PurposeMentoring is considered a valuable component of undergraduate medical education with a variety of programs at established medical schools. This study presents how new medical schools have set up mentoring programs as they have developed their curricula.MethodsAdministrators from 14 US medical schools established since 2006 were surveyed regarding the structure and implementation of their mentoring programs.ResultsThe majority of new medical schools had mentoring programs that varied in structure and implementation. Although the programs were viewed as valuable at each institution, challenges when creating and implementing mentoring programs in new medical schools included time constraints for faculty and students, and lack of financial and professional incentives for faculty.ConclusionsSimilar to established medical schools, there was little uniformity among mentoring programs at new medical schools, likely reflecting differences in curriculum and program goals. Outcome measures are needed to determine whether a best practice for mentoring can be established.

No abstract

We thank Rudolph et al. (2021) for their important piece regarding a historic world event. The COVID-19 pandemic affects every facet of industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology, challenging us as we guide clients, students, and research through an uncertain future (Toaddy, 2020). Although Rudolph et al. described research and practice opportunities, they did not broach the superordinate direction of I-O psychology in light of many deeming we have lost our way (Ones et al., 2017). I-O psychology views itself as a values-free science (Lefkowitz, 2008(Lefkowitz, , 2013, but no science is free of values (Riger, 2002). Minor improvements to efficiency, validity, and theory are deemed adequate accomplishments (Ones et al., 2017), and past criticisms (Gordon et al., 1978) have highlighted our narrow focus (Islam & Schmidt, 2019). Without a clear vision of what our discipline hopes to accomplish, our scope and effectiveness is limited.The present paper proposes a lens through which I-O psychology can rechart its future course while respecting its position as the premier field of organizational science by driving meaningful change. Values frameworks are linked to effective strategic planning (Williams, 2002), and we advocate for a comprehensive values framework for I-O psychology given recent events. The United States is in a historical civil rights shift with the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement (Buchanan et al., 2020), and organizations have consequently adopted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives (Duarte, 2020). This widespread DEI conversation was notably absent from Rudolph et al.'s (2021) piece, a surprise given COVID-19 and BLM protests are inexorably linked to the same pandemic: racism. DEI is a necessary component not just of social justice but also organizational justice. I-O psychology must address DEI without and within; the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) has taken steps by creating a D&I officer and establishing an antiracism grant. We argue more needs to be done to address DEI within I-O psychology, beginning with a strong values framework. Our compass is centered around this essential element missing from Rudolph et al.'s article. The big pictureThe COVID-19 pandemic and BLM movement cast a renewed light on an undeniable fact: structural inequality is pervasive. Rudolph et al. (2021) hint at this in their discussions on work-family issues, precarious work, and blue-collar workers in human resources (HR) policies but never fully

No abstract

In their focal article, Cucina, Walmsley, Gast, Martin, and Curtin (2017) raise a number of concerns about survey key driver analysis (SKDA). Although many are valid, we think their critique ultimately goes too far and risks throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We have found that SKDA can be an effective way to generate insight and action when analysis is done correctly and results are used appropriately. In this response article, we first provide data that counters Cucina et al.’s findings. Then we describe the approach we take to survey key driver analytics and application. In doing so, we hope to address some of the core concerns raised in the focal article and identify ways for scientists and practitioners to conduct SKDA in a responsible way.