\%DVV *OLFNDXI+XJKHV & f &KDUDFWHURORJLFDO UHVLVWDQFHV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ *RLQ 0 DQG .OLQH ) f 6XSHUYLVLRQ REVHUYHG -RXUQDO RI 1HUYRXV DQG 0HQWDO 'LVHDVH *ROGEHUJ f 3URFHVV QRWHV DXGLR DQG YLGHR WDSH 0RGHV RI SUHVHQWDWLRQ LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WUDLQLQJ 7KH &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU *ROGPDQ / f $ UHYROXWLRQ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ UHVHDUFK -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ *UDWHU +$ f 6WDJHV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ )URP WKHUDS\ VNLOOV WR VNLOOHG WKHUDSLVW 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH

PAGE 150

*UXQHEDXP + f $ VWXG\ RI WKHUDSLVWVf FKRLFH RI D WKHUDSLVW $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKLDWU\ *XJOLHWWL.HOO\ DQG :HVWFRWW 05 f 6KHfV MXVW VK\ $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXG\ RI VK\QHVV -RXUQDO RI 3KHQRPHQRORJLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ +DDVH -( f &RPSRQHQWV RI FRXUDJH LQ FKURQLFDOO\ LOO DGROHVFHQWV $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXG\ $GYDQFHV LQ 1XUVLQJ 6FLHQFH +DEHU 5 f 'LPHQVLRQV RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 6XSHUYLVLRQ 0DSV DQG 0HDQV 1HZ
PAGE 151

+RVKPDQG /7 f $OWHUQDWLYH UHVHDUFK SDUDGLJPV $ UHYLHZ DQG WHDFKLQJ SURSRVDO &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJLVW +RZDUG *6 f &DQ UHVHDUFK LQ WKH KXPDQ VFLHQFHV EHFRPH PRUH UHOHYDQW WR SUDFWLFH" -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW +RZDUG *6 f $ PRGHVW SURSRVDO IRU D UHYLVLRQ RI VWUDWHJLHV IRU FRXQVHOLQJ UHVHDUFK WKH -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ +XVVHUO ( f ,GHDV SHUWDLQLQJ WR D SXUH SKHQRPHQRORJ\ DQG WR D SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO SKLORVRSK\ ) .HUVWHQ 7UDQVf 7KH +DJXH 1LMKRII 2ULJLQDO ZRUN SXEOLVKHG LQ f +XWW &+ 6FRWW DQG .LQJ 0 f $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXG\ RI VXSHUYLVHHVf SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH H[SHULHQFHV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 7KHRU\ UHVHDUFK DQG SUDFWLFH -DFREV 'DYLG 3 DQG 0H\HU f 7KH VXSHUYLVRU\ HQFRXQWHU $ JXLGH IRU WHDFKHUV RI SV\FKRG\QDPLF SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG SV\FKRDQDO\VLV 1HZ +DYHQ &7
PAGE 152

0DQDVLV DQG 7UDXE:HPHU f 7KH RFFXUUHQFH RI PLUURULQJ LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 0DULNDV '$ 5XVVHOO 5. 'HOO '0 f (IIHFWV RI VXSHUYLVRU H[SHULHQFH OHYHO RQ SODQQLQJ DQG LQVHVVLRQ VXSHUYLVRU YHUEDO EHKDYLRU -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 0DUNRZLW] 0 f $ VXSHUYLVRU VXSHUYLVHG $ VXEMHFWLYH HFOHFWLF H[SHULHQFH $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 0DUPRU f &RPPRQ RSHUDWLRQDO IDFWRUV LQ GLYHUVH DSSURDFKHV WR EHKDYLRU FKDQJH ,Q $ %XUWRQ (Gf :KDW 0DNHV %HKDYLRU &KDQJH 3RVVLEOH" 1HZ
PAGE 153

3DVNLHZLF] -0 f 7KH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH VXSHUYLVRUfV H[SHULHQFH 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 3DWWRQ 0f 0DQDJLQJ VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ D FRQWULEXWLRQ IURP WKH SKLORVRSK\ RI VFLHQFH -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 3DWWRQ 0DQG .LYOLJKDQ '0 -U f 5HOHYDQFH RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ DOOLDQFH WR WKH FRXQVHOLQJ DOOLDQFH DQG WR WUHDWPHQW DGKHUHQFH LQ FRXQVHORU WUDLQLQJ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 3DXO */ f 6WUDWHJ\ RI RXWFRPH UHVHDUFK LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 3LFNHULQJ 0 f ([SHFWDWLRQ DQG LQWHQW LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ SURFHVV &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU 3RONLQJKRPH '( f 5HDFWLRQ WR VSHFLDO VHFWLRQ RQ TXDOLWDWLYH UHVHDUFK LQ FRXQVHOLQJ SURFHVV DQG RXWFRPH -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 3RONLQJKRPH '( f )XUWKHU H[WHQVLRQV RI PHWKRGRORJLFDO GLYHUVLW\ IRU FRXQVHOLQJ SV\FKRORJ\ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 3RONLQJKRPH f :KDW PDOHHV UHVHDUFK KXPDQLVWLF" -RXUQDO RI +XPDQLVWLF 3V\FKRORJ\ 3URFWRU % f 6XSHUYLVLRQ FRPSHWHQFH FRQILGHQFH DFFRXQWDELOLW\ %ULWLVK -RXUQDO RI *XLGDQFH DQG &RXQVHOLQJ 5HJLVWHU 70 DQG +HQOH\ 7% f 7KH 3KHQRPHQRORJ\ RI ,QWLPDF\ -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO DQG 3HUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLSV S 5HQQLH '/ f &OLHQWVf GHIHUHQFH LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 5KRGHV 5+ +LOO &( 7KRPSVRQ %DQG (OOLRWW 5 f &OLHQW UHWURVSHFWLYH UHFDOO RI UHVROYHG DQG XQUHVROYHG PLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJ HYHQWV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 5LRFK 0 f 7KH GLOHPPDV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ G\QDPLF SV\FKRORJ\ ,Q $. +HVV (Gf 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 6XSHUYLVLRQ 7KHRU\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH S f 1HZ
PAGE 154

5RGHQKDXVHU 3 f 7RZDUG D PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ EDVHG RQ GHYHORSPHQWDO VWDJHV -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 3UDFWLFH DQG 5HVHDUFK 5RJHUV & 5 f 7UDLQLQJ LQGLYLGXDOV WR HQJDJH LQ WKH WKHUDSHXWLF SURFHVV ,Q &5 6WURWKHU (Gf 3V\FKRORJ\ DQG 0HQWDO +HDOWK S f :DVKLQJWRQ '& $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ 5RQQHVWDG 0+ DQG 6NRYKROW 7 f 6XSHUYLVLRQ RI EHJLQQLQJ DQG DGYDQFHG JUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV RI FRXQVHOLQJ DQG SV\FKRWKHUDS\ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 5XVVHOO 5. &ULPPLQJV $0 DQG /HQW 5: f &RXQVHORU WUDLQLQJ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KHRU\ DQG UHVHDUFK ,Q 6' %URZQ DQG 5: /HQW (GVf +DQGERRN RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ S f 1HZ
PAGE 155

6ZDQVRQ -/ DQG 2f6DEHQ &/ f 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ VXSHUYLVRU\ QHHGV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV E\ WUDLQHH H[SHULHQFH FRJQLWLYH VW\OH DQG SURJUDP PHPEHUVKLS -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW 7DOERW 1/ f 8QHDUWKLQJ VKDPH LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ H[SHULHQFH $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 7KRPSVRQ &( DQG -HQDO 67 f ,QWHUUDFLDO DQG LQWUDUDFLDO TXDVLFRXQVHOLQJ LQWHUDFWLRQV ZKHQ FRXQVHORUV DYRLG GLVFXVVLQJ UDFH -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 8GLV .f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WUDLQHH DQ[LHW\ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ SUHIHUHQFHV RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WUDLQHHV 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 9DOOHU\ %. f 0HQWRULQJ LQ FOLQLFDO VXSHUYLVLRQ RI SV\FKRG\QDPLF SV\FKRWKHUDS\ $SSOLFDWLRQ RI :LQQLFRWWfV WKHRU\ RI WKH WUDQVLWLRQDO SKHQRPHQD H[SHULHQFH 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO %f :DWNLQV &( -U Df 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRU DQG VXSHUYLVHH 'HYHORSPHQWDO PRGHOV DQG UHVHDUFK QLQH \HDUV ODWHU &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HYLHZ :DWNLQV &( -U Ef 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ WKH V 6RPH REVHUYDWLRQV DQG UHIOHFWLRQV $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ :DWNLQV &( -U f 7KH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRU WUDLQHHV $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ :DWNLQV &( -U f 'HYHORSPHQW RI WKH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRU FRQFHSWV DVVXPSWLRQV DQG K\SRWKHVHV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU FRPSOH[LW\ PRGHO $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ :DWNLQV &( -U f 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG WKH VHSDUDWLRQLQGLYLGXDWLRQ SURFHVV $XWRQRP\ YHUVXV GHSHQGHQF\ LVVXHV &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU :DWNLQV &( -U f 'HYHORSPHQW RI WKH SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRU 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ :DWNLQV &( -U 6FKQHLGHU /+D\QHV DQG 1LHEHUGLQJ 5 f 0HDVXULQJ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ VXSHUYLVRU GHYHORSPHQW $Q LQLWLDO HIIRUW DW VFDOH GHYHORSPHQW DQG YDOLGDWLRQ &OLQLFDO 6XSHUYLVRU :DWVRQ -& DQG 5HQQLH '/ f 4XDOLWDWLYH DQDO\VLV RI FOLHQWVf VXEMHFWLYH H[SHULHQFH RI VLJQLILFDQW PRPHQWV GXULQJ WKH H[SORUDWLRQ RI SUREOHPDWLF UHDFWLRQV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\

PAGE 156

:HLVJHUEHU .0 f $ FRPSDULVRQ EHWZHHQ GRPLQDQW DQG VXERUGLQDWH UROHV DQG JHQGHU RQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO VHQVLWLYLW\ $Q LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI FRXQVHOLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ UROH SOD\V 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO %f :LOH\ 02 DQG 5D\ 3% f &RXQVHOLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ E\ GHYHORSPHQWDO OHYHO -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ :LOVRQ 05 f 7KH VXSHUYLVHHfV VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO :LQGKRO] ( f 7KH WKHRU\ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF HGXFDWLRQ ,QWHUQDWLRQDO -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRDQDO\VLV :RQGRORZVNL & DQG 'DYLV '. f 7KH OLYHG H[SHULHQFH RI DJLQJ LQ WKH ROGHVW ROG $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO VWXG\ $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRDQDO\VLV :RUWKHQ 9 DQG 0F1HLOO %: f $ SKHQRPHQRORJLFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI f*RRGf VXSHUYLVLRQ HYHQWV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ :RUWKLQJWRQ (/ -U f &KDQJHV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DV FRXQVHORUV DQG VXSHUYLVRUV JDLQ H[SHULHQFH $ UHYLHZ 3URIHVVLRQDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH :RUWKLQJWRQ (/ -U f $Q HPSLULFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLRQ RI FRXQVHORUV DV WKH\ JDLQ H[SHULHQFH -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\
PAGE 157

%,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ 7LPRWK\ 0DUN %XHKQHU UHFHLYHG D %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHH IURP :LWWHQEHUJ 8QLYHUVLW\ 6SULQJILHOG 2KLR LQ DQG D 0DVWHU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHH IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD *DLQHVYLOOH )ORULGD LQ 'U %XHKQHU FXUUHQWO\ ZRUNV DW WKH 6\OYHVWHU &RPSUHKHQVLYH &DQFHU &HQWHU DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 0LDPL 0LDPL )ORULGD 'U %XHKQHUfV FXUUHQW UHVHDUFK LQWHUHVWV LQFOXGH WKH XVH RI TXDOLWDWLYH UHVHDUFK PHWKRGV SURIHVVLRQDO VXSHUYLVLRQ DGMXVWPHQW WR FDQFHU GLDJQRVLV DQG LWV WUHDWPHQW DQG WKH VWXG\ RI KXPDQ FRQVFLRXVQHVV 'U %XHKQHU SODQV WR SXUVXH DQ DFDGHPLF FDUHHU RI UHVHDUFK SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ DQG WHDFKLQJ

PAGE 158

, FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ &KDLUPDQ V\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG ‘ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 5REHU7& =L 3URIHVVRU L 6\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 7!RD D-f L Xr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


ON BECOMING A PSYCHOTHERAPIST:
AN EXPERIENCE OF GOOD SUPERVISION
BY
TIMOTHY MARK BUEHNER
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1997

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my committee chairman, academic advisor, and
friend, Franz Epting, Ph.D. His introduction of phenomenological research sparked my
interest and his support allowed my enthusiasm to grow. I would also like to
acknowledge my other committee members, Drs. Jim Archer, Wayne Francis, David
Suchman, and Robert Ziller, for their interest and support of qualitative research in
psychology. Finally, I would like to acknowledge a supervisor, Enrique Casero, Ph.D.,
who re-ignited my passion for qualitative research and who hinted that it is okay to be
regarded as a “phenomenologist.”
I would also like to acknowledge my wife, Randi, and my children Anja, Linnea,
Nathaniel, and Tyra. Without their perpetual love, support, and faith in me, this project
and this manuscript would never have become complete.
11

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES v
ABSTRACT vi
INTRODUCTION 1
Clinical Supervision of Psychotherapy 2
Research Methodology in Counseling Psychology 5
Phenomenological Research 9
Summary 11
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 13
Importance of Supervision 13
Conflicts in Supervision Theory 15
Models and Theories of Supervision 18
What is Good Supervision? 52
Summary 58
METHOD 59
Subjects 61
Procedure 62
RESULTS 68
Essential Description of Good Supervision 76
Structural Description of Good Supervision 79
DISCUSSION 81
Personal Reflections 82
Orientation of the Subject 84
Qualities of Supervision 86
How Does This Relate to Developmental Models? 93
Other Phenomenological Studies of Supervision 96
Training in Supervision 105
Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research 106
Comments Regarding the Methodology Ill
iii

APPENDIX A SAMPLE PROTOCOL WITH MEANING UNITS 114
APPENDIX B FUNDAMENTAL STUCTURE OF POSITIVE SUPERVISION 135
LIST OF REFERENCES 138
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 150

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1: Characteristics of Beginning and Advanced Supervisors 34
2: Empirical support of supervisee developmental models 41
3: Empirical support of supervisor developmental models 43
4: Bernard’s 3x3 matrix of supervisor roles and functions 49
5: Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz four-stage unidimensional model of supervision 50
6: Three additional supervisor roles added by Ellis, Dell, and Good 50
7: Meaning units derived from the five subject protocols 69
8: Four phases of a Good Supervision Experience for Advanced Supervisees 97
v

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
ON BECOMING A PSYCHOTHERAPIST:
AN EXPERIENCE OF GOOD SUPERVISION
By
Timothy Mark Buehner
December, 1997
Chairman: Franz R. Epting, Ph.D.
Major Department: Psychology
Supervision in the training of professional psychologists is recognized as a
necessary and valuable practice. Despite its clinical relevance, supervision has received
relatively little attention in the form of empirical research. This study uses a qualitative
research method, the phenomenological method as developed by Amedeo Giorgi, to
explore good clinical supervision as experienced by predoctoral psychology interns. Five
interns were interviewed to elicit narratives of their lived experiences of good
supervision. Each interview began with the same question, then proceeded to clarify the
experience as reported by each subject. No questions were asked to support nor deny
preexisting hypotheses regarding the phenomenon. An analysis and eidetic reduction
were then performed on the interview transcripts to reveal the essential nature of the lived
experience of good supervision. The result of the analysis is reported as the essential
description and the result of the reduction is reported as the structural description of good
vi

supervision. This study found that supervisees experience supervision to be a direct
extension of the supervisor. Experiences of good supervision were attributed directly to
how the supervisor interacted with the supervisees rather than to learned skills or
behaviors. Supervisees were able to develop and invest in a supervisory relationship in
which they felt respected and supported. Supervisees valued supervision by competent
and invested supervisors. When supervision was valued, supervisees performed harder
and were more likely to actively participate in the supervision process. Supervisees
experienced good supervision as developmental in nature—building upon their existing
strengths rather than being corrective or critical. Other necessary components of a good
supervisory relationship include, trust, confidence, and likability of the supervisor. The
relevance of these results to existing empirical research in supervision is discussed.
Vll

INTRODUCTION
Since Freud began delving into the unconscious over one hundred years ago,
psychotherapy has become an important treatment modality in the United States and
throughout the world. Psychotherapy has been referred to as an art, a craft, and a science.
Regardless of how it is classified, psychotherapy is, in essence, a relationship between
two (or more) persons striving towards the mutual goal of the restoration of a person’s
mental health and/or well-being. How one of those persons becomes qualified to assist
the other(s) in the pursuit of health is the focus of this paper. We will examine how a
person becomes a psychotherapist through good clinical supervision by conducting a
phenomenological investigation of good supervision.
The training of professional psychologists is an area that has stimulated discussion
and research in the professional literature for many years. In accordance with the
scientist-practitioner model advocated by the American Psychological Association, the
psychologist should be trained as a researcher as well as a clinician. The training of the
scientist-practitioner is often reported to be composed of four primary elements:
academic course work, supervised practical experience, personal psychotherapy, and
applied research experience. While the requirement of engaging in personal
psychotherapy varies greatly across training programs, the requirements of academic
course work, supervised clinical experience, and applied research experience are the
essence of all training programs accredited by the American Psychological Association
1

2
(APA). Research into how psychology trains its professionals has become an area of
increased interest during the past 20 years.
The purpose of this research project is to examine two areas that are essential in
the training of professional psychologists, clinical supervision and research methodology.
The process of clinical supervision will be empirically studied from the perspective of the
psychologist trainee. The examination of research methodology will be experiential in
nature—this project intends to utilize a human science methodology, the
phenomenological method, to perform the empirical analysis. This research project is an
effort to not only contribute to the content of empirically-based psychological knowledge,
but to also support the profession’s call to embrace alternative methodologies in the
collection and analysis of such knowledge.
Clinical Supervision of Psychotherapy
Supervision is considered by educators, trainers, and professional regulatory
agencies to be a critical component of psychotherapy training (Holloway and Neufeldt,
1995). The importance of supervised training is underscored by the pre- and post-doctoral
practice standards of the American Psychological Association and licensing requirements
of most states (American Psychological Association, 1986). While supervision of clinical
training has long been considered a significant aspect to the training of professional
psychologists, it has generated an inadequate body of research compared to research of
psychotherapeutic issues in general. Prefacing a special issue of The Counseling
Psychologist devoted to supervision, Bartlett and associates noted the inadequacy of

3
research literature on counseling supervision (Bartlett, Goodyear, and Bradley, 1983).
Over a decade later, Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) noted that the body of research on
supervision was mediocre considering its importance to the clinical practice of
psychology. Robertson (1995) suggests this lack of research is due to the fact that
supervision generates relatively little controversy. He adds that research in the area has
increased recently due in part to the increasing pressure of accountability.
Research of the supervision of trainees in clinical and counseling psychology is
becoming an area of growing interest. During the past 15 years, there has been an
increase in the theoretical discussion of supervision although empirical research testing
those theories has been limited (Swanson and O’Saben, 1993; Worthington, 1987). The
published empirical research has focused on skills training and supervisor technique (i.e.,
Russell, Crimmings, and Lent, 1984; Marikas, Russell, and Dell, 1985) with an
increasing emphasis on testing developmental models of supervision. The testing of
these models builds on the work begun by Stoltenberg (1981) and Littrell, Lee-Borden,
and Lorenz (1979). Such developmental models have guided the research and,
presumably, the training of counseling psychologists.
As supervision is typically provided by individuals trained within a particular
orientation of psychotherapy, the supervision is often provided following the conceptual
framework of that theory, whether it is psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioral, humanistic,
or family systems in nature. There are, however, cross-theoretical models of supervision,
such as the developmental models which are not bound to any particular theory of
psychotherapy and may be employed by supervisors from a variety of theoretical

4
orientations. The field of counseling psychology appears to have embraced the
developmentally based models of supervision and the research has focused on the testing
and enhancement of those models (McNeill, Stoltenberg, and Romans, 1992; Stoltenberg
and Delworth, 1988; Wiley and Ray, 1986).
Although empirical research has focused on developmental models of supervision,
a review of the literature suggests a growing amount of research on the supervisory
relationship and process. Recent papers written on the supervisory relationship include
discussions of power and control (Salvendy, 1993; Weisgerber, 1992), stagnation in
supervision (Yerushalmi, 1993), resistance (Glickauf-Hughes, 1994), mirroring (Manasis
and Traub-Werner, 1994), separation-individuation (Watkins, 1992), and parallel process
(Adelson, 1994). Various aspects of the supervisor have been discussed, including the
supervisor as a mentor (Vallery, 1992), dimensions of the role (Duci, 1992), the
supervisor’s devotion (Yerushalmi, 1992), and the experience of supervising (Paskiewicz,
1993; Collett, 1995; Clarkson and Aviram, 1995). The role and perspective of the
supervisee has also begun generating interest in the professional literature, including the
experience of shame in the supervisory experience (Talbot, 1995), the struggle of
perfectionism (Arkowitz, 1994), role ambiguity (Oik and Friedlander, 1992), and trainee
anxiety (Udis, 1991). While the scope of this list is impressive, it should be noted that
much of this literature is accounted for by Dissertation Abstracts International and
specialized journals. Furthermore, many of these studies represent research endeavors
that apply non-traditional research methodologies. Perhaps the previously mentioned
lack of empirical research in counseling supervision is due not to a lack of interest in the

5
multifaceted process of supervision, but rather to the inadequacy of traditional, i.e.,
natural science, research methods in handling these meaningful, but experiential, aspects
of the supervisory process.
Research Methodology in Counseling Psychology
When psychology was first taught at institutions of higher learning, the teaching
professors held appoints in departments of philosophy. As psychology became more
applied in focus, however, psychologists strove to become more science-like—adopting
research methodologies utilized by the “natural” sciences—biology, physics, chemistry—
in an effort to become more efficacious in the pursuit of predicting human behavior.
While this tact has been effective in promoting the application of psychological principles
in the treatment of mental illness, it has also resulted in a departure from studying other
areas of psychological interest that are not conducive to being studied by the
experimental method. As the strength of psychology’s rigor in natural science
methodologies has increased, so too has the interest in alternative forms of research
methodology. Perhaps psychology is reaching an age where it can critically examine its
development, identify its strengths and weaknesses, and return, in part, to an examination
of issues originally tossed aside in hopes of becoming accepted by the scientific
community. The specialty area of Counseling Psychology is no exception to this
developmental progress in psychology. The advancement of counseling psychology’s
scientific rigor has been hailed, and utilization of natural science methodologies is the

6
accepted norm. Yet, there is a growing voice calling for methodological diversity that
has increased in volume and influence during the past two decades.
In 1979, Gelso called for increased methodological diversity, a call that has been
increasingly answered throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s. The three major
American publications of counseling psychology, the Journal of Counseling Psychology,
The Counseling Psychologist, and the Journal of Counseling and Development, have
given much attention to the advancement of methodological diversity (Hoshmand, 1989;
Gelso, Betz, Friedlander, Helms, Hill, Patton, Super, and Wampold, 1988; Heppner,
Gelso, and Dolliver, 1987; Howard, 1984,1985; Fretz, 1986; Gelso, 1979; Gelso and
Johnson, 1982; Patton, 1984; Polkinghorne, 1984). A special subsection of the Journal
of Counseling Psychology (Volume 31, 1984) was devoted to alternative methodologies
and included 3 major papers that examined the philosophical foundations of such research
(Howard, 1984; Patton, 1984; Polkinghorne, 1984). In 1988, the Research Group at the
Third National Conference for Counseling Psychology reported on prospects and
recommendations for research in counseling psychology (see Gelso et ah, 1988). Among
the fifteen recommendations offered regarding research, three directly supported the trend
toward alternative methodologies. The Counseling Psychologist, in 1989, devoted an
issue to alternative methodologies, and in 1994, the Journal of Counseling Psychology
included a special section on qualitative research in counseling process and outcome.
That section in Journal of Counseling Psychology comprised of eight qualitative studies
(Friedlander, Heatherington, Johnson, and Skowron, 1994; Elliot, Shapiro, Firth-Cozens,
Stiles, Hardy, Llewelyn, and Margison, 1994: Cummings, Hallberg, and Slemon, 1994;

7
Rhodes, Hill, Thompson, and Elliott, 1994; Thompson and Jenal, 1994; Rennie, D.L.,
1994; Frontman and Kunkel, 1994; Watson and Rennie, 1994) and a reaction by
Polkinghorne (1994), in which he noted that this issue was the first significant
compilation of qualitative studies produced, despite the call for increased methodological
diversity for over a decade. Polkinghorne (1984) also suggests that counseling
psychology should not only support the development of alternative methodologies, but
should assume a leadership role in training researchers in their use.
Counseling psychology's growing interest in alternative methodologies has not
been a spontaneous plunge into diversity for diversity's sake. There has been a growing
concern that heavy reliance upon natural science methodology has resulted in
inadequacies in addressing the full realm of psychological phenomena of interest to
counseling psychologists. Within the movement of methodological diversity has been a
commitment to go beyond diversity, to embrace alternative methodologies as a way to
compensate for the inadequacies of natural science methodologies. It has been argued that
the over reliance on natural science methods has failed counseling psychology research in
two fundamental ways.
The first problem is related to the types of questions, in terms of meaning and
language, asked by natural science researchers versus the types of questions pondered by
clinicians. Human scientists argue that questions regarding the depth and complexity of
human experience cannot be adequately addressed within the limitations of natural
science methodologies. This is an important distinction, they argue, as such questions are
most often the primary concerns of the practitioner. The human scientist attempts to

8
understand the subject from the perspective of his or her own subjective experience,
emphasizing exploration of the whole phenomenon rather than discrete parts. Human
science methodologies are offered as a source to address these distinctly different
research questions of interest to clinicians.
The second problem, according to the human science perspective, is that the
assumptions of the human scientist regarding human nature are closer to the assumptions
of the clinician than are the assumptions of the natural scientist. Specifically, it is argued
that most clinicians view their clients as being self-determining. Natural science
methodologies, however, conceptualize the individual as an object upon which
environmental variables are manipulated which then determine outcome. Human science
methodologies, on the other hand, treat the subject from a perspective more familiar to
the practitioner, incorporating the assumption of free-will into the data collection and
analysis.
Human science methods have developed through the investigations of various
researchers who have taken it upon themselves to seek alternative methodologies to the
natural science approach in understanding humanistic theoretical positions. Polkinghorne
(1982) argues that the development of new methodologies is a result of the humanistic
psychologist's commitment to "understanding that human beings exist within an
experience of meaning and retain the possibility of acting with self-determined purpose"
(p. 48). While humanistic theory does not propose that human action is completely
independent of environmental or genetic origins, it does allow that persons can choose to
act in ways not predetermined. Polkinghorne describes these alternative methodologies

9
as structural research designs-those which seek underlying themes or patterns of the
human experience. While these structural designs are similar to each other in their focus
on human experience, they vary in terms specific research questions addressed, types of
data required, and specific analytical procedures employed. The scientific method which
will be utilized in this study is the phenomenological method, as conceptualized and
developed by Giorgi (1989).
Phenomenological Research
Phenomenology, according to Giorgi, is the study of phenomena as experienced.
For the phenomenologist, phenomenon refers to what is given in experience, to be
understood in direct relationship with awareness (Giorgi, 1976). Therefore the
phenomenological researcher is interested in discovering the structure of the phenomena
(experience) as experienced. The phenomenologist refers to the context of the lived
world as a point of departure and searches for the meaning of the lived experience.
Phenomenology goes beyond the collection and analysis of facts to determine the
meanings of those facts—facts are important insofar as they have meaning. The focus of
human consciousness, going beyond the quantifiable measurement of the experience,
phenomenological research can provides a deeper understanding of human experience
than natural science methods.
Phenomenology is a process of discovery and it is essential that the phenomenon
be examined prior to drawing on pre-existing knowledge of the phenomenon. As it is
unlikely that a researcher can ever study a phenomenon without possessing preconceived

10
beliefs about it, the researcher must consciously separate and disregard all known
experience of the phenomenon of study. This partitioning off, of prior knowledge, is
known as bracketing, and it plays a vital role in the phenomenological research process.
Bracketing was first described as epochs by Husserl, in his explanation of psychology in
terms of pure phenomenology (Husserl, 1913/1983). Using a contemporary definition,
bracketing is the "refraining from accepting the actually existing, real world in the
customary sense of being" (Kersten, 1989, p. 23). It is the removal of preconceived ideas
and beliefs about the phenomenon of study from the experimenter's conscious thought.
Thus bracketing is, for the phenomenologist, experimental control—the effort at limiting
the amount of extraneous variables and biases into the scientific method and analysis.
A variety of phenomena have been studied utilizing phenomenological
methodologies, and the quantity of published studies has grown steadily, particularly
within recent years. Some of the phenomena studied are: being a supervisor (Clarkson
and Aviram, 1995), shame (Ablamowicz, 1992), moral sense (Giorgi, 1992), mutual gaze
(Angus, Osborne, and Koziey, 1991), maternal mourning (Brice, 1991), shyness
(Guglietti-Kelly and Westcott, 1990), anger (Buehner, 1993; Stevick, 1971), aging
(Wondolowski and Davis, 1988), decision and choice (Karlsson, 1988), friendship
between women (Becker, 1987), courage in chronically ill adolescents (Haase, 1987), the
formation of clinical impressions (Churchill, 1984), the experience of failing to learn
(Deegan, 1981), the premenstruum (Montgomery, 1982), tragedy (Carrere, 1989),
forgetting (Krai, 1989), intimacy (Register and Henley, 1992), and glaucoma (Kugelmann
and Bensinger, 1983).

