Every organization invests in training. New staff attend orientation, experienced staff participate in workshops, and teams complete online learning modules. The expectation is simple: if people receive good training, their practice will improve.
Yet supervisors often notice a different reality. A few weeks after training, many of the new skills are used inconsistently—or not at all.
If the training was good, why don’t the skills consistently show up in practice?
Training Is Necessary—But Insufficient
Research on transfer of training has consistently shown that what happens after training plays an important role in whether newly learned knowledge and skills actually become part of everyday practice. A supportive work environment—particularly opportunities to practice, receive feedback, and receive support from supervisors—can significantly influence whether learning transfers to the job (Blume et al., 2010; Govaerts & Dochy, 2014; Hughes et al., 2020).
Training increases knowledge, but knowledge does not automatically become skill.
The strongest improvements occur when staff have repeated opportunities to practice new methods in real work settings, receive timely feedback, and are supported by supervisors who actively coach and mentor their development.
When field mentoring was first described in the Strengths Model Case Management literature nearly a decade ago (Carlson, Goscha, & Rapp, 2016), we stated that training alone was not enough to produce lasting changes in practice. Since then, implementation science has continued to move in the same direction. Across healthcare disciplines, researchers increasingly describe coaching, mentorship, and supportive supervision as essential strategies for helping practitioners translate knowledge into high-quality practice.
Although the terminology differs, the underlying principle remains the same: people become more skilled when they receive guided practice, timely feedback, and ongoing support in real-world settings.
What Field Mentoring Really Is
At its core, field mentoring is an intentional teaching process that occurs while real work is being done.
Rather than discussing practice after the fact or relying solely on classroom instruction, supervisors and staff come together around a specific learning objective. The supervisor’s role is not simply to observe performance, but to actively help the practitioner develop a particular skill through modeling, coaching, guided practice, reflection, and feedback.
Field mentoring is not:
- Shadowing
- Field observation
- Crisis support
- Tagging along
- An impromptu visit
These activities certainly have value, but they are not designed primarily as teaching experiences. The difference is purpose.
Field observation asks, “How did the practitioner perform?”
Field mentoring asks, “How can the practitioner become more skilled?”
Field mentoring is:
- Planned
- Collaborative
- Focused on one specific practice skill at a time
- Designed around learning in real practice situations
Because field mentoring is intentional, every session has a clear learning objective for skill improvement, a plan for helping staff develop that skill, and dedicated time afterward for reflection and feedback.
Unlike field observation, where the primary goal may be evaluation, the primary goal of field mentoring is learning. Success is measured not by whether the supervisor observed the work, but by whether the practitioner left the session with greater confidence and competence.
The shift is subtle but important.
Great supervisors certainly monitor quality, support staff, and ensure accountability. They also see themselves as teachers. Rather than merely having a conversation with staff about a session that has already occurred, they create opportunities in vivo to teach, coach, and refine practice while learning can still occur.
Field mentoring is one of the most effective ways to bring that teaching role to life.
Think Like an Athletic Coach
A basketball coach doesn’t teach free throws via PowerPoint.
They stand beside the player. They watch. They give immediate feedback. The player practices again. And they repeat.
Legendary UCLA basketball coach John Wooden was known for teaching every detail of the game during practice. Whether it was shooting, passing, footwork, or even putting on socks correctly to prevent blisters, Wooden believed excellence came from practicing specific skills under the guidance of a coach who provided immediate instruction and feedback.
He didn’t expect players to become better simply because they attended a team meeting.
He taught while they practiced.
Great supervision follows the same principle.
Staff don’t become more skilled simply because they attended a workshop. They become more skilled when supervisors work alongside them, helping them practice specific skills, offering timely feedback, and creating opportunities for continuous improvement.
Yet in behavioral health, we often assume one training should permanently change practice.
Imagine becoming skilled at working on cars from a lecture.
Or becoming fluent in a second language by reading a manual.
Or learning how to drive a car by attending webinars.
Behavioral health is no exception. Helping people navigate recovery requires sophisticated interpersonal skills that are developed through guided practice—not training alone.
In fact, the principles underlying field mentoring can be found across countless professions. Experienced mechanics work alongside apprentices in the shop. Skilled tradespeople teach on construction sites. Veteran teachers mentor new educators in the classroom. Engineers, attorneys, firefighters, nurses, and software developers all rely on experienced professionals coaching less experienced colleagues while real work is taking place.
