The Mentor's Companion

A Guide to Good Mentoring Practice

Rhianon Washington

• Publisher: University of Wales Press
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781786831866
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Study Aids
• Subtopic: Study Guides

This book explores what mentoring is and what are the essential skills required for it to be effective. Based on research, a new model is introduced – distal mentoring – which embodies best practice and can mitigate negative outcomes. Illustrated with relevant scenarios and mentoring tips, this book is a development tool for active practitioners, and expresses the mentoring process by emphasising its fundamental applications. This is reinforced by case studies and supporting theory, delivering a practical yet digestible medium. Following an initial exploration of the nature of mentoring, key techniques such as deep listening skills, empathy and powerful questioning are examined. Along with developing the relationship through empathy, emotional intelligence and rapport building, this book provides a comprehensive text in its introduction of mentoring as well as its recommendation of best practice.

CHAPTER 1

What is Mentoring?

No textbook can be fully functional without first giving the subject some context and clarity of meaning. The present chapter illustrates why doing that may not be so easy, and seeks to explain the nature of mentoring and its somewhat incestuous relationship with allied disciplines. It contains examples of the varied ways mentoring has been applied, and highlights other literature and studies undertaken on generic and specific aspects of mentoring. This synopsis of theories and applications aims to give a better feel for the principles that lie at the heart of mentoring as well as providing a reference source for further reading.

Spontaneous mentoring, so unwittingly prevalent in all aspects of life, is equally apparent in the workplace: the colleague willing to listen; the trusted confidante; and those with values that influence attitudes, whom we seek to emulate. Its influence can be seen in many typically supportive interactions:

helping or guiding a colleague

showing a new colleague the ropes

advising on organisational politics and etiquette

championing them or acting as an advocate

acting as a ‘sounding board’

Even in these informal contacts, reflecting on efficacy and applying structures, techniques and tools can turn everyday connections into something more powerful and productive.

Inevitably, not everyone has the good fortune to benefit from informal support structures that can act as positive influences on their lives, or is inherently blessed with a drive to be winners or leaders of the pack (in what might mistakenly be viewed as a natural selection process). Establishing a more formal, targeted approach to mentoring opens the way for those who are more reserved or unguided to release their latent potential and to level the playing field. It is in fulfilling this need that mentoring delivers its most rewarding contribution to society. Mentoring is a fluid concept. Daloz (1999: 203) writes engagingly of ‘The Yoda Factor’ where, so long as the ‘Force’ is with you, the giving of support and challenge can nurture individuals not only through periods of transformation or planning long-term career pathways, but also in dealing with the routine interactions we all regularly encounter.

In its purest and most recognised form, mentoring is an intentional, nurturing process between two individuals: the mentor and mentee. Through challenge, support and reflection, it seeks to guide and facilitate growth through professional and personal change.

Historically, mentoring was more aligned to sponsorship activities, such as apprenticeships, where an experienced employee would instruct a junior colleague within the structured framework of the apprenticeship. Over time it evolved to include other relationships, for example, between two co-equal professionals as in peer mentoring. The term ‘mentoring’ has been applied to a variety of specific support structures creating some bewilderment over its precise definition and meaning (explored later in this chapter). There are common features to many, but not all, forms of mentoring – for example, a pastoral intent towards the mentee, illustrating an interest in and contribution to their overall well-being. More demanding methods can also be applied, such as challenging questions, which can cause the mentee some unease but still be laced with benevolent intent.

The generic essence

Daloz (1999) describes the mentoring process as a journey for both mentor and mentee, a journey that should be transformational as the mentee gains knowledge and experience. The change is unique to each individual; what comes quite naturally for one may be challenging or completely overwhelming for others. The mentor can also be influenced, especially if challenged to overcome deep-rooted dogmatism and self-limiting beliefs. The mentor can be perceived both as a guide on this journey and as a bridge between old and new beliefs. The shifting nature of the mentor-mentee relationship is also evident; at the outset, the mentor is viewed as the authority figure, and, if successful, the mentoring process results in a more equitable connection between the two participants, with the mentee occasionally surpassing the mentor’s expertise.

Mentoring models are generally facilitative, enabling and non-threatening in tone. Business-based mentoring models, however, can be more aggressive in manner and sometimes even subversive in tone when ambitions and hidden agendas come into play. This raises concerns surrounding the ethical intent and underlying motives of the mentor and mentee. A moral code needs to be applied to both roles, but especially to the mentor who is better placed to exert influence, as the name itself implies. Failure to do so may betray the whole ethos of the mentor as a wise and trusted guide.

Pascarelli (1998: 231–43) cites the ‘Mentor’s Creed’ which represents the quintessential symbol of the mentoring experience:

I am here for you.
I believe in you.
I will not let you fail.
You have the power.

The success of mentoring is hardly a revelation if an individual is guided by a respected colleague adopting such a supportive and enabling tenet. But as a synergetic partnership it is dependent on trust carefully nurtured over a period of time and of mutual benefit to both participants.

The fact that so many people benefit from the service of a mentor through informal or even imperceptible means does not weaken the value of a more formal process. Ensuring efficacy is, however, a greater challenge particularly for the untrained mentor, naïve to the moral implications of their guidance or the benefits of reflective analysis and facilitative advice, thereby creating a higher risk of complications.