11
Summary
The limited production of supervision research may be due, in part, to the
difficulty in applying natural science methodologies to the complex and dynamic nature
of clinical supervision. While behaviors can be monitored and self-report surveys can
reflect perceived effectiveness of supervisory styles and interventions, they cannot fully
describe the process that promotes the evolution of novices into competent therapists. At
a time when counseling psychology is increasing its utilization of human science
methodologies to better understand the psychotherapeutic process and to evaluate its
efficacy, it is appropriate to utilize such methods to examine the training of its
psychotherapists.
This study intends to examine the process of supervision using the
phenomenological method as developed by Giorgi. In particular, this study will attempt
to understand the experience of being supervised from the perspective of the trainee. By
performing a phenomenological analysis on interview data collected from psychologists-
in-training, it is anticipated that a structure of meaning can be discovered which will
identify the essences of the supervisory experience for trainees. This structure will then
be used as a guidepost to understand the meaning of being supervised relative to existing
research of supervision.
There are many general aspects of supervision, including, but not limited to,
didactic teaching, behavioral modeling, mentoring, and self-examination. At times, these
events may be experienced as anxiety-provoking, comforting, boring, frustrating, anger-
provoking, enlightening, educating, threatening, and so on. One’s valuation of the

12
supervisory experience, however, is more likely to be broken down into less defined
categories, simply as helpful or hurtful, positive or negative, good or bad. Given these
gross, yet clinically valuable categorizations of the supervisory experience, it seems a
study of experiences that are most indicative of an ideal supervisory process would
provide the most beneficial contribution to the professional literature. This study, then,
will be a study of good supervision, where “good” is defined by the subject, the
supervisee.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter will discuss several aspects of supervision. After discussing the
importance of supervision, there will be a discussion of conflicts regarding supervision
theory that have been identified in the literature. There will then be a section on models
and theories of supervision which will include developmental models, supervision as a
relationship, and the dimensions of supervision. The discussion of developmental models
will include models of supervisee development, supervisor development, and a review of
the empirical support of developmental models. Finally, there will be a review of what
has been identified as “good” supervision.
Importance of Supervision
The importance of psychotherapy supervision in the training of psychotherapists
cannot be understated. It is a fundamental training requirement for accreditation by the
American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, Social
Workers Association, as well as a licensing requirement by state regulatory agencies. It
is a key element in the process by which psychotherapy is taught and learned (Ekstein
and Wallerstein, 1972; Jacobs, David, and Meyer, 1995) regardless of specialty area,
level of training, theoretical orientation, or work setting (Watkins, 1995a). Despite this
apparent importance, research on the effectiveness of supervision has been limited.
13

14
Research into the supervisory process has increased significantly during the past
decade. Research of supervision is methodologically diverse, reflecting, perhaps the
diverse nature of theoretical beliefs regarding supervision. Supervision is a complex
process of teaching, modeling, and preparing the supervisee for the professional role.
Supervision affects not only behaviors designated as “treatment interventions," but
attitudes, beliefs toward the practice of psychotherapy and mental health in general.
Supervision provides the framework for an individual as one becomes a psychotherapist.
Experiences of supervision will likely affect the supervisee’s professional demeanor for a
significant portion of the supervisee’s professional life. In considering the effectiveness
of supervision, one must consider what is most important, outcomes of supervisee change
(and how that may be measured) or outcomes to the psychotherapy being performed by
the supervisee.
While the importance of supervision is typically accepted as self-evident by those
who practice, teach, and regulate psychotherapy, its efficacy toward treatment outcomes
is largely unproved. In their introduction to a special section on training in the Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Beutler and Kendall (1995) reported that
professional training may enhance clinical efficacy, but there is insufficient knowledge
regarding the specifics aspects of professional training and professional experience which
most effectively contribute to such a relationship (p. 180). In their paper within the same
special section, Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) concluded that there was little evidence of
a direct connection between supervision and therapist efficacy, though it is likely that
supervision increases the proficiency with which one uses complex therapy procedures,

15
enhances knowledge and role definitions, and increases one’s ability to facilitate internal
therapeutic processes. Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) concluded that the effects of
specific supervisory interventions to therapist and client change in behavior remained
largely unknown. Rather than accept the whole of supervision as contributing to
improved therapeutic technique, Holloway and Neufeldt argue for the identification of
specific behaviors and interventions leading to specific changes. Subsequently, Holloway
and Carroll (1996) argue that research on supervision must move from a theoretical
approach to the pragmatic application of behaviors. Supervision research must,
according to Holloway and Carroll (1996) advance from understanding how supervision
is performed to identifying how the effectiveness of supervision may be improved
Given the nature of supervision, however, as a complex process requiring an
interpersonal relationship of at least three individuals (supervisor, supervisee, and client)
engaged in a process of learning, modeling, and relating, it is possible that specific
behaviors to specific outcomes may never be proven. Yet given that possibility, it is
unlikely that anyone engaged in the practice of psychotherapy would advocate
elimination of training through supervision. Supervision is the mechanism wherein
individuals not only learn how to do psychotherapy, but how to be a psychotherapist as
well.
Conflicts in Supervision Theory
Despite one hundred years of psychotherapy, there has not developed one
accepted manner of training psychotherapists. The development of supervision theory is

16
in its infancy when compared to the theoretical development of psychotherapy. Due, in
part, to its immature status, there are several issues that must be resolved as theories of
supervision develop. One conflict in approaching supervision is the question whether
supervision requires a theoretical understanding of its own or whether is it can be
sufficiently understood by applying theories adapted from psychotherapy (Hess, 1987a).
Historically, particularly when psychodynamic theories were at their strongest, training
has duplicated the processes of the theory and psychotherapy the student was being
trained to implement. This traditional course of action may explain, in part, the historical
paucity of separate supervision theory. As the theoretical field of psychotherapy has
become more eclectic, there has also been an increase in the development of supervision
theory unlinked to a specific psychotherapeutic approach. Accepting the need for a
separate supervision theory, other conflicts remain.
A second conflict in supervision theory exists in how supervisors should perform
supervision. This conflict is whether supervision should be proactive or reactive
(Worthington, 1987). In proactive supervision, the supervisor effectively leads the
supervisee; in reactive supervision, the supervisor still facilitates growth, but allows the
supervisee to determine the course. Some supervision follows an agenda set by the
supervisor. Each session has defined goals and the task of the supervisor is to assist the
supervisee to attain those goals. In this form of supervision, the trainee is lead by the
supervisor toward professional development. Other supervision is lead by the supervisee.
Goals are still identified and tracked, but the supervisee is more instrumental in defining
those goals as well as the manner they should be attained. The proactive-reactive conflict

17
has been resolved in large part in the developmental models. Almost uniformly these
models advocate a more proactive stance by the supervisor during the supervisee’s early
development, and a more reactive stance during the later stages of development.
A third conflict identified in the literature is the question of whether the
supervisee should learn the theory of the supervisor or whether the supervisor should
adapt supervision to the theoretical stance of the supervisee (Worthington, 1987). In the
early years of psychotherapy, this was not much of an issue as supervision was sought out
to learn the perspective and methods of a particular supervisor. In the contemporary days
of eclecticism, as well as a broad range of theories to choose from, this has become more
of an issue. While specialty training stills requires the trainee to learn the methods of the
supervisor, the generalist approach used in most training programs must account for
theoretical differences between supervisee and supervisor. If a supervisee wishes to learn
from the experience of a given supervisor without necessarily adopting the theoretical
orientation, there is a question whether it would be effective for that supervisor to use
counseling based supervision for that supervisor. On the other hand, to expect a
supervisor to effectively adopt the theoretical perspective of each trainee does not seem to
be reasonable. Again, the developmental models step in to provide a solution. The
developmental models are, for the most part, atheoretical regarding counseling theory.
They can be incorporated into a wide range of supervision situations regardless of the
theoretical underpinnings of supervisor or supervisee.
Another question of supervision involves the amount of counseling that should
take place within the supervision environment. From one perspective some writers argue

18
that it is necessary for supervisors to help supervisees identify defenses, overcome
resistances, and facilitate personal growth. On the hand, other authors contend that those
activities are best saved for another environment. It is generally agreed, however, that
extensive psychotherapy should not be a part of the supervision process.
Models and Theories of Supervision
In reviewing the current literature of supervision, few broad categories of
supervision theory and research can be identified. Theories of supervision can be
intuitively classified into three categories: 1) developmental models, 2) supervision which
parallels a specific counseling theory, and 3) those that emphasize a particular aspect, or
dimension, supervision. As the interest of this paper is the unique process of supervision,
this review of theories will exclude those which simply apply counseling principles. On
the other hand, the importance of the supervisory relationship is typically underscored by
most supervision theorists, and a unique theory regarding that relationship will be
presented. There will also be a review of the limited research into the dimensions of
supervision. As developmental models have received the most attention in the past
twenty years, this chapter will begin with a review of supervisee and supervisor
development.
Developmental Models
The conceptualization of clinical supervision has become increasingly dominated
by thinking in developmental terms. In the words of Holloway (1987), the developmental
thrust has constituted “the Zeitgeist of supervision thinking and research” (p. 209). While

19
Holloway made her observation ten years ago, the statement remains as true today as it
was then (Watkins, 1995a). According to Watkins, these models have proven appealing
over the course of the years for three fundamental reasons: 1) they are meta-theoretical; 2)
they have direct practice and training implications, and 3) they provide a framework for
tracking progress over time (Watkins, 1995a).
Developmental models of supervision conceptualize the supervisee and, in some
models, the supervisor, as proceeding through a series of developmental stages across
time and, presumably, training. These models are often based upon the developmental
theories of Piaget, Erikson, and others who have left their mark on human developmental
theory. The person becoming a psychotherapist continues through a universal series of
stages which predict certain emotional experiences as well as certain needs that require
appropriate attention from the trainee’s supervisor. The supervisees progress from being
less developed, i.e., naive and unskilled, to becoming more developed, i.e., aware and
competent. The supervisee’s development is largely dependent upon how the supervisor
interacts with the supervisee at any given point during the trainee’s development. It is
assumed that the supervisee will develop as a natural function of supervision. The
supervisor may enhance and encourage growth by providing an appropriate environment
and supervisory experience, or conversely, may stunt development by providing an
inappropriate environment or engaging in inappropriate behaviors.
There have been many developmental models proposed in the literature. In an
1987 review, Worthington identified sixteen different developmental models in the
literature, from 1953 to 1986. In an updated review, Watkins (1995) identified an

20
additional six models proposed between 1986 and 1994. Although these models may
vary in the specifics of their language, number of stages, and developmental focus, both
researchers concluded the models were more similar than dissimilar. Watkins noted the
similarities began with the assumptions inherent in the models.
Watkins (1995) identified four key, identifiable assumptions shared by the
developmental models:
1) therapists in training develop and grow, provided they are not exposed to a
pernicious training environment;
2) their development proceeds through a sequence of stages, from less to more
developed;
3) that during those stages, they struggle with various developmental issues and
concerns (e.g. competency, identity);
4) that supervisors would do well to consider the developmental level of their
supervisees and structure supervision accordingly, (p. 647).
Often using the theories of Erikson, Piaget, or other models of human
development as their basis, developmental models of supervision and therapist
development describe the transformation of an unskilled, naive novice into a “master
psychotherapist.” As models of supervisee development have grown in popularity,
parallel processes have been noted in supervisor development as well, spawning literature
in support of supervisors developing in much the same manner as supervisees. The
following sections will describe models of supervisee development, models of supervisor
development, and empirical support for those models.
Supervisee development
Hogan (1964) proposed four stages in the development of the psychotherapist.
His model emphasized the supervisee’s increasing autonomy that culminated in a
collaborative relationship with the supervisor. According to Hogan, it is the supervisor’s

21
responsibility to provide a supervision environment that fosters the counselor’s growth
and development. The proper supervisory role is dependent upon the supervisee’s stage
of development. In the beginning, the supervisee has feelings of insecurity, lacks insight,
and is imitative of the supervisor. The supervisee is dependent upon the supervisor to
provide interpretation, support, and predictable outcomes to allow the supervisee to begin
developing self-confidence as a psychotherapist. In the second stage, Hogan identifies a
conflict centered upon dependency-autonomy issues in which the supervisee struggles
between overconfidence and feeling overwhelmed. During this stage of development,
Hogan recommends that the supervisor should provide support, exemplification,
teaching, and clarification of the ambivalence experienced by the trainee. Hogan also
recommends the initiation of personal psychotherapy for the trainee (with someone other
than the supervisor). The trainee’s successful resolution of the conflict in stage two leads
to a stage marked by conditional dependency. In this third stage, the supervisee has
increased professional confidence which includes greater insight into the supervisee’s
neurotic and healthy motivations. During this stage, the supervisor should continue
exemplification, begin sharing as a peer, and incorporate confrontation to ensure the
trainee’s continued development. Finally, the psychotherapist may now reach the fourth,
and Hogan’s final stage, that of Master Psychologist. This stage is identified when the
psychotherapist has gained personal autonomy, insightfulness with motivation, and
experiences a need for confrontation for continued and increased expertise. At this stage,
the supervisee and supervisor should interact within a mutually sharing relationship, in
consultation as well as confrontation. Hogan’s stages are expressed in terms of

22
developing within the supervisory relationship—all development is experienced and
progresses within the context of the supervisory relationship. Stoltenberg (1981)
accepted Hogan’s speculations about the development of counselors and further
elaborated upon how a supervisor might provide the optimal environment for optimal
growth by the supervisee (Worthington, 1987).
Stoltenberg’s (1981) Counselor Complexity Model focused on the supervisee’s
increasing levels of autonomy and indicated the supervisor’s behavior should change
according. The Counselor Complexity Model has four stages and is so named because
Stoltenberg viewed the trainee as becoming more complex as training progressed and the
trainee gained experience. Stoltenberg’s model speaks less to the varying levels of
dependency within the supervisory relationship and more to the development of identity
by the supervisee. Stoltenberg’s model was also more elaborate regarding how a
supervisor can promote the most growth. According to Stoltenberg, the novice
psychotherapist begins by attempting to define boundaries between the “counselor” and
the “person” (Worthington, 1987). During this initial stage, the supervisor should
provide a structured environment, encouraging autonomy and risk taking within that
structure. During the second stage, the supervisee’s professional identity begins to
become defined and the trainee begins to experiment with different styles. The
supervisee is no longer satisfied imitating the supervisor and will begin expressing
disagreement. At this time the supervisor should provide new skills and advice as
necessary, encouraging continued autonomy within a low pressure environment. The
acquisition of new skills allows the trainee to tolerate a broader variety of clients,

23
becoming less dependent upon a single doctrine of therapy. In this third stage,
Stoltenberg recommends an increased emphasis on sharing, allowing appropriate
professional and personal confrontation. In the final stage of Stoltenberg’s Counselor
Complexity Model, the therapist is capable of practicing independently, integrating the
standards of the profession within a personal value system. In 1987, Stoltenberg and
Delworth elaborated further on this model, and provided a model of supervisor
development within its framework.
In the revised Counselor Complexity Model, Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987)
identified three levels of development. The third level, however, has an integrated and
non-integrated component to comprise a four-stage model. In Level I, the supervisee is
dependent and lacks self-awareness and in-depth understanding of the therapy process.
The supervisee experiences anxiety and desires direction and guidance, searching for “the
right way” to operate. The supervisor should, at this time, provide structure and
direction, acting as a teacher and/or supporter. The dependency-autonomy conflict is a
characteristic of Level II. At this time, the supervisee’s heightened self-awareness is
coupled with confusion as the trainee vacillates between being overly confident and
overwhelmed with the increased insight. The supervisor should continue with empathy
and encouragement. Teaching should continue, though it plays a smaller role than earlier
in the training. As instruction decreases, the supervisor may perform more as a reference
source. In Level III, the supervisee experience high, consistent motivation and acts in a
more autonomous and confident manner. The psychotherapist possesses increased
insight, empathy and sense of professional identity. At this time, the supervisor functions

24
more as a peer with increased sharing and mutuality. A decrease in structure is matched
with an increase in appropriate confrontation. Stoltenberg and Delworth’s final stage,
Level III Integrated is marked by security, insightfulness, and healthy interdependence.
The “master practitioner” is aware of professional and personal strengths and weaknesses
and possesses integration of skill across many domains of practice. The supervisor’s role
is one of a collegial consultant. The difference between the non-integrated and integrated
phases of Level III is related to the supervisee-supervisor relationship and the
supervisee’s professional identity. As the supervisee becomes more integrated, there is
more insight regarding one’s sense of self as a psychotherapist. The supervisee becomes
simultaneously less dependent upon the supervisor for role definition as well as the
process of supervision.
Blount (1982) proposed a four-stage model that borrows heavily upon Erikson’s
model of personality development. The four stages identified by Blount are: adequacy
versus inadequacy, independence versus dependence, conditional dependency versus
individuation, and professional integrity versus personal autonomy. Supervisor behaviors
recommended by Blount are similar to those identified by Hogan (1964), Stoltenberg
(1981), and Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987), beginning with a supportive “teaching”
role and progressing to collegial consultation with greater supervisee autonomy.
Loganbill, Hardy, and Delworth (1982) identified three stages of counselor
development. The stages they identified were stagnation, confusion, and awareness.
Each of these stages is similar to those identified by Hogan (1964) and Stoltenberg
(1981). The focus, however, of the model proposed by Loganbill and associates (1982) is

25
that an individual must resolve eight critical issues before becoming a master
psychotherapist. The eight issues are: competence, emotional awareness, autonomy,
theoretical identity, respect for individual differences, purpose and direction, personal
motivation, and professional ethics. According to Loganbill and his colleagues (1982),
each of these issues is resolved separately within the structure of the three stages.
Therefore, competence develops following the progression from stagnation through
confusion to awareness, as does emotional awareness, autonomy, and the other five
critical issues. The trainee does not necessarily progress through each issue at the same
pace. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to assess the trainee’s development on each
of the eight issues, then to promote growth to the next level of development of each issue.
Sansbury (1982) proposed a three-level developmental model based upon the
specific training levels of professional training programs. The stages are referred to as
prepracticum, practicum, and internship and are identified by the level and sophistication
of skills acquired. In the first stage, basic listening skills and the assimilation of the
counselor role are fostered by the supervisor who provides evaluative feedback, needs
assessment, positive modeling, and support. In the second stage, the trainee broadens the
therapeutic repertoire, improves conceptualization, refines one’s personal theory, and
establishes limits of responsibility. The supervisor, to promote this growth, analyzes
cases and promotes the supervisee’s understanding through confrontation, role reversals,
interpretation, and feedback. During internship, the trainee should be broadening and
refining understanding of clients, examining one’s issues, and learning self-reliance. An

26
intern’s supervisor should confront the supervisee in discrepancies between talk and
behavior, assist with personal issues, and encourage risk taking.
Friedlander, Dye, Costellos, and Kobos (1984) proposed a model which
emphasizes the trainees’ development of their meaning-making and understanding of
psychotherapy. The learning and acquisition of skills is de-emphasized and Friedlander
and associates (1984) emphasize the supervisor’s responsibility to help the supervisee’s
meaning-making of psychotherapy as well as the supervisee’s role in it. The first stage is
marked by ambiguity in the supervisee. The supervisor’s role at this time, is to help the
trainee cope with the demands of ambiguity with an emphasis on learning how to learn.
During the second stage, the supervisee is able to recognize the limits of the therapeutic
condition. During this period the supervisor should help the supervisee see the
differences between theory and practice. The supervisor should also help the trainee
accept mistakes as well as unanticipated client responses. The supervisor should also
assist the supervisee to cope with guilt over failures. Friedlander and associate's (1984)
third stage of development is marked by the trainee’s discovery of psychotherapy as deep
communication. As the communication becomes emphasized, the supervisor should shift
the focus from techniques of therapy to the human relationship of therapy. In the final
stage, eclecticism relative to the client’s need becomes the emphasis as the supervisor
helps the trainee develop a repertoire of interventions to apply in the appropriate setting
according to the client’s need based upon a careful assessment.
Friedman and Kaslow (1986) identified six developmental stages that the
supervisee must pass through to become a “master” psychotherapist. The first stage is

27
marked with excitement and anticipatory anxiety as the trainee attempts to become
acquainted with the training agency. The supervisor is to provide a secure holding
environment, empathic to the trainee’s anxieties and vulnerabilities. In the second stage,
which begins when the supervisee is assigned a case, the supervisee becomes dependent
upon, and identifies with, the supervisor. The supervisee’s development at this point is
dependent upon the supervisor’s help in organizing and anticipating the processes of
therapy. It is also important for the supervisor to carefully select cases to avoid major
management issues. The third stage identified by Friedman and Kaslow is one of activity
and continued dependency. This stage begins when the trainee realizes the client is
taking therapy seriously. The trainee becomes more active in the psychotherapy process,
assuming more professional responsibility. At this point, it is important that the
supervisor acknowledges difficulties, limits criticism, and is affectively predictable.
When the fourth developmental stage is reached, the supervisee feels exuberant and
“takes charge.” Identifying oneself as a psychotherapist, the trainee has an increased
understanding of the relationship between theory and practice, is able to explore issues
related to countertransference, and is more independent. As the supervisee “breaks away”
it is important for the supervisor to relinquish control while remaining supportive. The
fifth stage of identity and independence is referred to as “professional adolescence.” The
supervisee has a firmly established internalized frame of reference. The trainee is also
well aware of the supervisee’s own weaknesses as well as those of the supervisor. During
this stage, the supervisee may devalue the supervisor. Despite the potential for
devaluation, the supervisor continues to support the trainee’s increasing autonomy and

28
being readily available to the trainee. The final stage identified by Friedman and Kaslow
is described as calm and collegial. When fully developed, the psychotherapist has a
firmly established sense of professional identity, is highly integrated, and experiences less
intense self-doubt and affective variability. During this final stage, the supervisor should
facilitate growth, challenge the supervisee’s inconsistencies, and focus on
countertransference.
Hess (1986, 1987) proposed a four-stage model of counselor development that he
felt was representative of the development models proposed to date. During the Inception
phase, the supervisee feels unanchored, insecure, and anxious. The supervisee is rigid,
ambivalent, unaware of therapy’s impact upon clients, and is dependent upon the
supervisor. As the supervisee moves through the skill development phase, the trainee
becomes more comfortable in the therapist role. The supervisee also has increased
awareness regarding client dynamics and is more accepting of one’s own weaknesses. As
awareness and competence increase, the supervisee typically fluctuates between being
over-confident and overwhelmed with one’s new role and skills. The next phase,
consolidation, is marked by an internal sense of mastery. Skills continue to develop and
the professional identity becomes solidified. Hess’ final phase, Mutuality, is marked by
the trainee becoming fully autonomous and able to give and receive consultation. At this
time the psychotherapist is also able to be creative and utilize intuition. The supervisory
relationship is collegial and consultative.
The four-stage model proposed by Rodenhauser (1994) emphasizes the
developing psychotherapist’s understanding of the therapeutic process and the role of the

29
self. The first stage, Restoration, is so named because the trainee attempts to “restore”
the client. During the second stage, Interpretation, the trainee adopts a theoretical base,
though it is often in a concrete and undifferentiated manner. As the supervisee recognizes
the importance of the relational aspects of therapy, the trainee works his way through
Rodenhauser’s Realization stage. Finally, the psychotherapist becomes fully developed
once the self, including one’s feelings and reactions, becomes utilized in practicing
psychotherapy.
Chazan (1990) proposed a three-stage model based on psychoanalytic theory. At
the beginning of training, the trainee feels uncertain and insecure yet is excited and
hopeful about becoming a psychotherapist. During the first stage of development, the
trainee’s effort is toward the creation of a space to provide a grounded psychological
environment in which to learn and work. The supervisor’s task during this stage is to
provide a “home base,” a secure holding environment. During the second stage, the
supervisee begins building structure within the created space. The supervisee identifies
with the supervisor and begins to venture out and explore newly learned techniques and
approaches. During this stage, the supervisor must provide empathy, flexibility,
tolerance, and tact. The supervisory environment continues to serve as a secure home
base while exploration is encouraged. During Chazan’s final stage of supervisee
development, the supervisee experiences reciprocity and well-being. The supervisee now
has a dependable sense of well-being coupled with professional identification. The
trainee has become “good enough.” Once the supervisee has reached this stage of
development, the supervisor acts in a collegial, consultative manner.

