Mentoring: A High-Touch Tool for Faculty Development
by Dr. Richard Lyons
In recent years, the culture of higher education has been permeated by an apparent paradox of increased demands for containment of instructional costs and increased accountability for educational outcomes. Academic leaders throughout the nation have sought to increase their flexibility and contain costs largely by utilizing various methods of instructional technology, and employing increased numbers of part-time faculty. Interestingly enough, the use of these two strategies have triggered an awareness of a second phenomenon, often called the "High Tech - High Touch Paradox," that is noticeable throughout our society. This paradox states that as we increase our dependence upon technology, the thirstier we become for richer levels of human contact. Thus, truly effective educators, increasingly dependent upon technology to relay information to time- and place- challenged students, are more proactively installing strategies to satisfy the human needs of both instructors and students. To address this paradox, educational leaders at leading institutions are "dusting off" a developmental tool that has proven its effectiveness over and over again for centuries (its roots can be read in Homer's Odyssey.) That tool is mentoring.
Mentoring can be defined as the process - formal or informal - of a knowledgeable and skilled veteran - usually not the direct supervisor -- guiding a relative novice through the maze of an organization. Thus the protégé's (or mentee's) self confidence and productivity develops faster and more effectively than it would have otherwise. If you were ever provided an "aha!" that gave you new insight into a challenging situation, were provided a story or quote that had long-lasting impact, or been given unexpected positive feedback on an otherwise unnoticed achievement, you have been, to one extent or another, mentored. If you were fortunate enough to have all of those, or similar experiences, provided by the same person, you probably regard that relationship as one of the most significant in your professional life. Mentors provide growth opportunities unavailable anyplace else. Program's instructional leaders believe mentoring is a critical tool for maximizing the effectiveness of their part-time faculty.
A successful mentoring relationship must be built upon a "common ground" of interests, be nurtured by both parties and offer mutual benefits. The common benefits to the protégé typically include:
- a more grounded orientation to the organization;
- information for developing an enriched perspective of the organization's mission;
- encouragement at critical times;
- an effective model for accepted organizational behavior;
- introductions to others who might provide insights and support;
- increased exposure and visibility;
- being supported during critical situations;
- increased self-awareness;
- feedback on teaching performance without the judgement associated with the formalized work relationship, i.e. supervisor/subordinate.
For the mentor, potential benefits include:
- developing a dependable crucial support resource;
- achieving vicariously through the accomplishments of the protégé;
- being valued as a knowledgeable person;
- receiving a fresh perspective on key issues;
- opportunity to repay past debts;
- developing a replacement when career advancement is sought.
In short, an effective mentoring relationship must provide benefits to each party, which are perceived as equitable and significant to both. Dr. Stephen Covey, author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, refers to this as maintaining a positive "emotional bank account," and creating "win-win, or no deal" interactions.
Effective mentors are fundamentally open-minded, invested in unselfishly developing the potential of others, patient, non-judgmental, and perhaps most importantly, effective listeners. They understand the need for an evolving organization to invest in its future, and are comfortable "giving the credit" for success to the protégé. They understand that the protégé is more likely to need help at times when they themselves are most busy, and are willing to subordinate their own needs at such times. They avoid giving advice, emphasizing simply their more grounded information and different perspective on key issues. Mentors realize their role does not include rescuing protégés from their own folly.
Effective protégés reflect many similar characteristics, including being open to constructive feedback (i.e. a bit "thick-skinned"), willingness to critically examine old beliefs and try new ideas, and accepting full responsibility for their own success. They view their mentors as resources with whom they must initiate communications, and do not expect mentors to rescue them. They regularly demonstrate appreciation.
Expectations must be thoroughly clarified and agreed upon by both parties before an effective mentoring relationship can be cemented. Successful, experienced mentors often emphasize the need to formalize expectations through a written agreement that specifies the behaviors of each party. A key element of effective agreement always includes the right of each party in the relationship to withdraw at any point, with no notice, without the expectation to provide a reason. As is the case in other critical personal documents, e.g. wills, resumes, etc., the mentoring agreement should be critically reviewed periodically to ensure that expectations of both parties are being met.
Mentoring is only one tool within a comprehensive program of professional development. Research shows that effective mentoring must build upon an existing knowledge held by the protégé, which might be established through workshops, or the protege's reading of The Adjunct Professor's Guide to Success. Stated another way, the mentor cannot be successful and feel rewarded when the only tool being employed by the protégé is mentoring alone.
Please take the time to analyze the potential personal rewards for developing faculty through a mentoring relationship with a veteran effective instructor.
The above paper presented originally at the Tenth Annual International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, Jacksonville, Florida. April 15, 1999.
