Social work practitioners' and supervisors' conceptualisation of supervision at the Department of Social Development, King Cetshwayo District: a polity dualism

Abstract

The historical development of social service supervision reveals that the professional and organisational demands do not co-exist without challenges. The tension that often manifests between professional and managerial supervision is explained using the analogy of “polity dualism”, a concept widely used in political science to describe the co-existence of democratic and traditional rulership. The study adopted a qualitative exploratory-descriptive design underpinned by an interpretive paradigm. Seventeen social workers and supervisors were purposively sampled at the Department of Social Development, King Cetshwayo District, KwaZulu-Natal. The findings were presented in terms of two main themes and two related subthemes. These included participants’ understanding of supervision and relating their understanding of supervision with experience. The recommendations could be summarised to involve the need to limit supervisors’ responsibilities to providing supervision only and to address the challenges posed by polity dualism by relying on professional supervision that offers more support and guidance and encourages collaboration between supervisors and supervisees. Keywords: managerial supervision, neoliberalism, polity dualism, professional supervision, social worker, social work supervisor

Full text

194
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk
A professional journal for the social worker
w: https://socialwork.journals.ac.za/pub e: socialwork@sun.ac.za eISSN: 2312-7198 (online)
Vol. 60, No .1, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15270/60-1-1259
SOCIAL WORK PRACTITIONERS’ AND SUPERVISORS' CONCEPTUALISATION
OF SUPERVISION AT THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, KING
CETSHWAYO DISTRICT: A POLITY DUALISM
Sandile Ntethelelo Gumbi1.1, Ntombifikile Margaret Mazibuko1.2 and Mbongeni
Shadrack Sithole1.3
1.1University of KwaZulu-Natal, Department of Social Work, Durban, South Africa
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0819-3869 gumbisn4@gmail.com
1.2University of KwaZulu-Natal, Department of Social Work, Durban, South Africa
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2072-8424 MazibukoN3@ukzn.ac.za
1.3University of KwaZulu-Natal, Department of Social Work, Durban, South Africa
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4075-0677 sitholem3@ukzn.ac.za
Article received: 16/8/2022; Article accepted: 18/08/2023; Article published: 26/03/2024
ABSTRACT
The historical development of social service supervision reveals that the professional and
organisational demands do not co-exist without challenges. The tension that often manifests
between professional and managerial supervision is explained using the analogy of “polity
dualism”, a concept widely used in political science to describe the co-existence of democratic
and traditional rulership. The study adopted a qualitative exploratory-descriptive design
underpinned by an interpretive paradigm. Seventeen social workers and supervisors were
purposively sampled at the Department of Social Development, King Cetshwayo District,
KwaZulu-Natal. The findings were presented in terms of two main themes and two related
subthemes. These included participants’ understanding of supervision and relating their
understanding of supervision with experience. The recommendations could be summarised to
involve the need to limit supervisors’ responsibilities to providing supervision only and to
address the challenges posed by polity dualism by relying on professional supervision that
offers more support and guidance and encourages collaboration between supervisors and
supervisees.
Keywords: managerial supervision; neoliberalism; polity dualism; professional supervision;
social worker; social work supervisor
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this article is twofold: (1) to gain an in-depth understanding of how social workers
and supervisors conceptualise supervision in the social services sector, (2) and to explore how

195
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
polity dualism influences the social service organisation as a context in which supervision is
implemented. In attempting to explain the nature of supervision in the social services sector,
the authors used the analogy of “polity dualism”. Before explaining the three functions of
supervision, it is worth indicating the relevance of polity dualism to this article. Holzinger,
Kern and Kromrey (2016) describe polity dualism as a situation of the co-existence in which
both democratic and traditional rulership apply simultaneously to the same population. While
this concept is widely used in political science to describe the co-existence of the state and
traditional systems, the authors became interested in the significance of traditional ruler-state
dualism in social service organisations as a context in which supervision occurs. As in the
duality of state and traditional systems at the political and administrative level, the influence
of this dualism in social service organisations and supervision, in particular, cannot be
disregarded and was therefore considered worth exploring in more detail.
The way that social workers and supervisors undertake supervision is directly linked to their
conceptual understanding of supervision practice and social service organisations as a context
in which supervision is practised. Tropman (2022) asserts that beyond the benefit of providing
quality social services to clients by social workers, being well-supervised is also helpful to the
supervisees in order for them to become better supervisors when the time arises. The
supervisory relationship between social workers and supervisors is significant and often
manifests through the quality of the services provided to clients (Caras & Sandu, 2014). While
the supervision relationship is significant, supervision may also be viewed as having limitations
if it does not address “the professional and organisational aspects of practice” (Rankine,
2019:67)
De Groot (2016) argues that effective supervision offers a platform for ensuring an integrated
balance between administrative, educational and supportive functions and subsequently
provides the most appropriate environment in which social workers can develop their
capacities. An inability of supervisors to maintain a balance in implementing the three
functions of supervision results in supervision practice-related inefficiencies. Wong and Lee
(2015) assert that social work supervisors are often confronted with challenges when it comes
to the simultaneous execution of administrative, supportive and educational functions of
supervision, as they are often expected to perform dual roles as managers and clinical
supervisors. The implications of this shortcoming are likely to be felt by the key role players,
namely social workers, the organisation they work for and the client system. To maintain a
balance, supervisors need to adequately implement the administrative, supportive and
educational functions. A growing body of literature suggests that social work supervision is
mainly conceptualised in terms of the administrative function, which emphasises
accountability and managerialism. The prioritisation of the administrative function of
supervision by social work supervisors stems from the focus on managerial rather than
professional supervision and compromises the quality of supervision provided to the
supervisees (Engelbrecht, 2013; Sithole & Shokane, 2023; Vetfuti, Goliath & Perumal, 2019).
In this regard, social work supervisors are likely to end up neglecting the need to integrate these
functions because they do not always complement each other and resort to focusing on just one
function (Hawkins & Shohet, 2012). The supervisor should apply these functions purposefully