Watkins (1990) proposed a six-stage model based upon Mahler’s theory of
individuation. During the first stage, symbiosis, the supervisee is anxious, dependent,
30
and lacks insight. The trainee desires direction and advice while idealizing the
supervisor. A primary task for the supervisor during this period is to provide a secure
holding environment providing structure, empathy, and facilitating trust. Watkins refers
to the next stage of counselor development as differentiation. During this period, the
supervisee becomes more attentive and discriminating with a more realistic image of the
supervisor. The trainee is still anxious but is also excited about the anticipation of
becoming a therapist. It is important that the supervisor remain active in providing a
secure learning environment with empathy and support. The supervisor should use
modeling, role playing, and discussion about the supervisee-supervisor relationship to
stimulate thinking about the psychotherapist-client relationship. In the third stage, early
practicing, the trainee is open to experimentation. Despite an increase in confidence, there
continues to be a need to check back with the supervisor as the trainee’s curiosity is
mixed with hesitancy and doubt. The supervisor still maintains security within the
structure of supervision, provides encouragement, and encourages the trainee to begin
measuring the trainee’s own feelings and reactions in response to using different
techniques. Watkins’ fourth stage is practicing proper. The supervisee’s confidence
continues to grow as does excitement at being a therapist. As the therapist identity begins
to crystallize, there is a tendency to overestimate one’s competence. During this period
the supervisor should function as the trainee’s alter ego, providing a “reality check” when
needed. During the fifth stage, rapprochement, the trainee struggles to individuate.
There is a heightened but ambivalent desire for supervision and the trainee exhibits

31
progressive and regressive behaviors. During this critical period, the supervisor must
reinforce gains and offer ego-supportive interventions. While helping the supervisee to
become fully aware of the developmental progress made, the supervisor validates the
difficulties of being independent and autonomous. Watkins’ sixth stage finds the trainee
on the way to object constancy. Rather than achieving a status such as “master
practitioner” the trainee becomes able to accept that professional development is, and will
be, in process throughout the professional career. The trainee perceives the supervisor as
an integrated whole, with both strengths and weaknesses, and has a strongly developed
sense of professional identity. Supervision now operates with less structure in a collegial
and collaborative manner. Responsibility for supervision can now be shared by both the
supervisee and the supervisor.
Models proposed by Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz (1979) and Grater (1987)
focus on the evolving process of supervision rather than the supervisee’s or supervisor’s
specific needs. Littrell and associates (1979) proposed a model of counselor development
where the trainee becomes a psychotherapist through an evolving process of supervision
as directed by the supervisor. This model emphasizes how the responsibility of
supervision begins with the supervisor and, as the trainee develops, is gradually shifted to
the supervisee. During the initial stage of supervision, the supervisor provides goal
setting and clarifies the nature of supervision and its components. During the counselor-
therapeutic stage, the supervisor acts as a counselor to the supervisee. According to
Littrell and associates (1979), the teacher stage, the second stage, is when the supervisor
teaches the skills of counseling to the supervisee. The supervisee continues developing

32
and reaches the third stage, the consultation stage, in which the supervisor works together
with the supervisee in cooperation. Once fully developed, the psychotherapist self¬
supervises, seeking to improve counseling skills through self-observation.
Based upon the supervisee development models presented earlier (Stoltenberg,
1981; Loganbill, et ah, 1981; Hogan, 1964) Grater (1985) proposed a four-stage model of
supervision. Rather than proposing specific developmental issues for supervisee or
supervisor, Grater proposed stages of tasks of developing complexity that should be
accomplished by the supervisee with the direction and guidance of the supervisor. He
reports his model is based upon the conclusions of several writers (Marmor, 1976;
Parloff, 1979; Paul, 1967) that progress in psychotherapy results from an interaction
between the client, the presenting problem, the therapy techniques, and the personal
interactions of the psychotherapist. With this model, Grater argues that the goals of
supervision should seek to promote therapeutic progress. The first stage of supervision
proposed by Grater is the development of basic therapy skills and the adoption of the
psychotherapist role. The second stage is composed of an expansion of the range of skills
and roles to match the client problems and role expectations. The goal in the third stage
of supervision is to develop the supervisee’s ability to assess the client’s habitual and
conflicting behavior patterns, paying particular attention to those that occur within the
psychotherapy environment. During the third stage the supervisor should also assist the
supervisee in learning to select the appropriate intervention methods. During the fourth
stage of supervision, the supervisor should help the trainee learn how to use the self in
assessment and intervention. Grater points out that the first two stages are devoted to

33
skill development, whereas the last two stages emphasize a skill foundation to perform
psychotherapy in an integrated manner.
While the above review does not include every model of supervisee development
that has been proposed, it includes the most significant proposals to date. It also allows
the reader to gain an understanding of the highly similar nature of the models, as well as
the variations. Models of supervisor development, reviewed in the next section are
similar in stage composition and progression.
Supervisor development
As developmental models of supervision have continued to be prevalent in the
literature, increased attention has be given to the supervisor behaviors necessary to
promote growth. Desirable supervisor behaviors have become more defined.
Subsequently, there arose a need to account for the supervisor’s acquisition of those
behaviors. Models of supervisee development were soon accompanied by models of
supervisor development as it was acknowledged that ideal supervision does not “just
happen.” Haber (1996) has identified characteristics of beginning and advanced
supervisors (see Table 1) which summarizes his perspective of how supervisors interact
according to their development. Developmental models of the supervisor follow paths
similar to those laid out by the models of counselor development.
Alonso (1983) proposed a theory of supervisor development which suggests
supervisors must resolve three key issues repetitively throughout their career. The three
issues she identified were: self and identity, the relationship between psychotherapist and
supervisor, and administration. Alonso (1983) proposed that throughout one’s career,

34
TABLE 1: Characteristics of Beginning and Advanced Supervisors
Beginning Supervisor
Advanced Supervisor
Lacks substantial knowledge of supervision theory
and methodology
Well-informed about supervision theory and
methodology
Overuses one approach to supervision
Implements diverse approaches suitable to specific
instance
Anxious in the role of supervisor; overidentifies
with therapist role
Understands role and responsibilities in the
supervisory process
Intervenes largely by being the expert clinician
More apt to use the resources of the supervisee
Engages in power struggles with the supervisee
over the right way
Able to connect and work with the supervisee’s
world view
Underemphasizes or overemphasizes the person of
the therapist in supervision
Discriminantly explores the personal/professional
interface when it is relevant for clinical issues
Overreacts to the supervisee
More aware of and able to utilize personal reactions
in the supervision process
Experiences diffuse boundaries and inability to
confront supervisee
Able to use clear boundaries to keep the supervisee
appropriately on task
Ignores cultural differences and learning styles of
the supervisee
Respects cultural and learning idiosyncrasies
Works with supervisee in isolation ignoring
ecological context
Considers all of the floors in the professional and
client houses
Content-oriented
Works with process, including the parallel process
between the therapeutic and supervisory
systems
Source: Haber (1996, p.57)
novice to mid-career to late career, the issues remained the same but were perceived and
resolved differently due to the perspective change due to experience and demands of life
and the profession differing at each life stage. While Alonso’s model demonstrates that
supervisors do not reach professional stagnation once they assume the supervisory

35
mantle, it does not relate directly to the supervisor’s development in regard to role
competency or mastery.
Hess (1986), on the other hand, proposed a three-stage model of supervisor
development that focuses on the supervisor’s performance of supervision. The first stage
is marked by anxiety as the new supervisor struggles with the change of role. Hess
(1986) predicts that the new Ph.D. is frequently thrown into a supervisory role without
much preparation. Only one in three interns receives any training in supervision (Hess
and Hess, 1983) and the new supervisor struggles in the role change from supervisee to
supervisor. Hess (1986) suggests new supervisors cope with the self-doubt and
ambiguity of their new role by adopting a concrete approach to supervision—focusing on
skill development and client diagnosis. In Hess’ second stage of supervisor development,
exploration, the supervisor has gained competence and confidence and is often able to
amaze and baffle the trainee with feats of psychological “magic.” Supervision is valued
as a professional activity and the supervisor’s enthusiasm often promotes increased
interest in learning by the student. Hess suggested the existence of two potential pitfalls
during this second stage of development: 1) supervision that is too restrictive; and 2)
supervision that is too intrusive. Hess’ third stage of supervisor development is marked
by a continuing increase in respect—the supervisor’s respect for the trainee and trainee’s
respect for the supervisor. Increased attention is given to the trainee’s learning and a
deeper relationship develops. Supervisors at this stage are sought out by trainees due to
their reputation as excellent teachers of psychotherapy. The fully developed supervisor

36
receives gratification when the student excels rather than when the supervisor is
recognized as a good supervisor.
Rodenhauser’s (1994) model of supervisor development has four stages:
emulation, conceptualization, incorporation, and consolidation. During the first stage, the
new supervisor draws upon past role models for guidance and information of what to do.
The second stage of conceptualization involves an active search by the supervisor for a
systematic approach to supervision. At this time, alliances can be formed with other
supervisors to limit over-identification with supervisees. During the incorporation phase,
the supervisor becomes aware of how one’s personal style impacts supervision. This
phase also includes heightened awareness of differences between one’s self and the
supervisee, such as gender, ethnicity, and lifestyle. In the consolidation phase of
supervisor development, the supervisor is able to use theory, experience, the self, and
supervisee countertransference within the supervisory process.
When Stoltenberg and Delworth (1987) revised Stoltenberg’s (1981) Counselor
Complexity Model, they included a model of supervisor development (Stoltenberg and
Delworth, 1987). The supervisor model mirrors their supervisee model—it has four
stages defined by three distinct levels, the third level having two components. At Level I,
the supervisor is highly anxious and relatively naive. Wanting to “do the right thing,”
supervisors at this first stage of development typically provide a structured environment
for supervision, often performing as “the expert.” As the supervisor develops, the
supervisor may become confused and conflicted as supervision becomes perceived as a
complex and multidimensional process. During this second stage, Level II, the

37
supervisor may be dependent upon colleagues for guidance. Level III sees the supervisor
having resolved earlier conflicts and operating in a more stable manner. The Level III
supervisor becomes more autonomous and wishes to improve supervisory skills. This
supervisor’s comfort level has increased as there is more security in the supervisor role.
The integrated phase of Level III is marked by the supervisor becoming fully integrated
across many domains. The fully integrated supervisor is able to work with all types of
supervisees and is willing to seek consultation as needed.
Watkins (1990, 1993, 1994) has proposed a four-stage model of supervisor
development that emphasizes the individual’s role development. The four stages of this
model are role shock, role recovery and transition, role consolidation, and role mastery.
Unlike the other supervisor development models presented here, Watkins also provides us
with recommended behaviors by the supervisor’s supervisor, recommending that the
professional should continue training during development of the supervisor role. During
role shock, the new supervisor may feel like an impostor. The new supervisor
experiences anxiety, lacks confidence, and feels overwhelmed. The new supervisor has
no “supervisor identity” and struggles to provide competent supervision, going through
much “soul-searching.” It is likely that the new supervisor will be overly structured and
concrete in supervision. The supervisor’s supervisor performs as a teacher and a guide
within a secure holding environment providing encouragement, direction, and teaching.
In role recovery and transition, the supervisor recovers from the shock of being a
supervisor. There is an increase in confidence as well as awareness regarding one’s
strengths and weaknesses although the core of supervisor identity begins to form. It is

38
likely that one feels ambiguous about one’s work as a supervisor. During this period the
supervisor’s supervisor begins to lessen the hold on the secure training environment and
teaches and directs less. There is an increase in effort by the supervisor’s supervisor
toward stimulating an examination of the new supervisor’s strengths and weaknesses and
their effect on supervision. During the third stage of role consolidation, the new
supervisor has a broader and more informed perspective of supervision. One’s
perceptions of one’s own strengths and weaknesses are more realistic and is more trusting
in oneself. The core supervisor identity is established and during supervision the
supervisor is more able to address the process of supervision. The development of a
personal theory of supervision also takes form by this point in development. The
supervisor’s motivations are driven more by the trainee’s and clients’ needs rather than
narcissistic fulfillment. The supervisor’s supervisor now acts as a supportive guide
facilitating a focus on process issues and their impact. There is also an increased focus
on the supervisor’s personal issues and their impact on supervision. The new
supervisor’s independent thought and action is encouraged and supported.
Finally, the last stage, role mastery, marks the new supervisor’s consolidation of
skill and supervisor identity. The new supervisor handles all aspects of supervision well,
possesses an integrated style and theory, and deals well with process issues. The
supervisor’s supervision is now sought and received in a collaborative and collegial
environment. The supervisor’s supervisor can be more confrontational while
encouraging continued examination of the supervision process, personal issues, and the
interaction. Supervision of supervision is now received on an as needed basis.

39
Supervisor development has not received as much attention as supervisee
development in the literature. As the influence of supervisor behavior upon the
development of trainees becomes better illustrated, there are more questions as to how a
supervisor can best promote growth and development. Questions regarding how a
supervisor becomes a supervisor has prompted a discussion in the literature which seeks
to describe the developmental stages of becoming a supervisor. These models follow the
same developmental pathways delineated by the supervisee models—the supervisors
begin anxious and naive to the task and progress toward an internalized professional
identity. As the supervisor develops, competence and confidence increase, motivations
become more attuned toward the learning of the supervisee, professional identity
becomes formed and the supervisor values the task of supervision.
Empirical support of developmental models
The developmental models described above are more similar than dissimilar.
Whether the model focuses on the developing counselor, the developing supervisor, or
the process of supervision, each model assumes the beginning trainee to be naive in
regard to the psychotherapy (or supervision). They also assume the trainee will develop
over time, with supervision, to become an integrated “master” psychotherapist (or
supervisor). The models, for the most part, suggest that the supervisor should facilitate
the trainee’s growth by providing the environment, instruction, and feedback appropriate
to the trainee’s level of development. In the beginning, that appropriate environment is
seen as a secure “holding” environment, safe and structured. The models recommend that
the supervisor provide skills training in a proactive manner to the novice psychotherapist.

40
As the trainee learns and develops, it is suggested that the supervisor allow and encourage
increased autonomy while continuing to support the supervisee. As the trainee becomes
increasingly developed, the supervisee-supervisor relationship is less teacher-student and
more consultative and collegial with supervision occurring is a peer-like setting.
To determine the empirical support of these models, Worthington (1987)
reviewed the research related to sixteen counselor development models and two
supervisor development models proposed through 1985. In a similar review, Watkins
(1995a) reviewed the research related to six counselor development models and four
supervisor development models proposed since 1985. Table 2 summarizes the findings
of both Worthington and Watkins. According to these summaries, the empirical support
has grown significantly during the past 10 years. The findings of these reviews show
support of developmental models as a valid way of conceptualizing supervision.
Furthermore, the empirical data reviewed by Watkins suggests supervision does indeed
change as the supervisee gains experience. But while continuing support for
developmental models may further entrench them as the dominant way of
conceptualizing supervision, Watkins (1995a) laments the fact that empirical support has
not progressed far enough during the last fifteen years. Watkins joins Worthington
(1987) and Borders (1989) in suggesting that research needs a more substantial focus on
the behaviors of supervisee and supervisor to understand what is changing within the
development process. They also argue that those behaviors need to be identified to
understand how they improve psychotherapist functioning. According to Borders,
There is a need for descriptions of the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of
supervisees at various developmental stages that are more detailed than
these global descriptions, as well as more precise depiction of the

41
TABLE 2: Empirical support of supervisee developmental models
Conclusions by Worthington
a) There is some support for developmental
models as proposed by Hogan (1964) and
others.
b) In general, perceptions of supervisors and
supervisees have been broadly consistent with
developmental theories.
c) The behavior of supervisors changes as
counselors gain experience.
d) The supervision relationship changes as
counselors gain experience. The relationship
between supervisor and supervisee is
influenced by the supervisee’s perceptions of
his/her supervisor.
Conclusions by Watkins
a) The majority of studies found some degree of
support for developmental models or a
developmental dimension of supervision.
b) Perceptions of both supervisors and supervisees
were broadly consistent with developmental
model thinking.
c) The supervision relationship and supervisor
behaviors were perceived at least by
supervisors to change in developmentally
appropriate ways as supervisees gain
experience.
d) Beginning supervisees were generally found to
be more in need of structure, direction, and
guidance and supervisors were found to
provide that more so for them.
e) Advanced supervisees were found to generally
need less structure, direction, and guidance and
supervisors were found to act accordingly.
f) Advanced as opposed to beginning supervisees
were found to be more willing to consider their
own personal issues and their effect on therapy.
g) Some research showed that, with experience,
supervisees’ needs changed in developmentally
appropriate ways and that, over time,
supervisees showed increase in
developmentally relevant structures.
h) The majority of studies tested Stoltenberg’s
(1981) complexity model or tested
developmental tenets more generally.
i) Stoltenberg’s complexity model received the
most support overall.
Source: Worthington (1987, p. 195-201); Watkins (1995a, p. 655 and 668).
supervision environment that ‘match’ each stage or foster movement
toward higher stages. (1989, p. 17).

42
Worthington (1987) and Watkins (1995a) both found the state of supervisor
development theory to be lacking. In his review of supervisor development models,
Watkins concluded,
supervisor development models have been fashioned after supervisee
development models; the number of stages, the content of those stages,
and the progression within and across stages are all largely similar for both
supervisor and supervisee. The main difference seems to be in the foci of
the models more than anything else, with the supervisor being the primary
focus in one case and the supervisee being the primary focus in the other.
(1995a, p. 674).
Worthington (1987) reviewed eight research articles that dealt specifically with
supervisor development. Watkins reviewed an additional three research articles that dealt
with the same issues. A summary of their conclusions is presented in Table 3. After
considering these conclusions, Watkins (1995a) reported that the research in this area has
been minimal. In addition, there needs to be more of a focus on behaviors specific to the
developing supervisor if much is to be gained. He adds that since the majority of
supervisor developmental models simply mirror supervisee developmental models, not
much more would be gained with the addition of more supervisor developmental models.
Watkins also reiterates Worthington’s conclusion, “There is little specification of what
makes a supervisor effective and thus of how one builds the skills necessary to become
effective” (1987, p. 206).
While developmental models continue to be the preferred perspective reported in
the supervision literature, little advancement has been made beyond the confirmation that
supervision does change as supervisees progress through their training. It is likely that
supervision is generally more structured for beginning trainees who are typically anxious,

43
unskilled, and naive regarding the psychotherapeutic process. As trainees gain
experience, competence, awareness, and insight, it appears likely that supervisors act in
an increasingly collegial and mutually collaborative manner, enforcing less structure and
becoming less directive. Despite the prevalence of developmental models, many
reviewers argue that the focus of research should not be directed toward the development
of new models, but rather the validation and refinement of the existing models (Borders,
1989; Worthington, 1987; Watkins, 1995a). Furthermore, many argue that specific
behaviors and processes should be identified that promote growth within the
developmental framework.
TABLE 3: Empirical support of supervisor developmental models
Conclusions by Worthington
Conclusions by Watkins
a) There are differences in skillfulness in
supervision across supervisors.)
b) Supervisors do not become more competent as
they gain experience.
c) Supervisors change little in other ways [ways
other than competence] as they gain
experience.
a) Some of the dimensions that define
supervisors’ perceptions or cognitive map of
supervision have been identified.
b) Experience level has not been found to affect
supervisors’ cognitive maps of supervision.
c) Some of the issues, such as competency,
critical to supervisor trainees have been
identified.
d) More experience supervisors have been found
to be more highly developed with regard to
their views of themselves as supervisors.”
e) The supervisee developmental models of
Littrell et al. (1979) and Loganbill et al. (1982)
have received minimal to no research support
[when applied to supervisors],
f) Sansbury’s (1982) supervisee developmental
model or hierarchy of supervisory issues, when
applied to supervisors, has been partially
supported.
Source: Worthington (1987, p. 203-205); Watkins (1995a, p. 676)

44
Theories of supervisor development also lack empirical support. Although levels
of skillfulness has been shown to vary across supervisors (Worthington, 1984; Zucker
and Worthington, 1986), it has been demonstrated that supervisors do not necessarily
improve across time or experience (Marikas, Russell, and Dell, 1985; Worthington,
1984). There is also no evidence that supervisors actually change over time though they
may have a more highly developed sense of self as a supervisor (Watkins, Schneider,
Haynes, and Nieberding, 1995). The call for research designed to identify effective
supervisor behaviors as well as how those behaviors can be developed has been made
(Worthington, 1987; Borders, 1989) and essentially ignored (Watkins, 1995a).
Supervision as Relationship
While the developmental models continue to be the Zeitgeist of supervision
theory, there is a small body of literature devoted to the relationship of supervisor and
supervisee. In the words of Hess, “supervision is a relationship in which one person’s
skills in conducting psychotherapy and his or her identity as a therapist are intentionally
and potentially enhanced by the interaction with another person” (1987, p. 255-256). By
developing this relationship, Hess argues, one can transcend the need for theory based on
developmental models of supervision. In presenting his argument for a theory of
relationship, Hess relates the research and experience of four other writers, Markowitz,
Grunebaum, Aldrich, and Swain.
Markowitz (1958), though an accomplished psychotherapist, decided to enter into
supervision with six supervisor of different theoretical orientations. Markowitz

45
discovered that the supervisor’s ability to relate was the most important factor in being
able to provide effective supervision. Grunebaum (1983) studied the qualities that
psychotherapist’s look for in their own therapist. Of the four fundamental criteria
identified, two were related to personal style and one’s ability and/or willingness to
interact. The four criteria were: 1) competence; 2) non-overlapping professional and
social networks; 3) warmth, caring, and flexibility; and 4) the therapists’ willingness to
talk rather than remain silent. Aldrich and Swain studied the criteria on which
supervisees and supervisors evaluated each other.
Aldrich (1981; Aldrich and Hess, 1983) found that supervisees appraised
supervisors on: defensiveness (how comfortable is the supervisor with the supervisee’s
comments); professionalism (modeling); clinical experience (what skills can be
provided); theoretical base (how adept conceptually); experience as a teacher; appropriate
interest in the student’s life; likability; and motivation. While a concern for skills
training and what can be learned is evident, so is the quality of the supervisor-supervisee
relationship. Swain (1981) found supervisors to judge supervisees on eight criteria:
interest in client and client welfare; preparation for supervision; knowledge; self-
awareness, self-exploration, self-disclosure and self-esteem; openness to suggestions;
clinical and interpersonal skills; boundary management; and decision-making skills.
Issues pertaining to the relationship are also present here, though not as prevalent as in
Aldrich’s (1981; Aldrich and Hess, 1983) findings. Reviewing these findings it appears
that the supervisor and supervisee both regard the quality of their relationship an integral
component of the supervisory process. The supervisee appears to measure the quality of

46
supervision directly from the quality of the relationship, regardless of the supervisee’s
developmental level. Despite the apparent importance of the relationship, few studies
have focused on supervisor-supervisee relationship characteristics (Watkins, 1995a).
Hess (1987) proposed a theory of supervision relationship based on the work of
Martin Buber (1970). Buber proposed that the concept of “I,” as in one’s self, does not
stand alone, but exist only in relation to a “You,” a “Thou,” or an “It.” As we each exist
in the world, we (“I”) can relate to others as a “You,” a “Thou,” or an “It.” Buber pointed
out that relationships exist at varying levels of meaningfulness. The levels vary from
superficial wherein a person relates to the other as an object rather than a fellow human
being, to deeply personal when a person experiences and acknowledges the humanness of
the other person. Designating the relationship to be of “I-It,” “I-You,” or “I-Thou”
reflects the understanding of the depth of the relationship. As we order our hamburger at
the drive-up window, we are typically engaged in an “I-It,” or even “It-It” relationship as
we treat each other as an object at the other side of a goal—one to serve and the other to
be served. To engage in small talk while waiting for the order, to acknowledge each
person as a person, is a deepening of the relationship to “I-You.” To feel genuine
empathy with the worker’s sore feet and frustration of a seemingly never ending line of
customers steps toward an “I-Thou” relationship. To acknowledge the humanness of the
other and to have the other respond to your acknowledgment further deepens the
relationship as it takes on the flavor of “I-Thou.” Within the “I-Thou” relationship occurs
a dialogue between two people, each recognizing the humanness of the other. The
dialogue takes place within what Buber referred to as the “gaze” (Buber, 1970).

47
The gaze can be conceptualized as a specific, molecular, behavioral unit (Hess,
1987). The gaze occurs when a person hears the “I” of another person addressing the
“Thou” in the self. In our example, the gaze occurs when the fast food clerk hears the
customer express her concerns about his fatigue and frustration. The gaze can occur at
any time and any place, whenever and wherever two people may interact. It is a purely
psychological event with no requirement of space or time. It is for this reason that Hess
argues the gaze is a useful way for a supervisory interaction to occur. In addition to being
free of space and time constraints, the gaze is super-theoretical, meaning it can be used
within the context of any approach to supervision, whether from within a counseling
model or developmental model of training. For the gaze to occur, the supervisee and
supervisor must connect on a meaningful level, communicating within a meaningful
relationship. By attaining an “I-Thou” relationship, the supervisee-supervisor
communication transcends the constraints of any specific or given technique. The
establishment of such a relationship, Hess argues, should be fundamental within any
supervisory, or psychotherapeutic, relationship.
Development of the supervisee-supervisor relationship has received little
attention. While the importance of the relationship is almost universally accepted,
whether a supervisor can develop or learn how to promote a meaningful relationship has
not been demonstrated. Furthermore, it is unclear what components of the relationship or
aspects of the supervisor and supervisee are most salient to a productive supervisory
relationship. The next section will review the limited amount of research that has
attempted to identify dimensions of supervision.

48
Dimensions of Supervision
Dimensions of supervision can be thought of as broad-based structures in which
supervision occurs. By identifying relevant dimensions it is hypothesized that
appropriate behaviors within each dimension can be identified, quantified, and measured.
Ellis (Ellis and Dell, 1986; Ellis, Dell, and Good, 1988) has attempted to identify and
confirm the dimensions as proposed within a developmental framework. Ellis and Dell
(1986) tested the content and dimensionality of Bernard’s (1979) dual dimension and
Littrell and associate’s (1979) singular dimension supervision models from the
supervisor’s perspective. Using a multidimensional scaling research design, Ellis and
Dell found a three-dimensional cognitive map of supervision.
Bernard’s (1979) supervision model is a 3x3 matrix defined by two dimensions.
The two dimensions identified by Bernard are supervisor roles and supervisor functions.
The three supervisor roles identified by Bernard are teacher, counselor, and consultant.
The three supervisor functions identified by Bernard relate to process, conceptualization,
and personalization skills. The function of supervision is to assist the supervisee develop
these three types of skills. Process skills focus on the execution of counseling techniques.
Conceptualization skills includes those skills that organize and synthesize information
about the client. Personalization skills include awareness about one’s feelings, values,
and beliefs and how they may impact the therapy. The three functions of supervision
interact with the three supervisor roles to produce nine categories of supervisor behavior
(see Table 4). Each of these nine categories presumably corresponds to supervisee needs.

