9 Lies About Mentoring

I’ve heard it said, a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. What I’m talking about here today is the fake news about mentoring that’s criss-crossing the globe and the fallout we’re suffering, today, because of it. Through challenging these myths about mentoring, I’m going to reveal the truth and what actually works.

  1. Structured mentoring no longer works

The truth: Humans yearn for structure when they are uncertain

It can be hard for people to admit that they’re not sure how to start a mentoring relationship. Structured programs provide tried and true results and are probably needed even more today than ever before. Structured programs train mentors and mentees in their responsibilities and expectations. They train mentors in listening skills to help mentees discover their own goals, and solutions by prompting reflection and deep thinking around their work challenges. Mentors untrained in the art of listening can derail even the best mentoring relationships, by giving misguided advice, forming judgements about the mentee and simply not hearing what the mentee is saying.

  1. Any manager has the skills to mentor

The truth: Any manager has the potential to mentor.

Managing and mentoring are two very different skill sets. Managers come to the table to guide their team to achieve organisational goals. Good mentors, on the other hand, are expected to provide a safe and trusting environment for the mentee to explore and discover their own goals. Mentors use the art of listening and conversation to guide the mentee to their own solutions.

In AIM’s 2020 Leadership Survey,  it was found that the average manager overrates their performance in a number of areas – most notably in Coaching and Mentoring (41.81%), Displaying Emotional Intelligence (39.25%), and Displaying Honesty and Integrity (34.3%). Most managers have a lot to learn when it comes to mentoring – if only they would admit it.

  1. It’s easy to reach out to a mentor

Truth: It’s not easy to approach potential mentors.

In times past, when it was common to have elder members of the community spend unstructured time with less experienced people, the art of mentoring may have been handed down through generations. Today, it’s rare for younger generations to have access to wise counsel through their family and community, particularly for those who come from underrepresented groups in the workplace. Not only that, introverts find it intimidating to reach out to senior members of the workforce for career guidance.

Structured mentoring can make it possible for people from all walks of life to tap into the knowledge and wisdom around them, by having the match made for them.

  1. People choose mentors wisely

Truth: Most people choose a mentoring partner just like themselves.

Choosing mentors can be tricky: There is no one size fits all, and a lot of it comes down to luck and persistence. Left to their own devices, people may try to connect with mentors that are too senior for them, or mentors with whom they feel too comfortable because the mentor looks just like them, just a bit older. There needs to be enough stretch in the match to be sufficiently challenging for the mentee without intimidating them.

  1. Mentoring programs are easy to implement

Truth: Mentoring programs are surprisingly difficult to implement.

There are so many moving parts, including the sheer individuality and unpredictability of humans, it’s no wonder many programs fail!

Yet when a program is successful, participants will unanimously tell you (and everyone they know): “That was the best experience of my life”.

  1. The best mentors are the most successful in their careers

Truth: Career success and the ability to mentor are two very different beasts.

You may have discovered how to achieve excellence in your work by figuring out your uniqueness and how to apply this to the needs of your workplace. Yet helping a mentee to do precisely this is another story.

The best mentors achieve excellence in their ability to help a mentee discover their unique gifts and how to use them to best advantage at their place of work.

They’re gifted in the art of developmental conversations.

  1. The best time to start a mentoring program is when things are stable

Truth: A good time for mentoring can be in periods of disruption.

Organisations facing massive change or disruption change may avoid beginning mentoring programs for team members because they think it will overload them. Yet this is precisely when less experienced team members would benefit from talking with wise mentors. After all, it’s within the process of upheaval that people discover their real strengths and what they’re capable of achieving. The 2020 pandemic has revealed the great extent to which mentoring can be instrumental in maintaining meaningful connections with others – and social connection is important for wellbeing.

  1. The number of participants in a mentoring program equals success

Truth: The number of participants in a mentoring program frequently only reflects the budget!