196
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
and according to the needs of the supervisees to enhance their practice. Supervision has taken
a managerial and performance management character, which is not always desirable and may
result in a situation where supervisees experience supervision as a harmful rather than helpful
practice (Chibaya & Engelbrecht, 2022; O' Donoghue & Engelbrecht, 2021). For social work
supervision to become helpful rather than harmful, it has to take on the characteristics of
professional supervision. Caras and Sandu (2014) assert that professional supervision
contributes to the growth and development of good social workers. The professional growth
and development of social workers ultimately enables the organisation as a social service
agency to render quality and effective services to its clients.
In the social service context, the historical development of social services and supervision
reflects the plural nature of the democratic era in which social service organisations operate. In
terms of the polity dualism analogy in the context of social service organisations, the
professional and organisational demands could be viewed not as just co-existing, but also as
characterised by an underlying tension. White (2015:252) asserts that “the organisational
cultures of many social work agencies have been refashioned under the impact of
modernisation and managerialism”. In contrast to managerial supervision, professional
supervision enables practitioners to engage in a relationship with a supervisor “enabling both
a place and space to refine and develop professional identity, knowledge and skills and for
reflectively examining the challenges faced in everyday practice” (Karvinen-Niinikoski,
Beddoe, Ruch & Tsui, 2019:87).
The literature shows that the notable preference for managerial over professional supervision
can be mainly attributed to the dominance and influence of neoliberal discourse in social
service organisations. In a study conducted in the DSD in 2020, it emerged that, practically
speaking, there was “notable centralisation and emphasis on the managerial supervision, with
professional supervision pushed to the periphery” (Sithole, 2020:77). One explanation for this
was that:
Neoliberalism and managerialism have increased surveillance and control and
replaced collegiality and trust with contracts, competitiveness, individuality and
performance indicators, supporting a compliant and technically skilled workforce
rather than critically reflexive professionals. (Dlamini & Sewpaul, 2015:477)
Rankine (2019) explains that social workers currently operate in a managerial and neoliberal
environment that threatens their ability to engage in a critical reflective supervision practice
and consequently forces them to engage in supervision agendas that are concerned with
measuring outputs and efficiency. While the construct of neoliberalism lacks a uniform
definition, several authors have written on “an increasing pressure on social service
organisations to conform to the political, economic and ideological precepts of neoliberalism”
(Patel, 2019:3). Among the operational consequences of the influence of neoliberalism,
according to Spolander (2019), is the prioritising of efficiency, effectiveness and economics
above other predominant social work values such as social justice.

197
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
CONTEXTUALISING SUPERVISION
The literature depicts supervision in social service agencies to be a context-driven process
(Beddoe, 2015). To contextualise social work supervision, Khosa (2022) explains that it is
crucial to take into account the context within which supervision takes place. For the purposes
of this article, supervision practice is contextualised within the King Cetshwayo Department
of Social Development (DSD) as a social service organisation characterised by high levels of
polity dualism.
The Department of Social Development as a social service context
Supervision plays a significant role in the DSD in helping social workers perform their
functions efficiently to fulfil the Department’s mandate and vision. The mandate of the DSD
is to “provide social protection services and lead government efforts to forge partnerships
through which vulnerable individuals, groups and communities become capable and self-
reliant participants” in their development, (DSD, 2021:21). This mandate is derived from
section 27(1)(c) and section 28(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (RSA,
1996), which provide rights for the provision of social assistance to vulnerable populations and
protects the rights of children, respectively. The White Paper for Social Welfare (RSA, 1997)
(herein referred to as the White Paper) was developed to fulfil the mandate provided by the
Constitution of RSA (1996) and adopted a developmental approach to social welfare and the
framework for the provision of social welfare services. The White Paper (RSA, 1997)
recognises social workers as the main practitioners who must lead in the implementation of the
policies.
Therefore, social work supervision becomes critical for social workers because it becomes the
primary resource for increasing levels of autonomy of social workers in the provision of
efficient and effective services to their clients (Caspi & Reid, 2002). The Supervision
Framework for the social work profession in South Africa developed by the Department of
Social Development (DSD) and the South African Council for Social Service Professions
(SACSSP) states that supervision can take place in many different contexts and employments;
the core significance of social work supervision is that it is a professional activity ingrained
within social work as a demanding and dynamic profession (DSD & SACSSP, 2012).
Social work as a profession exposes social workers to different contexts where they face
different challenges in working with diverse clients, and hence, social work professional
supervision becomes fundamental in social work professional practice, (Nickson, Gair &
Miles, 2016). Social workers are regarded as key frontline cadres in the delivery of quality
social welfare services, and this requires them to be afforded quality and efficient supervision
(DSD & SACSSP, 2012). Ncube (2016) mentions that since social work supervision plays a
critical role in guiding social workers to provide quality social welfare services, the application
of supervision should, therefore, be specific to the specific context within which it is practised,
in as much as supervision can be applied across different contexts.

198
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
The King Cetshwayo District DSD as a rural-based social service organisation
The King Cetshwayo District of the DSD is located north-east of KwaZulu-Natal province,
South Africa. The district is comprised of five municipalities, namely the City of uMhlathuze,
uMfolozi, Nkandla, Mthonjaneni and uMlalazi. It is also the home of five DSD service offices
that serve the people residing in the respective districts. Among the reasons for choosing the
King Cetshwayo District DSD as the locality for this study was that this district reportedly
services communities that are situated in a setting that is mainly rural and only a small part
being urban (Gumbi, 2021). It was also relevant as one of the districts that provide social
services aimed at empowering marginalised and vulnerable people. Phungwayo (2012) states
that the DSD is the custodian of social services that purport to empower vulnerable groups in
South Africa. However, this district is characterised by high levels of polity dualism.
Polity dualism
Polity dualism in the context of the King Cetshwayo District DSD relates to the co-existence
of the traditional and state sectors; both democratic and traditional rulership apply
simultaneously to the same population (Holzinger et al., 2016). Holzinger et al. (2016) describe
contemporary traditional forms of governance as co-existing with the political institutions and
laws of the state. The King Cetshwayo District is located at the north-east of KwaZulu-Natal
with most of its land administered by the Ingonyama Trust Land under the Traditional
Authority of the Zulu Kingdom. Traditional ruler-state dualism is common in regions riddled
with internal conflict, delayed democratisation and stalled development (Holzinger et al.,
2016). All these factors are relevant in this study locality as they influence the context in which
social services are provided. Ubink and Duda (2021) add that traditional rulership creates
unequal power relationships that affect access to goods, services and natural resources.
In the identified district, people are subject to the traditional authorities while also being under
municipal administration. In the context of social work practice, social work practitioners may
find themselves having to practise within a more cultural and traditional environment and, at
the same time, having to provide services in a municipal administrative environment. The
tensions that prevail between professional and organisational mandates in social service
organisations could be viewed as being influenced by the co-existence of two systems.
In a South African context, where social work supervision has been described as tending largely
towards managerialism, the supervision formation is clearly influenced by external factors
(Chibaya & Engelbrecht, 2022; Sithole, 2020). The challenge stems from the uniquely peculiar
sets of clients’ needs emanating from their traditional and cultural orientations while at the
same time relying on a democratically founded institution for intervention with different
operative mechanisms, a situation that could frustrate the practice of effective supervision.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Patel and Patel (2019) define research methodology as principles for conducting research
scientifically. The key elements in this regard are the generated participants’ accounts and
findings achieved through a logical, systematic, and step-by-step research process undertaken.