49
TABLE 4: Bernard’s 3x3 matrix of supervisor roles and functions.
Supervisor
Functions
Teacher
Supervisor Roles
Counselor
Consultant
Process
Demonstrates specific
interpersonal, treatment, or
intervention skills
Helps trainee determine what
hinders or facilitates their
interventions with a specific
client; focuses on reducing
inhibitions, increase
experimentation
Works with trainee to
explore different uses of an
intervention and jointly
practice them; mutual
learning of skills
Conceptualization
Demonstrates one or more
ways to classify, organize,
and understand client’s
behavior, thoughts, and
problems
Helps trainee understand how
their stereotypes,
conceptualizations, and
unresolved issues affect the
counseling session and provide
alternate perspectives
Works with trainee to
explore mutually issues
and implications of
theories, models, and
alternative
conceptualizations to
counseling
Personalization
Demonstrates or describes
the potential importance of
trainee’s affect and ways of
recognizing and using one’s
own affect during counseling
Helps trainee work through
personal issues or feelings
associated with counseling
sessions
Works with trainee to
explore mutually personal
concerns relevant to
counseling.
Source: Ellis and
Dell (1986) p. 284; Bernard (1979)
The four-stage unidimensional model proposed by Littrell and associates (1979) is
unidimensional. The dimension identified by Littrell is the control and responsibility for
supervision. Table 5 summarizes this unidimensional approach. As the counselor
develops, the trainee moves along the developmental stages. At the beginning of
training, the naive supervisee is directed by the supervisor regarding the development of
training goals as well as what to expect within the supervisory relationship. As training,
and presumably development progresses, the supervisor gradually relinquishes control of
the supervisory processes until the supervisee is finally self-sustaining. The supervisee
progresses from complete reliance upon the supervisor to complete self-reliance.
In testing Bernard’s and Littrell’s models, Ellis and Dell (1986) found partial
support for Bernard’s model, but little support for that of Littrell. Ellis and Dell (1979)
found, however, that Bernard’s model was better supported when a fourth role was added
to their dimension of supervisor roles. The addition of self-supervision to the matrix

50
TABLE 5: Littrell, Lee-Borden, and Lorenz four-stage unidimensional
model of supervision
Stage Focus
Control/Responsibility of Supervision
1. Establishment of supervisory
relationship
Supervisor facilitates goal setting and the definition of the
supervisory relationship
2. Counselor-teacher
Supervisor teaches the techniques of psychotherapy
3. Consultant
Supervisee assumes more responsibility for own learning, using the
supervisor as a consultant is a mutually collaborative role
4. Self-supervision
The supervisee is responsible for his/her own learning, operates
independently
Source: adapted from Ellis and Dell (1986).
changed the original 3x3 matrix (Supervisor Role x Supervisor Function) to a 4x3 matrix
with twelve identifiable supervisor categories (see Table 6). These new supervisor roles
account for the continued development of the psychotherapist after completing formal
training.
TABLE 6: Three additional supervisor roles added by Ellis, Dell, and Good
Self-Supervision
Self-supervision Role
Functions
Self-supervision
Process
Learning new interventions, techniques, or diagnostic strategies or
skills; self-exploration to reduce inhibitions, encourage
experimentation
Conceptualization
Learn new conceptual approaches or models; determining multiple
perspectives of client’s behaviors, thoughts, affect, and problems,
then developing multiple intervention goals and strategies
Personalization
Personal issues and feelings related to counseling sessions or
clients; learning new ways to recognize and use one’s feelings and
intuitions
Source: Ellis, Dell, and Good (1988, p. 318)
Having identified twelve distinct categories of supervisor behaviors, Ellis, Dell,
and Good (1988) found that the twelve categories could be evaluated along three
additional dimensions of supervision. The three dimensions identified by Ellis and

51
associates (1988) are bipolar in nature and interact with each other to produce a three-
dimensional model of supervision. The three bipolar dimensions are:
Process and personal foci
Conceptual focus
Non-directive
Emotional
Directive
Behavioral
According to Ellis and his colleagues (1988), each of the twelve supervisory behavior
categories (see Table 4 and Table 6) vary uniquely along the continuum of each of the
above three dimensions. For example, Teacher-conceptualization behaviors are high on
conceptual focus and directive focus, and toward the midpoint on the behavioral—
emotional axis. On the other hand, Self-supervisor-personalization behaviors are toward
the process, non-directive, and emotional poles (Ellis et al., 1988). Ellis and Dell (1988)
have commented on the value of these dimensions as a step toward being able to quantify
appropriate and facilitative supervisory behaviors as well as to identify when and how
these behaviors should occur during the development of the supervisee.
Regardless of the theoretical stance on supervision, the purpose of supervision is
to train aspiring psychotherapists and prepare them to operate independently in a
professional manner. It has been demonstrated that supervisors vary in their
effectiveness—there is, in effect, “good” supervision as well as “bad” supervision. It is
presumed that “good” supervision leads to improved training and subsequently better
prepared and more effective psychotherapists.

52
What is Good Supervision?
From a theoretical or intuitive perspective, it is relatively easy to identify the
components of good supervision. Reviewing recommended supervisor behaviors by the
authors of counselor development models can provide us with a fairly comprehensive
picture of good supervision. On the other hand, research of what makes good supervision
is limited to a handful of studies. In attempting to define “good supervision,” one must
first acknowledge that there is no “ideal formula” for conducting supervision (Bruch,
1974; Fleming and Benedek, 1966). We can acknowledge, however, that, like in
psychotherapy, there are general “guideposts” in supervision that can, and should govern
its practice (Storm and Heath, 1985; Carifio and Hess, 1987). The search for good
supervision leads to the performance of good supervisors.
In their review of the “ideal” supervisor, Carifio and Hess (1987) divided their
quest into three components. The first component is identified by the question, “Who is
the ideal supervisor?” This question refers to personal characteristics that make the
supervisor a good teacher, educator, mentor, or psychotherapist. The second component
and question, “What does the ideal supervisor do?” refers to the activities and techniques
such as role modeling and role playing used by the supervisor. The third question, “How
does the ideal supervisor perform supervision?” relates to the conditions, styles, and
overall environment the supervisor creates and/or uses in conducting supervision. This
intuitive categorization will be used in this section of the paper to explore the concept of
good supervision.

53
Who is the Good Supervisor?
According to Rogers (1957), supervision should be a model of the psychotherapy
process. Therefore, he thought supervisors should exhibit empathy, understanding, and
unconditional positive regard. Furthermore, Rogers felt that congruence and genuineness
should also be demonstrated by supervisors in their interactions with supervisees. Coche
(1977) agreed with Rogers about the importance of these fundamental characteristics, and
added his belief that the supervisor’s willingness for self-disclosure is an important
characteristic. Research and theory in the area of supervision have generally supported
Rogers’ notions about supervision (Cariño and Hess, 1987). To this basic foundation of
supervisor “musts,” other theoreticians and researchers have described additional factors
believed to be important in positive supervisory interactions (Albott, 1984; Aldrich,
1981; Gitterman and Miller, 1977; Hess, 1980). The supervisor characteristics these
writers thought were important include flexibility, concern, attention, investment,
curiosity, and openness. Unlike the characteristics described by Rogers, however, few of
these characteristics have received empirical support (Carifio and Hess, 1987).
While the facilitative conditions of empathy, respect, genuineness, and
concreteness are deemed important in supervisory interactions, it is unknown how much
of these aspects is the right amount, or the appropriate amount. Lambert (1980, 1974)
investigated this question by comparing levels of facilitative conditions between
therapists and their clients as well as between supervisors and their supervisees. He
found that supervisors generally exhibited less of these conditions than did therapists, and
that both groups varied the amount in varying circumstances. While we do not know

54
how much is the appropriate amount, it does appear that the appropriate amount may vary
according to specific circumstances.
What Does the Good Supervisor Do?
As noted earlier, supervision is a complex task. The good supervisor must be able
to perform a variety of tasks during her interactions with supervisees. A fundamental
criteria is that the supervisor should be knowledgeable and experienced in therapy
(Albott, 1984; Fox, 1983; Hess, 1980; Windholz, 1970). It has been recommended that
early meetings between supervisor and supervisee should be structured with the intention
of providing information to the supervisee and supervisor. These early meetings lay the
foundation for the developing relationship between supervisor and supervisee. That
relationship should involve openness, trust, mutual understanding, two-way
communication, and collaboration (Bruch, 1974; Finch, 1977).
An important component in the supervisee’s and supervisor’s collaborative
relationship is goal-setting. It has been suggested that trainees and their supervisors set
specific, explicit, and measurable goals (Archer and Peake, 1984; Fox, 1983). Mutually
agreed upon goal setting allows both the supervisor and supervisee mark the supervisee’s
progress during the course of supervision. It has been suggested that an open discussion
of progress on pre-established goals will ease the trainee’s inherent anxiety about
evaluation (Freeman, 1985).
Another task for the supervisor is disentangling the trainee’s report of the events
in psychotherapy, and to determine what actually happened (Bruch, 1974; Melchiode,

55
1977; Coche, 1977). This task appears to be a more covert goal of supervision and
supervisors appear to be less explicit in defining it to their trainees (Carifio and Hess,
1987). In comparing therapists’ written summaries with recorded material of
psychotherapy sessions, it has been demonstrated that the trainees’ recollection of events
may not be particularly helpful (Couner, 1944; Chodoff, 1972). The use of audio or
video tape to record trainee’s psychotherapy sessions has proven to be a more reliable
record, though the intrusiveness of such measures may counter-indicate their use,
depending upon the goals of supervision (Goldberg, 1985).
It has been suggested that the supervisor should use a variety of teaching methods
and modes of data presentation. For example, Brannon (1985) described how a variety of
teaching techniques could be used to communicate information and knowledge.
Brainstorming, for instance, allows the exploration and exchange of novel ideas in a
noncritical environment. Role playing allows the participants to “try out” a variety of
techniques therapeutic outcomes, finding new solutions. Modeling behavior by the
supervisor allows the demonstration of certain behaviors for the supervisee’s later use.
Guided reflection allows the replay in supervision of therapist-client interactions that in
turn promotes supervisee awareness.
Due to the nature of the supervisory relationship and supervision’s often parallel
relationship to psychotherapy, the issue of performing psychotherapy as part of
supervision is often discussed. Generally, the literature recommends against
psychotherapy during supervision. While some authors (i.e. Orzek, 1984; Riorch, 1980)
suggest the supervisor should help the supervisee fight inner battles and penetrate the

56
supervisee’s own defenses, it appears that this is better suited for a separate therapist in a
separate setting (Ekstein and Wallerstein, 1972; Lambert, 1980).
How Do Good Supervisors Perform Supervision?
The good supervisor is able to influence the supervisee’s behavior through a
variety of ways (Carifio and Hess, 1987). A supervisee’s perspective can be
significantly altered by a supervisor’s personal style (Markowitz, 1958). It has been
suggested that to provide a positive supervisory experience, the supervisor will create a
trusting and open environment in which two-way communication and collaboration are
valued (Bruch, 1974). In their approach, the supervisor should be supportive (Bruch,
1974), noncritical (Melchiode, 1977), confident, enthusiastic, and open to a supervisee’s
questions and input (Albott, 1984). Dorn (1985), using a social influence model,
suggested that a supervisor’s expertness, trust, and attractiveness improve his/her ability
to influence supervisees.
A particularly important factor in how the supervisor conducts supervision
appears to be how he/she gives feedback to the trainee. Barth and Gambrill (1984) and
Freeman (1985) have suggested that feedback should be direct, immediate, and closely
tied to the trainee’s performance. Freeman also identified four characteristics to ideal
feedback. To be most effective, feedback should be: 1) systemic, including objective,
accurate, consistent, and reliable; 2) timely; 3) clearly understood and based on specific
performance criteria; and 4) reciprocal. In addition to the feedback itself, it has been
found that how it is delivered can greatly influence the trainee’s acceptance. Cherniss

57
and Egnatios (1977) found that didactic, insight-oriented, and feeling oriented styles were
better received by trainees than were confrontational or authoritarian styles. In terms of
the teaching that occurs in supervision, Goin and Kline (1974) found that a supervisory
approach that was neither passive nor directive but “middle ground” was most suitable to
most supervisees. On the other hand, there is no conclusive evidence that teaching styles
should be more didactic or experiential in nature (Cariño and Hess, 1987).
What is Good Supervision?
In attempts to define good supervision, the discussion invariably turns to a
discussion of good supervisors. Good supervision is apparently performed by a good
supervisor, and good supervisors apparently provide good supervision. It appears that the
good supervisor shows respect, empathy, genuineness, concreteness, and self-disclosure
in interactions with supervisees. It appears that these characteristics vary in the level in
which they are presented. The good supervisor is knowledgeable and experienced in both
psychotherapy and supervision. The good supervisor works within a collaborative
relationship with the trainee, setting mutually agreed upon goals. The supervisor uses an
appropriate variety of teaching methods and tools and avoids doing psychotherapy in
supervision despite the development of a meaningful relationship. Good supervision is
performed in an open and trusting environment and the supervisory relationship is
typically viewed as collaborative involving two-way communication. The good
supervisor performs supervision in a supportive and thoughtful manner, being neither too
directive nor too passive. Feedback is provided in a manner to enhance learning and

acceptance by the trainee. These are all qualities of good supervision that have been
identified in the literature.
58
Summary
The primary purpose of the present study is to determine the compatibility of
psychological literature research describing good supervision to how the supervisee
experiences good supervision. The bulk of the literature on supervision is theoretical in
nature. Furthermore, the empirical data reflects the measurement of a few characteristics
believed to be important in the provision of psychotherapy supervision. The
phenomenological method to be used in this project is designed to discover the essential
elements of an experience rather than confirm or deny theorized components. Once the
essential elements of the supervisees’ experience have been elicited and identified, they
will be reintegrated into a description of good supervision as experienced by the trainees
as they develop into professional psychologists. The obtained description will then be
compared to the existing research of good supervision.

METHOD
A phenomenological method was used in this study to explicate supervisees’
experiences of good supervision. The particular method used was developed by Giorgi
(1989). Using the fundamental precepts defined by Husserl (1983/1913) as guidelines
and assumptions, Giorgi has developed a specific and rigorous phenomenological method
for psychological research (Giorgi, 1989) based, in part, on the model of Merleau-Ponty
(1962). The methodology is comprised of four theoretical processes: 1) empirical
observation, reduction of the data, search for essences, and synthesis into the whole.
The first “step” of the method is to empirically obtain a description of the
phenomenon to be studied. The goal of the experimenter at this stage is to obtain an
experimentally non-biased description of the phenomenon to be studied. To achieve this
goal, it should be a candid concrete description obtained from another person, the
“subject,” without additional explanation or inquiry. Once the description is obtained, the
experimenter performs a reduction of the data into psychological terms.
The second step, the reduction of the data, is the transformation of the descriptive
narrative provided by the subject into a psychological description of the subject's
experience. For the reduction to remain true to the subject's experience, “the experiencer
must be present to what is given precisely as it is given” (Giorgi, 1989, p. 45). To
achieve this “presence,” Giorgi emphasizes the importance of intuition on the part of the
experimenter. Intuition which in part aids the absorption of the uncontaminated and
59

60
meaningful description. To exist at the time of the reduction is not enough; one must be
fully present to understand the experience. Additionally, for the absorption to remain
uncontaminated, bracketing is vital, as prior knowledge and beliefs of the phenomenon
must be disregarded in order to be fully present to the description as obtained. Bracketing
is the process of actively partitioning preconceived ideas and beliefs about the
phenomenon from conscious thought.
The third “step” of the method calls for a search for the essences of the
description. The essences of an experience are the most invariant meaning for a
phenomenon within the given context (Giorgi, 1989). These essences are what make up
the essential structure of the phenomenon studied. This step involves reflection on the
part of the researcher to discover the psychological meaning of the obtained description
as it comes forth through the transformed narrative. The narrative, however, is more than
the sum of its parts, and each part cannot be understood without an understanding of its
relationship to the whole. The phenomenologist labels these parts as constituent
elements.
Finally, once the constituent elements of the experience are discovered, they are
synthesized into a whole description of the meaning. This description constitutes the
structure of the experience, the results of the study. The synthesis, or integration involves
reflection on the continual influx of consciousness within the context of the situation as
the final step of the analysis of the description.
The four “steps” described above provide a general prototype for
phenomenological research, leading to a number of possible methodologies which may be

utilized to answer the type of research questions addressed by phenomenology. The
methodology used is this study is the phenomenological method developed by Giorgi
(1989).
61
Subjects
The design of this study, including the number of subjects, is based on several
published studies which have utilized phenomenological methodology (Giorgi, 1992;
Anjus, Osburne, and Koziey, 1991; Guglietti-Kelly and Westcott, 1990; Stevick, 1971).
Five subjects, all predoctoral psychology interns, were selected on the basis that the
experimenter anticipated that they would be able to provide full descriptions of their lived
experience of being supervised in a clinical setting. So they were able to communicate
freely with the experimenter, an additional selection criterion was that they were
professional peers, in good standing, of the experimenter.
The subjects ranged in age from 26 years old to 34 years old. Four of the subjects
were women, one was a man. All five subjects were in the final month of their
predoctoral internship at the same APA-accredited internship site. All five subjects were
enrolled in clinical psychology training programs; three were in university programs, two
were in professional school programs. Two of the subjects were enrolled in the same
university program, but in different specialty tracks. The five subjects had received
training in twelve of the fourteen training rotations available at the internship site.

62
Procedure
The phenomenological research process as outlined by Giorgi follows a rigorous
process. The qualitative data was collected through the use of interviews in which each
subject’s experience of supervision was fully explored. The audio recorded interviews
were then transcribed verbatim, and these transcripts, hereafter referred to as protocols,
comprised the data of the study. The data was then analyzed following Giorgi’s method
of phenomenological research, a four step method comprised of observation,
identification of meaning units, identification of constituent elements, and reintegration
of constituent elements into the description of the experience. Prior to engaging in this
process, it was necessary for the experimenter to identify his own biases regarding the
experience and then bracket them, consciously separating them away from the data
collection and analysis procedure.
Self-Reflection and Bracketing
Prior to beginning the data collection, it was necessary for the experimenter to
bracket all known experiences and beliefs regarding supervision. To be successful, the
experimenter first performed a “self-reflection” on the phenomena. This process entailed
writing out all thoughts and beliefs regarding supervision, then reducing that written
expression to identify previously held beliefs and potential biases. The results of that
reduction are presented in the Discussion chapter of this paper so the reader may be
informed of potential biases of the researcher. After these biases were identified and
bracketed, the experimenter continued with the data collection.

63
Data Collection
The data was collected by conducting unstructured interviews. All five interviews
were conducted by the experimenter. Each interview was scheduled one week in
advance. When the interview was scheduled, each subject was told that the nature of the
interview would be a discussion of the subject’s positive experiences of supervision
received throughout professional training. At that time each subject was asked to reflect
upon such experiences as a way to prepare for the interview.
Prior to beginning the interview, each subject was asked to read and sign an
informed consent which included information about the audio taping of the interviews.
Each interview began with the same question, “Think back to a time when you
experienced what you believe to be a positive experience in supervision. Tell me about
the experience, what happened, what was said, what was felt, anything you believe was
part of that experience.” After the subject answered the initial question, the interview
proceeded by asking the subject to elaborate upon what was originally introduced into the
discussion by the subject. Except for the first question, the interview did not follow any
set plan or seek to confirm pre-established hypotheses, but reflected and followed the
subject’s lead. The five interviews ranged in length from 50 to 75 minutes. The five
interviews were conducted within a ten day period.
After the fifth interview was conducted, each of the five interviews were
transcribed, in the order in which they were completed. The experimenter completed all
five transcriptions. The interviews were transcribed verbatim with the exception of
names and other identifying data which was changed to protect the anonymity of the

64
subjects as well as any individuals they discussed during the interview. After the
accuracy of the protocols was confirmed by the experimenter, the audio tapes were
destroyed. The written protocols comprise the data set of the study which was then
analyzed as follows.
Data Analysis
The method of analysis for each protocol followed the method for psychological
phenomenological analysis as outlined by Giorgi (1989). This method is a specific four
step procedure which is based on the general phenomenological model described earlier,
and is detailed below. Prior to beginning the analysis, it was essential for the
experimenter to continue to bracket all he knew concerning the phenomenon of good
supervision. The conscious and purposeful act of bracketing drew upon the self¬
reflections discovered by the experimenter prior to beginning the interviews. Each
protocol was analyzed individually following the procedure described below. A sample
protocol with corresponding meaning units is presented in Appendix A.
First, the entire description was read through in its entirety two times. The
purpose of these initial readings was to get a sense of the protocol as a whole. Reading it
twice allowed the experimenter to better understand the protocol as a description of one
person's lived experience. After a general understanding of the protocol was achieved,
the next step was taken, the process of understanding the meaning of the experience.
Since it is difficult, if not impossible to analyze the entire protocol at once, the
second step of the procedure consisted of dividing the protocol into parts. As the goal of

65
the phenomenological method is to discover meaning, the protocol was divided into what
Giorgi calls, “meaning units” (Giorgi, 1989). These were delineated by points of
transition of meaning within the protocol. In other words, each individual unit contained
one individual meaning which revealed something about the subject's experience of
supervision. The division into meaning units was accomplished by beginning at the
beginning of the protocol, reading until one meaning unit delineated itself, and marking
the point of transition on the page. The experimenter then continued reading the protocol
from that point, marking each successive meaning unit as it appeared. After completing
the protocol, the researcher returned to the beginning of the protocol, testing each
meaning unit individually. This “test” determined 1) whether each unit could stand on its
own, and 2) if each unit contained only one meaning. If the meaning unit withstood the
test, the researcher advanced to the next unit. If not, the meaning unit was corrected.
This correction was performed by either adding the unit to an adjacent meaning unit (if
the unit failed to stand on its own) or by splitting the meaning unit into two or more units
(if the unit contained more than one meaning). This correction procedure was conducted
once through the entire protocol, at which time the determination of meaning units was
complete.
Once the meaning units were determined, they were transformed to reveal their
implicit psychological value to the meaning of good supervision. This step was the
transformation of the subject's own words into psychological terms—the transformation
of the subject's own narrative description of his/her experience into the generalized
psychological meaning of that experience. These psychological meanings were noted in

66
the margins of the protocol to correspond to the meaning unit from which it came. After
the psychological meanings were identified for each meaning unit of the protocol, the
constituent elements for the protocol were identified. The constituent elements were
comprised of psychological meanings which appeared to be most central to the subject’s
experience. The constituent elements were identified by the experimenter’s reflective
presence with the data and subsequent understanding. The constituent elements could be
conceptualized as the significant themes that emerged from the subject’s narrative. After
the constituent elements of the protocol were identified, the analysis of the individual
protocol was complete. Each of the remaining four protocols were analyzed following
the same procedure.
When the five protocols were analyzed, the constituent elements were listed
together. This list formed the constituent elements of the experience of good supervision
as determined by the five individuals interviewed. Using all of the constituent elements
for the group, the final step of the analysis was undertaken, following a prototype set by
Colaizzi (1978) and described by Stevick (1971). The elements of the group were used to
obtain an overall structure of being supervised by synthesizing them into a whole. This
process began by determining which, if any, of the elements were common among the
subjects. Elements that occurred on a less frequent basis were then considered. Common
and uncommon elements were integrated to form a whole, unified, description of good
supervision. The aim of the integration is to describe common aspects of the experience
while allowing for individual elements to be considered. This initial integration of
elements is reported as the essential description of good supervised in the Results chapter.

67
This description was then further reduced after reflecting upon the themes of the essential
description. This final reduction yielded the structural description of good supervision.
This description is also reported in the Results chapter of this paper.

