Search results

One of the main aspects of a mentoring relationship involves the expectations that mentees have of an ideal mentor. However, the traits that mentees envision in an ideal mentor are unclear. The purpose of this paper is to present series of studies examined mentees’ ideas about their ideal mentor’s physical characteristics and mentoring functions. The authors also examined gender and racial (white/nonwhite) differences in ideal mentor preferences.

The two studies examined what mentees envision when they picture their ideal mentor, and whether the ideal mentor prototypes varied by participants’ ethnicity and gender. Study 2 further examined mentees’ ideal mentor characteristics in a forced choice ranking scale and the ideal mentor scale (Rose, 2003).

When asked to describe their ideal mentor’s appearance, participants provided detailed descriptions of the ideal mentor’s features. They also emphasized mentoring characteristics and behaviors, such as guidance. Participants’ preferences for their ideal mentor’s gender and race varied by the question format (open-ended description vs scale).When asked to envision their ideal mentor (Study 2), participants emphasized guidance, interpersonal warmth, and ethical integrity. Other mentoring characteristics and behaviors emerged in the content coding framework. Prototypes of the ideal mentors varied based on ethnicity and gender, but also on how the question was presented.

These findings suggest that the ideal mentor prototype involves guidance, understanding, and role modeling ethical values. Like other organizational roles (i.e. leaders), awareness of these traits informs how employees view mentors and what they expect from mentoring relationships. Facilitators of mentoring programs can consider the ideal mentor prototype during the matching process and the initial stages of the mentoring relationship.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how postsecondary mentoring programs address mentee dispositions prior to the mentee entering the reciprocal relationship, particularly which mentee dispositions are valued across mentoring program types, including peer, community-to-student, faculty-to-student and faculty-to-faculty programs.

This study employed quantitative content analysis to examine 280 institutional US postsecondary mentoring websites across four different institution types (public, four-year; private, four-year, non-profit; private, four-year, for-profit; public, two-year) and four different mentoring program types (peer or student-to-student, community-to-student, faculty-to-student and faculty-to-faculty programs). Grounded coding strategies were employed to generate these four mentoring program types, supported by extant research (Crisp et al., 2017).

Of 280 mentoring programs, 18.6 percent articulated mentee dispositions prior to entering the reciprocal relationship. When mentoring programs did address mentees, most programs articulated mentor duties aligned with mentee expectations (47.5 percent of programs) and program outcomes for mentees (65.7 percent of programs) rather than what the mentee can and should bring into a reciprocal relationship.

This study is delimited by its sample size and its focus on institutional website content. Future studies should explore how mentoring programs recruit and retain mentees, as well as how website communications address the predispositions and fit of mentees within different types of mentoring programs.

This study provided evidence that many postsecondary mentoring programs in the USA may not be articulating programmatic expectations of mentees prior to the mentoring relationship. By failing to address mentee predispositions, mentoring programs may not be accurately assessing their mentor’s compatibility with their mentees, potentially leading to unproductive mentoring relationships.

This study affirms extant research (Black and Taylor, 2017) while connecting mentor- and coaching-focused literature to the discussion of a mentee dispositions scale or measurement akin to Crisp’s (2009) College Student Mentoring Scale and Searby’s (2014) mentoring mindset framework. This study also forwards an exploratory model of mentoring program inputs and outputs, envisioning both mentor and mentee characteristics as fundamental inputs for a mentoring program rather than traditional models that view mentors as inputs and mentee achievements as outputs (Crisp, 2009; Searby, 2014).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of mentoring of young librarians in South East Nigeria so as to improve their research and scholarly publications.

The study confined its scope to 135 librarians in the five different federal universities in South East Nigeria. In all, 100 (80 percent) of the librarians were sampled. The instrument for data collection was questionnaire which contained 30 items derived from the research questions. The descriptive survey research design was used as research method. Librarians were grouped into young librarians (assistant librarian and librarian II) and higher librarians (librarian I, senior librarian, principal librarian, deputy university librarian and university librarian); for a comprehensive analysis of the study.

The findings of the study among others reveals that young librarians are a bit knowledgeable and conversant about the term “mentoring” but not equitable when compared to that of other higher librarians in matters of scholarly publication. Also there is evidence of mentoring in place in these libraries for boosting the research prowess of librarians, but in an informal form. The librarians believed that most times the mentee’s inability to open up during interaction, and unconstructive criticisms from mentors to their mentees; are serious challenges to successful mentoring for improved scholarly publications.

Research studies focusing on mentoring young librarians on research and scholarly publications in Nigeria, are rare. Furthermore, librarians are not conversant with the concept of mentoring and which mentoring practices and programs are currently in place in their libraries to boost their research prowess. Also, adopting a mentor and what to expect from both mentors and mentees concerning research publications are salient areas explored in the work. This study will raise important issues that relate to research publications of both librarians and other academic researchers especially in this research impact-factor driven world of ours.

This article reviews mentoring literature and presents the findings emerging from research into the dynamics of mentoring and how similarities and differences between mentor and mentee influence learning for both parties and the organisation. The principal organisations contributing to the research, Scottish Hydro‐Electric and Skipton Building Society, used different approaches to matching mentor and mentee. Theoretical models are developed from the findings that suggest that similarity will support the development of rapport whereas contrasts support learning. However, the importance of personal values should not be ignored.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the operating factors influencing a cross-organisational mentoring initiative created to support leadership development. The research provides insight on participants’ views and mentoring practices around planning and preparation of mentoring relationships, to inform future training of leaders.