199
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Research approach, design and paradigm
Qualitative research is employed to elicit in-depth truths and understanding through
observation, engagement and listening (Crabtree & Miller, 2022). This study adopted the
qualitative research approach with an exploratory-descriptive design. This research design was
deemed appropriate for the study as it allowed for an open, inductive and flexible approach to
exploring and describing how participants conceptualise social work supervision in the King
Cetshwayo District DSD, which is marked by polity dualism. The interpretivist paradigm seeks
to clarify the meaning of the participants’ experiences. Krysik (2018) describes an interpretivist
paradigm as concerned with understanding social conditions through construing the meanings
that individuals ascribe to their experiences.
Sampling
Purposive sampling was used to select the participants of the study, comprised of social
workers and supervisors. Daniel (2012) describes purposive sampling as a procedure in which
participants are selected from the target population based on their fitness for the study and in
terms of specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The researcher purposively sampled
participants from King Cetshwayo District at oNgoye, Richards Bay, and Lower Mfolozi
service offices. Following data saturation, a total of seventeen participants, consisting of
thirteen social workers and four supervisors, were included in the study. Both social workers
and supervisors were part of the sample of this study because the Supervision Framework for
the social work profession in South Africa (SACSSP & DSD, 2012) tasks supervisors with
mainly being responsible for the implementation of supervision to social workers and mandates
social workers to be recipients of supervision. The main inclusion criteria for the sample were
that the participant should be (1) employed by the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Department of
Social Development on a full-time basis; (2) placed in any of the DSD services situated at King
Cetshwayo District Municipality; (3) either a social worker or social work supervisor; (4)
subject to supervision or entrusted with the supervisory responsibility, respectively; and (5)
registered as a social worker with the South African Council for Social Service Professions.
Data collection
In-depth semi-structured interviews were utilised to collect data from the participants. Mahat-
Shamir, Neimeyer and Pitcho-Prelorentzos (2021) assert that in-depth interviews are employed
in a study to gauge the perspectives of participants in order to uncover information that can be
meaningful to address the research questions. Both telephonic and face-to-face interviews were
used in accordance with the prepared interviewing guide, which contained questions that were
open-ended. The duration of each interview was between 30 and 60 minutes, which allowed
the researcher sufficient time to elicit relevant data from the participants.
Data analysis
For data analysis, the researcher adopted thematic analysis to analyse and interpret the collected
data. Mahat-Shamir, Neimeyer and Pitcho-Prelorentzos (2021) assert that the thematic analysis
technique includes identifying the codes, categories and themes that emerge through the
systematic analysis of data. Through the thematic analysis, data were identified, analysed and

200
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
coded into themes. To analyse data, the researcher closely followed the six steps proposed by
Braun and Clarke (2006): data familiarisation, forming codes, inducing themes, reviewing
themes, defining and naming themes, and producing a report. Two main themes and two related
subthemes emerged from this study. These are dealt with in the findings section below.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The researcher observed research ethical principles while collecting data. Amongst the ethical
principles were permission to conduct the study, voluntary participation, informed consent and
confidentiality.
Ethical and gatekeeper permission
Obtaining ethics approval from an independent Research Ethics Committee (REC) is an
acceptable practice in research studies that involve human beings as participants directly or
indirectly, taking into account the implications of the research on the participants (Gelling,
2016). To gain access to participants, the researcher needs gatekeeper approval. Gatekeepers
can be individuals or institutions who control access to a specific area, institution or
organisation that is a key to the research study (Singh & Wassenaar, 2016). The ethical
approval for this study was granted by the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) through the
Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HSSREC). The ethical clearance
reference number allocated was HSSREC/00002004/2020. The gatekeeper letter was sourced
from the KZN provincial DSD, and approval was granted by the KZN provincial Head of
Department (HOD). Access to DSD service offices at King Cetshwayo District was granted by
the district director and the respective service office managers, respectively. After that,
arrangements for the actual data collection had to be made with the supervisors and social
workers.
Voluntary participation and informed consent
The principles of voluntary participation and informed consent ensure that participants make
informed decisions without being coerced. Clark-Kazak (2017) asserts that the participants
should be afforded the right to withdraw from the study after you provide them with
information about the study and specify what is required of them. Informed consent enhances
the participants' right to autonomous decision-making as it grants them an opportunity to decide
whether their participation in the research study will be compatible with their interests, values
and beliefs (Pietilä, Nurmi, Halkoaho & Kyngäs, 2020). Participants were provided with
information that pertained to the study, and their rights to participate or withdraw were
guaranteed. Consent forms were provided to participants and signed voluntarily.
Confidentiality
Confidentiality is one of the fundamental and basic ethical principles of social work research.
It upholds the participants’ right to privacy regarding what they share in the course of the data-
collection process and allows them to feel more at ease with participation and sharing their
experiences (Kamanzi & Romania, 2019). Confidentiality was guaranteed, which allowed
participants to express their feelings and experiences freely. In this regard, the participants' real
identities were protected through the use of codes. Social workers were coded as SWP 1 to

