Executive Coach Julia Robinson shares findings from her recent research into how trauma can show up in coaching supervision. Through examples of how this can impact both coaches and clients, Julia explores ways to respond appropriately when trauma arises in supervision. Julia will also be part of a panel discussion on this at the EMCC UK’s Supervision special interest group in September.
I once had a coaching client who, mid-way through a session, disclosed a serious historic trauma. They shared this experience because they recognised it might be relevant to the topic they had brought to coaching. I acknowledged what they had shared and while we didn’t revisit the trauma, which they had worked through with the help of a therapist, it did inform our coaching. Reflecting afterwards in supervision, I worried that I might have overstepped a boundary, although I didn’t feel like I had.
While there are a few practitioner texts exploring trauma and coaching (Vaughan Smith, 2019), and a growing number of specialist training courses, I discovered there is a gap between how coaches and supervisors are currently practising in this area, and the research available to understand it. That led to my recent master’s dissertation exploring how trauma shows up in coaching supervision, and how supervisors respond when it does.
The supervisors I interviewed were of the view that trauma content in coaching and supervision would continue to increase – even among those who did not consider it to be frequent currently – with the frequency accelerating in part due to the increased awareness of, and interest in, trauma in wider society.
The themes I identified suggest that:
As much about the ‘trauma biography’ of the coach as that of the coachee
All 15 of the coach supervisors I interviewed gave examples of when trauma had shown up in their supervision sessions, and I was able to group these into 11 different scenarios. While there is not space to consider them here, broadly the scenarios split into two groups: ones where the trauma content was coming from the coachee, and ones where it was coming from the coach, plus a related scenario where it was coming up for the supervisor.
Examples of trauma included a coachee’s child self-harming, a coach disclosing having been raped much earlier in life, bereavements for coachees, coaches and supervisors, as well as workplace bullying. The supervisors also gave examples of ‘survival behaviours’, likely a response to earlier trauma, (Ruppert, 2014; Vaughan Smith, 2019), exhibited by coaches (or reflected in their descriptions of their coachees’ behaviour) including: feelings of not being good enough, a desire to rescue and overworking.
I was surprised by how often the examples of trauma content brought up in supervision came from the coach rather than the coachee. This only underscores the importance of supervision and, while the number of coaches in supervision are increasing (Hawkins & Turner, 2017), the need for the profession to make a more persuasive case to reach those coaches who are yet to appreciate its benefits.
Working ‘in the presence of trauma’, and not with the trauma itself
There was a contrast between those supervisors who thought trauma came up frequently in coaching supervision and those who thought it was rare. Although, after analysing the entire data set, this tension appeared less antipodal and more a difference in how they thought about trauma.
The supervisors agreed that coaches were ‘not actually meeting the trauma itself very often in coaching’ (supervisor participant), and that they should not be ‘working directly on the trauma’ (supervisor participant), or seeking to explore the source of the trauma when it did come up.
The difference seemed to relate to how common they thought trauma was in everyday life, whether they had studied trauma, and whether or not they understood ‘showing up’ to mean that trauma would be the topic of the coaching. Those who said it came up frequently did not view ‘showing up’ to mean trauma was the topic of the coaching. They were also more likely to have studied trauma or to have had personal experiences that meant they were more aware of trauma in everyday life.
Those who thought it was rare said that the word itself did not come up frequently, and were hesitant to use it themselves; whereas those who said that trauma was often present were more comfortable with the word, but agreed it was rarely used directly, and more in supervision than coaching. Some commented that they thought trauma had become an overused word in everyday language.
Some of the supervisors felt it was important to establish a definition of trauma, and some seemed comfortable using the ‘big T, little t’ language (Shapiro, 2001; Maté & Maté, 2022) used by many in the field to encompass both trauma from acute life-threatening events, and from what may be perceived as potentially lower significance events, or an accumulation of lesser events. But others were of the view that it was about the individual’s experience and the impact on them, and that a definition was unnecessary.
Don’t be afraid, focus on the fundamentals
The word ‘fear’ (supervisor participants) came up repeatedly across the data set and in a variety of ways. Several supervisors described coaches being fearful of continuing to work with a coachee who had raised trauma content, as well as how coaches, especially novice coaches, often expressed a fear of feelings or what to do if a coachee cried. Some spoke about the potential harm to a coachee of ‘othering’ or even re-traumatisating if a coach, in response to their own fear, referred too quickly when trauma content arose.
Most supervisors were aware that specialist trauma-specific coach training is available. However, even those who had participated in or who delivered that type of training, emphasised the importance of focusing on the ‘fundamentals of coaching’ (supervisor participant) – core coaching skills, contracting, making good use of supervision, and the coach’s own personal work – before seeking to learn new trauma-specific theories or techniques, especially in the case of new coaches.
Some supervisors did feel it would be helpful for all coaches to have an awareness of basic trauma concepts, such as survival behaviours, and there was a greater expectation that supervisor training should include trauma-specific content.
One supervisor gave an example of working with a coach who was having trouble coping with trauma content that had come up in their coaching sessions, especially as it was coming up with more than one client. She was considering giving up coaching, but instead paused her coaching practice (making sure her coachees had support), continued in supervision, and was later able to return to her practice with a renewed commitment.
Continuing the conversation
Whenever I present my research, or am asked about my findings by other coaches or supervisors, the first reaction I get is relief that these questions are being explored, quickly followed by a desire to continue the conversation. While we continue sharing experiences, and there is certainly a great deal more to explore, I believe the first step is for us to acknowledge that trauma is an everyday human experience. By doing so we are supporting our fellow practitioners to be better prepared and more confident in their ability to respond appropriately when, rather than if, trauma-related content shows up.
About Julia Robinson
Julia Robinson is a certified business psychologist and accredited executive coach with an MSc in coaching psychology. She is a member of the City of London Law Society’s training committee and a Fellow of the RSA.
Julia will be part of a panel discussion on trauma informed supervision hosted by the EMCC UK’s Supervision special interest group in September. More details will be announced on our events page soon.
References
Hawkins, P., & Turner, E. (2017). The rise of coaching supervision 2006–2014. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 10(2), 102-114.
Maté, G. & Maté, D. (2022). The Myth of Normal. Penguin Random House UK.
Ruppert, F. (2016). Early Trauma: Pregnancy, Birth and First Years of Life. UK: Green Balloon Publishing.
Shapiro, F. (2001). Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing: Basic Principles, Protocols, and Procedures (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Vaughan Smith, J. (2019). Coaching and Trauma: from Surviving to Thriving. London: Open University Press
Photo by Nik Shuliahin
EMCC UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee
Registration No: 05625451
Registered address: 87 North Road, Poole, Dorset BH14 0LT
VAT No: 891919474