Although the terminology varies, the underlying process is remarkably similar: people develop complex skills through guided practice, observation, feedback, and reflection in authentic work settings.
What Field Mentoring Looks Like in Practice
Practice Example
During individual supervision, a case manager explains how they are struggling to begin a Strengths Assessment with several people on their caseload.
Rather than spending another hour discussing engagement strategies in the office, the supervisor suggests a field mentoring session.
Together, they identify one specific skill to practice: introducing the Strengths Assessment in a way that connects it to what is important to the person.
They select a person who has expressed interest in a specific goal—for example, housing, employment, education, building relationships, or greater involvement in the community. They agree that the supervisor will observe and offer feedback afterward, and they schedule the visit.
Following the meeting, they discuss what went well, where the conversation became difficult, and how the introduction could be strengthened next time.
Notice that the supervisor didn’t try to improve everything.
The goal wasn’t to solve every challenge the case manager faced. It was to help them become more skilled at one specific practice behavior in one real situation.
That focused approach is what makes field mentoring such a powerful teaching strategy.
Proficiency in complex practice develops one skill at a time. Attempting to improve several skills during a single field mentoring session often dilutes learning. Concentrating on one specific behavior allows the supervisor to provide focused coaching, meaningful feedback, and repeated opportunities for practice until the skill becomes more natural and confident.
The Four Questions Every Supervisor Should Ask
Every successful field mentoring session begins before the supervisor and staff member ever meet with a person receiving services.
Spending a few minutes answering four planning questions dramatically increases the focus and effectiveness of the session. Without this preparation, field mentoring can easily become little more than field observation.
| Question | Purpose |
|---|---|
| What is the skill we are trying to improve? | Gives the session a clear learning objective |
| Which person receiving services and setting provides the best opportunity for learning? | Creates a meaningful opportunity to practice |
| How will the person receiving services benefit? | Keeps the session person-centered |
| What will the supervisor’s role be? | Clarifies the teaching strategy |
These questions do more than organize the session—they shape how the supervisor thinks about teaching.
Rather than simply accompanying staff into the field, the supervisor and practitioner intentionally identify a skill to develop, choose a situation where the skill can be practiced, ensure the person receiving services benefits from the experience, and select the teaching approach most likely to help the practitioner succeed.
In just a few minutes, the session shifts from observation to purposeful learning.
The Biggest Mistake Supervisors Make
One of the most common mistakes supervisors make is trying to improve too many aspects of practice during a single field mentoring session.
When the learning objective becomes too broad—such as “improve engagement” or “conduct a better Strengths Assessment”—the session quickly loses focus. The practitioner leaves with several ideas but little clarity about what to practice differently next time.
Effective field mentoring takes the opposite approach. It narrows the learning objective to one specific, observable behavior that can be practiced, discussed, and refined.
Rather than trying to improve an entire session, the supervisor may focus on how the practitioner introduces the Strengths Assessment, asks open-ended questions, reflects a person’s strengths, or summarizes what they heard.
Proficiency develops one skill at a time.
| Too Broad | Specific and Teachable |
|---|---|
| Improve engagement | Use reflective statements and open-ended questions to explore what is most meaningful and important to the person. |
| Conduct a better Strengths Assessment | Introduce a Strengths Assessment by helping the person describe what they hope to move toward during their time in services. |
| Improve use of the Personal Empowerment Plan | Help the worker develop one or two first-person action steps that can be completed within the next week and reflect what the person is willing and confident they can do. |
The goal of field mentoring is not to improve an entire practice. It is to help practitioners master one observable behavior at a time.
Feedback Is Where Learning Happens
The learning that occurs during field mentoring doesn’t happen simply because the supervisor was present.
It happens during the discussion that follows.
Feedback transforms an experience into a learning opportunity.
Before offering observations, supervisors should invite staff to evaluate their own performance. Self-reflection encourages practitioners to think critically about what happened, identify what worked well, and recognize opportunities for improvement.
Rather than feedback being something that is done to staff, it becomes a collaborative conversation about learning.
Effective feedback is also specific.
Saying, “You did a great job,” provides encouragement but little guidance for future practice. Feedback becomes much more powerful when it identifies the specific behaviors that contributed to success or the specific skills that could be strengthened.
Specific feedback helps practitioners repeat effective behaviors and refine those that need improvement.
Why Supervisors Avoid Field Mentoring
Supervisors often tell us they avoid field mentoring for four reasons:
- They don’t have time.
- They worry staff will feel evaluated rather than supported.
- They don’t see themselves as experts.
- They assume people receiving services won’t want a supervisor present.
These concerns are understandable. Field mentoring does require an investment of time, and for supervisors already carrying many responsibilities, finding that time can be difficult.
The question, however, is not simply whether field mentoring takes time. Teaching takes time. If supervisors are responsible for helping practitioners develop complex practice skills, some supervision time needs to be devoted to actually practicing those skills.
One advantage of field mentoring is that it does not require the practitioner to set aside additional time in their workday for training. Learning occurs during an actual case management session the practitioner would already be conducting. The work itself becomes the classroom. Rather than removing practitioners from practice to teach them about practice, supervisors join them in the work they are already doing and use that experience to help develop one specific skill.
Supervisors also do not need to be experts in every situation they encounter. Good coaches do not always have the answer. They know how to help someone examine their practice, recognize what is working, experiment with different approaches, and continue developing their skills. Field mentoring can be a learning experience for both the practitioner and the supervisor.
The concern that staff will feel evaluated is particularly important. If field mentoring feels like a performance review conducted in the field, staff are unlikely to take risks, acknowledge uncertainty, or experiment with new approaches. Supervisors need to be explicit about the purpose: we are here to learn, not to catch mistakes. That message becomes credible when supervisors stay curious, notice what staff are doing well, and treat difficulties as learning opportunities rather than evidence of poor performance.
The person receiving services must also remain at the center of the experience. Their meeting should never become simply an opportunity for staff training. The supervisor’s role should be explained, the person should agree to the supervisor being present, and there should be a clear reason to believe the experience can be useful to them. This is why one of the four planning questions is so important: How will the person receiving services benefit?
Perhaps the biggest barrier, however, is simply getting started. Field mentoring can feel uncomfortable at first because it asks supervisors and staff to work together differently. Like any new practice, it becomes more natural with experience.
Start small.
Choose one practitioner. Identify one skill. Find one real opportunity to practice it. Make time afterward to reflect together on what happened, what worked, and what to try next time.
That is field mentoring.
And when it becomes a regular part of supervision, something important begins to change. Supervision is no longer only a place to discuss practice. It becomes a place where practice is developed.
Great Supervisors Develop Tomorrow’s Practitioners
Ask yourself this: How many hours did your staff spend in training this year?
Now ask a second question: How many hours did you spend beside them helping them apply those skills with real people?
The answer to that second question may tell us a great deal about whether training ultimately changes practice.
Organizations often ask how to improve fidelity to Strengths Model Case Management. The answer is rarely another training alone. Training can introduce new ideas, tools, and practice skills. Developing proficiency requires something more—opportunities to practice those skills in real situations with the guidance, encouragement, and feedback of a supervisor.
This is where field mentoring becomes so important. It gives supervisors a way to move beyond talking about practice and begin actively developing it. One practitioner, one skill, and one real situation at a time.
Training introduces practice. Supervision develops it.
Great supervision, then, isn’t measured only by how well supervisors oversee the work being done today. It is also measured by how well they help practitioners develop the skills and confidence they will carry into tomorrow.
Great supervisors develop tomorrow’s practitioners.
Want to strengthen field mentoring in your organization?
Strengths Model Inc. provides support to organizations and supervisors to develop effective field mentoring practices that improve staff skills and strengthen fidelity to Strengths Model Case Management.
Interested in learning more? Contact Rick Goscha at rick@strengthsmodel.com
References
Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1065–1105.
Carlson, L., Goscha, R. J., & Rapp, C. A. (2016). Field mentoring: An important strategy for evidence-based practice implementation. Best Practices in Mental Health, 12(2), 1–13.
Govaerts, N., & Dochy, F. (2014). Disentangling the role of the supervisor in transfer of training. Educational Research Review, 12, 77–93.
Hughes, A. M., Zajac, S., Woods, A. L., & Salas, E. (2020). The role of work environment in training sustainment: A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 62(1), 166–183.
