Roth and Pilling's competence framework for clinical supervision: How generalisable is it?

Background: Roth and Pilling's (2009) competence framework for the supervision of psychological therapies was commissioned as a training resource for the UK Government's ‘Improving Access to Psychological Therapies’ (IAPT) programme. Aims: This paper considers the extent to which it reflects current supervisory practice in the UK. Method: Supervisors' opinions of the non‐modality‐specific competences were surveyed using an online survey form and two emailed survey forms. Findings: Regardless of their professional background, participants felt able to identify with the majority of competences surveyed; however, a minority elicited disagreement. Here, findings suggest that those who drew on cognitive and/or behavioural theory, and were members of the British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies (BABCP) might be more confident in their ownership than others. However, small sample sizes in the email surveys prevent firm conclusions from being drawn. Conclusions: Regardless of the theoretical approach they subscribe to, supervisors should find the framework helpful as a guide to best practice.