IJSP Number 3, 2021

19 remains an event in everyone’s memory. Spectator supervisees are focused in this situation on how the supervisor manages or resolves the situation, somewhere their expectations are to see how a conflict is resolved by a master. We believe that professional maturity is not only achieved by presenting successful cases; acknowledging a failure and especially what can be learned from it, how to overcome a crisis in the supervisory relationship are creative events that stimulate reflective analysis and bring the supervisor and the supervisee to a level of professional modesty or professional humiliation creating solid therapeutic relationships and supervision [19]. A supervisee who has a mature supervisory relationship with the supervisor accepts feedback and challenge from both the supervisor and the members of the supervisory group; s/he understands the supervisor’s honest role when s/he raises alarm signals and does not perceive them as an affront. S/he accepts the suggestion to resume personal therapy or to request individual supervision beyond the minimum number of those hours. We found that the beginning of the development stage of a supervision group begins with the triggering of transfer and countertransference processes between participants, of some signals sent to the supervisor (like family quarrels with teenage children). Personally, we consider the mentioned situations as chances to develop the supervision group, without turning the supervision into group therapy. We do not propose a recipe, but we present a framework that has worked for years (more or less): - The first thought is to investigate whether or not there are any parallel processes and enactment; - Reflective analysis and discussion within the group is the next step, with an appeal to the observant Ego of the supervisee or supervisees who started the process; - Managing the supervisee with a reflective focus on a back and forth sometimes on him/herself, sometimes on the group (what s/he feels, what s/he thinks, how s/he lives the “hot” situation); - Return to what triggered the situation: who presented the case; which supervisee intervened first; who went to the supervisor; what elements of the case presentation made sense for the supervisees who intervened; what expectations do they have from the supervisor; - Turning the focus on the inside of supervisees, what they feel where they became more attentive in the story presented, what was woken up in them. Thus, everyone explains the attitude, behaviour towards the colleague who presented the case and towards the supervisor. The situation should not slip into the therapy process for every supervisee; - If necessary, the supervisor makes the recommendation for individual therapy for some supervisees; - Focus the dialogue with the whole group on what each learned of the event, how they will react in the future in therapy with clients, etc.