201
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
SWP 13, while social work supervisors were coded as SWS 1 to SWS 4. The code SWP
represents social work practitioner, whereas code SWS refers to social work supervisor.
Trustworthiness
As far as trustworthiness is concerned, credibility, confirmability, dependability and
transferability were given due attention. Credibility is described as entailing confidence in the
accuracy and truthfulness of the findings (Amankwaa, 2016). In this study, credibility was
ensured through the adoption of a suitable research approach, paradigm and design that enabled
the researcher to apply an appropriate data-collection instrument. Dependability has to do with
the stability of findings over time (Connelly, 2016). Dependability was ensured through
constantly reflecting on the methods employed in the study and the entire research process.
Transferability refers to the applicability of the findings to other contexts (Amankwaa, 2016).
The findings cannot be generalised but can be replicated in related contexts. Transferability
can be thought of in terms of context-bound extrapolations, which the researcher could enable
by providing a deep and rich contextual description of context and participants (Bloomberg &
Volpe, 2019). Other DSD service offices are viewed as having a set of similar characteristics
to those of the King Cetshwayo Districts across the KZN province. Connelly (2016) describes
confirmability as focusing on the degree of consistency of the findings. This aspect was ensured
through conducting member checks with the participants.
FINDINGS
This section represents the findings of the study based on the collected data as guided by the
research questions. Findings are presented in themes and subthemes as shown in the Table 1
below.
Table 1: Themes and subthemes
Themes Subthemes
1. Participants’ understanding of supervision 1.1 Supervision as support and guidance
1.2 Supervision as educational and growth-related
process
2. Relating understanding of supervision to
experience
2.1
2.1 Understanding not similar to experience of
supervision
2.2 Supervision experience partly corresponds with
the theory of supervision
Theme 1: Participants’ understanding of supervision
Participants were interviewed on how they conceptualised and understood supervision, which
is essential in their practice as social workers. Participants were asked to define supervision
and describe how they understand it. In defining supervision, participants related supervision
to its functions, namely administrative, supportive and educational. Engelbrecht (2010)
mentions that supervision has been defined in various ways, with social workers and social
work supervisors conceptualising supervision in terms of control, guidance and support.
Emerging from the participants’ responses, support and guidance emerged as the essential
elements in the participants’ conceptualisation of supervision.

202
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Subtheme 1.1: Supervision as support and guidance
“Support” and “guidance” were predominant in participants’ responses as they provided their
perspectives on how they conceptualised social work supervision. The role of supervision
practice in providing support and guidance was described as necessary to contribute to social
workers’ skill development and professional maturity. Participants’ responses were as follows:
Supervision is the guidance and support from somebody who is your senior in the
workplace where he/she provides you with information that ensures that you have the
skills that are needed to do work accordingly. (SWP 1)
Real supervision provides support and guidance to social workers. It provides
support to social workers. (SWP 9)
I would say it is the communication between the supervisee and the supervisor when
the supervisor will provide guidance to the supervisee when it is needed and check
whether everything is done in an acceptable manner. Any guidance needed by the
supervisee has to be communicated by the supervisor. (SWP 10)
It is where you provide support to the employee… you educate and support them so
that the employee can grow… Supervision must help an employee to develop
professional maturity. Yeah, I can define it that way… you educate, you support the
employee to develop professional maturity… (SWS 3)
While few participants described supervision in terms of education and growth, the above
statements demonstrate that support and guidance emerged as the main features of supervision
that should be evident in their practice. The participants’ responses revealed that supervision
should be characterised by the constant provision of the support and guidance that are necessary
to stimulate professional growth and maturity and to ensure job satisfaction. The DSD and
SACSSP (2012), through the Supervision Framework for the social work profession in South
Africa, recognise the supportive functions of supervision that mainly assist in increasing job
satisfaction and improving work morale. Schmidt and Kariuki (2019) explain that the
supportive function of supervision contributes towards the elimination of work-related
stressors and promotes healthy working conditions that contribute to increased job satisfaction.
Guidance is offered to social workers in the supportive function as they work to enhance the
provision of services to clients (McPherson & Macnamara, 2017).
Subtheme 1.2: Supervision as educational and growth-related process
Supervision is also regarded as a reflective process which provides an opportunity to enhance
individualised personal and professional growth (Berger & Quiros, 2014; O’Neill & del Mar
Fariña, 2018). In response to the same question about the conceptualisation of social work
supervision, some participants stated the element of growth and development as another
essential element in supervision. Participants’ responses were as follows:
Supervision must have an element of growth and development of the supervisee. Now,
it doesn’t happen like that. It is all about submitting reports and meeting deadlines
and does little that is needed to develop and grow an individual. Supervision also

203
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
deals with educational development, but it doesn't happen. That's how I understand
it. It must shape even the approach, behaviours, and attitudes of employees. (SWP
12)
For me, supervision is about educating supervisees on the work they need to do to
ensure that they do it accordingly. I also think of supervision as a way to account for
the work that you have been given. (SWP 5)
According to my understanding, we conduct supervision for an individual to grow in
his/her profession. This takes me to the concept of what is supervision. According to
what I've been trained on, supervision is a scientific and conscious process that you
need to plan for and need to do as a supervisor to help the employee grow in the
scope of work he or she is doing. (SWS 2)
The above comments indicate the views of participants on the significance of the growth and
development of supervisees in supervision. As is noticeable from the participants’ responses,
supervision is also conceptualised as a process that is characterised by education through the
provision of training for the purposes of empowerment and enhancement of skills. Kadushin
and Harkness (2014) view the educational function as encompassing teaching, facilitation,
clarifying, professional growth, informing and problem solving. Social workers and
supervisors in this particular district thought that supervision should focus mainly on the
educational function so as to achieve professional growth. For professional growth to be
realised, it must be informed by the appropriate assessment of gaps in social workers’
knowledge and skills as well as the understanding of current practice challenges (Schmidt &
Kariuki, 2019).
Joubert, Hocking and Hampson (2013) mention that professional supervision is an integral
component of social work practice, providing opportunities for case discussion and reflection,
support and professional development. Participants view professional development and
maturity as key to the effective delivery of services and, therefore, should be the key focus of
supervision. Supervisors expressed concerns that supervision ends up becoming difficult to
implement because supervision ratios become excessively escalated beyond what the
Supervision Framework for the social work profession in South Africa prescribes. The high
levels of cases from the clients of social workers also exert pressure on supervisors as the need
for continuous supervision becomes a need for all social workers, especially when confronted
with more complex cases. Participants were also requested to relate their understanding of
supervision to their own experience.
Theme 2: Relating understanding of supervision to experience
Participants were asked to relate their conceptual understanding of supervision to their practical
experience of supervision. The significance of exploring the participants’ understanding of
supervision on the basis of their experiences was to assist the researchers in arriving at an
informed conclusion on whether there were commonalities among participants’ understanding
of supervision and whether these were based on their practical experiences or not. Most
participants explained that their understanding of the nature of supervision is not related to their
actual experience of supervision.

