Synergistic Supervision Scale (SSS)

Abstract

The Synergistic Supervision Scale (SSS) is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to assess the supervisory practices of administrators, particularly within the field of Student Affairs in higher education. Developed based on the theoretical framework of Synergistic Supervision proposed by Winston and Creamer, the scale measures the extent to which a supervisor employs collaborative, developmental, and supportive behaviors. The SSS is crucial for evaluating supervisory effectiveness and its impact on staff satisfaction, professional growth, and institutional goal attainment. It helps organizations determine alignment between current supervisory practices and the integrated model necessary for fostering high-performing teams.

Keywords

Synergistic Supervision, Supervision, Student Affairs, Higher Education, Leadership, Professional Development, Organizational Behavior, Staff Evaluation

Authors

The scale and its underlying theoretical model were primarily developed and validated through the work of Robert B. Winston, Jr., Don G. Creamer, Stephanie A. Saunders, Deborah L. Cooper, and others associated with research into higher education administration and staff development.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Synergistic Supervision Scale is to provide subordinates with a structured method for evaluating their supervisor’s adherence to the principles of Synergistic Supervision. This model posits that effective supervision integrates three critical functions: educational/developmental, managerial/administrative, and supportive/relational. By measuring these dimensions, the SSS allows organizations to identify specific areas of supervisory strength and weakness, facilitating targeted training and professional development for managers.

Furthermore, the SSS is often used in academic research to correlate supervisory styles with outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, employee engagement, and intention to turnover, especially among new professionals entering the higher education sector.

Construct

The SSS measures the construct of Synergistic Supervision, defined as an integrated approach to supervision that simultaneously addresses the needs of the staff member, the unit, and the institution. This construct is multidimensional, typically encompassing:

• Developmental Function: The supervisor’s commitment to facilitating the subordinate’s professional growth, addressing weaknesses, and supporting career advancement (e.g., mentoring, planning development goals).
• Managerial Function: The supervisor’s effectiveness in administrative tasks, including goal setting, decision-making, resource allocation, and ensuring staff members are informed about institutional objectives.
• Relational/Supportive Function: The supervisor’s ability to build trust, provide emotional support, advocate for the staff member, and foster a positive, collaborative work environment.

Synergistic supervision moves beyond traditional managerial oversight by emphasizing shared decision-making and mutual responsibility for achieving organizational goals, thereby creating synergy between individual and institutional success.

Validity

Initial research, such as the validation study by Saunders, Cooper, Winston, & Chernow (2000), provided evidence for the scale’s construct validity. The scale items were derived directly from the conceptual model of Synergistic Supervision, ensuring content validity. Subsequent studies have confirmed its criterion validity, showing that SSS scores significantly predict related outcomes, such as higher levels of job satisfaction and lower intentions to turnover among staff members, particularly in student affairs roles (Tull, 2006).

Exploratory factor analysis has been employed to confirm the scale’s underlying structure, generally supporting the hypothesized multidimensionality of the construct. While the precise factor structure may vary slightly across samples, the scale consistently captures the core components of developmental, managerial, and supportive supervision, demonstrating adequate construct validity for use in organizational and academic settings.

Reliability

The SSS demonstrates strong internal consistency, which is a key measure of psychometrics reliability. Studies consistently report high Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the overall scale, typically ranging between .90 and .95, indicating excellent reliability. This suggests that the items within the scale are highly interrelated and measure the same underlying construct of synergistic supervision effectiveness.

Specific subscales derived from factor analysis also typically exhibit acceptable to good internal consistency (e.g., alphas above .70), confirming that the instrument reliably measures the distinct components of the synergistic model. While test-retest reliability data may be less frequently cited, the high internal consistency confirms the scale’s robustness for cross-sectional assessment of supervisory relationships.

Factor Analysis

Initial investigations utilized Factor Analysis to determine the empirical structure of the SSS. The findings generally support a multi-factor model, aligning with the theoretical components of Synergistic Supervision (Developmental, Managerial, and Supportive). For instance, the Saunders et al. (2000) study confirmed that the 22 items load onto distinct yet related factors, reinforcing the idea that effective supervision is not a monolithic concept but rather an interplay of several measurable behaviors.

The factor structure typically distinguishes between items reflecting positive, developmental behaviors (e.g., professional planning, inclusion in decision-making) and items reflecting negative, counter-productive behaviors (e.g., public criticism, favoritism, blame). Researchers often score the scale by reversing the negative items and summing them to create a total Synergistic Supervision score, or by analyzing the scores for the distinct factors identified through the factor analysis.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire (Subordinate evaluation of supervisor)

Format: 22 items utilizing a 5-point Likert-type response scale.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Professionals and staff members reporting to a supervisor.

