Formal Mentoring Programs Part 2
Parise, M.R. & Forret, M.L. (2008) Formal Mentoring
Programs: The relationship of program design and support to mentors perceptions
of benefits and costs, Journal of
Vocation Behavior, 72, 225-240.
Part II
But what are the costs of mentoring? These include a
negative reflection on the mentor if the mentee does not perform as well as
expected. A mentor may be placed in the
uncomfortable position of having to defend his/her own status if the mentee
does not perform to expectations. If the partnership deteriorates, a
dysfunctional relationship may occur. Mentors may perceive that an individual
is not worth the time and effort that is necessary. The time a mentor devotes to mentoring has
opportunity costs. Scheduling issues and geographic distance may create
additional hurdles from a time commitment perspective. Lastly, mentors may be accused of nepotism if
they are viewed as showing favoritism to their mentees.
The article included research done on a mentoring program
that occurred over three years in a financial institution in the Midwest. There were not enough mentors initially, so
management reached out to strong performers and invited them to participate in
the program. Initially, when the program was small, mentors could list three
potential mentees and the coordinator tried to meet these requests. As the
program grew, this became unwieldy, and coordinators took on all responsibility
for matching pairs. Mentor training
included a definition of mentoring, why the program was established, roles,
relationships, benefits, outcomes and a suggested process to follow. Dyads received the same information, though
training for the two groups was conducted separately. Goal setting with
timeframes was the initial task for each dyad.
When surveys were done to assess benefits vs. costs, there were 97
mentors who participated in the research.
Correlation analysis indicates that voluntary participation
was significantly related to mentors perceiving the experience as rewarding and improved job performance. Training effectiveness was
positively related to rewarding experience.
There was no significant relationship between the matching process and
benefits perceived by mentors, though input to matching was negatively related
to nepotism. Interestingly, in follow-up
interviews, mentors thought proteges should have more say in the matches,
rather than the mentors. The conclusion
of the study highlights the following points: voluntary participation and
management support are important elements of a mentoring program. It is
suggested that mentors identify other potential mentors and that past proteges
become mentors in the future. Management needs to show strong, consistent and
visible support of the program. Support
includes having top managers serve as mentors, publicizing the success of the
program, providing financial support of the program and providing rewards or
recognition to the mentors.
Comments
Post a Comment