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

Popular posts from this blog

Mentoring the Mentor

I just read an article called Mentoring the Mentors in the College Student Journal. It identifies various practices used to set up a mentoring program between MD-PhD. students and undergraduates. The program identified that reflective practice for both mentors and mentees is essential. The mentors used a number of tools to promote active listening. This included an exercise called “Chalk Talk” which was done in silence, with all participants identifying the qualities of a good mentor. This activity helped them to recognize the similarities in their expectations. Group activities promoted active listening. Games such as “two truths and a lie” reinforced the skill.  Strategies included teaching the mentors to ask open-ended questions of their mentees, rather than simply providing an answer.  Mentors were also encouraged to bounce ideas off each other. The article identifies that mentoring is a learned skill and sound listening skills are essential for the process to be successful.      
Read more

Mentoring 2.0

The article, Mentoring 2.0, found at www.training.org recommends that individuals participating in mentoring meet face to face regularly, but suggests leveraging technology if distance or time is an issue. During face-to-face meetings, cell phones should be silenced to respect each member’s time.  For communications that are not face to face, recommendations included the use of Google Hangouts, Skype, and message boards as appropriate avenues for communication.  Participation in webinars can improve the skills of both mentors and proteges.  Technology tools such as Google docs and Pinterest are suggested as a means to share ongoing ideas. Communication is meant to be a two way street, with both participants benefiting from the mentoring process.  Mentors may view this as an opportunity to learn new tools to enhance their productivity and technological expertise.  Please share your experiences using technology to support your mentoring experience. Thanks. Martha
Read more