RESULTS
The results of this study is presented at three levels of depth and complexity: the
original meaning units; the essential description which is comprised of the constituent
elements; and the structural description, which is a reduction of the essential description.
The data analysis of the five subject protocols yielded meaning units for each narrative.
The meaning units are presented in Table 7 beginning on the next page. The meaning
units were then reflected upon to determine the most significant, central, aspects to the
experience of being supervised. The central elements are identified as the constituent
elements. The constituents elements may be comprised of one or more meaning units. In
other words, a meaning unit may be significant enough on its own to be deemed a
constituent element. Additionally, a constituent element may be composed of two or
more meaning units to comprise a unit of higher and more complex meaning. These
constituent elements are reintegrated to produce the essential description of the
experience of good supervision. Finally, the essential description was reflected upon and
further reduced to produce the structural description. The results of this study are
comprised of all three of these types of information.
68

69
TABLE 7: Meaning units derived from the five subject protocols
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
1.
SPRa experienced
as personable and
professional
Aware of Depth
of knowledge
Organized
Experience
depends upon the
interpersonal
process between
SPEb and SPR
SPR was close in
age, allowed
identification
2.
Committed time
to supervisee
Love of teaching
SPR explicit re:
expectations,
performance
requirements
Seriousness of
responsibilities,
evident through
organization
respected due to
competency and
organization
3.
Provided specific
feedback
Relationship—
SPR’s investment,
attributed to
personality
factors
Provided in vivo
modeling in
session
SPR gave clear
expectations of
what was wanted
SPE actively
sought SPNC
because of
respect, wanting
to get info from
her
4.
Open
communication,
allowed
disagreement
Genuineness
Assessed current
level of ability at
the onset of SPN
Expectations
implied
confidence,
maturity,
experience
Invested,
committed to
training and
fulfilling SPE’s
needs
5.
Felt free to ask
questions
Supportive and
validating when
teaching
Gave confidence
@ beginning,
after assessing,
gave approval
Kept scheduled
appointments
Regular
communication
6.
Informal
structure,
boundaries
minimized,
permitted
increased
interaction
Growth within
relationship
Monitored
performance
periodically with
tapes
Structure and
consistency is
important to
learning new
information
SPE challenged to
push for own
learning
7.
Personality and
behavior reflected
openness
Relationship
moves from
superficial to
deeper level,
bonding, fostered
by SPR’s
personality style
Flexible in
process of SPN,
depending on
needs of SPE
Structure and
consistency not as
important when
familiar with
subject
Nonthreatening
8.
Explicit regarding
process and
expectations of
SPN
Process moves
from info
gathering to
consulting
Always made
time and gave
attention to SPE,
sense of priority
Structure may
change-requires
adaptation, more
aggressive
behavior by SPE
to have needs met
Nonpunitive
Note: a refers to supervisee,0 refers to supervisor,c refers to supervision

70
TABLE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
9.
Process attributed
to personality
Bond allows for
discussion of
deeper issues
Feedback
perceived as
accurate
Implies potential
of being
embarrassed if
need to ask
questions
Validating of
feelings,
particularly
important at
difficult times
with patients
10.
Although
informal, there
were boundaries
Bond dependent
upon
interpersonal
style/personality
SPR got feedback
from other team
members, aware
of interactions,
role, effort
Trainee actively
seeks SPN if
necessary
Understanding of
SPE’s
perspective,
confirming—
allowed increased
openness
11.
SPR encouraged
self-disclosure
Personality
factors: open,
genuine
Reinforced good
work
Course of SPN is
responsibility of
SPR
Provided
instruction for
growth within a
safe environment
12.
Friendly,
empathic
Self-confident,
centered, and
honest
Identified poor
work, made
suggestions for
improvement
Negative
experience when
not informative
Interested in SPE
at a personal
level—-invoked a
good feeling in
SPE
13.
Likable
Being supportive
important to
decreasing
anxiety
Honest
Seeing potential
of SPR increases
eagerness to seek
SPN
Accurate
attentiveness to
SPE’s state of
mind and
confronted SPE
14.
Interactive,
encouraged
discussion
Relationship
works on
reciprocal basis:
take something of
value from SPR,
work harder to
give back/repay
Impressive as role
model
Structure not as
important as new
information, SPR
had positive long
term relationship
SPN was at a
personal level,
personal growth
which impacted
SPE professional
behavior
15.
Reputation among
peers
Interpersonal
style factors,
behavioral in
addition to verbal
SPR expressed
confidence in
SPE, increased
self-confidence
Respect of SPR
knowledge and
willingness to
acknowledge
what they don’t
know
SPR must be
competent and
good role model
16.
Was not as
available as
desired, due to
her popularity
Style identified as
being due to who
the person is,
including
confident, non-
punitive
clarity of SPR’s
expectations
provided an
external measure,
helped SPE
organize her goals
Respect
supersedes
scheduling
structure
Balanced support
and validation
with challenging
and identifying
things to improve
upon

71
TABLE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
17.
Joint decision
making regarding
direction of
therapy, helped
build SPE
confidence
SPN as an “art”
Organization and
explicitness
demonstrated
SPR experience
and knowledge
SPN format
varied- question
and answer,
review, report
Left SPN
knowing I learned
something today
18.
SPE’s judgment
was trusted
SPR
communicates
needs, changes,
corrections, SPE
maintain self-
respect
Assistance with
integration into
the team
increased sense of
security
Interaction varied
Able to open up
and receive
feedback on
personal aspects
while maintaining
appropriate
boundaries
19.
Feedback,
possibility for
learning,
dependent upon
competency
Experienced at an
affective level
Good professional
reputation with
other disciplines
SPR has desire to
be a SPR, to teach
Genuineness
20.
Weakness of SPN
overcome with
SPR’s interest in
SPE’s growth as a
therapist
In relationship,
developed
potential through
reassurance,
support,
understanding
Training included
processing of
specific
interventions and
suggestions
An intrinsic desire
to see another
person grow,
pleasure at
fostering that
growth
I liked SPRs as
people
21.
Relationship
beyond SPN is
important,
whether or
teacher or socially
SPR’s investment
shown through
time, energy,
enthusiasm;
observed and
exchanged with
the relationship
Adapted to SPE’s
professional,
interpersonal
style—built on
strengths of SPE
rather than mimic
SPR.
Confident and
secure, wants to
share knowledge,
not fearful of
competition
Given opportunity
to open up,
22.
Mutual respect
SPR appears to
enjoy what they
are doing.
Makes specific
suggestions for
interventions
Format and
process varies
Trust develops
over time,
includes SPR
sharing with SPE
23.
Responsiveness
and support for
SPE
Commitment to
time
Provides
appropriate
reinforcement
including
recognition to 3 rd
party
Positive feedback,
acknowledgment
of growth,
learning
Trust required

72
TABLE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
24.
Self-disclosure
Involvement at an
affective level
Sets professional
model
Identifies
individual as
mentor
Identification
with SPR
important in
establishing goals
and establishing
SPR as a role
model
25.
Professional
freedom in work
SPE experiences
at intuitive level
Maintains
professional
boundaries
though
increasingly
“personable” over
time.
Identified specific
requirements
needed to attain
professional goals
Gender aspect
minimized by
SPE, though
gender important
re: identification
26.
Style of giving
feedback is
attributed to
personality
factors
Learning in a
developmental
building model,
rather than
correction.
Respect.
Honest
SPR competence
and SPE respect
is a prerequisite
of having +
supervisory
experience
27.
Important for SPE
to not feel as
though she was
wrong, but that
there are many
ways to do
therapy
Time is
productive
Professional and
personal
reputation.
Able to overcome
personality flaws
No respect equals
questionable
learning equals
why bother with
SPN?
28.
No gender related
differences
SPE is more
open, less
defensive
Conscientious
regarding her
presentation
An understanding
ofSPR
personality led to
deeper
relationship,
mutual respect
No respect, more
guarded
29.
Confidence
built—trusted my
judgment,
provided varying
experience to
push the training
expertise
SPE seeks
suggestions,
corrections
Takes time,
increases effort at
times of increased
SPE need.
Expectations were
rigid
SPR expresses
confidence in
SPE, particularly
when specifics are
identified

73
TABLE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
30.
Beginning at a
new site, it is
necessary for SPR
to help give
confidence
Teaching can be
reciprocal-
relationship
dependent
SPE learned
about boundaries/
unprofessionalism
through a poor
SPN experience.
Experiences SPR
at an affective
level
Poor SPN results
in + learning,
through
experiencing
anger towards
SPR, how it can
impact
professional
behavior/therapy
31.
Dedication to
training—taking
some risks,
providing new
challenges
SPE’s needs
change with
development
Poor boundaries,
SPE was scared
Despite closeness,
no experience of
boundaries
crossed
Personal and
professional
disclosure does
not include
emotional
disclosure re:
SPN relationship
32.
compromises with
SPE to provide
new experiences
while getting the
necessary work
done
As SPE develops
as a therapist,
becomes more
knowledgeable,
confident,
expectations
change
Poor boundaries,
SPE lost respect
for SPV.
SPR open to
diverse ways of
thinking
SPE’s activity,
willingness to
participate in
important, was
reinforced
33.
Own willingness
to participate,
expose
weaknesses, to
learn
Expectations
include “I know
more of what I’m
doing”
Poor boundaries,
SPE learned
importance of
professional
boundaries, more
aware of when
they are being
pressed.
SPR open to
diversity-more
important later
when less need to
learn new
material
Instillation of
confidence
necessary to
perform and
develop
professionally
34.
SPE’s openness
has increased
over time, with
confidence,
personal and
professional
maturity
SPE has needs,
expects to be
fulfilled,
Character traits:
self-confident,
organized,
insightful, warm,
caring, empathic
with boundaries.
Rigidity okay
when learning
new material
Personal aspects
must be addressed
in SPN, goes
beyond skill
training
35.
Maturity may be
related to be able
to handle negative
feedback and
perceptions of
SPN experience
SPE expectation-
SPR shares
experience
Helpful regarding
other professional
issues, i.e. office
politics
Modeling role not
primary
importance in
evaluating
supervisory
experience
Technician vs.
therapist—
therapist must be
willing to
face/work through
personal issues

74
TABLE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
36.
Felt connected
SPE belief: it is
important to still
be learning
Honest—straight
forward
Behavior is a
function of who
the person is
To be good
therapist personal
issues must be
addressed in SPN
37.
Interpersonal trust
Identifies warm
affective
experience as due
to personality
variables
Positive, even
when giving
negative feedback
SPE has respect
for SPR’s position
and
responsibilities
Reach a point in
relationship able
to disagree,
comes later in
development
38.
Sense of equality,
learn from each
other, process of
change, different
perspectives
A guide, mentor
SPE expectations
of needing to
improve clinical
skills
Respect—
universal
requirement
SPR shares own
training
experiences
insecurities
39.
Relationship
outside SPN
affects experience
and perception,
both + and -.
Highly
trustworthy
Identification of
specifics
illustrated SPR’s
interest and
attention
Ethics—
prerequisite for
positive
experience
Time and
availability
important
40.
Involved as a
person, not just a
SPE
Expectation of
SPR to help—
give confidence
and to teach
Felt respected by
being given
responsibilities
41.
Roles change,
evolve, but not
separable
Knowledgeable,
specific in
feedback, is
genuine,
approachable,
role model.
Factors required
to be a good SPR:
interest,
commitment,
patience
42.
Flexible within
boundaries
Went out of his
way to advance
him
professionally
43.
Needs of SPE
important
44.
Relationship is
experienced as
“special” creates
an extraordinary
experience-
beyond good.
45.
Requires a
willingness to be
close, involved

75
TABKE 7—continued
Subject 1
Subject 2
Subject 3
Subject 4
Subject 5
46.
Challenged to
develop/grow as
therapist
47.
Positive
reinforcement
48.
Positive SPR is in
tune with SPE,
touching all
aspects during
SPN
49.
SPR, modeling
how to do therapy
50.
Knowledge and
competence
prerequisite
(otherwise no
learning)
51.
SPR’s knowledge
is measured by
how much SPE
learns
52.
Trust develops-
being to SPN on
time, how they
treat you at
difficult times
53.
Dynamic and
evolving
54.
Development of
relationship
mirrors
therapeutic
relationship
55.
One who is
willing to share
one’s affective
experience
56.
SPE likes them as
people
57.
Increased trust
allows SPE to
expose more of
self, develop into
a better therapist

76
Essential Description of Good Supervision
The compilation of constituent elements of the five subjects’ descriptions of good
supervision generated the following essential description of good supervision.
For the five subjects interviewed in this study, good supervision was experienced
as a period of learning and professional growth within the context of a meaningful
interpersonal relationship. The relationship was experienced as being collaborative
between supervisor and supervisee, teacher and student, mentor and novice. As
supervisees grow and develop, they expect their supervisors to change with them,
matching their interventions and teaching methods to the supervisee’s need. The
supervisor’s commitment to the supervisee’s learning was identified as a fundamental
component of good supervision.
Supervisees approach supervision anticipating their own professional
development. There is an implicit power differential in the supervisory relationship in
which the supervisee initially concedes control and power to the supervisor. On the other
hand, the supervisee expects to be treated with respect in addition to being taught by the
supervisor. The supervisor is also expected to relinquish power and control to the
supervisee as the supervisee develops skills and proficiency at the psychotherapeutic task.
The supervisee’s evaluation of supervision is dependent in part on how well these
expectations are met. The value attributed to supervision by the supervisee is also
dependent upon how much the supervisee can and does learn from the supervisor during
the course of supervision.

77
In order for ideal learning to occur, the supervisee must feel safe enough to expose
weaknesses and open oneself to scrutiny by the supervisor. The supervisee’s desire and
ability to take more risks, both in therapy as well as in supervision, is a result of
developing confidence and feeling safe within the supervisory environment. Supervisee
confidence is developed by being trusted, given positive feedback, and being provided
with challenging clinical cases to further develop clinical skills. Safety is not experienced
unless the supervisee is able to trust the supervisor and the supervisory relationship. Good
supervision also draws the supervisee into the process, encouraging the supervisee to be
more active in the training process.
Good supervision was attributed directly to the actions and personality of the
supervisor. Professional competence of the supervisor is measured by how much the
supervisee learns from the supervisor. The extent to which the supervisee values
supervision is determined by how much the supervisor has to offer. Supervision with
supervisors perceived as competent, knowledgeable, and skilled is actively sought out by
supervisees. Good supervisors identified in the study were also described as honest,
ethical, genuine, supportive, self-confident, warm, caring, insightful, and empathic. Good
supervisors encourage, or at least allow, the supervisory relationship to develop from a
superficial task-oriented relationship to a deeper relationship wherein the supervisee can
share and better understand affective experience. Good supervisors are also explicit in
their expectations and evaluation requirements. Good supervisors are in tune with and
responsive to their supervisees. Commitment to training in general as well as

78
commitment to the supervisee’s training were also identified as important components to
good supervision.
Supervisors demonstrate their commitment to training through their commitment
of time to their trainees and their attention to the trainees during their allotted time.
Supervisors also demonstrate their commitment by being willing to share their own
training experiences, particularly difficulties. Supervisors can also demonstrate their
interest in the trainees’ learning by asking questions about their training expectations,
needs, and whether they are being met.
While the supervisor’s personality and likability are identified as important, it is
more important to maintain a professional relationship; although the relationship may
become more informal as the trainee develops. The maintenance of appropriate and
professional boundaries was experienced as being the supervisor’s responsibility.
Boundary concerns were expressed by all five subjects and was experienced as a
necessary component to a safe and productive relationship. Mutual respect was also
identified as a necessary prerequisite of good supervision.
Feedback was reported to be an important part of good supervision.
Appropriately given feedback was experienced as validating, accurate, and contributing
toward the supervisee’s professional development. Positive feedback contributed to the
self-confidence of the trainee and increased the trainee’s commitment to work for the
supervisor. Negative feedback, when received, was experience by the trainee as an
honest effort by the supervisor to contribute to the supervisee’s development. Helpful

79
negative feedback was described by the subjects as being timely, noncritical, accurate,
specific, and focused on behaviors or interventions rather than personal attributes.
The above essential description is a compilation of constituent elements extracted
from the meaning units identified in the five subject protocols. This description is a
summary of good supervision as experienced by the five subjects interviewed as part of
this study. This description is reduced one more time to yield the structural description.
Structural Description of Good Supervision
Further reflection upon the above essential description of good supervision
yielded the following structural description of good supervision as experienced by these
five subjects.
Good supervision was expressed by all the subjects to be a highly personal and
individualized process. Good supervision was attributed directly to a good supervisor—
good supervision is performed by a person with a commitment to the supervisee’s
training. From the trainee’s perspective, supervision is not a skills dependent process but
rather a person dependent process, where the supervisor’s own personality and
interpersonal style is identified as the reason supervision is experiences as good or bad.
Important supervisor attributes which were identified by the subjects include
honesty, genuineness, insightfulness, and self-confidence. Good supervisors also support
and validate the trainee’s experience, are committed to the profession and to professional
training, and respected by students and professional peers. Good supervisors exhibit
professionalism, are cognizant and respectful of trainee-supervisor boundary issues, and

80
are explicit regarding performance expectations. Nonauthoritarian styles of
communication and interpersonal warmth were also identified as desirable, though not
necessary, characteristics.
Good supervision is experienced as a period of learning when the trainee is able to
invest in the training process through the establishment of a trusting interpersonal
relationship with the supervisor. The development of a meaningful and safe interpersonal
relationship allows the trainees to become more invested in the training process by
permitting themselves to ask more questions, admit to difficulties, and be less defensive
in the supervisory process. The trainee enters supervision with expectations—
expectations to learn, expectations to be respected, expectations for the supervisor to
commit to the training process. How well the supervisor meets these expectations has a
direct impact on how beneficial the trainee experiences the training. Good supervision is
experienced as a dynamic process with the supervisor able to track and respond to the
trainee’s changing needs. Good supervision facilitates growth of the trainee by
encouraging the trainee to seek additional supervision and training.

DISCUSSION
The purpose of utilizing the phenomenological method in this study was to
discover a structural account of the experience of good supervision during psychotherapy
training. This study strives to understand supervision as experienced in the lived world,
related by the subjects in their own words. Supervision was selected as the phenomenon
of study due to its nature as a fundamental method in training psychologists. Despite its
central role in professional training, clinical supervision has received relatively little
empirical research attention (Watkins, 1995a). A discovery oriented approach such as this
is particularly useful when applied to phenomena with relatively scarce research findings.
The results of this phenomenological investigation will be discussed in this
chapter. The primary constituent elements of the discovered reductions will be discussed
individually and related to appropriate traditional research findings. The reductions in
their entirety will then be discussed in a comparative manner to previous
phenomenological studies on supervision. Before beginning with the discussion of the
results, however, the experimenter’s personal reflections regarding supervision are
presented. These reflections were written prior to beginning the data collection. They are
presented here so the reader may be informed of any potential biases held by the
experimenter.
81

82
Personal Reflections
An important aspect of this phenomenological method is the bracketing of
preconceived knowledge regarding the phenomenon being studied. To effectively
bracket, it is necessary to identify those preconceived beliefs. The following is a written
representation of the experimenter’s beliefs regarding good supervision prior to beginning
the data collection. It is presented here so the reader may be informed of the
experimenter’s biases prior to beginning the project.
As I was preparing the proposal for this project, a then current supervisor of mine
suggested to me that good supervision is nothing more than the provision of a safe and
secure environment in which the trainee could learn psychotherapy. I was initially drawn
to this elegantly simple conclusion and began to believe that yes, perhaps good
supervision could be reduced to such a simple but potentially comprehensive thought. As
I began to reflect upon my own experiences of being supervised, however, the matter
became a great deal more complex. My first recollections of good supervision began
with memories of supportive supervisors who encouraged me, expressed confidence in
my work (even when I was not confident in it), and, of course, gave me glowing reviews
at the end our training period together. As I attempted to identify specific incidents or
experiences in supervision which seemed to have a particular impact upon my growth as
a therapist those experiences flattened out into average experiences. Such experiences
were experienced as good, as in average. These experiences must have contributed to my
development as a psychotherapist, but not in a way that prompted me to identify them as
critically important to my professional identity.

83
As I reflected further upon my past experiences, it became more apparent to me
that supervision most profoundly affected my professional development when it helped
me overcome some form of adversity. The adversity typically took the form of an inner
struggle—a crisis of loss of confidence, boredom within a therapeutic context, an
interpersonal conflict with another supervisor, peer, or client. In my discovery I found
that when I was in a good supervisory relationship, I had assistance in resolving the
matter. When I was not, I was left to my own devices to handle the crisis, which at times
felt as though I were negotiating a land-mine. So, what was the difference?
When I had “good” supervision I felt I could bring the struggle to the attention of
my supervisor who would then share a past experience, insight, or a fresh perspective to
help me resolve the issue. I felt, in a word, “safe.” When I reflected upon the times when
I resisted bringing the issue to supervision, it was, I think, because I was afraid of being
“scolded” or penalized for doing something wrong. I determined I would be safer
negotiating the land-mine on my own. While my hesitancy clearly falls under the
category of personal “issues,” of interest here is that there were times when I did take the
issue to supervision. It seems, then, that a sense of safety is a fundamental component of
good supervision, after all, as supervision may not even take place without it.
As far as other characteristics of good supervision, I expect to learn in supervision
and I expect to be treated in a fair manner. While I don’t know if likability is a necessary
component, I do know that I liked those supervisors from whom I received good
supervision. Good supervision has challenged me, supported me, and encouraged me.
But most of all, good supervision has taught me new things about psychotherapy—new

84
skills, new processes, new understandings—and has encouraged me to use that
knowledge in the psychotherapeutic setting.
Orientation of the Subject
In reviewing the results of this study it becomes clear that experience of good
supervision is understood within the context of the supervisee’s world. A significant
aspect of their “world of supervision” is their understanding of the supervision process.
Each of the subjects reported that they approached supervision with expectations. The
expectations of these supervisees involved their development as professionals and how
they expected to be treated as human beings. These expectations could be summarized as
expectations to learn, be supported, and be treated with respect.
As supervision is a context for training, expectations to learn are reasonable and
normal. Supervision has been described as primarily a teaching-learning activity
(Holloway and Neufeldt, 1995). The learning process in supervision is also well
documented, at least theoretically. Developmental models emphasize the learning
processes of the supervisee with the assistance of the supervisor (i.e. Stoltenberg and
Delworth, 1987; Watkins, 1993, Ronnestad and Skovholt, 1993) and supervisors
themselves experience the supervisor role to include the role of teacher (Paskiewicz,
1993). The quality of learning has also been shown to be related to the quality of the
supervision (Carifio and Hess, 1987; Shanfield, Matthes, and Hetherly, 1993)
Expectations to be treated with respect are consistent with APA guidelines for
ethical conduct. Writing as a supervisor, Pickering (1987) tells us that,

85
students have a right to expect that the supervisory process and
relationship will not wound them to the point of bewilderment, will not
create anxieties that they are given no guidance in handling, and will not
be a place where harmful interpersonal games are played (p. 50).
Supervisee expectations and value of respect for self-autonomy and integrity has been
documented elsewhere (Hutt, Scott, and King, 1983). Additionally, respect as a
necessary component in the supervisor-supervisee relationship was a conclusion of
Carifio and Hess (1987) in their search for the ideal supervisor.
Expectations to be supported may be a reflection of the supervisees’ needs to be
guided through the process of becoming a psychotherapist in a thoughtful and human
manner. Such expectations are legitimate (Pickering, 1987). Supervisee expectations of
support are also consistent with the expectations and intent of supervisors when they are
engaged in a supervisory relationship (Paskiewicz, 1993; Pickering, 1987). Furthermore,
the relationship qualities of warmth, acceptance, trust, and understanding, the “facilitative
conditions,” are well-documented in the literature as important dimensions in all helping
relationships.
One other significant expectation held by the trainees is the expectation to engage
in a meaningful interpersonal relationship with the supervisor. In fact, for the subjects in
this study, supervision is not experienced as a process of learning with the assistance of a
person, but rather as a relationship in which learning occurs. Supervision is not attributed
to learned skills, but rather, who the supervisor is and the relationship between the
supervisor and trainee. Identification of the supervisor as the instrument of change
suggests trainees do not perceive supervision as a professional skill which may be learned

86
as much as a process of shared learning within the context of an interpersonal
relationship.
The perceived quality of the supervisory relationship, and consequently
supervision, is dependent upon the perceived quality of the supervisor, who is evaluated
in terms of competence and commitment to training based, in part, on experience and
maturity. Experience and maturity of the supervisor was measured by one subject, Karen
(all names have been changed), as the supervisor’s level of organization and explicitness
regarding expectations and evaluation criteria. Karen inferred that since the supervisor
was able to verbalize exactly what she expected during the course of training, that the
supervisor understood the training process and was able to predict certain outcomes. This
could only be accomplished, inferred the supervisee, through experience and knowledge.
It could not occur, apparently, through training and knowledge about the supervisory
process. A significant consequence of this is that trainees do not anticipate the possibility
of learning supervision but hold on to the notion that supervision is person dependent and
a matter of either “you’ve got it or you don’t.” Consequences of this perspective are
discussed later in this chapter.
Qualities of Supervision
As stated earlier, it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the quality of
supervision from the quality of the supervisor. In fact, in the present study, the benefits
of good supervision were attributed directly to the personal characteristics and
professional behaviors of the supervisor. For practical purposes, good supervision is a

87
good supervisor, and visa versa. Studies of supervision invariably include aspects of the
supervisor, whether it is what they do, how they do it, or who they are. As it would not
be reasonable to attempt to remove the supervisor from the process of supervision, the
following discussion of qualities of supervision will include all aspects of supervision,
including the supervisor.
While the facilitative conditions have been well-documented in the literature,
other proposed important characteristics have received less empirical support. These
intuitively derived characteristics include flexibility, concern, attention, investment,
curiosity, and openness (Albott, 1984; Aldrich, 1981; Gitterman and Miller, 1977).
Despite the lack of previous empirical support, all of these characteristics were present in
the subjects’ protocols. Concern, attention, investment, and openness all appear to be
significant supervisor characteristics present in good supervisory experiences while
curiosity may be reflected in the supervisees’ perceptions of the supervisor’s interest in
the supervisee. Perhaps the addition of these types of characteristics to the “facilitative
conditions” is what delineates the supervisor from other helping roles. Supervisor
investment in the supervisee’s training seems to be a particularly important characteristic
when fulfilling the mentoring aspect of the supervisory role.
The development of supervisee confidence and trust was reported by the subjects
to be related to self-disclosure by the supervisor. The importance of self-disclosure is
consistent with the findings of Hutt and her associates (1983) although the desirability of
supervisor self-disclosure has not been emphasized in the literature in general. Hutt and
associates (1983) also proposed that self-disclosure by the supervisor is the link between

88
the supervisory relationship and the content of supervision, moving the process of
supervision forward when the supervisee may otherwise be inhibited or reluctant to move
forward. Carkhuff (1969) proposed that self-disclosure is an extension of genuineness
and a necessary part of any helping relationship. According to Carkhuff (1969), the
supervisor’s self-disclosure relates to the supervisee’s concerns and provides a model for
increasingly deeper levels of self-exploration by the supervisee. The present findings
suggest that self-disclosure represents an intimate sharing by the supervisor which in turn
opens the door for similar sharing by the supervisee. These explanations do not seem
mutually exclusive but complement each other nicely. Supervisor self-disclosure can
dissolve blockages in supervision by increasing risk taking by the supervisee through the
instillation of trust and commitment by the supervisor. This would also be consistent
with the findings in this study that trust develops by how the supervisor treats the
supervisee at difficult times.
Supervisee trust in the supervisor was described as a necessary component of
good supervision.. These findings in the present study support similar findings
elsewhere. Allen, Szollos, and Williams (1986) found that perceived expertise and
trustworthiness of the supervisor were the best discriminators of quality according to
supervisees. Other phenomenological investigations of good supervision found trust to
be a central component of a positive experience (Worthen and McNeill, 1996; Hutt et ah,
1983). Cariño and Hess (1987) also concluded that trust is a necessary component of the
supervisory didactic relationship.

89
Like trust, perceived competence of the supervisor is a prerequisite to a positive
supervisory experience. It was stated that the supervisor’s competence was a driving
force in motivating the supervisee to seek supervision. Furthermore, the supervisor’s
competency was directly related to how much the supervision was valued by the
supervisee. In the words of one subject, Manny,
She was very competent, she’s really organized, which made me really
respect her and want to seek out supervision even more because I knew
she knew a lot and I knew that she was competent so I wanted to learn, get
that information from her.
It is interesting to note that another subject evaluated the supervisor’s competence by
measuring how much she learned, suggesting the supervisor must always have something
to offer the supervisee.
Trust, competence, facilitative qualities—-all of these aspects of supervision are
components of the supervisory relationship. The relationship between supervisee and
supervisor has been proposed as the single most important aspect of effective supervision
(Worthen and McNeill, 1996; Cariño and Hess, 1987; Hess, 1987). In the present study,
all positive aspects of supervision are experienced to occur within or as a direct
consequence of the supervisory relationship. But is the relationship actually as important
as it is perceived? In a recent study by Patton and Kivlighan (1997), the working alliance
of the supervisory relationship had a differential impact upon the types of learning that
occur in supervision. Patton and Kivlighan (1997) found that the working alliance had no
impact upon the technical functioning of the supervisee but did impacted positively upon
the trainee’s comfort in supervision. More importantly, however, they found that the
working alliance between supervisee and supervisor was related to the supervisee’s

90
performance in counseling sessions, as measured by independent raters. This appears to
be the first empirical support that the quality of the supervisory relationship has an impact
upon the professional performance of the trainee, validating years of speculation and
theorizing.
Although the subjects in this study valued a collaborative supervisory
relationship, they also placed the responsibility of supervision upon the supervisor. This
appears contradictory to the idea of establishing a collaborative relationship, but
consistent with the supervisee’s implied deference to the supervisor as an authority
figure. This suggests a tension between establishing a peer-like relationship with
someone who has evaluative power over the supervisee. The supervisee’s demand for
respect and maintenance of professional boundaries may be a way of negotiating what
could become an ambiguous and potentially harmful relationship. By maintaining
boundaries, supervisees establish a structure in which they are able to learn, grow, and
relate to the supervisor while being protected from arbitrary acts that may occur in a less
structured or defined relationship.
While the responsibility of the supervision is perceived to be in the supervisor’s
hands, the supervisees do acknowledge that their active participation is required to make
supervision work. In the words of another subject, Catherine,
part of the positive experience has been because of my willingness to learn
and expose myself.. .to learn and receive the training and not be afraid to
have things dissected and pointed out.
Pickering (1987) states that it is likely that supervisors expect their supervisees to be
active in the supervisory process.