204
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Subtheme 2.1: Understanding not similar to experience of supervision
As participants gave accounts of their experiences of social work supervision, it emerged that
most of their understanding of what supervision is and what it should be was not related to
what they experienced in practice daily. This discrepancy is evident in the participants’
accounts as reported below:
I would say supervision has never been something that has made any positive impact
on me, because it has never been a good thing or had an impact… I work
independently I have never had an opportunity to be supervised genuinely. As I have
said that I work independently, because rarely would you find the person who comes
and supervises. At the end of the day, you have to work independently… theoretically
we can say that things should be supposed to go this way, but practically I have to go
my own way to get issues solved…. (SWP 13)
No, the supervision I have described is not what happens in this office, because they
do not care about your problems, even those that relate to your cases or other
duties… I have never had a one-on-one session with my supervisor except for those
urgent short consultations… rather I use my senior social workers to provide me with
guidance… (SWP 7)
The understanding is the same with the one we were taught in university, but when it
comes to it being implemented, it is different because there are things that a
supervisor is expected to do but that are impossible to do in this environment… I
cannot do one-on-one with my supervisee; I cannot give them the support they need…
all that is required, but I end giving them few minutes of my time when there are
urgent cases… (SWS 2)
For supervision experience of supervisors and supervisees to be better, they have to
revise the ratio of supervision in the framework. You will find that in the framework
the ratio of a supervisor to supervisees is maybe 1:15 or 1:13, but that ratio is too
high for supervision. You cannot provide effective supervision. Even if you really wish
to do so, it becomes impossible when having other responsibilities. At least if you can
say 1:5 or 1:6… so supervision ends up undoable…. I currently have 19 or 20
supervisees so that [is] the challenge, because I also have other duties expected of
me… (SWS 1)
The participants’ statements reflect the extent of the discrepancy in supervision practice
between the conceptual and practical level. It is evident from the participants’ accounts above
that what they described and understood conceptually as supervision in social work is not what
they experienced supervision to be on a day-to-day basis. The participants’ accounts
demonstrate that both social workers and supervisors describe supervision in their practice as
non-existent. Hence, this deprives social workers of the chance to receive the necessary support
for their work as well as of an opportunity to engage in reflective practice and consequently
their ability to develop professionally (Maslow, 2020). The nature of the environment in which
social workers and supervisors operate creates a situation that makes it difficult for both
supervisors and social workers to translate into practice what they have been trained to expect

205
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
regarding supervision. Alpaslan and Schenck (2012) found that social workers working in rural
settings are confronted with conditions that are too hostile for an effective supervision process
to unfold. Nevertheless, professional supervision can be highly advantageous for social
workers in rural areas, as that would cushion them by providing constant support as they are
mostly confronted with a high number of cases that are very diverse (Nickson, Gair & Miles,
2016; Sandu & Unguru, 2013). As a result of the lack of professional supervision, service
delivery to clients remains compromised. Some participants also described their supervision
experience as being partly in line with what they had understood supervision to be.
Subtheme 2.2: Supervision experience partly corresponds with the theory of supervision
There were social workers and supervisors who described their understanding of supervision
as having little correlation with their practical experience of supervision as implemented in
their practice. When participants were requested to provide their views, these accounts
emerged, amongst others:
I would not say it is completely similar and I would not say it is completely different,
because I think we have got a lot of workload… So, you will find that we consult
supervisors, otherwise we figure things on our own, but they do give us that small
support and guidance when we call for it. (SWP 12)
It is different partly because it is not functional due to the high caseload, because
sometime you make plans on what you will need to do, but find that you are tasked to
do other things… same with supervisors, [who] do make plans on what they will do
but get disturbed… it is very much different in the Department on how it is
done…sometimes you end up thinking that what you learnt in the university does not
help you when it comes to its practicality… you even forget what it means to be a
social worker… (SWP 6)
I think it is similar because when you have a problem you can consult with your
supervisor and also get the information you need… (SWS 4)
The participants’ assertions above indicate that their experiences of social work supervision in
their service offices as being unreliable, inconsistent and unpredictable. The impact of such
supervision practices yields unguaranteed and unmeasured outcomes to supervisees and
clients. Holzinger et al. (2016) mention that in a context marked by less integration and
harmonisation of state and traditional institutions, more negative consequences normally
emerge. In the context of this study, the integration and harmonisation should unfold from the
DSD as an institution founded upon democratic statutes and the deeply cultural and traditional
institutions and communities that are served by social workers at the DSD service office level.
These negative consequences of the disjuncture between the DSD and its surrounding
traditional communities include a direct or indirect impact on the functioning of social workers
with their clients as they aim to fulfil their professional and organisational mandate. Hair
(2015:352) asserts that “it is the responsibility of supervisors to explore differences and local
understandings of knowledge and values with social workers in order to have effective
supervision relationships”. It is evident that supervision is critical for social workers to foster