‘Mentoring means such a lot, because it’s very difficult to define’ Colley (2003: 12). Mentors can serve as coach, counsellor and role model, encompassing many functions, and the term ‘mentor’ has been adopted by various professions to represent specific activities, or to alter the perspectives of established roles. There are numerous sub-modalities such as executive mentoring (exclusive to high level professionals), and business or workplace mentoring, both of which adopt generic mentoring and coaching techniques. Mentoring can also take place between equals. In co-mentoring the mentor/mentee role is interchangeable (as it is in peer mentoring within groups) as it provides mutual support, shares understanding and promotes development, as well as allowing access to useful networks (Johannessen, 2016). Even the basic concept of the mentoring relationship can be turned completely on its head. One company, seeking to inject a better understanding of the workings of the organisation into their managers, innovatively assigned them mentors drawn from junior staff, who – in this instance – were the people in the know (Greengard, 2002).

Some organisations have preferred a tailored system; the National Health Service (NHS), for example, has developed styles of support akin to mentoring (including coaching, clinical supervision and preceptorship) with overlapping elements (such as a focus on career development) and a variety of approaches (goal setting, for example). Mentoring in nursing is actually closer to supervision in style. For example, a supervision record that explores areas for development also agrees targets and the actions necessary to achieve them then formally registers achievements. Although operating independently from the appraisal process, it is, nevertheless, an extension of it. Appraisal identifies an agreed outcome while supervision examines how this outcome is achieved, and forms part of an individual’s personal development plan (PDP). The PDP is linked to the requirements prescribed for each job. Preceptorship is structured supervision for newly qualified professionals designed to support them through the transitional process. All these procedures are underpinned by policies and guidelines. Within an organisation the size of the NHS, mentoring can encompass many roles and be aligned to other support mechanisms.

The characteristics required of a successful mentor, as viewed by the mentee, is a patron who cares, supports, envisages and identifies potential, inspires enthusiasm and energy while injecting experience and empathy into the relationship. Megginson, Clutterbuck, Garvey, Stokes and Garrett-Harris (2006) recognise mentoring and co-mentoring as useful learning tools in the continuance of professional development and discuss the logistics for building a relationship. They also assess the desirability of choosing a mentor external to the organisation as an individual’s aspirations may extend beyond their current environment. The pros and cons of such external support are explored later in this book. Internally sourced mentors, nevertheless, still deliver significant benefits for an organisation, particularly when assimilated into the appraisal process.

The mentor can facilitate and inspire learning and development. Allowing the mentee to assume responsibility for their own learning is an empowering proposition. In ‘Transformational Mentoring’, Hay (1995) describes the diverse roles of a mentor as ranging from role model or advocate to simply showing a colleague the ropes. Megginson et al. (2006) separate the mentoring relationship into four roles: performance improvement, development, counselling and knowledge sharing, with the mentee driving the process. The mentor, serving as an inclusive facilitator, guides and empowers their mentee.

Murray (2001) extols the virtues of mentoring and coaching within organisations to resolve skills shortages not satisfied by the standard education system, thereby addressing a variety of needs from functional literacy to leadership skills. Faced with increasing levels of illiterate school leavers, mentoring’s mounting relevance has been addressed by the Department for Education and Skills (2007) through measures such as the adjustment of school performance indicators to include basic skills.

Attempts to unequivocally categorise mentoring are therefore perplexing and, some would argue, irrelevant. Bush, Adam and Saunders (1992), for instance, contend that mentoring should avoid any simplistic labelling.

Johnson and Ridley (2008: xi) refer to mentoring as ‘dynamic, reciprocal, personal relationships’, and identify the outstanding mentor as someone who is ‘intentional’ about the role. Yet it is difficult to discern a clear, consistent definition of mentoring in general or its interrelationship with coaching, ‘a concept derived from mentoring’ (Garvey, 2010: 352). This lack of clarity can create misunderstanding or misalignment of mentor and mentee expectations, undesirable factors which are likely to inhibit the relationship.

The mentoring/coaching conundrum

Differences between coaching and mentoring may appear clear-cut when they operate in their purest forms at either end of the coaching/mentoring spectrum. Many practising programmes draw on techniques from both purer forms, and this hybrid approach blurs the distinction, particularly at the midpoint of this spectrum. Wallace and Gravells (2007: 10) postulated whether the length of the relationship could determine definitions, suggesting mentoring relationships were likely to last longer than a coaching attachment. Daloz (1999) supports this view likening the mentoring process to a journey, and, in pursuing the metaphor, implies the need for a map to clarify the path. The mentor, in such a scenario, could be viewed as the cartographer, driving forward and mapping uncharted areas of change.

Coaching implies a more focused, task-based approach solv...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Chapter 1. What is Mentoring?
• Chapter 2. Mentoring Skills: the Building Blocks
• Chapter 3. Mentoring Models
• Chapter 4. Toxic Mentoring
• Chapter 5. Mentoring Schemes
• Chapter 6. Distal Mentoring
• Afterword
• References
• Bibliography