Peer supervision groups
Regular meetings of colleagues at a similar level to review their own work. Without hierarchy but with structure — otherwise it turns into a conversation about difficult clients.
How peer supervision differs from supervision
In supervision there is a more experienced participant who carries responsibility for the quality of the review. In peer supervision the participants are equals: a group of colleagues reviews cases drawing on collective experience.
Both formats are needed and they do not replace one another. Supervision gives precision; peer supervision gives regularity, a variety of perspectives and the sense that you are not alone.
Why it is needed
Practice in isolation degrades. A practitioner who works alone for years imperceptibly entrenches their own habits, including the unhelpful ones. From outside this is visible; from inside it is not.
Different views of one case. Five practitioners will see five different emphases in your case. Often one of them is the one you had not considered.
Normalising difficulties. Discovering that a colleague with ten years of practice gets stuck in the same places is itself professionally healthy.
Learning from other people’s cases. Over a year of participation you work through dozens of cases, not only your own.
How a meeting is structured
Without structure, peer supervision slides into complaints about clients. So the format is fixed:
- Allocating time. At the start we agree who is presenting a case and how long it will take.
- The question. The presenter formulates what they want from the group: a hypothesis, an idea for a technique, a view of the relationship with the client.
- Presentation. A brief, anonymised description of the case.
- Clarifying questions. Questions only, without advice or judgements.
- Discussion. The group offers hypotheses and options.
- Closing. The presenter says what they are taking away. This is an important step: it stops the review from falling apart.
Frequency and membership
Groups meet regularly — usually once a fortnight or once a month. Membership is stable: trust and an understanding of each other’s context accumulate over time, so “open entry” does not work here.
The optimal group size is 4–8 people. Fewer and there is not enough variety of perspectives; more and there is not enough time for everyone.
Who can take part
Practising specialists working in CBT or third-wave approaches. For participants in the centre’s long-term programmes, peer supervision meetings form part of the training and are paid for separately from the modules.
Confidentiality
Cases are presented anonymised. Everything discussed in the group stays within it — this is a condition of taking part, not a request.
Forming groups
Groups are formed as participants with comparable levels of training come together. Send a request — the coordinator will tell you when a suitable group has formed.
Join a peer supervision group
Write to us about your practice experience and approach — a coordinator will tell you about the groups being formed.