206
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
the necessary growth, autonomy, support and guidance, and to develop the capacities to
effectively confront unique challenges that may arise by functioning in this context.
DISCUSSION
A central feature of this study is the social workers’ and supervisors’ conceptualisation of
supervision in the social services sector, which is characterised by the co-existence of
managerial and professional supervision. The analogy of polity dualism has been used to
explain the nature of this existence. This coexistence served as the thread that cuts across to
explain the context of supervision and its influence on implementation supervision. It is evident
from the data collected that the coexistence plays a huge role on how social workers
conceptualise and experience the practice of social work supervision in this district.
In summary, the findings reflect that the implementation of social work supervision still
remains a major challenge in the DSD with a highly managerialist approach taking precedence
over professional supervision. The implication of supervision being mainly managerial is that
professional supervision is neglected, and subsequently the educational and supportive
functions are minimised. Compared to professional supervision, managerial supervision is
viewed as largely influenced by external factors that impact on the organisation.
This not only creates a major gap in practice, but also leads to ineffective practice for social
workers. Although in the findings of this study, the participants described the implementation
of supervision in the social service organisation as still being a challenge, they still regard it to
be important and believe that it is necessary to provide them with support, guidance, education
and foster growth. The findings are roughly congruent with the analogy of polity dualism in
supervision, as the practice of managerial supervision is seen as the traditional mode of
supervision and still takes precedence over professional supervision, which is seen as a
democratic mode of supervision which allows for active participation and critical reflective
practice.
Secondly, the influence of the socio-political factors on social services and supervision cannot
be underestimated. These influences may be indicative that supervision is “not a politically
innocent” phenomenon and that it is susceptible to external influences (Adamson, 2012:194).
High caseloads were highlighted by participants as one of the issues that impact of the
implementation of supervision in DSD at King Cetshwayo District. These findings are similar
to the ones reached by other scholars (Dlamini & Sewpaul, 2015; Manthosi & Makhubele,
2016; Shokane, Makhubele, Shokane & Mabasa, 2017). Common among the related studies is
the depiction of the high caseloads of social workers and supervisors and the impact of this on
their responsibilities, the high supervisor-supervisee ratio and job dissatisfaction.
Thirdly, Dlamini and Sewpaul (2015) highlighted the implications of neoliberalism and its
relationship to managerial supervision as contributing to the erosion of the core of the
profession’s identity. With the unique challenge that polity dualism presents in the DSD at
King Cetshwayo District, social workers require extended support and guidance from their
supervisors to navigate complex and demanding cases that may stem from the clients’ deeply
held cultural and traditional orientations. However, some African scholars have emphasised
that the provision of supportive supervision needs to take into account the unique socio-cultural

207
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
context of each locality, so that it can promote professional development and service delivery
to clients (Gumbi, 2021; Mendenhall, De Silva, Hanlon, Petersen, Shidhaye, Jordans., Luitel,
Ssebunnya, Fekadu, Patel & Tomlinson, 2014; Ncube, 2016; Ross & Ncube, 2018).
Furthermore, Nickson, Cater and Francis, (2020:5-6) assert that the “impact of social work
supervision on social workers depends on the supervisor’s cultural sensitivity and ability to be
contextually relevant as well as whether supervision is conducted in a more humanistic
manner”.
Despite the limitations of the clear articulation of African-centred supervision in South Africa,
this article acknowledges that the meaningful strides made in the literature and practice related
to indigeneity, Africanising, decolonising and decoloniality of social work practice lays a
critical foundation for African-centred supervision. Moreover, the need for extensive literature
on social work supervision with specific reference to the African context cannot be over-
emphasised as this would lay the foundations for new Afrocentric literature on supervision.
African scholarship on supervision would provide a unique perspective on how supervision
should be carried out in a context characterised by high levels of polity dualism.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Three recommendations worth noting in this article may be summarised as (i) adherence to the
policy framework, (ii) capacity building and (iii) the development of new supervision practices.
Firstly, it is recommended that supervisors adhere to a supervisory-related policy framework.
The Supervision Framework for the social work profession in South Africa (DSD & SACSSP,
2012) stipulates the roles and responsibilities and the prescribed supervisor-supervisee ratio, to
name a few aspects. Adherence to these provisions would strengthen the supervision process
in the service offices, and afford time and space for social workers to be supervised across the
three supervision functions. Having supervisors who focus only on supervision would assist
social workers to receive much needed support when confronted with uniquely complex cases
emanating from the demanding contexts within which they are employed. There is a need to
find innovative ways to decrease the administrative duties for social workers and supervisors.
This may assist in better managing the high caseloads that pertain to clients. This would ensure
that each client’s case would be dealt with more efficiently.
The second recommendation is the provision of ongoing capacity-building support for both
supervisors and social workers, even before the latter assume a supervisory role. This is
relevant considering that supervision is a relational process. Supervision education and training
are also fundamental for the successful implementation of quality and effective supervision.
This is because, as Schmidt and Kariuki (2019) assert, the social work curriculum on the
undergraduate levels of study reflects generalist practice and educates social work students on
social policy, ethics and values, and basic practice methods, but it lacks supervision training as
an important dimension of social work practice. Furthermore, to assist social work supervisors
confront challenges presented by polity dualism, it is recommended that they practise
professional supervision that would enable their supervisees to constantly engage in reflective
practice.

208
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Lastly, the widened interest in social service organisations and supervision practice in
contemporary society could dictate the development of new ideas of designing and executing
supervision practices as opposed to adherence to the traditional ways. As indicated in Hafford-
Letchfield and Engelbrecht (2019), the key stakeholders in supervision extend beyond the
immediate supervisor-supervisee relationship, and include service users, educators, people
leading and managing services, and organisations providing services. Social workers and social
work supervisors as key role players in supervision are required to develop deeper engagement
and reflection not only on their experiences, but with due consideration of the influence of
socio-political factors on social service organisations within the context in which supervision
is taking place (Mo & Tsui 2019; Rankine, 2019; Roche, 2022). The contemporary literature
and research on supervision practice locally and internationally is likely to assist in
strengthening the practice of supervision.
REFERENCES
Adamson, C. 2012. Supervision is not politically innocent. Australian Social Work, 65(2):
185-196. Doi:10.1080/0312407X.2011.618544.
Alpaslan, N. & Schenck, R. 2012. Challenges related to working conditions experienced by
social workers practising in rural areas. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 48(4): 400-419.
https://doi.org/10.15270/48-4-24.
Amankwaa, L. 2016. Creating protocols for trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of
Cultural Diversity, 23(3): 121-127.
Beddoe, L. 2015. Supervision and developing the profession: One supervision or many?
China Journal of Social Work, 8(2): 150-163. doi:10.1080/17525098.2015.1039173.
Berger, R. & Quiros, L. 2014. Supervision for trauma-informed
practice. Traumatology, 20(4): 296-301. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099835.
Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. 2019. Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map
from beginning to end. 4th ed. Los Angeles: London
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2): 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Caras, A. & Sandu, A. 2014. The role of supervision in professional development of social
work specialists. Journal of Social Work Practice, 28(1): 75-94.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2012.763024
Caspi, J. & Reid, W. L. 2002. Educational supervision in social work: A task-centred model
for field instruction and staff development. New York: Colombia University Press.
Chibaya, N. H. & Engelbrecht, L. K. 2022. What is happening in an individual supervision
session? Reflections of social workers in South Africa. Social Work/Maatskaplike
Werk, 58(4): 520-545. https://doi.org/10.15270/58-4-1079
Clark-Kazak, C. 2017. Ethical considerations: Research with people in situations of forced
migration. Refuge, 33(2): 11-17.