No, seriously, participant numbers are meaningless. Quality trumps quantity every time in mentoring. It is the mentee’s satisfaction level and goal achievement at the close of the program that truly reflects its success for the individual participants. Did the mentee emerge from the program with a better understanding of their career aspirations, their professional development goals and how to get there? Do they feel more optimistic about their career direction? And did mentors also learn from the experience? These dimensions are how we gauge success.

  1. Mentoring is a “nice to have” but should not be high priority for organisations

Truth: Mentoring delivers a high ROI against many important people goals.

The benefits of mentoring to organisations are numerous. They include helping employees be more successful in their work, reducing turnover, increasing loyalty and helping create new development opportunities for participants. Mentoring programs have the potential to improve these and other measures of employee engagement. Most leaders would be hard pressed to say these are not high priorities for all organisations today.

There you have it—the nuts and bolts of what makes structured mentoring so great. Who would have known that mentoring conversations can deliver such fabulous results? Looks like the truth has put on its pants.

© Melissa Richardson, 2021

Reviewing the mentor’s motivations towards the mentee

GUEST BLOG

In every mentoring or coaching relationship, patterns gradually become established in how you work with the learner. We fall into roles, which may not be obvious. Reviewing these from time to time helps keep us balanced and prevents those roles becoming “fixed”.

One useful model is the triangle of Protect – Exploit – Equate. Protect refers to the instinct to shield the learner from pain and/or to intervene on the learner’s behalf. It has much in common with the parent-child dimension of transactional analysis. In this mode, we are part-parent and part-hero. We give advice, rather than help the learner work things out for themselves. It taps into all our deep instincts of protecting the vulnerable but can easily lead to being overprotective.

Exploit is the dark side. It is the instinct to manipulate others to our own ends and/or to take advantage of their weaknesses. We don’t like to acknowledge this side of ourselves, but it comes to light in many, often subtle, ways – for example, when the mentor steers the mentee along a path that they wish they had taken. Mentors can sometimes create dependency in their mentees, not recognising that this is a by-product of their own needs for recognition and approbation.

Equate is where we achieve an appropriate equilibrium. It is not that we don’t have the instincts to protect and exploit; they are still there, often both at the same time. The skill of equating lies in being fully aware of them and managing them. Once we get used to acknowledging these instincts, we can put them to better use. For example, if we observe an inclination to exploit, it may lead us to wonder whether other people have similar reactions to the mentee and what the implications might be for the mentee. What is there in their behaviour that makes others view them as exploitable? Similarly, awareness of our own urge to protect might stimulate a stronger focus on helping the mentee achieve greater self-confidence and self-belief.

© David Clutterbuck 2020

Reverse & Reciprocal Mentoring

During the 2020 pandemic, we saw a huge rise in Reciprocal Mentoring – where traditional mentoring pairs flipped roles and mentors discovered they were receiving mentorship from their mentees. But how does Reciprocal Mentoring work and how does this differ from Reverse Mentoring?

Here’s what you will learn in this webinar:

  • Reverse and Reciprocal mentoring – what are they and where have they come from?
  • How to design a Reverse or Reciprocal program
  • Top tips for mentors and mentees in Reverse or Reciprocal relationships.

Presented by:

  • Melissa Richardson
    Managing Director, Art of Mentoring
  • Gina Meibusch
    Client Service Delivery Manager, Art of Mentoring

 

Is it time… for men to seek female mentorship?

In a recently released working paper, Overcoming Gender Discrimination in Business: Reconsidering Mentoring in the Post #Me-Too and Covid-19 Eras, the authors provide an excellent description of the “women are wonderful” effect; men are associated with leadership qualities that are valued in corporate circles — confidence, risk taking and negotiation skills — while women are perceived as better at creating a safe and respectable workplace, valuing people of different backgrounds and considering the impact of business on society. The “women are wonderful” theory explains that the favourability of women is dependent on women behaving in a manner consistent with preconceived gender roles. When women threaten men by competing for traditionally male roles, men tend to withdraw support for them.

