This site seems to think so.
Here's what they say about the relationship:
The Supervision relations are asymmetric with one partner being the Supervisor and the other â€“ Supervisee.
These relations are considered the worst possible in Socionics. The Supervisor's “Leading„ function is the “Vulnerable„ function of the Supervisee. But unlike the Conflicting relations the Supervisee cannot “hit back„ as his “Leading„ function is the strong “Creative„ function of his Supervisor.
To the Supervisor it seems that the Supervisee is a capable but incomplete person, who can benefit from his advice and attention. As his advice goes from his “Leading„ function straight to the “Vulnerable„ function of his Supervisee, but in a way that the Supervisee not only understands, but is identical to how he sees the world, the Supervisee is left willing to learn, but completely unable to do so.
To the Supervisor it starts to look as if the Supervisee deliberately ignores his advice, which leads to the displeasure of the Supervisor, who starts to force his picture of the world (the “Leading„ function of the Supervisor and the “Vulnerable„ function of the Supervisee) â€“ with an intent only to explain his dissatisfaction, but again in the way (through his “Creative„ function) that seems justified to the Supervisee, who feels angry and undervalued, but keeps on trying to satisfy his partner.
If the Supervisee tries to explain his feelings, the Supervisor thinks that the Supervisee makes troubles for nothing.
Depending on the types of people involved and psychological distance, this might take different amount of time before a complete break-up.
Supervision relations are common for the romance and marriage. Partners share two values out of for with the strong Leading function of the Supervisee being the strong Creative function of the Supervisor. But the Leading function of the Supervisor is the weak Vulnerable function of the Supervisee.
Therefore people often find supervision relations intriguing. They have common points and share area of interests so that spending time together can be rewarding.
For the Supervisee the Supervisor is someone who's able to deal effortlessly with the kind of problems they've always been struggling with, which can build admiration and respect in the beginning.
The Supervisor often sees the Supervisee as someone to whom they can relate, but who lacks some experience in life and needs their help and advice.
Due to the partly shared values, the Supervisee in the beginning tries to follow that advice. Even if it is hard for them, they agree on the advantages and see the advice as valuable. But later on, they find out that no matter how hard they try, they are not able to perform to the standards put in place by the Leading function of the Supervisor. That realization often takes a long time.
They also often project their vision of life on to their Supervisor due to the shared values and it is very hard to see the big differences in the attitudes.
The Supervisor at this point begins to feel underrated, as in his/her eyes he/she does all the heavy lifting and don't get anything in return. They would expect to get the kind of support they would from their Duals, which is impossible as the strongest function of their Duals is the background function of the Supervisee. That means that the Supervisee acts on it subconsciously and mostly to protect their partner from these kind of information completely. Which is counterproductive, as the Supervisor needs and appreciates this type of information.
The Supervisor also starts to perceive the lack of ability of the Supervisee as a deliberate sabotage. As for the Supervisor it is incomprehensible how someone could not be able to deal with such an obvious and natural type of information.
At the same time the Supervisee feels he/she does more than he/she should be expected to and also doesn't get anything in return as their partner lacks two of their values.
Often people in the Supervision relations break up feeling betrayed and blaming the other partner for all the troubles.
The Supervision relations are considered to be the toughest in Socioncs. And also very misleading as in the beginning they can be quite fulfilling.
Being in a relationships with your Supervisor or Supervisee would take a lot of effort in order to make it work and in the end will require to make a lot of conscious compromises based on the knowledge of your partners type almost with every step you take.
- See more at: http://e*********.com/index.php?page....kVlHB2d3.dpuf
I'm thinking there may be some truth to this. I've always felt like I've had more difficult relations with SLE (Supervisor) than SEE (conflict). Then again, I don't know as many SEEs and haven't had as much experience with them. I could be mistyping myself as LII and I'm really EII but this point I doubt it.
The assymetry part of it is interesting. At least in a conflict relationship, you can strike back so you're not as powerless. In a supervision relationship, it doesn't quite work that way, one person always has the 'upper hand.'
Do you think it matters if you're the supervisor or the supervisee? Which is worse?
Personally I find it worse to be on the supervisee end as I feel more helpless and inadequate but the being on the supervisor end definitely brings it's own challenges.
I supervise IEE. I greatly respect their Ne and Fi skills but their PoLR is Ti. Why is it that they can't get the basic Ti stuff? It's like they're not even trying to get it. Oh yeah, their PoLR is where my base it.
So do you find that talking to your supervisee is like banging your head against a brick wall?
Where do you think supervision relations rank amongst all of the other relation types?