209
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Connelly, L. M. 2016. Trustworthiness in qualitative research. Medsurg Nursing, 25(6): 435-
436.
Crabtree, B. F. & Miller, W. L. 2022. Doing qualitative research. 3rd ed. California: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Daniel, J. 2012. Sampling essentials: Practical guidelines for making sampling choices.
London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
De Groot, S. 2016. Responsive leadership in social services: A practical approach for
optimizing engagement and performance. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Department of Social Development (DSD) & South African Council for Social Service
Professions (SACSSP). 2012. Supervision framework for the social work profession in South
Africa. Pretoria: Government Printers.
Dlamini, T. T. L. & Sewpaul, V. 2015. Rhetoric versus reality in social work practice:
Political, neoliberal and new managerial influences. Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 51(4):
467-481. https://doi.org/10.15270/51-4-461
Engelbrecht, L. K. 2010. Yesterday, today and tomorrow: Is social work supervision in South
Africa keeping up? Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 46(3): 324-342.
https://doi.org/10.15270/46-3-162.
Engelbrecht, L. K. 2013. Social work supervision policies and frameworks: Playing notes or
making music? Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 49(4): 456–68. https://doi.org/10.15270/49-
3-34
Gelling, L. H. 2016. Applying for ethical approval for research: The main issues. Nursing
Standard, 30(20): 40-44. Doi: 10.7748/ns.30.20.40.s46
Gumbi, S. N. 2021. Exploring the experiences of social work practitioners and supervisors
on the implementation of social work supervision in the Department of Social Development:
A case study of King Cetshwayo District Municipality. Master’s thesis. University of
KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
Hafford-Letchfield, T. & Engelbrecht, L. 2019. Introduction. In: Hafford-Letchfield, T. &
Engelbrecht, L. (eds.). Contemporary practices in social work supervision: Time for new
paradigms? (pp. 1-5). London: Routledge.
Hair, H. J. 2015. Supervision conversations about social justice and social work
practice. Journal of Social Work, 15(4): 349-370. https://doi.org/10.1177/146801731453908.
Hawkins, P. & Shohet, R. 2012. Supervision in the helping professions. 4th ed. New York:
Open University Press.
Holzinger, K., Kern, F. G. & Kromrey, D. 2016. The dualism of contemporary traditional
governance and the state: Institutional setups and political consequences. Political Research
Quarterly, 69(3): 469-481. Doi: 10.1177/106591291664801.

210
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Joubert, L., Hocking, A. & Hampson, R. 2013. Social work in oncology - Managing vicarious
trauma: The positive impact of professional supervision. Social Work in Health Care, 52(2-
3): 296-310. Doi: 10.1080/00981389.2012.737902.
Kadushin, A. & Harkness, D. 2014. Supervision in social work. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Kamanzi, A. & Romania, M. 2019. Rethinking confidentiality in qualitative research in the
era of big data. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(6): 743-758.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219826222
Karvinen-Niinikoski, S., Beddoe, L., Ruch, G. & Tsui, M. 2019. Professional supervision and
professional autonomy. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 31(3): 87-96.
Khosa, P. 2022. Implementation of the supervision framework for the social work profession
in South Africa by a designated child protection organisation. Doctoral thesis. Stellenbosch
University, South Africa.
Krysik, J. 2018. Research for effective social work practice. New York: Routledge.
Mahat-Shamir, M., Neimeyer, R. A. & Pitcho-Prelorentzos, S. 2021. Designing in-depth
semi-structured interviews for revealing meaning reconstruction after loss. Death
Studies, 45(2): 83-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481187.2019.1617388
Manthosi, F. L. & Makhubele, J. C. 2016. Impact of supervision on social worker's job
performance: Implications for service delivery. SAAPAM Limpopo Chapter 5th Annual
Conference Proceedings. Polokwane: University of Limpopo.
Maslow, A. 2020. Social work supervision. In: Nickson, A. M., Carter, M. & Francis, A. P.
(eds.). Supervision and professional development in social work practice. New Delhi: SAGE
Publications India Pvt LTD.
McPherson, L. & Macnamara, N. 2017. Supervising child protection practice: What works?
An evidence informed practice. Cham: Springer.
Mendenhall, E., De Silva, M. J., Hanlon, C., Petersen, I., Shidhaye, R., Jordans, M., Luitel,
N., Ssebunnya, J., Fekadu, A., Patel, V. & Tomlinson, M. 2014. Acceptability and feasibility
of using non-specialist health workers to deliver mental health care: Stakeholder perceptions
from the PRIME district sites in Ethiopia, India, Nepal, South Africa, and Uganda. Social
Science & Medicine, 118(2014): 33-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.057
Mo, K. Y. & Tsui, M. S. 2019. Toward an indigenized external supervision approach in
China. International Social Work, 62(4): 1286–1303 Doi: 10.1177/0020872818778104
Ncube, M. 2016. Conceptualizing social development supervision in social work. The Indian
Journal of Social Work, 80(1): 31-46. Doi: 10.32444/ijsw.2018.80.1.31-46.
Nickson, A., Gair, S. & Miles, D. 2016. Supporting isolated workers in their work with
families in rural and remote Australia: Exploring peer group supervision. Children
Australia, 41(4): 265-274. Doi:10.1017/cha.2016.41