As the #MeToo movement has brought many things regarding sexual harassment out into the open, it has led many men to shy away from working with women. We reported on this in our own research report on mentoring post-#MeToo. The authors of the working paper believe that whilst #MeToo has raised awareness of inequality at work, if men resist spending time with women or mentoring more junior women at work, then women will be perceived more and more as the ‘outgroup’. In this way, ‘ingroup’ and ‘outgroup’ bias based on gender appears to have been heightened by #MeToo – the problem snowballs. It is argued that it is not enough to provide tips on how to avoid risk in male-female encounters, and try to encourage men to come forward. Rather, active steps are needed that cause the genders to re-categorize their workplace identities with something other than genders and their stereotyped qualities.

A solution offered in the paper is to have senior women mentor junior men, as a way to recondition the ingroup/ outgroup categorizations of the genders and reduce gender bias in the long term. The authors say “the reality is that it will take substantial effort to encourage senior level men to interact with junior women. These barriers, however, may not apply to encouraging senior women to mentor junior men. Ostensibly, senior women would, unlike their male counterparts, not fear a perception of impropriety or otherwise hesitate at interacting with junior men.”

They go on to say: “This form of mentoring relationship could naturally create the interdependence and cooperative interaction needed to break gender bias. In such a relationship, the success of the junior men would be irrevocably tied to the success of the senior women. The junior men would rely on the senior women for opportunities and their ability to capitalize on these opportunities would be tied to the success and approval of the senior women. This should help normalize cooperative interaction between the genders. Through these mentoring relationships, junior men may then be reconditioned into viewing women and men as belonging to the same workplace group. The interactions would also allow (or force) junior men to confront their gender bias. It is one thing to learn about gender bias through training, it is another to confront gender bias by interacting with women directly. By working with senior women, junior men may grow accustomed to interacting with women in a position of authority and learn to value women for their knowledge and guidance. These interactions would directly counter the prescriptive stereotypes created by the women-are-wonderful effect.”

So, there you have it. If you have senior women in your workplace, make sure they are encouraged to mentor junior men. The authors of the paper do not address how to solve the problem of there not being enough senior women to go around. So, whilst the paper was fascinating and I found myself nodding in agreement throughout, I was not totally convinced by the practicality of the solution.

The value in the paper for me was the description of the “women are wonderful” effect and of male-female ingroup-outgroup bias which has increased post-#MeToo. Knowing this, we should continue to find ways to enable more cross-gender mentorship pairings (or groups) within the relative safety of a formal, structured program, where it is widely known that pairs have been matched by a facilitator.  Fewer questions asked about why the pair is spending time together.

I was also inspired by the authors’ discussion of this form of mentoring as a means to achieve “positive externalities” – benefits that extend beyond the mentor and mentee and the here-and-now, to create constructive change in workgroups, organisations, professions and larger society.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

© Melissa Richardson 2021

Self-Matching vs Partner Preferencing

Self-Matching, Facilitator Matching, Traditional Mentoring, too many options and types of mentoring so how do I choose…?

At Art of Mentoring, we have deliberately avoided developing self-matching, fast-knowledge-transfer solutions into our platform because we firmly believe that it does not lend itself to real, developmental mentoring. This type of mentoring is a mutual exchange that develops over time, often quickly addressing short term goals and then delving deeply into more substantial conversations around career direction, unhelpful thinking, etc. Developmental, transformational mentoring goes beyond one or two coffee catch ups or a couple of online questions. Like the old adage of “give a man (or woman) a fish and feed him for a day but teach him to fish and feed him for a lifetime”, we’re in the business of enabling people for life! Recently a mentor said to us, “Yeah? Open my networks to the mentee, that’s pretty cool, but teach him or her to network, now that’s powerful, isn’t it?”

Technology has a habit of looking for efficiencies to save money and so too has the mentoring industry succumbed, with many mentoring software providers touting self-matching as an administrator-friendly solution, creating a marketplace of mentors for mentees to choose from.

What is self-matching and 3 reasons why it falls short?