91
Although this project did not intend to explore negative supervision, experiences
of “bad” supervision were related by the subjects as a way of contrasting the positive
experiences. The most significant expression of “bad” supervision was related to the
breakdown of professional boundaries by the supervisor. One subject, Karen described
her experiences with crossed boundaries as scary and unprofessional.
It was scary. It was unnerving for me, because here’s this person [crying
to her about her personal problems] who’s supposed to be my mentor.. .I’d
hope they’d have some kind of professional sense.. .1 was scared. I was
overwhelmed.. .1 lost respect for her.
In such experiences, the supervisee experiences anxiety, anger, and frustration and the
supervisory relationship is burdened with mistrust, disrespect, and a lack of honest
disclosure (Hutt et al., 1983). When supervision falls into a category somewhere between
good and bad, it is likely that both the supervisee and supervisor discount its value.
Though it may not be harmful toward the supervisee, when supervision fails, the
relationship is dulled and an air of tolerance prevails (Paskiewicz, 1993). Hutt and
associates (1983) report such an experience is likely to result in anger and anxiety in the
supervisee as a result of frustrated professional needs.
Boundary issues were identified by the subjects to be an issue which is necessary
to a good supervision experience as well as being a primary contributor to a negative
experience. Boundaries were experienced as a dynamic process rather than a static wall.
Trainees experience the boundaries to become more flexible as the relationship develops.
As the supervisory relationship deepened, the supervisor was experienced on a more
personal level. All subjects reported, however, that a professional relationship with
appropriate boundaries was maintained, even when interacting with the supervisor on a

92
social level. The boundaries were a desired and welcomed aspect to the relationship. In
no instances did the subjects report frustration at wanting to be closer to the supervisor
than was permitted. It was as though the trainees experienced the boundaries as a
protective mechanism for themselves, and they were able to apply their experience with
supervisory boundaries to counseling situations.
Another characteristic of good supervision is the supervisor’s ability to track,
attend to, and respond to the needs of the supervisee. The subjects experienced this
aspect as attention and responsiveness—attention to their needs and emotional states
followed by appropriate responses and interventions. In a study of psychiatry resident
training, supervisors with the highest ratings identified and tracked the residents’ central
and affectively charged concerns about the client (Shanfield et al., 1993). This is
attentiveness in a direct sense, and can be illustrated by Manny’s experiences.
The one thing that I’ve had with her that I haven’t had with most of my
supervisors, is that she would really key in on my attitude, or what was
going on in the moment. And she would confront me with it.
Another aspect of the attentiveness is how a supervisor tracks unidentified supervisee
needs and tailors the supervision to match it. The types of needs a supervisee can have in
supervision can vary. Some needs vary according to developmental level, as in what type
of learning is most appropriate for the trainee. Other needs are context sensitive, such as
difficulties with a client, spoken or unspoken. Still other needs may be related to the
interactions with the supervisor as when the trainee needs more direction or more
autonomy. Appropriate interventions at times of difficulty were described as being
instrumental in developing a trusting relationship with the supervisor.

93
It has been suggested that the most significant interventions provided by
supervisors is feedback (Cariño and Hess, 1987). Feedback is anticipated, expected, and
closely tied to a trainee’s performance (Barth and Gambrill, 1984). Supervisees in this
study experienced feedback as an instrumental aspect of their development as
psychotherapists. According to Freeman (1985), feedback should be systematic, timely,
clearly understood, and reciprocal. According to the subjects in this study, it is most
important for feedback to be accurate (part of being systematic), noncritical, and relevant
to what the supervisee is doing. Both of these guideline address the fact the feedback
must be received and accepted by the trainee before any behavioral and attitudinal change
will take place. In this study, negative feedback given within the context of a good
supervisory relationship was experienced as the supervisor’s contributions toward
improving the skills of the trainee. While the content of the feedback was aimed at
changing a supervisee’s behavior, the manner in which it was presented was experienced
as supportive, encouraging, and building upon the supervisee’s strengths and knowledge.
Positive feedback was experienced as a motivating force for continued development by
the trainee. Positive feedback let the trainee know that the supervisor was paying
attention and interested in the trainee’s growth. It also increased trainee confidence and,
in some cases, motivated the trainee to work harder for the appreciative supervisor.
How Does This Relate to Developmental Models?
It was not the intent of this project to support or not support hypotheses proposed
by the various developmental models of supervisee and supervisor development. Some

94
observations, however, may be made regarding developmental models based upon the
data and findings of this study.
The appropriateness of the conceptualization of supervisee learning as
development was evident in the protocols of this study. The subjects described a
transformation from needing skills training to developing increased competency and
confidence to a desire to explore more process oriented aspects of psychotherapy. The
learning processes described were developmental in nature, building upon preexisting
strengths, as opposed to being corrective or punitive. In the words of Sara,
I left knowing, okay, this is going to be a better way to approach this. It
wasn’t like I walked away feeling like I had made this horrible mistake or
I am a bad clinician. I was like, yeah, just more information and I’ll use it
next time.
It was interesting to note that there was variability among the subjects regarding
how much they valued insight and process awareness versus further skills development.
Some trainees appeared to value insight and self-awareness as a part of supervision
whereas other subjects did not. Despite this discrepancy, however, it did not impact their
evaluation of the supervisory process. Although all subjects interviewed in this project
were at the same point in their training, it could be hypothesized that they were at
different points developmental^ from a developmental perspective. This would account
for the acceptance of skills training as good supervision at this point of their training.
The difference may also be related to the fact that some of the subjects where beginning a
specialization, such as psychooncology, child psychology, or neuropsychology. One may
be proficient in one area of psychotherapeutic work but require introductory supervision
in an area that is being learned. Finally, it may also be due to individual differences—

95
some trainees may simply value insight-oriented supervision and actively seek it out, and
others may not.
One final comment about developmental models should be made regarding their
accuracy in assuming supervised experience until becoming a “master psychologist.”
The subjects interviewed in this study were near the termination of their formal
supervised experience as required by the APA. Yet by their own admission, none of
them felt they were operating at a “master” level. While these individuals will seek
licensure and therefore receive additional supervision, postgraduate training in
psychology is highly variable and consistent supervision cannot be assumed to occur.
Developmental models which predict a continuation of formal supervision beyond
graduation or licensing appear inaccurate and overly optimistic. Today’s graduate must
be more proactive in pursuing further development than was necessary prior to
graduation.
Recent developmental models have begun allowing for continued development
without the necessary intervention of a supervisor. In the model proposed by Watkins
(1993, 1990), one feature of the final stage is the professional’s realization that
development continues throughout the professional career. With this in mind, models
that propose “professional” development rather than “supervisee” development may be a
more accurate representation of expected growth during an individual’s training and
professional life. Skovholt and Ronnestad (1992), for example, propose a model of
professional development in which only three of eight stages occur within the context of
the formal training environment.

96
According to Skovholt and Ronnestad (1992), counselor development is an eight
stage process which spans the professional’s career. The first stage addresses the
individual’s initial motivation “to help” prior to the initiation of formal training. The
final stage is a process of defining professional integrity which continues until the end of
the person’s professional life. Of the eight stages proposed by Skovholt and Ronnestad
(1992), only three are directly applicable to the professional’s formal training. Those
three stages are: 1) transition to professional training; 2) imitation of experts; and
3) conditional autonomy. According to Skovholt and Ronnestad (1992), the processes of
exploration and integration, two processes that are usually included within supervisee
development, do not occur until after the trainee graduates from the training program.
Furthermore, individuation and integrity do not begin occurring until four to ten years
after graduation. A model such as this appears to be more consistent with the level
development evident in the trainees interviewed for this study. A broader perspective of
development such as this may be more accurate, and more helpful in identifying
supervisee needs while receiving supervised experience.
Other Phenomenological Studies of Supervision
Three other phenomenological studies of supervision have been identified. Two
of those studies examined supervision from the supervisee’s perspective (Worthen and
McNeill, 1996; Hutt et al., 1983) and the other examined supervision from the
supervisor’s perspective (Paskiewicz, 1993). While the descriptions and findings of these
studies are very similar to the present study, there are some interesting differences. So

97
the reader may compare the results of the present study to the results of the other two
phenomenological investigations of the supervisees’ experience, a summary table from
Worthen and McNeill (1996) is presented here as Table 8 and the entire fundamental
description from Hutt and associates (1983) is presented in Appendix B.
TABLE 8: Four phases of a Good Supervision Experience for Advanced Supervisees
Phase
Description
Existential baseline
Fluctuating to grounded level of confidence; aversion to overt
evaluation; desire for rewarding supervision; previous unrewarding
supervision; disillusionment to sense of efficacy with therapeutic
process
Setting the Stage
Sensed inadequacy consisting of disruption in the usual, anxiety-
induced emotional arousal, and perceived needing; global to
domain-specific response to sensed inadequacy
Good supervision experience
Supervisory relationship experienced as empathic, nonjudgmental, and
validating, with encouragement to explore and experiment; struggle
normalized; sense of freeing consisting of reduced self¬
protectiveness and receptivity to supervisory input; nondefensive
analysis; reexamination of assumptions; acquisition of a
metaperspective
Outcomes of good supervision
Strengthened confidence; refined professional identity; increased
therapeutic perception; expanded ability to conceptualize and
intervene; positive anticipation to reengage in the struggle;
strengthened supervisory alliance
Source: Worthen and McNeill (1996, p. 28)
Two Phenomenological Investigations of the Supervisee’s Experience
Worthen and McNeill (1996) and Hutt and associates (1983) investigated the
experience of being supervised using a phenomenological method similar to the one used
here. The most obvious difference between the present description and the descriptions
of Worthen and McNeill (1996) and Hutt and associates (1983) is the specificity of the
descriptions. The descriptions elicited by Worthen and McNeill (1993) and Hutt and

98
associates (1983) appear to be focused on one supervisory event that was experienced as
good (or positive). The descriptions obtained in the present study were broader in
context, incorporating an entire training experience with one or more good supervisors.
Consequently, the descriptions from the other investigators appear more dynamic in
nature and include antecedent conditions and outcomes of the supervision experience.
The descriptions obtained by Worthen and McNeill (1996) and Hutt and
associates (1983) are particularly helpful at identifying critical incidents that occur with
the supervision process, particularly in understanding how such events contribute to the
development of the trainees. The description obtained in the present study, on the other
hand, appears useful in identifying the global environment of supervision, including the
perceived attitudes, behaviors, and overall stance of the supervisor as well as the
experience of the supervisee. It is possible that preexisting biases or expectations of the
experimenter lead to the global narratives obtained. On review, however, all five subjects
responded globally to the initial question.
Another possible explanation for the difference is that the question asked in this
study elicited a broader response than the initial question in the other studies. The initial
question asked by Hutt and associates was, “Try to recall a positive experience you have
had in supervision and describe it in as much detail as you can” (Hutt, et al., 1983, p.
119). The first question posed by Worthen and McNeill was, “Please describe for me as
completely, clearly, and concretely as you can, an experience during this semester when
you felt you received good psychotherapy supervision” (Worthen and McNeill, 1996,
p. 26). The opening question in the present study was, “Think back to a time when you

99
experienced what you believe to be a positive experience in supervision. Tell me about
the experience, what happened, what was said, what was felt, anything you believe was
part of that experience.” The length of the last question, or perhaps the inclusive of the
phrase, “anything you believe was part of the experience,” may have contributed to the
breadth of the responses.
Comparing the content of the three studies, the lack of an explicit description of
anxiety is conspicuously missing from the present description. The difference could be
accounted for by the nature of the descriptions obtained. The anxiety reported by the
other investigators is reported as part of the antecedent conditions to good supervision.
As this description lacks any reference to the antecedent conditions, that may account for
the missing anxiety. The experience of anxiety in supervision was present for the
subjects of this study as evident in this description by Sara.
In that type of relationship, I felt insecure, you come in, you tell them, “Oh
God, this is what happened with this patient and this is what I did.” and
you’re not exactly sure how they’re going to respond.
While the narratives elicited from the subjects included inferences to anxiety
experienced or anticipated in supervision, only one of the five subjects made a specific
reference to experiencing anxiety related to performance or evaluation in supervision.
From the subjects’ descriptions of trusting and respectful supervisory relationships, one
may infer underlying anxiety or fear which prompted the need for such a relationship,
even if not explicitly stated. On the other hand, the narratives suggest that such
relationships are necessary to prevent anxiety rather than alleviate existing anxiety. The
lack of a description of felt anxiety is contradictory to most theories, models, and studies

100
of trainee supervision. In the developmental models, for instance, most of the
supervisor’s task, particularly in the earlier stages, is theorized to be actively seeking to
reduce trainee anxiety, through the use of structure, support, and empathy. According to
Skovholt and Ronnestad (1992), a prerequisite for achieving professional identity is
having the experience of uncertainty and anxiety. My own beliefs at the outset of the
study was that a necessary component of good supervision was the creation of a safe and
secure learning environment. The subjects interviewed in this study, however, were more
concerned with learning than being protected.
The discrepancy may be due to the level of training achieved by the subjects. As
all subjects were completing their training at the end of predoctoral internships, they had
probably reached states of comfort within their current training environment. Even
though they were asked to reflect upon their past experiences, they may have been so
removed psychologically from beginning supervision that their anticipatory anxiety was
forgotten. Another possibility is that their anxiety was overshadowed by a greater
concern that they were completing their training they hadn’t learned everything they were
supposed to learn before graduating.
Other than the missing anxiety, the fundamental structure of positive supervision
reported by Hutt and associates (1983) is very similar to the essential and structural
descriptions found in the present study. One other difference between this description and
that of Hutt and associates (1983) is the emphasis on collaborative relationships. While
collaboration was repeatedly emphasized throughout the description by Hutt and

101
associates (1983), it was not so prevalent in the present description. Several factors may
account for this discrepancy.
One factor may be less of an emphasis on collaboration due to subject selection.
Swanson and O’Saben (1993) found that trainees in clinical psychology training
programs expected less mutuality in supervision than counseling psychology and
counselor education trainees. Mutuality was described as a sharing of personal
vulnerabilities and to show confidence and respect in the trainee (Swanson and O’Saben,
1993, p. 463). The study by Hutt and associates (1983) used clinical psychology, social
work, and counselor education trainees whereas all the participants, in the present study,
were enrolled in clinical psychology programs. There may have been less expectation for
mutuality and collaboration in the subjects of this study than in the subjects of the Hutt
and associates (1983) study. Another explanation for the discrepancy may be related to
basic assumptions regarding the supervision process.
One possible explanation for the difference may be that the varying emphasis in
collaboration reflects a difference in basic assumptions held by trainees at the two time
periods, 1983 versus 1997. Developmental models clearly indicate the desirability of
supervisors moving forward from a didactic teaching model at the beginning of training
toward the establishment of a more consultative, collaborative process as the supervisee
develops. As described earlier, developmental models have dominated the thinking in
supervision theory for the past fifteen years. As a result, it may be that the collaboration
proposed by the models is now accepted as the norm, and therefore minimized in the
present narratives. This effect may also have influenced the assumptions of the

102
experimenter who subsequently minimized the importance of collaboration during the
analysis of the data. Finally, one additional explanation may be related to the level of
development of the subjects.
It is possible that the trainees interviewed in the present study had not developed
as psychotherapists as fully as the subjects in the study by Hutt and associates (1983). If
the fundamental assumptions of developmental models are correct (that is, trainees
develop over time and become less focused on skills training than on process issues as
they develop) the differences in the present description and the one produced by Hutt and
associates could be accounted for developmentally. The trainees in this study may still be
concerned with skills training and therefore anticipating the supervisor to be more
proactive and instructing. The subjects in the Hutt and associates (1983) study, on the
other hand, may have been less concerned with skills development and had higher
expectations regarding collaboration.
Another difference between the two studies is the identified goal of supervision:
in the present study, the anticipated outcome of supervision is learning and growth as a
psychotherapist. In the study by Hutt and associates, supervision is described as “an
exploration.. .of the supervisee’s interactions with clients” (1983, p. 120). This difference
in perspective is reflected throughout the supervision literature. Some writers emphasize
the didactic relationship between supervisee and supervisor while others describe the
triangulated relationship between supervisee, supervisor, and client. The later appears to
reflect the dominating view in current supervision literature, and may be instrumental in
future attempts to link client change to the supervision process. In this instance, the

103
description in this study may reflect an outdated, or perhaps uneducated, view of
supervision. The minimization of the client’s role in supervision may be an additional
factor to consider when contemplating the state of supervision training.
Despite the differences described above, the differences between the study by
Hutt and associates (1983) and the present study is minimal. The description presented
by Hutt and associates (1983) is clearly supported by the data and the descriptions
obtained in the present study. In comparing the present study to the investigation by
Worthen and McNeill (1996) there are again more similarities than dissimilarities.
Aside from the antecedent conditions and consequences, the described
experiences of the Worthen and McNeill (1996) study and the present study are similar.
The language used by Worthen and McNeill (1996) has a more philosophical basis than
the language used in this study but the meaning structures appear the same. The
description presented by Worthen and McNeill (1996) appears to reflect the supervisees’
inner, preverbal experience. The present description, on the other hand, reflects the
verbal experience while clarifying and condensing the meaning of the supervisees’
experience. The language used by Worthen and McNeill (1996) is more consistent with
the existential basis from which the phenomenological method is derived. On the other
hand, the language in the present study may be more accessible to researchers and other
interested parties who may not have past experience of existential principles. Again, as in
the case of the Hutt and associates (1983) study, the similarities of the descriptions
outweigh the dissimilarities.

104
A Phenomenological Investigation of the Supervisor’s Experience
Paskiewicz’s (1993) phenomenological investigation of supervisors’ experiences
of supervision is an appropriate and accurate complement to the present study.
Paskiewicz (1993) found that supervisors value their supervisory relationships, finding
them enjoyable, enriching, and a way of making a meaningful contribution to the
profession and practice of psychology. They also see themselves as teachers, mentors,
and supportive facilitators of the supervisees’ effectiveness. The supervisors interviewed
by Paskiewicz (1993) also work to create a supervisory relationship that provides an
important supportive space for supervisee learning. The supervisors report that the
relationship develops over time, deepening with increased comfort, openness, and
friendship.
The above report complements the findings in the present study so well, one
would think the supervisees in this study trained under the supervisors in Paskiewicz’s
study (1993). There are additional elements, however, that exist in her study due to the
perspective of the participants that don’t exist in the present study. First of all, the
supervisors value the relationship for the opportunity it brings for an intense, creative,
sharing relationship. Another unique aspect is that the supervisors feel responsible and
protective of their supervisees as well as their supervisees’ clients. These two aspects are
function of varying perspectives. The present study and the Paskiewicz (1993) study
illustrate the capability of the phenomenological method to clearly delineate varying
perspectives of the same event. The Paskiewicz (1993) study is also encouraging as it
demonstrates that supervisors have intent to perform their tasks well. From the

105
supervisor’s perspective, at least, supervision is a professional activity that can be learned
much like psychotherapy.
Training in Supervision
Despite the recognized importance of supervision to professional psychology,
training in how to supervise is not provided in the vast majority of psychology training
programs (Watkins, 1995b). Hess and Hess (1983) reported that only one-third of
psychology internship sites offered training in how to supervise. In a more recent survey,
Barachok and Kunkel (1990) found that few doctoral level counseling psychology
programs offered supervision course work. Watkins (1995b) points out that surveys on
the state of supervision training in psychology consistently report that training is not
offered at the level it should be. While the professional literature has expressed a need
for improved training practices, the call has been largely unheeded by those who practice.
The dangers of such a lackadaisical approach to supervision training is pointed out by
Bernard and Goodyear (1992):
One hindrance to the development of more universal training of
supervisors has been the fact that so many mental health professionals
have taken on the role of supervisor without formal preparation. Although
they lack specific training in it, they are doing supervision—typically
believing they are pretty good at it. Consequently, they are more inclined
to believe that if they have learned it without formal preparation, then their
students and trainees can as easily do so. These faculty and field
supervisors often serve as role models for trainees, who may receive
mixed messages about the actual importance of supervision training (p.3).
This is the message that the subjects in this study have somehow acquired even though
they have not stepped onto the supervisory stage. There was no indication by any of the

106
subjects that supervision can be a learned skill. Instead, supervision, good and bad, was
directly attributed to the person of the supervisor. This assumption that a person becomes
a supervisor simply by performing the task may account for the limited amount of
training available.
Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research
The results of this study are consistent with the existing empirical research and
thought regarding supervision in training psychologists. The results of this study, while
compatible with existing research on the developmental nature of supervision, suggest
that developmental models should be broader in their conceptualization of
psychotherapist development. The results also suggest that the meaning of the
supervisory relationship should be taken into account and incorporated into future
research of development as well as the efficacy of supervision.
As stated earlier, the developmental perspective has dominated the thinking and
research of professional supervision. The orientation of the subjects in this study was
also developmental in nature. The narratives elicited from the five subjects clearly
described expectations that their supervisor would assist them build upon their existing
strengths to increase their clinical acumen. On the other hand, there appeared to be a
greater emphasis on skills training than would have been predicted by the majority of the
developmental models. This discrepancy may have been due to a number of possible
factors: 1) trainees were learning a specialization which required a focus on skills and
specific interventions; 2) trainees were oriented from a technical training background,

107
therefore expecting a continuation of the same; 3) trainees had received poor training in
the past and were not as developed as would have been predicted. While the data in the
present study does not fully support the predictions of developmental models, it is
consistent with much of the research that has attempted to validate specific models.
The empirical research to date has supported the intuitively strong notion of
development, but it has been inconsistent in supporting specific stages or processes
predicted by the various models. Possible explanations for the lack of empirical support
may be that the models are: 1) too narrow in their time frame; or 2) too specific as to
what type of learning should be occurring at a given time point. In other words, the
models may predict too much development within the formal training period; and they
may be too linear in the prediction that skills training occurs first followed by process
training.
The developmental models of supervision generally begin with a naive novice and
end with a master practitioner. At the same time, many attempt to provide specific
direction to the trainees’ supervisors so the supervisors may facilitate the trainees’
growth. In order to account for the development of novice to master within formal
training, these models may expect too much growth to occur within too short of a time
frame. Models developed more recently have addressed this issue by extending
supervised experience beyond graduation then beyond licensure. Most recently, proposed
models acknowledge that the professional psychologist will continue to be “in process”
(i.e. Watkins, 1990, 1993) and therefore, presumably, in development.

108
The concept of continually being “in process” is taken a step further in the
empirically-derived model of professional development proposed by Skovholt and
Ronnestad (1992). Skovholt and Ronnestad identified eight specific stages and processes
that occurs throughout the professional’s career. Of the eight stages in the model, only
three occur within the context of formal training prior to graduation. The trainee only
reaches a stage of conditional autonomy prior to seeking professional employment
suggesting a continuing dependency upon supervision, whether it is for skill or process
assistance. This prediction of conditional autonomy is consistent with the data and
results of the present study suggesting that models with a broader focus should be the
focus of future research.
If developmental models are to be used as guides in the provision of supervision,
it is necessary that they accurately reflect the current status of training and development.
Therefore models must be continually updated to current standards if they are to be
effective. Models can be particularly helpful to beginning supervisors conceptualizing
the process of supervision. To be helpful, however, the models must also be realistic in
their predictions of supervisee needs and behaviors. Based on the conclusions of this
study, the models should also address the development of the supervisory relationship.
Another conclusion of this study is that good supervision is a critical component
of an individual’s process of becoming a psychologist. Furthermore, a quality
supervisory relationship is a prerequisite of good supervision. The subjects in this study
identified the supervisory relationship as the context in which they experienced growth as
a professional and as a person. The trainees’ experiences of supervisor and supervision

109
were inseparable. This identification suggests that the supervisory relationship should
receive greater attention in the empirical literature. While the desirability of “facilitative
conditions” in the supervisory relationship is well documented, it would be worth
knowing if the quality of the relationship actually affects the performance of the trainee.
Holloway and Neufeldt (1995) concluded that since the quality of the therapeutic alliance
affects therapeutic outcomes (i.e. Orlinsky, Grawe, and Parks, 1994), it is likely that the
same holds true in supervision. In a recent study by Patton and Kivlighan (1997),
trainees’ comfort in supervision was associated with performance in their counseling
sessions, as measured by external observers. Whether the quality of supervision affected
performance, or whether high functioning trainees are more comfortable in supervision is
not clear and should be the subject of future research. Likewise, the present study
suggests the trainees’ evaluation of their own performance is affected by how much they
value supervision and, by association, the relationship; but whether their performance
actually changed is not known.
If a good supervisory relationship is a necessary prerequisite for good supervision,
how much effort should be made at matching compatible personality styles of supervisee
and supervisor? The impact of personality styles on the supervisory process becomes
most evident when supervision goes awry. This is usually noted when supervision loses
its effectiveness due to personality conflicts that cannot be resolved. Whether
supervision can be significantly improved, however, by matching supervisor and
supervisee personality styles has not been demonstrated. Given the importance of the
supervisory relationship to the process of supervision it would be a valid field of inquiry.