211
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Nickson, A. M., Cater, M. A. & Francis, A. P. 2020. Supervision and professional
development in social work practice. Los Angeles: SAGE publications.
O’Neill, P. & del Mar Fariña, M. 2018. Constructing critical conversations in social work
supervision: Creating change. Clinical Social Work Journal, 46(4): 298-309. Doi:
10.1007/s10615-018-0681-6
O' Donoghue, K. & Engelbrecht, L. 2021. Introduction: Supervision in social work. In: O'
Donoghue, K. & Engelbrecht, L. (eds.). The Routledge international handbook of social work
supervision. New York: Routledge.
Patel, L. 2019. Social development, management and supervision of social workers. In:
Engelbrecht, L. K. E. (ed.). Management and supervision of social workers. 2nd ed.
Hampshire: Cengage Learning, EMEA.
Patel, M. & Patel, N. 2019. Exploring research methodology: Review article. International
Journal of Research & Review, 6(3): 48-55. https://doi.org/10.4444/ijrr.1002/1004.
Phungwayo, M. 2012. The performance management system of the Department of Social
Development in enhancing the delivery of social services. Master’s thesis. University of
Witwatersrand, South Africa.
Pietilä, A. M., Nurmi, S. M., Halkoaho, A. & Kyngäs, H. 2020. Qualitative research: Ethical
considerations. In: Kyngäs, H., Mikkonen, K. & Kääriäinen, M. (eds.). The application of
content analysis in nursing science research (pp.49-69). Cham: Springer.
Rankine, M. 2019. The ‘thinking aloud’ process: A way forward in social work
supervision. Reflective Practice, 20(1): 97-110.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2018.1564651
Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1996. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.
Government Gazette, Vol. 378, No. 17678. (8 May 1996) Pretoria: Government Printer.
Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1997. Ministry of Welfare and Population. White Paper for
Social Welfare. Notice 1008 of 1997. Government Gazette, Vol. 368, No. 18166. Pretoria:
Government Printer.
Roche, C. 2022. Decolonising reflective practice and supervision. Philosophy of Coaching:
An International Journal, 7(1): 30-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.22316/poc/07.1.03.
Ross, E. & Ncube, M. 2018. Student social workers’ experiences of supervision. Social
Sciences, 79(1): 31-54. Doi: 10.32444/IJSW.2018.79.1.31-54
Sandu, A. & Unguru, E. 2013. Supervision of social work practice in North-Eastern
Romanian rural areas. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 82: 386-391.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.280
Schmidt, G. & Kariuki, A. 2019. Pathways to social work supervision. Journal of Human
Behavior in the Social Environment, 29(3): 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.
2018.1530160.

212
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Shokane, F. F., Makhubele, J. C., Shokane, A. L. & Mabasa, M. A. 2017. The integrated
service delivery model challenges regarding the implementation of social work supervision
framework in Mopani District, Limpopo Province. International Conference on Public
Administration and Development Alternatives (IPADA), 278-287.
Singh, S. & Wassenaar, D. R. 2016. Contextualising the role of the gatekeeper in social
science research. South African Journal of Bioethics and Law, 9(1): 42-46.
Doi: 10.7196/SAJBL.2016.v9i1.465
Sithole, M. S. 2020. The first-time supervisors’ experiences of power relations in social
service professions: Case study of social work supervisors in the public sector. Journal of
Public Administration and Development Alternatives, 5(2): 68- 80.
https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-jpada-v5-n2-a6
Sithole, M. S. & Shokane, A. L. 2023. Workplace learning in the contemporary supervision
landscape: The case of supervision in a social service organisation. Social Work/Maatskaplike
Werk, 59(2): 127-149. Doi: 10.15270/59-2-1125.
Spolander, G. 2019. The impact of neoliberalism on management and supervision. In:
Engelbrecht, L. K. E. (ed). Management and supervision of social workers: Issues and
challenges within a social development paradigm. 2nd ed. (pp.278-287). Hampshire: Cengage
Learning, EMEA.
Tropman, F. E. 2022. Managerial supervision. Encyclopedia of Social Work, 20: 01-22.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199975839.013.1511.
Ubink, J. & Duda, T. 2021. Traditional authority in South Africa: Reconstruction and
resistance in the Eastern Cape. Journal of Southern African Studies, 47(2): 191-208.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057070.2021.1893573
Vetfuti, N., Goliath, V. M. & Perumal, N. 2019. Supervisory experiences of social workers in
child protection services. Southern African Journal of Social Work and Social
Development, 31(2): 1-18.
White, V. 2015. Reclaiming reflective supervision. Practice, 27(4): 251-264.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09503153.2015.1048055
Wong, P. Y. J. & Lee, A. E. Y. 2015. Dual roles of social work supervisors: Strain and
strengths as managers and clinical supervisors. China Journal of Social Work, 8(2): 164-181.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17525098.2015.1039168.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
Sandile Ntethelelo Gumbi is a PhD candidate and a contract Lecturer at the University of
KwaZulu-Natal in the discipline of Social Work. His research focus is mainly, on Social Work
Supervision, Decoloniality and Afrocentricity. Mr Gumbi conducted a Masters study from
January 2019 to December 2021, and that is the study on which the article is based. He was
responsible for conceptualising the article and led the process, including collating the activities
and liaison with the Journal.

213
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk, 2024: 60(1)
Ntombifikile Mazibuko is a Professor Emeritus at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, also
serves as an Interim Senior Director in the office of Pro Vice-Chancellor: Student Services,
leading the Project Renewal of the institutional student support services. Prof Mazibuko
specialises in social development, social policy, management administration and leadership.
She contributed from the conceptualisation to the finalisation of the article, including
interpretation of findings.
Mbongeni Shadrack Sithole is a senior lecturer in the Department of Social Work in the
School of Applied Human Sciences at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. His research interests
involve Afrocentricity, decoloniality, management and administration and inclusive education.
He supervised the study and assisted with the drafting of the article.