In self-match solutions, a mentee is presented with a marketplace of potential matches and can search, then request a match from a preferred mentor. There are a number of reasons why this is fraught with problems and produces less effective matches:

  1. Biased self-selection
    Bias and misguided assumptions lead a mentee to select a partner based on their seniority level (having a senior exec as a mentor can be a status symbol) or whether they like or feel comfortable with them. In fact, matching with someone too senior can be a mistake, and challenge, rather than comfort, is good for a mentoring relationship if the mentee is to be pushed outside their comfort zone.
  2. Availability of the mentor or mentee
    Say you open applications to participants, and mentees log in for the first time to the marketplace of mentors. They notice the C-Suite is available for mentoring at the time and so reach out to the C-Suite in droves, inundating their inboxes with match requests and leaving other mentors disappointed and unwilling to mentor again in future. In addition to this, imagine if the mentor had applied 6-months prior to only be contacted now to mentor, but by this time circumstances have changed and they’re no longer available.
  3. The match maker knows best
    Sometimes the match maker seems to have a magic touch and somehow knows what’s going to work, even if the participants are not convinced at first. The benefit of a matching algorithm and a third-party match maker who can take algorithm suggestions or override them, is that it injects some objectivity into the process.. When the small proportion of facilitator matched participants in a program report they are unhappy with their match, there may be a valid reason to re-match, like “they used to be my direct report” or “they are a competitor”.  But when they say “I was more looking for someone with x, y and z”, or “I’m not sure I will get along with this person”,  our response is “we suggest that you give the match a try and come back to us if not.” 99% of the time these matches see the program through to the end and come back saying “we don’t know how you knew but that was the best match for me!”

When we started to build our alternative to self-matching, we were searching for a way for mentees to have input to their mentor allocation, without leaving them the final choice.

Spawned from research and experience, our new method, called Partner Preferencing,  allows the administrator to oversee and finalise matches, but streamlines the selection process, saving large amounts of time for the administrator. It’s not a silver bullet, there are always trade-offs, but we see it as a better solution. The premise is that mentees are presented with pre-curated mentor options based on agreed match criteria; powered with a smart algorithm. This solution is a great first step towards a more evidence-based way of matching effectively and efficiently. Mentees only see the most compatible mentors’ profiles, then choose which mentors they would be prepared to work with. Research suggests that having some degree of choice via Partner Preferencing is likely to increase a mentee’s commitment to the match and to the program.

Partner Preferencing isn’t going to be the best solution for all but for those, especially with large numbers or participants, this may be a great option to streamline some of the matching process to increase efficiency during the matching phase. At Art of Mentoring, we help you design and implement the most appropriate methodology for your needs so if you think Partner Preferencing sounds interesting or if you’d like to explore if it is for you, then please reach out to our team for a demonstration.  You can consider our Situation Analysis Workshop as a way of testing your program design ideas.

© Alex Richardson 2021

Mentoring new parents returning to work

Mentoring for new parents is an essential mechanism within effective Talent Management and Diversity and Inclusion strategies. By investing in returning talent, organisations are much more likely to retain their best employees and have them working at their best. This new mentoring approach is taking off in the UK – find out why from our special guest.

Here’s what you will learn in this webinar:

  • Why it’s important to support employees on parental leave and on return to work
  • How return to work mentoring can help smooth the transition from caring back to work responsibilities
  • How to design a return to work mentoring program

Presented by:

  • Nicki Seignot
    Founder of The Parent Mentor, and Co-Author of Mentoring New Parents at Work
  • Melissa Richardson
    Managing Director, Art of Mentoring

The Sticky Topic of Stuckness

Stuckness is a word we hear frequently in coaching and mentoring, but what does it mean? Here, Professor David Clutterbuck and Melissa Richardson have identified six kinds of stuckness in mentoring, each with its own context and challenges:

  1. When the mentor suddenly doesn’t know what to do or say next
  2. When the mentor feels trapped by the relationship
  3. When the mentor feels trapped by circumstances (for example, by being confined during Lockdown)
  4. When the mentee is unable to act, because they can’t choose between different ways forward
  5. When the mentee feels trapped, because they cannot see any way forward
  6. When the mentor and mentee find themselves in circular conversations, where no progress happens and they repeatedly go over the same ground.