110
In the present study, not only did the subjects highly value the relationship in supervision,
but they identified good supervision as being a function of the supervisor’s personality.
The subjects in the present study attributed good supervision to the personal
characteristics of their good supervisors. While the competency and skill of the
supervisor was noted when the supervisor was performing the role of psychologist, when
performing the role of supervisor skills became less explicit. Good supervisors were not
identified by what they did as much as how they were experienced. In the present study,
good supervisors were perceived as being willing to teach, committed to training, ethical,
respected, likable, and, in general, good human beings. There is a lack of
acknowledgment by the subjects that supervision is, or can be, a learned skill. This
perception appears to reflect the attitude of the profession as a whole.
Given the importance of supervision to the training of professional psychologists,
it seems intuitively obvious that lessons in “how to supervise” should be included in
professional training programs. Yet the value of training in supervision is not reflected in
the number of training programs offering courses in supervision (Watkins, 1995b) or in
the number of training sites offering opportunities for supervised experience in
supervising (Hess and Hess, 1983). In the present study, the subjects did not seem to
even consider the possibility that their good supervisors became good supervisors through
specialized training. Much of what they valued, as a matter of fact, appeared to be more
related to the supervisors’ motivations’ rather than their skills. To the extent that being
trained to supervise can improve motivation, the need for training becomes greater. The
actual impact of training on supervision, however, is unknown. It has been demonstrated

Ill
that supervisory skills training can improve how one evaluates one’s own performance as
a supervisor (i.e. Bernard, 1979). The data is inconclusive, however, as to whether
training in supervision, separate from experience, has a beneficial impact upon
supervision outcomes. The discipline of professional psychology reflects this lack of
empirical support in the apparent ambiguity in providing training for tomorrow’s
supervisors.
Comments Regarding the Methodology
The highly similar nature of the results of this study to the results of the other
phenomenological studies discussed in this chapter attest to the reliability of this type of
research methodology. Phenomenological research is finding its place in psychological
research as a tool that can explore events that do not lend themselves to traditional
quantitative methods. Furthermore, qualitative data collection and analysis is a natural
extension to the professional training received by psychologists. Interviewing and
analyzing those verbal reports are tasks performed daily by psychologists working in
applied settings. Using methods recognizable to clinicians and relating the results in a
language they can understand will go a long way in reducing the existing gap between
research and applied psychology. There are, however, weaknesses to the methodology.
As language is the primary tool for data collection, analysis, and reporting,
semantics plays an important role in this type of research. It is necessary for the
researcher to choose words carefully, identifying words and phrases that most accurately,
and most comprehensively account for the experience being examined. It is possible, in

112
pursuit of brevity, for a researcher to neglect or discard a critical component of the
experience. Likewise, it is necessary for the reader to make additional effort to
understand the full meaning being conveyed by the writer.
Another question regarding the methodology is its ability to transcend the
constraints of time. It has been reported that phenomenological research can provide
universal descriptions that are not dependent upon timeliness. This may be particularly
true in instances of universal experiences such as emotion. In the present study, however,
the methodology is potentially limited to a specific time point. This may be true for all
phenomenological research when the experience in question involves development or
some other form of dynamic and growing process. While the subjects in this study were
asked to reflect upon past as well as present experiences, they could only respond as
advanced trainees, even when reflecting upon experiences they had as novices. It is
likely that the experience of good supervision will change as the trainee develops and the
orientation in the world changes. To understand the full supervisory experience, then, it
would be desirable to interview trainees along the continuum of training, beginning with
prepracticum students through post graduate level trainees. It is anticipated the changes
will be subtle, but evident.
Like other research methodologies, subject selection must be considered. In this
case, the subjects selected for the study were peers in good standing of the experimenter.
This is a recommended practice for this type of research as it is believed that a positive
relationship between experimenter and subject will facilitate a fuller, more complete
narrative. There is, however, the possibility that subjects may be more conscientious, and

113
possible censoring, in their report if they anticipate a continued relationship with the
experimenter. A greater problem in this case, however, is related to the experimenter’s
belief that he selected high functioning trainees who could, in turn, provide cogent,
thoughtful, and complete narratives.
When discussing this project with a psychologist who supervisors on a regular
basis, the supervisor remarked to the experimenter that “supervising the good ones is
easy.. .it’s the struggling trainees who require a great deal of patience and consideration.”
If the subjects selected for the study were indeed, “the good ones,” it is possible that a full
range of supervisory experiences weren’t obtained. It would be interesting to interview
lower functioning trainees to determine if there are any differences in how good
supervision is experienced, or whether good supervision is good supervision.
Finally, it is impossible to know exactly how successful the experimenter was in
bracketing his preconceived beliefs about supervision. This is particularly the case since
he has had his own experiences of supervision. Although the reliability is demonstrated
by the similarity to other phenomenological studies (which weren’t identified until after
the data analysis and construction of the descriptions) the final test of validity lies with
the reader. For this reason, the results of other similar studies have been included as well
as a description of the experimenter’s own experiences of supervision.

APPENDIX A SAMPLE PROTOCOL WITH MEANING UNITS
The following is an example of a protocol with the discovered meaning units.
The verbatim transcript is on the right side of the page and the corresponding meaning
units are listed on the left side of the page. All names and other identifying information
have been changed.
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
I: Think back to a time when you experienced what you
believe to be a positive experience in supervision. Tell
me about the experience, what happened, what was said,
what was felt, anything you believe was part of that
experience
Supervisor was close
S5: Well, a lot of my training has been in testing. I’ve
in age, allowed
thought about this a little bit, and I couldn’t think of one
personal identification
person. It wasn’t like I had this role model that came to
mind right away. I thought about it a little more and I
thought probably one of the most positive experiences
I’ve had was with one of my supervisors who actually
hadn’t been in the field that long—she was probably six
years post graduate. Maybe it was the fact that she was
closer in age to me. . .for some reason I identified with
her more than my other supervisors.
Respected supervisor
I think one of the things that made it positive for me was
due to competency and
one, that I really respected her. She was very competent,
organization
she’s really organized, which made me really respect her
114

115
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisee actively
and want me to seek out supervision ever more because I
sought supervision to
knew she knew a lot and I knew that she was competent
learn as much as
so I wanted to learn, get that information from her.
possible from
competent supervisor
Supervisor invested,
The other part of it is just how she related to me. Just to
committed to training
the staff as a whole. She was really invested in the
and fulfilling
training program; we weren’t paid, this was a practicum
supervisee’s needs
position, or compensated in any way. And she always
checked in, with me as well as the other people—how
cases we had, was this too overwhelming, was this not
enough. ..
Regular
She always checked in, what was our goal. Was I getting
communication,
really what I wanted out of the training.
assessment of needs
being met
Supervisee was
She would challenge me when it came to sessions,
challenged to push for
particularly when it came to testing. It was so easy being
her own learning
a practicum student, what do you want me to do? And
she would always turn it around and say, What do you
think you need to do? Or What would be the first step
you would think about?
Nonthreatening,
She approached supervision in a very open non-
nonpunitive, didn’t
threatening way, so you didn’t feel if you gave an answer
make supervisee feel
that was really way off, that you would feel embarrassed,
uncomfortable
or stupid. Her approach was such that I didn’t feel
uncomfortable at all, even if I thought I might be way off
on something.

116
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Validated supervisee’s
feelings and
She also would validate me if I was having trouble with a
patient. I had this one patient and he was driving me
experience
crazy. He had a lot of personality problems, and I was
just involved with him in terms of testing, it wasn’t like I
was doing therapy with him. Yet she sat there, listened to
me, and said, “All those things that you are feeling are
okay, and this is probably why its happening.
Confirming rather
So it wasn’t like, “Well you’re not working with this
than disapproving,
person the right way,” it was always, “Yes, I can
encouraged supervisee
understand your feeling this way.” I felt therefore that I
to inform supervisor of
could always approach her if I had a conflict with
difficulties
patients, I knew that she’d be validating.
Provided instruction
I think one of the things I liked about her, it wasn’t as
oriented toward
though I went in and she praised me for how well I was
growth
doing. It was always she balanced it off with, this is
great, that’s good, but, what about this part, or you need
to work on this part. She did it in a way that was non¬
threatening.
Interested in
And she seemed interested. It wasn’t as if, okay, we’re
supervisee at a
in supervision, it’s over, and that’s it. she always wanted
personal level within
to know what was happening with my personal life. Not
professional
that she was intrusive,
boundaries
Supervisor’s interest
she just wanted to know how you were doing outside the
invoked a positive
practicum situation. It was .. .it made me feel good that
affective experience
she wasn’t just interested in how well I was doing in
testing, or how I was relating to such and such patient,
but wanted to know how I was doing overall. I think I’ve
captured it with her.

117
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisor was
Recently, being here, my supervisor, I always felt that
attuned to supervisee;
maybe I wasn’t getting enough supervision. I was
accurate attentiveness
thinking about my supervision with her, and I realized
to supervisee’s state of
the one thing that I’ve had with her that I haven’t had
mind and confronted
with most of my supervisors, is that she would really
supervisee with
queue in on my attitude, or what was going on in the
observations
moment. And she would confront me with it. She’d
look at me and say, “You look mad.” Or “You look really
frustrated, what’s happening?” It wouldn’t even be
supervision time, and she’d pull me aside and say,
“What’s going on?” And there’d always be something.
Whether I’d just had a conflict with a nurse, or with a
patient, or whatever it would be, she was just really
attuned to that.
Supervisor intervened
I really appreciated that because even though I didn’t
at a personal level
have enough time with in terms of supervision and, “This
which supervisee felt
is what you need to do with this patient,” It wasn’t
subsequently impacted
technical like that, but it was always very personal. I
her professional work
think with this experience, it almost seemed like, it
in a positive way
wasn’t so much my professional development, but it was
also my personal growth. She allowed me to talk about
those things which I think really influence you
professionally. What’s going on with you personally will
definitely influence how you react to patients for that
day, or that month. And she pointed it out to me in a
subtle way, “I’ve noticed something’s up, talk to me
about it” and maybe in a way she helped me not let that
interfere with my work. She helped me check that out
with myself, too. Do you want me to say more?

118
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
I:
Yes, keep going until you run out of things to say.
Supervisor must be S 5:
This is aside from my experience, but when I think about
competent
a good supervisor, I think not only do they have to be
competent
Supervisor must be
and be a role model for you professionally, but they have
good role model
to. ..
Supervisor must
the main thing is that they balance both being supportive
balance support and
and validating and making you feel comfortable and
validation with
allowing you to open up with whatever it is. But balance
challenging the
it with challenging you, and not just sitting back and
supervisee to improve
allowing the person make their mistakes, but really
pointing out things to them and focusing on what they
can do to improve.
Experienced
I’ve had supervisors where that hasn’t been the case,
supervisors who
“Okay, you’re doing okay, whatever. . .” where in fact I
haven’t pushed
know there are a lot of things I can work on.
improvement
Leaving supervision
That was one supervisor who I felt, when I went in there
knowing I learned
I would come out of the supervision knowing that, okay,
something today
I learned something about the testing, or the patient, but
about my skills or what I need to work on or what
questions I need to ask.

119
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervision is the
I guess the other part, and I may have highlighted it a
relationship with the
little bit, is that supervision isn’t just about the patient
supervisor, the process
you’re working with, isn’t just about the technical things
to learn about oneself
you need to know about testing or the theories of
through good
therapy—but that personal relationship you have with
supervision
that other person, because they’re your mentor, they’re
allowing you, whether you want to call it
countertransference, whatever you want to call it, but
allowing you the opportunity to bring up your personal
issues.
Experiencing enough
Not that it becomes therapy, because that’s not what it is.
trust in the
But being able to be comfortable enough, and trust them
relationship to expose
enough that you can open up and share those things and
oneself for personal
the feedback you get is really about, “How’s this
growth to aid
affecting your work” or “How’s this affecting your
professional
skills,” or whatever it may be. I wouldn’t want a
development while
supervisor to give me therapy about my personal life,
maintaining
that’s not what I mean. This particular supervisor, both
appropriate
of them, did that. I knew they were interested and I knew
professional
that was important to them.
boundaries
I liked these
And I think the important thing, too, was I got along well
supervisors as people
with them. There are people I would’ve wanted to
socialize with afterward, even if they weren’t my
supervisor.
I: You said, “I knew they were interested in that” referring
to the personal aspect of the relationship. How did you
know that?

120
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisor
S5: For them, asking open ended questions about me
demonstrated interest
personally. The first supervisor I was talking about, she
in supervisee by asking
would say, “what are your plans for next year?” or
about issues other
“How’s the application process going?” “Has it been
than those directly
stressful for you?” She would ask a lot of open ended
applicable to
questions, and if I was uncomfortable, I would say,
supervision
“Everything was okay” and she would have dropped it.
But it never got to there. It was always as if there was a
reason for them to ask that because they sensed
something. With my supervisor, it was not subtle, she
would look at me and say, “Let’s go in my office” and
we’d go in and she’d say, “What’s wrong?” Or “I’ve
sensed such and such.”
“opportunity ” to open
Then it would give me the opportunity to open up.
up implies desire/need
Because they asked about it.
of supervisee to open
up
I: How about the trust component?
Trusts develops over
S5: I’m not sure if its a tangible thing or if there’s something
time
I can pinpoint and say that’s what made me trust this
person. I think it developed over time. The first
supervisor I worked with over a year. Obviously at first,
you feel your way.

121
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Trusts develops due to
In both situations, what was similar, was that there was
how supervisor
either staff or someone, an employee, that I had either
handles difficulties
trouble with, let me focus on the first one. There was
brought to supervision
another supervisor, and we typically didn’t get
by trainee
supervision from him. But on particular cases we did.
At first, I held it back. I did not like him as a supervisor.
It was not positive in any way. She asked me about
things are going, and at first I wasn’t sure about how
much to open up to her, because they worked together
and I didn’t know if they were going to be discussing this
with each other. We never said this is confidential. But
as soon as I said its been a little bit difficult, and I don’t
remember her exact words, but I remember she said,
“Well let me just tell you that you’re not the first person
who’s told me that. And it allowed me to open up and
talk to her about it. But this was later in the year, too. So
I had worked with her and gotten to know her a little bit
more.
Trust develops through
With this supervisor, she... I don’t want to say she
supervisor's disclosure
treated me as a colleague, but she would share with me,
before I would share with her about a nurse, or someone I
was having a hard time getting along with, she would tell
me about her own experience. And I’m thinking, well if
trusts me that she’s sharing that with me, then I feel I can
do the same. So it was kind of different.
I: what is it that you’re trusting them with?
Treating supervisor as
S5: I was telling them things about colleagues I worked with
a confidant
that I would not want them to discuss with the person, or
discuss with someone else.

122
Meaning Units Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
I
So you’re trusting them with information.
S5
Yeah.
I
It sounds like there’s a deeper level of trust there.
Supervisor trusted to S5
It wasn’t just information, it was my feelings about this
process affect-laden person. Some people would say, I’m not going to say
experiences in a anything about anyone I work with because I want to
confidential manner cover my ass. You think about that, you work in a
system and those things come up. You don’t necessarily
tell whoever you’re working with the problems you’re
having. You have to assess the situation. Is this
someone who’s trustworthy were I can kind of vent, and
know that the information isn’t going to go further than
with us.
I: This is being taken from a very small N, but the two
supervisors you’ve identified as your best, are both
women, while the supervisor you didn’t like was a man.
Based only on your own experience, do you think gender
had anything to do with those relationships or
experiences?

123
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Female supervisors
S5: First of all, I’ve only had 2 male supervisors, and I have
allowed supervisee to
had, more than 6 female supervisors, so right off the bat,
identify supervisor as
I’ve had more experience with female supervisors. I
a role model
guess that’s just the nature of the profession, not as many
men as women, at least now. I definitely have been able
to identify more with the women, because they have been
the people who have been role models to me. At least the
first one was closer in age with me, and hadn’t been too
long since she had graduated, and it gave me the sense
that I could be a her level in so many years. I definitely
identified with her more, not only because she was
female, but also because her stage in her career.
Actually, the second supervisor, the same is true.
I: The words you have mentioned, mentor, and the
relationship that was established. I wondering if the
gender had any impact on that.
Same gender
S5: I think so. I don’t think it precluded me having a positive
supervisor facilitated
relationship with a male supervisor, but I think it
identification
definitely helped in terms of me identifying with them
more or -1 guess.
I: It sounds like there is a strong component of
identification.
S5: Yea, yea, yea.
I: How much impact do you think that’s made on your
relationships?

124
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Identification and
S5: I think probably a lot, because I think in just any type of
respect adds to what
supervisory experience you’re learning from them and
can be learned from
hopefully, at least if it’s a positive one you respect their
supervisor
work. You respect their style, their professionalism, or
whatever it may be and in some sense you want those
things for yourself. I mean in terms of training and
supervision that’s what you work towards.
Positive role model
That whatever positive qualities they have that hopefully
facilitates additional
that you can learn from them and those are the qualities
learning
you can improve on. So I think definitely the
identification has to be part of that.
I: You don’t need to pause and wait for a question, if you
think of something related to what it is you are saying,
please continue.
Supervisor competency
S5: I think definitely one thing even with other supervisors
and earned respect are
has been if I think they are competent and I respect their
prerequisites for
work, and their style and professionalism and all those
positive supervisory
things that automatically sets the stage about what kind
experience
of relationship I’m going to Have with them. I have been
lucky I think with all the supervisors that I have had,
most of them I have felt that way towards. I know that if
I didn’t feel respect for their work then obviously that
would probably interfere with my supervision with them
or what I was getting out of the supervision with them.
I: How so?

125
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Lack of respect limits
S5: Well, if I don’t think, or there is something about their
value supervisee
work or their way of approaching it, or whatever it may
places on supervision,
be, that I don’t particularly like or value. Then I would
precludes the
think, what is it that I am learning from this person? I
occurrence of
think that would maybe shut me off a little bit and maybe
learning, supervisee
not go to the person as much.. .or not ask as many
becomes less active
questions.. .or not bring up as many issues. If I didn’t feel
that they were competent, and knew their field as well to
help me to develop those skills in me, then I wouldn’t
think they would be as good of a supervisor experience.
I wouldn’t learn as much from them. I feel like initially
you have to be.. I think that’s important to have the
respect and feel that this person can be a role model for
you. They have certain qualities..
Supervisee has to see
I mean, nobody is perfect, but at least they have certain
something in the
qualities that you respect that you want to develop in
supervisor that she
yourself, or allow them to help you develop those skills.
wants for herself
Supervisor expresses
One of the things I just thought of, was a lot times the
confidence in
fact that the supervisor believes in you., do you know
supervisee,
how many times I have thought, there is no way I feel I
particularly when
am ready to go out there and do this., or I feel I know
supervisee questions
nothing about such and such. A lot of times my
self
supervisor has come back to me and pointed out to me
the things that they have witnessed, what they have
observed with me, which was almost like OK, just kind
of instilled that confidence in me that I needed. I think
that was really important.

126
Meaning Units
Positive learning
through poor
supervision—became
aware of parallel
processing in
supervision and
therapy, how one
situation, set of issues,
can effect performance
in the other
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
I: Think about the supervisor that you didn’t like. Did any
aspect of that experience within the supervisor role or
process contribute to your development as a
psychologist?
S5: That’s interesting. Yea, it did. I was working with a
patient. I think probably borderline personality disorder
and I felt very intimidated by him. He would make
comments, and I did not feel comfortable with this
patient at all. He , I mean, pushed me to the limit in
terms of working with this patient. I never did things the
way he would do it. It was never good enough, it was
never the right way. The whole situation I probably got
one or two positive feedback from my experience with
him. What I realized afterwards was my frustration with
him was bringing up a lot of frustration with the patient.
It was like, I was so angry with my supervisor for
pushing me and making me ask certain questions or
wanting certain information about something. I realized I
was really angry with the patient.

127
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Good supervisor was
I didn’t realize this until afterward. That was one thing I
able to give insight to
was definitely not aware of, that you can be really pissed
supervisee regarding
at your supervisor and you could take it out on the
past negative
patient, if you’re not aware of it. That’s definitely
experiences
something that allowed me to check those things out
within myself. He never pointed that out to me,
otherwise it would have been a very positive experience,
if he was open about it and allowed me to talk about me
experience and what was going on with this patient,
instead, it was, “You’re not doing this right,” or “this is
how you should go about it.” I never had the opportunity
to learn that within supervision. It was after, two months
later. Actually, it was with the second supervisor. I was
so frustrated with him. Talking about it, I remember it
came up with her, I said, “you know, I was so mad at
him, the patient,” and I remember talking about it. I
don’t know if she was the one who pointed it out, or how
it came up, but I remember it came up.
I: Did your supervisor ever know how mad you were?
Supervisee less open in
S5: No. And its funny, because, at the end of the year, he
presence of poor
was the training director there, and he gave out the
supervisor—
certificates, and all the practicum students had the
supervisee resorts to
opportunity to thank, or say whatever they needed to say,
passive-aggressive
and I said absolutely nothing about him. I knew that was
behavior
my way of just not acknowledging him. Maybe he
picked it up.
I: Did these other two supervisors ever know how you felt
about them?

128
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisee relies on
S5: I think towards, the end. My current one, I don’t think
informal information
so. I think probably throughout the six months she’s
to supervisor to inform
probably picked it up because there have been times I’ve
her of satisfaction of
said, “How is it you know this and this” “When did you
the supervisory
learn this?” I feel that she probably, in a subtle way,
relationship
picked up that I really think she’s competent, that she
knows a lot, and I want to learn from her. I’m sure she’s
picked that up. But I never openly said, “You’re one of
the most competent people I’ve worked with,” or “I
really admire you.” I know that its easier for me,
especially with supervisors, to say that, sometimes I give
supervisors cards at the end of the year, and those are
things I’ll probably tell her in the card. I don’t remember
if I told that supervisor. But I remember always talking
about her to other people. “Isn’t she great,” I’m not sure
if I told her.
I: Did you ever disclose any kind of emotional reaction you
may have had during supervision to one of those two
supervisors, whether they made you angry, or sad, or
happy?

129
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisee disclosure
S5: I definitely didn’t feel.. .with the first supervisor.. . I
does not include
don’t think I ever had a negative experience with her, you
disclosure regarding
know? So that didn’t come up. With this one, there have
the satisfaction or
been times that I’ve been disappointed with not getting
dissatisfaction of the
enough supervision, or I’ve been angry even sometimes
supervisory
for her not making a commitment for not providing the
relationship
training opportunity that I first talked to her about. I
know she’s busy and everything, but I know I didn’t tell
her that. And that’s partly my issue. I have a hard time,
especially with people that I kind of put on a little
pedestal. Its hard for me to do that. I don’t think it was
really. . . I don’t think it was coming from them, it was
me.
I: So it sounds like your active role in this is important, too.
Supervisee takes an
S5: Yeah. Definitely. In one of the feedback I got from
active role in
supervision was that I would go in there with questions,
supervision, reflects
or things I wanted to talk about. That was the positive
wanting to get all the
feedback I got from my supervisors. I thought everybody
available information
does that, you don’t just go into supervision and shoot
the breeze. There are things you think about or want to
talk about. So its definitely active.
I: Do you think its been part of the positiveness of the
experience?

130
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Good supervision is
S5: That its both ways? Yeah. I feel if I wasn’t.. .for
dependent, in part,
example, the first supervisor, I said she asked open ended
upon supervisee being
questions about my personal situations, what was going
active and cooperative
on with me. If I wasn’t open with her, then the
in the process
supervision, that’s were we’d stop. So I had to be open
with my feelings, and feel comfortable enough to do that
for her to be able to address those issues.
I: How is it that the learning or the development is so much
better when that happens?
Supervisor must instill
S5: Because you’re a whole person. When, I think your
confidence in
professionalism definitely is related to how you feel
supervisee so
about yourself, your self-perception, to be specific, when
supervisee can project
I said... Wait. I would go to them and say, “I don’t
confidence to clients
know anything” or “I feel like I’m incompetent. I can’t
do this.” When they would come back to me and say,
well, I’ve noticed such with you, or give me some
positive feedback, or give me that confidence. Obviously
I know that that’s going to impact how I am
professionally. You need someone there to give you that
confidence, so when you go out there and you’re working
with patients, they sense that with you. They don’t sense
someone who’s really insecure about their abilities or
insecure about themselves. I think that definitely comes
through your work.

131
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Any personal issues
Those issues have to be addressed in supervision,
that may impact
because they definitely influence your professional
confidence or
development. I just think they go hand in hand. I’ve had
professional role must
supervisors that haven’t addressed that, and, yes, I’ve
be addressed in
gained, I’ve learned from them. But when I think of a
supervision as they
really positive experience, something that I will
affect professional
remember for a long time, and if I’m ever in a
performance
supervisory role, something that I want to give to the
people I’m training is to be in tune with their personal
development, too.
I: So if you had a course of all these types of supervisors
where you learned the “business” aspect only, how are
you a better clinician today by having the experiences
you’ve had?

132
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Personal growth in
S5: I can only guess. Maybe, I would feel more like being a
supervision allows
technician, or technical about things. I think being a
development of
therapist, your personality, your personal issues—all
therapist beyond just a
those things affect the quality of treatment you are
technician
providing. Through supervision, if those things were
separated, let’s just talk about the technical part of it, the
theory, all of that. Then I may be a great technician, but I
might not be a really good therapist. Maybe I’m just
assuming that’s how it would be. Because as a therapist,
and the work we do, you have to be so attuned to those
subtle things in the patients that you work with, that you
kind of need to work those things out with yourself.
They can still be problems, but that you’re kind of
working on them. If no one points those things out to
you during supervision, if nobody kind of highlights the
fact that maybe this is influencing your work, then I think
it might really impede your work with patients. With
another profession, maybe it would be different.

133
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervision must make
But in our profession, I mean we’re working with other
us aware of our own
people whose issues might be the same as ours, or they
issues so we are aware
might bring up a lot of issues up within ourselves. If we
of how they may
don’t pay attention to that and through these role models,
impact our
these people we’ve learned from show us that those
relationships with our
things don’t matter, then I think you’re missing a whole
clients
lot there. What kind of therapist would you be if you’re
not paying attention to those things? I guess it goes back
to my personal belief about therapy and therapists, and I
believe that your personal issues totally affect your work.
And patients react to that, so having that bias, or
whatever you want to call it, then I would say if that
wasn’t available to me during supervision—that scrutiny,
that, whatever it is—I think I would be missing a big
part. Not only part of my development, but missing a big
part of the patients, maybe and how they’re affecting me
and how I’m affecting them.
I: Any other thoughts?

134
Meaning Units
Protocol (Interview transcript of Subject 5)
Supervisor must be
S5: What goes along about being comfortable about bringing
open to disagreement
up issues about other employees, that’s just part of it.
and discussion,
The other part of it is being able to say to your
particularly as
supervisor, “That’s your opinion, but this is my opinion.”
supervisee skills
That you get to a point that you feel confident enough
develop and
with your skills and you trust the person enough that
confidence builds
you’re able to say, “yeah, but I disagree.” I think it takes
a long time before the supervisee can say that. Probably
not the first one, but with the second one, I’ve gotten to a
point where I’ll say, “No, I don’t think this is the right
time to give this test to this person,” or “I think they’re
going to fall apart if I bring this up.”
I: Great. Are there any other thoughts, related to
supervision contributing to your development as a
professional psychologist?
Supervisor shares own
S5: One of the other things, is that the supervisors have
training experiences,
shared with me their process, too. “I remember just
validates supervisee's
when I was in your place” and it was so reassuring that,
own position
they’ve been here, too. Or that they’ve felt this way. It
didn’t seem like I was the only one who’s not catching
on, that they’ve been there, too. So, anyway, okay.
Time commitment and
Something else, and I don’t know if this came through,
availability
but the fact that the supervisor is available is really
important, and most of my supervisors have been
available. Not just for the time you set with them, but
knowing that if something comes up you can go to them.
Pull them aside, or, they’ll be there. It that’s always
been. . .I’ve been lucky with that, too. .. .okay, that’s it.
I: Okay. Thanks for your participation.