Age Group: Typically adult employees (22+), often focusing on new professionals.

Population Details: Primarily utilized within the context of higher education and student affairs administration, though applicable to other organizational settings requiring collaborative supervision.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their supervisor’s behavior on a scale where 1 = never or almost never; 2 = seldom; 3 = sometimes; 4 = often; 5 = always or almost always. Several items (e.g., 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 19, 22) are reverse-scored, as they describe detrimental or non-synergistic supervisory behaviors. A higher total score indicates a greater degree of synergistic supervision.

Keywords

Synergistic Supervision, Organizational Development, Leadership Evaluation, Staff Morale, Job Satisfaction, Psychometrics, Higher Education Management

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not consistently available in primary sources)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not consistently available in primary sources)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Refer to primary publications by Winston, R. B., Jr. and Creamer, D. G.)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was conceptualized in the 1990s, with key publications detailing its structure appearing around 1998–2000 (Winston & Creamer, 1998; Saunders et al., 2000). The SSS is often used freely in non-commercial academic research settings, particularly within higher education. Users should consult the primary authors or NASPA (Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education) resources for formal permission regarding commercial or institutional use.

The original PDF of related materials and the instrument can be downloaded here: http://naspafl.org/Resources/Documents/New_20Professional.pdf

Reference’s

• Saunders‚ S. A.‚ Cooper‚ D. L.‚ Winston‚ R. B.‚ Jr.‚ & Chernow‚ E. (2000). Supervising staff in student affairs: Exploration of the synergistic approach. Journal of College Student Development. 41‚ 181-192.
• Tull‚ Ashley. (2006). Synergistic Supervision‚ Job Satisfaction‚ and Intention to Turnover of New Professionals in Student Affairs. Journal of College Student Development‚ 47(4)‚ 465-480.
• Winston‚ R. B.‚ Jr.‚ & Creamer‚ D. G. (1997). Improving staffing practices in student affairs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Winston‚ R. B.‚ Jr.‚ & Creamer‚ D. G. (1998). Staff supervision and professional development: An integrated approach. New Directions for Student Services‚ 84‚ 29-42.
• Winston‚ R. B.‚ Jr.‚ & Miller‚ T. K. (1991). Human resource management: Professional preparation and staff se‎lection. In T. K. Miller‚ R. B. Winston‚ Jr.‚ & Associates (Eds.)‚ Administration and leadership in student affairs: Actualizing student development in higher education (2nd ed.‚ pp. 449-493). Muncie‚ IN: Accelerated Development.
• Winston‚ R. B.‚ Jr.‚ Torres‚ V.‚ Carpenter‚ D. S.‚ McIntire‚ D. D.‚ & Petersen‚ B. (2001). Staffing in student affairs: A survey of practices. College Student Affairs Journal‚ 21‚ 7-25.

Items of the Synergistic Supervision Scale (SSS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. My supervisor includes me in a significant way when making decisions that affect my area of responsibilities.
2. My supervisor works with me to gather the information needed to make decisions rather than simply providing me the information he/she feels is important.
3. My supervisor criticizes staff members in public.
4. My supervisor makes certain that I am fully knowledgeable about the goals of the division and institution.
5. My supervisor willingly listens to whatever is on my mind whether it is personal or professional.
6. My supervisor shows interest in promoting my professional or career advancement.
7. My supervisor is personally offended if I question the wisdom of his/her decisions.
8. My supervisor shows that he/she cares about me as a person.
9. My supervisor speaks up for my unit within the institution.
10. My supervisor expects me to fit in with the accepted ways of doing things‚ in other words‚ “don’t rock the boat.”
11. My supervisor has favorites on the staff.
12. My supervisor breaks confidences.
13. My supervisor takes negative evaluations of programs or staff and uses them to make improvements.
14. When faced with a conflict between an external constituent (for example‚ parent or donor) and staff members‚ my supervisor supports external constituents‚ even if they are wrong.
15. My supervisor is open and honest with me about my strengths and weaknesses.
16. If I am not careful‚ my supervisor may allow things that are not my fault to be blamed on me.
17. My supervisor rewards teamwork.
18. When the system gets in the way of accomplishing our goals.
19. My supervisor looks for me to make a mistake.
20. My supervisor and I develop yearly professional development plans that address my weaknesses or blind spots.
21. When problem solving‚ my supervisor expects staff to present and advocate differing points of view.
22. In conflicts with staff members‚ my supervisor takes students’ sides (even when they are wrong).

Scoring Key: 1 = never or almost never; 2 = seldom; 3 = sometimes; 4 = often; 5 = always or almost always

The instrument can be found at: http://naspafl.org/Resources/Documents/New_20Professional.pdf & https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc5110/m1/74/