When the mentor suddenly doesn’t know what to do or say next

As a beginner mentor and coach, David used to dread these moments. He says “Then I realised that I was taking all the responsibility for what came next, when it was a shared responsibility with the mentee. So, I learned to pause and ask the mentee “If this path isn’t taking you where you want to go, let’s go back a way and choose a different route.” We would review the choice points in the conversation and begin again at one, where the conversation felt purposeful.”

“Nowadays, I have learned additionally to be intrigued and excited about these moments of stuckness. The more experienced we become, the more we can predict where the conversation is going to go – and the greater the danger of becoming restricted by our own expertise. So, now I am grateful for an opportunity to learn and develop new insights and additions to my mentoring repertoire. So much so, that I am comfortable in saying to the mentee: “This is a unique situation in my experience. So, let’s reflect on how we can use it to learn together.”

When we have sudden creative insights, they are almost always preceded in our minds by a short period of stuckness. Now I know, whenever I experience stuckness, that I may be on the cusp of a significant insight!”

When the mentor feels trapped by the relationship

This can be an issue for some mentors. Our rational brain tells us that we should withdraw from a mentoring relationship, but our emotional brain tells us that we can’t “let them down”, because they need us. Mostly, this is a trap of our own creation – it’s about our need to feel useful and to have a positive impact on other people’s lives. Three questions for self-reflection help here:

  • What value are the mentoring conversations having for the mentee?
  • To what extent is the mentoring relationship substituting for other kinds of help that the mentee needs to draw upon? (And therefore, limiting the mentee’s ability or willingness to face up to issues?)
  • How dependent is the mentee becoming on the mentoring conversations before making critical decisions?

Supervision (a process by which a mentor develops their own mentoring mastery by talking with a more experienced practitioner or with peers) helps clarify the responsibility the mentor has towards the mentee and their stakeholders and the conditions, under which the assignment might or might not be viable going forward. Understanding the roles that the mentor is playing for the mentee establishes clearer choices: either change those roles or end the relationship. Time and again, when we explore why the mentor has known instinctively what needs to be done but has not acted, it emerges that they are motivated by avoiding the pain of parting – both their pain and the mentee’s pain. In formal mentoring programs, it is important to explain there is a “no fault separation clause” that allows either party to extricate themselves if necessary, without fear of offence to the other.

When the mentor feels trapped by circumstances

An example of this is when a mentor signs up for a formal mentoring program that is not well designed and managed. What looked like a straightforward developmental engagement turns out to involve working with a mentee that has not been well prepared for the relationship and who does not take accountability for their own learning. To withdraw could damage relationships with the mentee and with the mentoring program host organization. Mostly, mentors opt to go ahead, going through the motions with the mentee all the while knowing that the mentee is missing out on a significant learning opportunity.

Again, this is an issue that can be resolved through supervision. Resolution may take the form of having a difficult conversation with the mentee about their apparent lack of understanding about their responsibilities in the relationship, joint exploration about how to work together productively, and a request to the program manager to provide more educational materials to better prepare the mentee to engage with a mentor.

When the mentee is unable to act, because they can’t choose between different ways forward

This is a common and probably the simplest issue to address, because there are so many practical and effective tools to help people clarify and attach values to the elements of difficult choices. Among our favourites are:

  • The change balloon, where every “want” becomes a sandbag on the basket of a hot air balloon. The mentee has to choose the order, in which to release sandbags to keep the balloon afloat.
  • Separate selves, where the mentee adopts one of two opposing parts of their persona (e.g., their mean self, versus their generous self). The mentor explores the issue with each of these selves separately, then the mentee chooses which self’s arguments they are most drawn to.
  • Extremes, where difficult choices are spread out over a spectrum. Both ends of the spectrum are unacceptable. Mentor and mentee explore the pluses and minuses of different positions on the spectrum until one becomes the clear choice.