135
APPENDIX B FUNDAMENTAL STUCTURE OF POSITIVE SUPERVISION
The following is the fundamental structure of positive supervision as reported by
Hutt, Scott, and King (1983, p. 120-121.) It is presented verbatim and unedited.
In a positive experience in supervision, the task emerges as an exploration with
the supervisor of the supervisee’s interactions with clients. The supervisee approaches
the experience with anxiety stirred up by the expectation of being judged. The supervisor
is perceptive and supportive while actively engaging the supervisee in exploring the
therapeutic process and resolving concerns which interfere with the supervisee’s search
for more helpful ways of interacting with clients. The supervisee comes to value
supervision which facilitates working through conflicts and frees the supervisee to
respond more sensitively and creatively to clients’ needs.
During the same time that the task of supervision is emerging, the supervisory
relationship is developing and supporting the work. This relationship embodies warmth,
acceptance, respect, understanding, and trust. The interpersonal climate facilitates growth
and learning. “Mistakes” can be made without “failure”; and behavior, attitudes, and
feelings can be explored without questioning the worth of the individual. The
supervisee’s anxiety is substantially, if not altogether, reduced so that it does not interfere
seriously with the work of supervision. If conflicts arise between the supervisor and
supervisee, these are openly resolved, thus advancing both the task and the supervisory
relationship.
The quality of the supervisory relationship encourages the supervisee to disclose
actions, feelings, attitudes, and conflicts which occur in the professional work. The

136
supervisor also reveals personal feelings and experiences—both positive and negative—
which relate to the supervisee’s concerns. As the supervisee and supervisor reveal
themselves to each other, their relationship deepens along with their involvement in the
exploration process.
Respect for personal integrity and autonomy characterizes positive supervisory
interactions. The exploratory process is a mutual one, although the focus is on the
supervisee’s emerging professional concerns and needs. The supervisory relationship
meets individual needs for structure and support as well as autonomy. The supervisor
discloses professional knowledge and expertise to the supervisee as needs arise. The
supervisee may choose to incorporate some of the supervisor’s behavior into interactions
with clients.
The supervisor initiates inquiry and other active interventions as well as
responding to supervisee requests for information and feedback. The supervisor’s
interventions reflect a unique, personal style and are made with sensitivity to the
supervisee’s current needs and readiness to accept new learning.
During the course of positive supervision, the supervisee experiences changes in
self-perceptions as well as increases in skill and knowledge. Awareness of how specific
feelings, behaviors, and attitudes can interfere with, or facilitate, therapeutic interactions
with clients also develops. The supervisee experiences increasing competence, self-
confidence, and trust in his/her professional judgment.
Supervisor and supervisee evaluate together the supervisee’s progress and identify
areas for further development. The supervisee learns to assess interventions in terms of
therapeutic impact on clients rather than in terms of supervisory approval. The

137
transformation which occurs through a positive experience in supervision enables the
supervisee to interact in more therapeutic ways with clients.

LIST OF REFERENCES
Ablamowicz, H. (1992). Shame as an interpersonal dimension of communication among
doctoral students: An empirical phenomenological study. Journal of
Phenomenological Psychology, 23, 30-49.
Adelson, M.J. (1994). Clinical supervision of therapists with difficult-to-treat patients.
Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 59, 32-52.
Albott, W. (1984). Supervisory characteristics and other sources of supervision variance.
The Clinical Supervisor, 2, 27-41.
Aldrich, L. (1981). Construction of mixed standard scales for the rating of psychotherapy
supervisors. Unpublished master’s thesis, Auburn University.
Aldrich, L. and Hess, A.K. (1983). The parallel process in psychotherapy supervision. Paper
presented at the annual Southeastern Psychological Association convention, Atlanta,
GA.
Allen, G.J., Szollos, S.J., and Williams, B.E. (1986). Doctoral students’ comparative
evaluations of best and worst psychotherapy supervision. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 17, 91-99.
Alonso, A. (1983). A developmental theory of psychodynamic supervision, The Clinical
Supervisor, 1, 23-26.
American Psychological Association Committee on Accreditation. (1986). Accreditation
handbook. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Angus, N.M., Osborne, JW., and Koziey, P.W. (1991) Window to the soul: A
phenomenological investigation of mutual gaze. Journal of Phenomenological
Psychology, 22,142-162.
Archer, R., and Peake, T. ( 1984). Learning and teaching psychotherapy: Signposts and
growth stages. The Clinical Supervisor, 2, 61-74.
Arkowitz, S.W. (1994). Mediating the struggle of perfectionism: A developmental
challenge in supervision. Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 13, 77-92.
138

139
Barachok, J.S. and Kunkel, M.A. (1990). Clinical supervision training in counseling
psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 18, 685-693.
Barth, R., and Gambrill, E. ( 1984). Learning to interview: The quality of training
opportunities. The Clinical Supervisor, 2, 3-14.
Bartlett, W.E., Goodyear, R.K., Bradley, F. (Eds.) (1983). Supervision in counseling
psychology II. Counseling Psychologist, 11, 9-79.
Bascue, L.O. and Yalof, J.A. (1991). Descriptive dimensions of psychotherapy supervision.
Clinical Supervisor, 9, 19-30.
Becker, C.S. (1987). Friendship between women: A phenomenological study of best
friends. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 18, 59-72.
Bernard, J.M. (1979). Supervisor training: A discrimination model. Counselor Education
and Supervision, 19, 740-748.
Bernard, J.M., and Goodyear, R.K. (1992). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. Boston,
MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Beutler, L.E. and Kendall, P.C. (1995). Introduction to the special section: The case for
training in the provision of psychological therapy. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 63, 179-181.
Blount, C.M. (1982). A developmental model of supervision: Implications for practice and
research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological
Association, Washington, D.C.
Borders, L.D. (1989). A pragmatic agenda for developmental supervision research.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 29, 16-24.
Brannon, D. ( 1985). Adult learning principles and methods for enhancing the training role
of supervisors. The Clinical Supervisor, 3, 27-41.
Brice, C.W. (1991) Paradoxes of maternal mourning. Psychiatry, 54,1-12.
Bruch, H. ( 1974). Learning psychotherapy: Rationale and ground rules. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Buber, M. (1970). 1 and Thou. New York: Schribner’s.
Buehner, T.M. (1993). Anger as experienced by men and women. Unpublished Master’s
Thesis, University of Florida.
Carifio, M.S. and Hess, A.K. (1987). Who is the ideal supervisor? Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 18, 244-250.

140
Carkhuff, R.R. (1969). Helping and Human Relations: A Primer for Lay and Professional
Helpers (Vol. 2). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Carrere, R.A. (1989). Psychology of tragedy: A phenomenological analysis. Journal of
Phenomenological Psychology, 20, 105-129.
Chazan, S.E. (1990). On being supervised and supervision. In R.C. Lane (Ed.)
Psychoanalytic approaches to supervision, (p. 25-28). New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Chemiss, C., and Egnatios, E. ( 1977). Styles of clinical supervision in community mental
health programs. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 1195-1196.
Chodoff, P. (1972). Supervision of psychotherapy with videotape: Pros and cons. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 128, 819-823.
Churchill, S.D. (1984). Forming clinical impressions: A phenomenological study of
psychodiagnostic seeing. Studies in the Social Sciences, 23, 67-84.
Clarkson, P. and Aviram, O. (1995). Phenomenological research on supervision:
Supervisors reflect on “being a supervisor.” Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 8,
63-80.
Coche, E. (1977). Training of group therapists. In F.W. Kaslow (Ed.) Supervision,
consultation, and staff training in the helping professions, (p. 235-263). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Colaizzi, P.F. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. In R. Valle
and M. King (Eds.) Existential-Phenomenological Alternatives for Psychology.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Collett, E. (1995). Some experiences of being a traveling psychotherapy supervisor. Nordic
Journal of Psychiatry, 49, 60-61.
Couner, B. J. (1944). Studies in phonographic recording of verbal material: The
completeness and accuracy of counselor interview reports. Journal of General
Psychology, 30, 181-203.
Cummings, A.L., Hallberg, E.T., and Slemon, A.G. (1994). Templates of client change in
short-term counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 464-472.
Deegan, P.E. (1981). An empirical phenomenological study of failing to learn. Journal of
Phenomenological Psychology, 12, 231-259.
Dorn, F. (1985). Utilizing the social influence model in clinical supervision. The Clinical
Supervisor, 3, 77-84.

141
Duci, J.F. (1992). The “good enough” supervisor: Relational dimensions of supervision.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 2058.
Ekstein, R. and Wallerstein, R.S. (1972). The teaching and learning of psychotherapy. New
York: International Universities Press.
Elliot, R., Shapiro, D.A., Firth-Cozens, J., Stiles, W.B., Hardy, G.E., Llewelyn, S.P., and
Margison, F.R. (1994). Comprehensive process analysis of insight events in
cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapies. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 42, 449-463.
Ellis, M.V. (1991a). Critical incidents in clinical supervision and in supervisor supervision:
Assessing supervisory issues. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 342-349.
Ellis, M.V. (1991b). Research in clinical supervision: Revitalizing a scientific agenda.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 30, 238-251.
Ellis, M.V. and Dell, D.M. (1986). Dimensionality of supervisor roles: Supervisor’s
perceptions of supervision. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 282-291.
Ellis, M.V., Dell, D.M., and Good, G.E. (1988). Counselor trainees’ perceptions of
supervisor roles: Two studies testing the dimensionality of supervision. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 35, 315-324.
Finch, W. A. (1977). The role of the organization. In F.W. Kaslow (Ed.) Supervision,
consultation, and staff training in the helping professions, (pp. 61-80). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fleming, J., and Benedek, T. (1966). Psychoanalytic Supervision: A Method of Clinical
Teaching. New York: Gruñe and Stratton.
Fox, R. (1983). Contracting in supervision: A goal oriented process. The Clinical
Supervisor, 1, 37-49.
Freeman, E. (1985).The importance of feedback in clinical supervision: Implications for
direct practice. The Clinical Supervisor, 3, 5-26.
Fretz, B. (1986). Research training in counseling psychology [Special Issue]. The
Counseling Psychologist, 14, 3-7.
Friedlander, M.L., Heatherington, L., Johnson, B., and Skowron, E.A. (1994). Sustaining
engagement: a change event in family therapy. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
42,438-448.
Friedlander, S.R., Dye, N.W., Costellos, R.M., and Kobos, J.C. (1984). A developmental
model for teaching and learning in psychotherapy supervision. Psychotherapy, 21,
189-196.

142
Friedman, D., and Kaslow, N.J. (1986). The development of professional identity in
psychotherapists: Six stages in the supervision process. The Clinical Supervisor, 4,
29-49.
Frontman, K.C. and Kunkel, M.A. (1994). A grounded theory of counselors construal of
success in the initial session. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 492-499.
Gelso, C.J. (1979). Research in counseling: methodological and professional issues. The
Counseling Psychologist, 8, 7-35.
Gelso, C.J., Betz, N.E., Friedlander, M.L., Helms, J.E., Hill, C.E., Patton, M.J., Super, D.E.,
and Wampold, B.E. (1988). Research in counseling psychology: prospects and
recommendations. The Counseling Psychologist, 16, 385-406.
Gelso, C.J. and Johnson, D.H. (1982). Research in Counseling Psychology II [Special
Issue], The Counseling Psychologist, 10.
Giorgi, A. (1992). An exploratory phenomenological psychological approach to the
experience of the moral sense. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 23, 50-86.
Giorgi, A. (1989). One type of analysis of descriptive data: Procedures involved in
following a scientific phenomenological method. Methods, 39-61.
Giorgi, A. (1976). Phenomenology and the foundations of psychology. In J.K. Cole and
W.D. Arnold (Eds.), 1975 Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, (p.281-348).
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Gitterman, A., and Miller, I. ( 1977). Supervisors as educators. In F.W. Kaslow (Ed.),
Supervision, consultation, and staff training in the helping professions, (p. 100-
114). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Glickauf-Hughes, C. (1994). Characterological resistances in psychotherapy supervision.
Psychotherapy, 31, 58-66.
Goin, M., and Kline, F. ( 1974). Supervision observed. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disease, 158,208-243.
Goldberg, D. ( 1985). Process notes, audio, and video tape: Modes of presentation in
psychotherapy training. The Clinical Supervisor, 3, 3-13.
Goldman, L. (1976). A revolution in counseling research. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 23, 543-552.
Grater, H.A. (1985). Stages in psychotherapy supervision: From therapy skills to skilled
therapist. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 605-610.

143
Grunebaum, H. (1983). A study of therapists’ choice of a therapist. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 140, 1336-1339.
Guglietti-Kelly, I. and Westcott, M.R. (1990). She’s just shy: A phenomenological study of
shyness. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 21, 150-164.
Haase, J.E. (1987). Components of courage in chronically ill adolescents: A
phenomenological study. Advances in Nursing Science, 9, 64-80.
Haber, R. (1996). Dimensions of Psychotherapy Supervision: Maps and Means. New York:
W.W. Norton & Co.
Heppner, P., Gelso, C., and Dolliver, R. (1987). Three approaches to research training in
counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 45-49.
Hess, A.H. (1987a). Advances in psychotherapy supervision: Introduction. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 187-188.
Hess, A.K. (1987b). Psychotherapy supervision: Stages, Buber, and a theory of relationship.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 215-259.
Hess, A.K. (1986). Growth in supervision: Stages of supervisee and supervisor
development. The Clinical Supervisor, 4, 51-67.
Hess, A. K. (1980). (Ed.) Psychotherapy supervision: Theory, research, and practice. New
York: Wiley.
Hess, A.K. and Hess, K.A. (1983). Psychotherapy supervision: A survey of internship
training practices. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 14, 504-513.
Hoffman, L.W. (1994). The training of psychotherapy supervisors: A barren scape.
Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 13, 23-42.
Hogan, R.A. (1964). Issues and approaches in supervision. Psychotherapy: Theory,
research, and practice, 1, 139-141.
Holloway, E.L. (1987). Developmental models of supervision: Is it development?
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 209-216.
Holloway, E. and Carroll, M. (1996). Reaction to the special section on supervision
research: Comment on Ellis et al. (1996), Neufeldt et al. (1996), and Worthen and
McNeill (1996). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 51-55.
Holloway, E.L. and Neufeldt, S.A. (1995). Supervision: Its contributions to treatment
efficacy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 207-13.

144
Hoshmand, L.T. (1989). Alternative research paradigms: A review and teaching proposal.
Counseling Psychologist, 17, 3-79.
Howard, G.S. (1985). Can research in the human sciences become more relevant to
practice? Journal of Counseling and Development, 63, 539-44.
Howard, G.S. (1984). A modest proposal for a revision of strategies for counseling research,
the Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 430-42.
Husserl, E. (1983/1913). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a
phenomenological philosophy. (F. Kersten, Trans.) The Hague: Nijhoff. (Original
work published in 1913)
Hutt, C.H, Scott, J., and King, M. (1983). A phenomenological study of supervisees’
positive and negative experiences in supervision. Psychotherapy: Theory, research
and practice, 20, 118-123.
Jacobs, D., David, P., and Meyer (1995). The supervisory encounter: A guide for teachers
of psychodynamic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Karlsson, G. (1988). A phenomenological psychological study of decision and choice. 11th
Conference on: Subjective probability, utility and decision making (1987,
Cambridge, England). Acta-Psychologica, 68, 7-25.
Kersten, F. (1989). Phenomenological Method: Theory and Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Krai, V.A. (1989). Forgetting: A phenomenological analysis. Psychiatric Journal of the
University of Ottawa, 14, 517-519.
Kugelmann, R. and Bensinger, R.E. (1983). Metaphors of glaucoma. Culture, Medicine and
Psychiatry, 7, 313-328.
Lambert, M. J. (1980). Research and the supervisory process. In A. K. Hess (Ed.),
Psychotherapy supervision: Theory, research, and practice, (pp. 423-452). New
York: Wiley.
Lambert. M. J. (1974). Supervisory and counseling process: A comparative study.
Counselor Education and Supervision, 14, 54-60.
Littrell, J.M., Lee-Borden, N., and Lorenz, J.R. (1979). A developmental framework for
counseling supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision, 19, 129-36.
Loganbill, C., Hardy, E., and Delworth, U. (1982). Supervision: A conceptual model. The
Counseling Psychologist, 10, 3-42.

145
Manasis, K. and Traub-Wemer, D. (1994). The occurrence of mirroring in psychotherapy
supervision. Psychotherapy, 31, 363-367.
Marikas, D.A., Russell, R.K., Dell, D.M. (1985). Effects of supervisor experience level on
planning and in-session supervisor verbal behavior. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 32, 410-16.
Markowitz, M. (1958). A supervisor supervised: A subjective eclectic experience. American
Journal of Psychotherapy, 12, 488-492.
Marmor, J. (1976). Common operational factors in diverse approaches to behavior change.
In A. Burton (Ed.), What Makes Behavior Change Possible? New York:
Brunner/Mazel.
McNeill, B.W., Stoltenberg, C.D., and Romans, J.S.C. (1992). The integrated development
model of supervision: Scale development and validation procedures. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 23, 504-8.
Melchiode, G. A. (1977). Psychoanalytically oriented individual therapy. In F.W. Kaslow,
(Ed.), Supervision, consultation, and training in the helping professions, (pp. 155-
174). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. New York, Humanities Press.
Montgomery, J.D. (1982). A phenomenological investigation of the premenstruum.
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 13, 45-72.
Nelson, G.L. (1978). Psychotherapy supervision from the trainee’s point of view: A survey
of preferences. Professional Psychology, 9, 539-550.
Oik, M.E. (1992). Role conflict and role ambiguity in the supervisory experiences of
psychotherapy trainees. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 4477-4478.
Oik, M.E. and Friedlander, M.L. (1992). Trainees’ experiences of role conflict and role
ambiguity in supervisory relationships. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 389-
387.
Orlinsky, D.E., Grawe, K., and Parks, B.K. (1994). Process and outcome in
psychotherapy—noch einmal. In A.E. Bergin and S.L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of
psychotherapy and behavior change, (p. 270-376). New York: Wiley.
Orzek. A. (1984). Mentor-mentee match in training programs based on Chickering's vectors
of development. The Clinical Supervisor, 2, 71-77.
Parloff, M.B. (1979). Can psychotherapy research guide the policymaker? A little
knowledge may be a dangerous thing. American Psychologist, 34, 296-306.

146
Paskiewicz, J.M. (1993). The supervisory relationship: The supervisor’s experience.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, 1678.
Patton, M.J. (1984). Managing social interaction in counseling: a contribution from the
philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 442-56.
Patton, M.J. and Kivlighan, D.M. Jr. (1997) Relevance of the supervisory alliance to the
counseling alliance and to treatment adherence in counselor training. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 44,108-115.
Paul, G.L. (1967). Strategy of outcome research in psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 31, 109-119.
Pickering, M. (1987). Expectation and intent in the supervisory process. Clinical
Supervisor, 5, 43-57.
Polkinghome, D.E. (1994). Reaction to special section on qualitative research in counseling
process and outcome. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 510-512.
Polkinghome, D.E. (1984). Further extensions of methodological diversity for counseling
psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 416-429.
Polkinghome, D. (1982). What malees research humanistic? Journal of Humanistic
Psychology, 22, 47-54.
Proctor, B. (1994). Supervision: competence, confidence, accountability. British Journal of
Guidance and Counseling, 22, 309-318.
Register, T.M. and Henley, T.B. (1992). The Phenomenology of Intimacy. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 9, p. 467-481.
Rennie, D.L. (1994). Clients’ deference in psychotherapy. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 42, 427-37.
Rhodes, R.H., Hill, C.E., Thompson, B.J., and Elliott, R. (1994). Client retrospective recall
of resolved and unresolved misunderstanding events. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 42, 473-483.
Rioch, M. (1980). The dilemmas of supervision in dynamic psychology. In A.K. Hess (Ed.),
Psychotherapy Supervision: Theory, Research, and Practice (p. 68-77). New York:
Wiley.
Robertson, M.H. (1995). Psychotherapy Education and Training: An Integrative
Perspective. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, Inc.

147
Rodenhauser, P. (1994). Toward a multidimensional model of psychotherapy supervision
based on developmental stages. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research,
1-15.
3,
Rogers, C. R. (1957). Training individuals to engage in the therapeutic process. In C.R.
Strother (Ed.), Psychology and Mental Health, (p. 76-92). Washington D.C.:
American Psychological Association.
Ronnestad, M.H. and Skovholt, T. (1993). Supervision of beginning and advanced graduate
students of counseling and psychotherapy. Journal of Counseling and Development,
71, 396-405.
Russell, R.K., Crimmings, A.M., and Lent, R.W. (1984). Counselor training and
supervision: Theory and research. In S.D. Brown and R.W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook
of Counseling Psychology, (p. 123-147). New York: Wiley.
Salvendy, J.T. (1993). Control and power in supervision. International Journal of Group
Psychotherapy, 43, 363-376.
Sansbury, D.L. (1982). Developmental supervision from a skills perspective. The
Counseling Psychologist, 10, 53-57.
Shanfield, S.B., Matthes, K.L., and Hetherly, V. (1993). What do excellent psychotherapy
supervisor do? American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 1081-1084.
Skovholt, T.M. and Ronnestad, M.H. (1992). The Evolving Professional Self: Stages and
Themes in Therapist and Counselor Development. New York: John Wiley and
Sons.
Stevick, E.L. (1971). An empirical investigation of the experience of anger. In A. Giorgi,
W.F. Fischer, and R. Von Eckartsberg (Eds.) Duquense Studies in
Phenomenological Psychology, Vol. 1. (p. 132-148). Pittsburgh: Duquesne
University Press.
Stoltenberg, C.D. (1981). Approaching supervision from a developmental perspective: the
counselor complexity model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 59-65.
Stoltenberg, C.D. and Delworth, U. (1987). Developmental models of supervision: it is
development—Response to Holloway. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 19, 134-37.
Storm, C., and Heath, A. (1985). Models of supervision: Using therapy theory as a guide.
The Clinical Supervisor, 3, 87-92.
Swain, D. (1981). Behaviorally anchored rating scale for recipients of psychotherapy
supervision: Instrument construction. Unpublished master’s thesis, Auburn
University.

148
Swanson, J.L. and O’Saben, C.L. (1993). Differences in supervisory needs and expectations
by trainee experience, cognitive style, and program membership. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 71, 457-64.
Talbot, N.L. (1995). Unearthing shame in the supervisory experience. American Journal of
Psychotherapy, 49, 338-349.
Thompson, C.E. and Jenal, S.T. (1994). Interracial and intraracial quasi-counseling
interactions when counselors avoid discussing race. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 42, 484-491.
Udis, K.J. (1991). The relationship between trainee anxiety and supervision preferences of
psychotherapy trainees. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 2788.
Vallery, B.K. (1992). Mentoring in clinical supervision of psychodynamic psychotherapy:
Application of Winnicott’s theory of the transitional phenomena experience.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 52 (10-B), 5551.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1995a). Psychotherapy supervisor and supervisee: Developmental
models and research nine years later. Clinical Psychology Review, 15, 647-680.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1995b). Psychotherapy supervision in the 1990s: Some observations and
reflections. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 49, 568-581.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1994). The supervision of psychotherapy supervisor trainees. American
Journal of Psychotherapy, 48, 417-431.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1993). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor: concepts,
assumptions, and hypotheses of the supervisor complexity model. American Journal
of Psychotherapy, 47, 58-74.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1992). Psychotherapy supervision and the separation-individuation
process: Autonomy versus dependency issues. Clinical Supervisor, 10, 111-121.
Watkins, C.E., Jr. (1990). Development of the psychotherapy supervisor. Psychotherapy,
27, 553-560.
Watkins, C.E., Jr., Schneider, L.J., Haynes, J., and Nieberding, R. (1995). Measuring
psychotherapy supervisor development: An initial effort at scale development and
validation. Clinical Supervisor, 13, 77-90.
Watson, J.C. and Rennie, D.L. (1994). Qualitative analysis of clients’ subjective experience
of significant moments during the exploration of problematic reactions. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 42, 500-509.

149
Weisgerber, K.M. (1992). A comparison between dominant and subordinate roles, and
gender, on interpersonal sensitivity: An investigation of counseling supervision role
plays. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53 (4-B), 2077.
Wiley, M.O. and Ray, P.B. (1986). Counseling supervision by developmental level. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 33, 439-445.
Wilson, M.R. (1991). The supervisee’s satisfaction with the supervision of psychotherapy.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 1272.
Windholz, E. (1970). The theory of supervision in psychoanalytic education. International
Journal of Psychoanalysis, 51, 393, 406.
Wondolowski, C. and Davis, D.K. (1988). The lived experience of aging in the oldest old:
A phenomenological study. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 48, 261-270.
Worthen, V. and McNeill, B.W. (1996). A phenomenological investigation of “Good”
supervision events. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 25-34.
Worthington, E.L., Jr. (1987). Changes in supervision as counselors and supervisors gain
experience: A review. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 189-
208.
Worthington, E.L., Jr. (1984). An empirical investigation of supervision of counselors as
they gain experience. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 63-75.
Yerushalmi, H. (1993). Stagnation in supervision as a result of developmental problems in
the middle-aged supervisor. Clinical Supervisor, 11, 63-81.
Yerushalmi, H. (1992). Structural factors affecting the supervisor’s devotion. Journal of
Contemporary Psychotherapy, 22, 183-194.
Zucker, P.J. and Worthington, E.L., Jr. (1986). Supervision of interns and postdoctoral
applicants for licensure in university counseling centers. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 33, 87-89.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Timothy Mark Buehner received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Wittenberg
University, Springfield, Ohio, in 1983, and a Master of Science degree from the
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, in 1993. Dr. Buehner currently works at the
Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami, Miami, Florida. Dr.
Buehner’s current research interests include the use of qualitative research methods,
professional supervision, adjustment to cancer diagnosis and its treatment, and the study
of human consciousness. Dr. Buehner plans to pursue an academic career of research,
professional training, and teaching.
150

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
;, Chairman/
sychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and â– 
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
RoberTC. Zi
Professor i
Sychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. /,
T>Oa hj) Ss l jU*
David I. Suchman
Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosor
James Archer
Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
AaU
iielFn
0
L
WaynelFrancis
Professor of Political Science
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of
Psychology in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and
was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
December, 1997
Dean, Graduate School



xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EA45DGXXF_FOVGDH INGEST_TIME 2014-08-25T22:41:49Z PACKAGE AA00024949_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES