To match or mis‐match? The dynamics of mentoring as a route to personal and organisational learning

Abstract

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.

Mentor development in higher education in Botswana: How important is reflective practice?

“…Although less attention has been devoted to understanding mentor's learning experience than to that of mentees (Allen, Poteet and Burroughs 1997;Hezlett and Gibson 2005), there is research that examines the learning of mentors through the mentoring process (Allen and Eby 2003;Alred and Garvey 2000;Hale 2000;Healy and Welchert 1990;Singh, Bains and Vinnicombe 2002;Waxman 1996). Mullen and Noe (1999) found that mentors seek information from their mentees.…”

“…In a study conducted by Allen and Eby (2003), mentors who perceived themselves as similar to their mentees reported learning more from their mentoring relationships. Mentors participating in Hale's (2000) study reported that mentoring helped them gain insight into their developmental needs, refresh their skills, understand how others perceived their work, and develop their management style.…”

Formal Mentoring: Mentee And Mentor Expectations And Perceived Challenges

“…This gives rise to increased career commitment (Appelbaum et al1994). Mentoring provides learning benefits on the part of mentors (Hale, 2000) as well as a way for them to redirect their energies, gain respect and even fulfil generativity needs, which may in itself be rewarding (Scandura, Manuel, Werther & Lankau, 1996). As the mentee learns from the mentor, the growth and learning potential inherent in the relationship decreases.…”

“…Furthermore, mentors select mentees with characteristics similar to theirs and their perception that the mentee is a stereotype of an effective subordinate (Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002;Hale, 2000). However, Johnson, Geroy and Griego (1999) warn that when a mentee is selected on the basis of perceived similarity there is a tendency toward homogeneous reproduction, and mentors tend to mould an image of their own characteristics.…”

“…If mentees are selected on the basis of a rich amount of differences, this could possibly result in a dysfunctional relationship due to a mutual inability to empathise. It was suggested by Hale (2000) that the selection of mentees be based on their talent, eagerness to learn and willingness to participate in the mentoring programme. The greater the hierarchical distance between mentor and mentee, the greater the communication gap and the less the interaction (Clutterbuck & Lane, 2005;Mullen, 1998), hampering both mutual trust and obligation .…”