When the mentee feels trapped, because they cannot see any way forward

This is particularly poignant condition, because the stress it causes can lead to burnout and either (or both) physical or mental illness. For example, fear of losing one’s job, combined with disliking the work and /or the work environment, feel like an impasse that can only be broken by moving to a new employer. When similarly paid jobs are not easily found, even that release may be blocked.

What makes it worse is that the stress makes it more difficult to think creatively to find ways out of the impasse. The temptation for a mentor is to do the creative thinking for the mentee but this often fails to work, because the ideas are a product of the mentor’s imagination, not the mentee’s. More productive approaches shift the mentee’s focus of attention. Instead of concentrating on the view from inside their private prison to outside of it, the mentor takes them to the vantage point of the contribution they want to make to the world, then looks back over the prison walls to the cell they are in. The question then becomes not “How are you going to break out?” but “When you have broken out, what do you want to do with your life and career?” Hope theory has lots of practical guidance on how to manage this discussion. By setting a goal completely outside the confines of the mentee’s current role, they are able to make progress towards it, which helps them find the energy to invest in ameliorating the conditions that make them feel stuck now. (To continue the analogy, they are earning release for good behaviour!)

When the mentor and mentee find themselves in circular conversations, where no progress happens and they repeatedly go over the same ground.

This is another of the top 10 issues that come to us regularly as mentor supervisors and program managers. There are multiple causes, but among the most common are:

  • The mentee is going through the motions but has no intention of fully engaging with the mentoring process. They enjoy the emotional massage, but have no intention of undertaking radical personal change.
  • The mentoring conversations are dealing with superficial issues, because the mentee is unwilling or unable to engage with deeper issues that are too painful to address.
  • The mentee has selected to work on a goal that is not theirs (it may be their manager’s) or is not important enough to them.

When David encounters the first of these two situations, he asks the mentee: “What is the big challenge, which will stretch you intellectually and emotionally, force you to develop new skills and question much of what you think you know now?” If they simply talk about getting to higher levels of position, he explores with them the scale of the changes in their cognition, behaviour and people skills. If he gets a lot of waffle, he may respond with “Is that it? With all the talent and potential that you have, that’s all you can come up with?”. If the mentee is willing neither to challenge themselves or be challenged by the mentor, he decides they are not ready for mentoring – at least by him.

For a new mentor it may feel hard to take such a challenging stance. Melissa suggests another approach. Share observations with the mentee about their apparent lack of momentum and then say: “I can hear that you think you want to change, but it feels like you may not be committed enough to really engage in what it would take. Let’s explore what might be holding you back. What are the costs/benefits of making a change and the costs/benefits of not making a change? What other (unspoken) goals or needs might conflict with this goal, that could unconsciously be driving your behaviour/ procrastination?”

In the case, where the mentee is avoiding painful issues, one pragmatic approach is to say something along the lines of: “I feel a bit like a frustrated dentist. I’m feeling a sense of pain in you, when we talk about [whatever the issue is]. But I can’t help you unless you show me where the pain is. What can we do together to make it safer to explore what you are afraid of?” Other useful questions include:

  • “What is it that you can’t bring yourself to say to yourself?”
  • “How could you say those things to me instead?”

Bear in mind, in any of these cases, that there may be underlying psychological issues that require a different solution than mentoring. Many psychological problems in the workplace go unaddressed, because there is no mechanism to bring them to the surface. However, one of the ways, in which we add value as a mentee, is to create the conversations, where these needs can be articulated and a referral made.

Summary

As mentors, we need to be able to recognise the different kinds of stuckness and have to hand a toolkit shaped to work with each of them. Whenever we encounter stuckness, in ourselves or our mentees, it is helpful to review:

  • What’s different about this stuckness compared with others I have encountered?
  • What’s the learning opportunity here, for me and for the mentee?

© David Clutterbuck & Melissa Richardson, 2021

How mentors can help your career

In the modern workplace, there is no longer one clear career trajectory. We hear of the career ‘ladder’ being replaced by the career ‘lattice’. What does this mean, and how can mentors help people navigate a more complex career pathway? Little wonder that career mentoring is one of the most popular forms of mentoring today.

