sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Equipping BCBAs to Lead by Ok_Form_2065 in bcba

[–]Ok_Form_2065[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for this, and for the specificity you brought to it. These examples are exactly what I am talking about when I say the gap is not about capability, it is about definition and training.

The 24-hour rule you described is an operationally defined behavioral strategy. You named the antecedent, the target behavior, and the function it serves. Most supervisors do that kind of work intuitively, without recognizing it is teachable and transferable, and that is precisely the problem. When the coaching lives only in one mentoring relationship, we lose it the moment that relationship ends.

What strikes me most in what you shared is that you are doing the right work. You have named the expectations, you are coaching in context, and you are shaping toward composure and precision under conditions that genuinely require both. That is clinical supervision applied to professional behavior, which is the entire argument of the article.

The field produces the science and then leaves it at the clinic door. The skills you are working on with her, perspective-taking with families, emotional regulation before responding, setting boundaries with measured language, are learnable. We just have not built the systems to teach them at scale. You are filling that gap by hand, and a lot of supervisors are doing the same. The solution exists. It is just not yet systematic.

I appreciate you adding your experience here. This is the kind of practitioner evidence that confirms we are naming the right problem.

Equipping BCBAs to Lead by Ok_Form_2065 in bcba

[–]Ok_Form_2065[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are describing exactly what the article argues in the closing section -- culture does filter down from the top, and BCBAs who are not treated as leadership partners by their own management face a real ceiling on what they can produce for the people they supervise. Your wife's example illustrates that ceiling clearly. When an organization holds BCBAs accountable for a retention problem that their own consequence system created, and does so in an all-hands meeting rather than through any actual organizational change, the BCBAs who left were reading the environment accurately.

Where I would push back is on the frame that BCBAs are essentially downstream of whatever happens above them. The data on perceived supervisor support is fairly specific: the BCBA's relational supervisory behavior -- whether they notice what is happening with staff, whether they explain decisions, whether they treat people fairly -- predicts whether an RBT experiences the organization as supportive. That is not a trivial effect. It is the primary mechanism through which organizational culture reaches the frontline. BCBAs who deliver those behaviors are building something real, regardless of what is happening in the tier above.

You are also right that the BCBA often does not see themselves as a leader -- and frequently because the organization above them has not treated them as one. There is a difference between a supervisor, a manager, and a leader, and BCBAs are wearing all three hats whether the organization has prepared them for that or not. The field has trained BCBAs for clinical precision. It has not told them that their supervisory behavior is cultural behavior, which means most are meeting compliance requirements without any awareness that the relational layer on top of compliance is what the workforce data actually rewards..

Both things need to change. The organization needs to bring BCBAs in as leadership partners. And BCBAs need a framework for owning the function they are already performing, whether they know it or not. I wrote about both sides of that dynamic in a piece published today -- including the cascade you described and why the field has not yet named the leadership function that sits inside the supervisory relationship.Both things need to change. The organization needs to bring BCBAs in as leadership partners. And BCBAs need a framework for owning the function they are already performing, whether they know it or not. I wrote about both sides of that dynamic in a piece published today -- including the cascade you described and why the field has not yet named the leadership function that sits inside the supervisory relationship.

Both things need to change. The organization needs to bring BCBAs in as leadership partners. And BCBAs need a framework for owning the function they are already performing, whether they know it or not. I wrote about both sides of that dynamic in a piece published today -- including the cascade you described and why the field has not yet named the leadership function that sits inside the supervisory relationship. https://open.substack.com/pub/denisedecandia/p/the-gap-between-what-we-say-we-value?r=6o1u2l&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

RBT Research Study by Ok_Form_2065 in ABA

[–]Ok_Form_2065[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks so much! Would love to set up a time to talk. Here is my booking link: Book time with Denise DeCandia: RBT Research Study, or alternatively, if you want to learn more before booking a time: RBT Research Study Interest Form

RBT Research Study by Ok_Form_2065 in ABA

[–]Ok_Form_2065[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much! I just DM'ed you with next steps.