The research is inductive in nature, using an exploratory approach via a two-stage qualitative analysis. The qualitative data were gathered via interviews with the initiative partners and questionnaires distributed to all mentors and mentees involved. Data were gathered at the outset of the initiative and one year later.

Emergent themes revealed that centrally driven criterion-based matching was deemed effective, with skills and experience of mentors perceived as more important than seniority. Support from senior management was of paramount importance at all stages. Clear personal and professional objective setting was vital at the outset of the mentoring relationship; however, a degree of fluidity in direction occurred over time. Planned periodic meetings to share experiences, aid reflection and gather feedback from individual mentors and mentees groups was requested. Finally, while the mentees should drive the process, it was recognised that mentors may be required to take the lead initially.

It is recognised that wider generalisations are limited; the initiative would require replication with a number of different participants to increase validity. However, as the research is exploratory in nature, there is value in the initial research findings with potential for replication within other organisations and for other cross-organisational mentoring initiatives.

The research provides a number of useful themes which practitioners could use to explore the creation of a cross-organisational mentoring scheme and provides benchmarking indicators for this.

This is an innovative approach to leadership training that can be seen in the limited literature and theory related to cross-organisational mentoring as a leadership training tool that the design team, a partnership of HR academics and HRD professionals, were able to access.

This abstract describes research to explore the extent to which issues such as personal courage, fear and the potential for failure are addressed in mentoring relationships. How much can mentoring contribute to personal growth and why it is that some people in mentoring relationships seem to have an almost transformational development experience and yet for others it seems to have little impact? The methodology consisted of individual interviews with National Health Service managers, focus group discussions, reflection on the authors’ experiences and discussions with delegates attending the 6th Annual European Mentoring Conference. The article summarises the issues of personal courage and fear addressed in different types of mentoring relationships and identifies the conditions necessary for mentoring relationships that are able to explore these issues.

Structural mentoring barriers are policies, practices and cultural norms that collectively disadvantage marginalized groups and perpetuate disparities in mentoring. This study aims to better understand structural mentoring barriers at the postdoctoral training stage, which has a direct impact on faculty diversity and national efforts to retain underrepresented groups in research careers.

A diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the USA were asked to participate in focus groups to discuss their training experiences. The authors conducted five 90-min focus groups with 32 biomedical postdocs, including 20 (63%) women and 15 (47%) individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (URG).

A social-ecological framework was used to categorize both the upstream and downstream manifestations of structural mentoring barriers, as well as mentoring barriers, overall. Notable structural barriers included: academic politics and scientific hierarchy; inequalities resulting from mentor prestige; the (over) reliance on one mentor; the lack of formal training for academic and non-academic careers; and the lack of institutional diversity and institutional mentor training. To overcome these barriers, postdocs strongly encouraged developing a network or team of mentors and recommended institutional interventions that create more comprehensive professional development, mentorship and belonging.

For postdoctoral scientists, structural mentoring barriers can permeate down to institutional, interpersonal and individual levels, impeding a successful transition to an independent research career. This work provides strong evidence for promoting mentorship networks and cultivating a “mentoring milieu” that fosters a supportive community and a strong culture of mentorship at all levels.

The purpose of this paper is to advance the argument for the transformative potential of e‐mentoring support to women entrepreneurs, presenting an e‐mentoring intervention to rural women entrepreneurs in Greece.

A six stage e‐mentoring process is practiced through a project supporting rural women entrepreneurs, based on mentees' and mentors' reactions. Their expressed degree of satisfaction with regard to the e‐mentoring relationship, achievement of personal goals, as well as their desire to continue the relationship are served as useful indicators. Questionnaires are used during three times (pre and post the e‐mentoring relationship, i.e. before, just after its end and six months later) to obtain information from mentees' and mentors' groups.

The features of the quality of the e‐mentoring relationship such as mentors'/mentees' characteristics, frequency of contacts, and e‐services are judged to be satisfactory by both mentors and mentees. Mentees perceive that they sufficiently achieved their personal goals, emphasizing the successful role modeling that their mentors provide. Mentors gain publicity and the broadening of their connections.

The survey results could offer substantial assistance to decision makers concerning designing and implementing e‐mentoring processes supporting female entrepreneurship.

Despite the explosion of online mentoring opportunities, few academic articles and little empirical evidence have addressed e‐mentoring support to women entrepreneurs. The present paper attempts to add research results and suggests a framework of e‐mentoring process discussing both mentors' and mentees' reactions.

The goals of a mentoring relationship are important to the development of mentees. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the specific needs of students and junior faculty in counseling programs.

The authors used a psychological phenomenological research approach to understand the role and significance of a mentor and the mentoring relationship. In this qualitative research study, pre-tenured faculty, doctoral- and master’s-level students in counselor education programs in the USA were interviewed (n=30), to explore the mentorship needs.

In the study, the authors identified 28 codes that emerged from the participants’ lived experiences, which then were organized into seven meta-codes. The seven meta-codes were: relationship between mentor and mentee; communication style or patterns; preferred gender of mentor; introduction to the relationship; mentee needs; mentee benefits; and experiences as a mentee.

In the paper, the authors sought to explore the mentoring needs of students and junior faculty in counselor education programs and how these needs can begin to be addressed effectively.