Here’s what you’ll learn in this webinar:

  • Modern career challenges and how the career landscape is changing
  • How mentors can help
  • Why the Beaumont People mentoring program has been so successful

Presented by:

  • Nina Mapson Bone
    Managing Director & President of the RCSA, Beaumont People
  • Melissa Richardson
    Managing Director, Art of Mentoring

Why mid-career public servants need mentoring

Time and time again, government agencies tell us that middle management and front-line management are the least engaged cohorts, based on their census or survey data. Like many organisations, government agencies often focus career development opportunities on new recruits, graduates, high potentials and on senior leaders. Layers in between, especially front-line staff who provide services to the public, have fewer development options made available to them.

With limited opportunities for promotion within the organisation and low visibility of the skills and experience needed to make an internal move, many look externally for a step-change in their career.

There are too many reasons why this problem needs to be solved to list them all, but here are a few:

  • Workforce mobility
  • Acquisition cost to replace people who leave
  • Quality delivery of public services

Ehrich and Hansford (2008) reported that mentoring in government was usually targeted at graduates, new staff, trainees, current and aspiring leaders and specific groups who were the focus of diversity strategies. Today, we are seeing more government agencies who look to mentoring to empower their mid-career employees and retain them.

Mentoring is a cost-effective and proven way to:

  1. Provide employees, at any level, with a confidential space in which they can explore development needs and career path options.
  2. Let them learn about areas of the department with which they are unfamiliar.
  3. Re-energise and re-engage with their current role.
  4. Feel supported and valued.
  5. Foster better communication and understanding between areas of a department.

When mentoring programs are run effectively, they achieve their objectives.  Some government departments with whom we have worked have sought to build leadership capacity with mentoring, and discovered surprising extra benefits such as improved wellbeing, confidence and, in particular, attitude to employer and intention to stay.

What are mentees after?

Recently Art of Mentoring analysed aggregate data from 13,000 participants across their programs – the benchmark report can be found here.

Mentees were asked to make a selection from four types of mentoring that they were seeking. Mentors were shown the same four and asked which they felt most equipped to offer. Across many different types of programs, professions and industries, mentees were very focused on career development and capability building.

What are mentees after?

Shouldn’t mentoring just be for people with potential?

It can be extraordinarily difficult to identify potential in any organisation. Professor David Clutterbuck argues that typical nine-box grid succession planning exercises simply don’t work – if they did, he says, then we wouldn’t have so many of the wrong people at the top. (Clutterbuck, 2012).  Providing mentorship to people, who would otherwise be overlooked for development, allows them to self-identify as having potential, seek challenging assignments, build networks, develop skills and perhaps accelerate their careers, to the benefit of the public servant and the employing agency.

Public sector mentoring programs are more attractive than ever right now

In 2020 the pandemic impacted mentoring programs in one of two ways. Either programs were undersubscribed, because people were too busy or overwhelmed to make time for mentoring, or over-subscribed, because other professional development opportunities had dried up.  We observed that public-sector programs tended to fall into the latter group. A state government program had to close applications after two weeks due to the deluge of mentee requests for mentoring.

There is an interesting gender difference too. In a recent government mentoring program open to any gender identity from any seniority level, 70% of the mentee applications were from women. This is consistent with a New Zealand study (Bhatta & Washington, 2003) that found that female public servants were more likely than their male counterparts to have a mentor. The researchers posit that women may have greater need for a mentor (to overcome systemic gender barriers to advancement) and/or women might make more deliberate efforts to seek support for career advancement. Either way, it is a trend we see across most public sector programs.

References:

  1. Ehrich, Lisa C. and Hansford, Brian C. (2008) Mentoring in the public sector. Practical Experiences in Professional Education, 11(1). pp. 1-58
  2. Bhatta, G. and Washington, S. (2003) ‘Hands up’: Mentoring in the New Zealand Public Service, Public CLUTTERBUCK, D. (2012). The talent wave: why succession planning fails and what to do about it. London, Kogan Page.
  3. Personnel Management, Volume 32, No.2, Summer.