Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, 2^nd Deluxe Editions, defines mentor as "n. [from Mentor, the friend and counselor of Odysseus and Telemachus.] a wise and faithful counselor." In the thesaurus, synonyms like advisor, instructor, tutor, master, and guru appear. Current writers seem to suggest a shift away from this one-way teacher-to-partners instruction to a power free, two-way, mutually beneficial relationship. Are these two extreme, either or positions correct or, can it be both? Does this represent the values of those charged with implementing mentoring programs and training mentors? Who better to ask than the partner? One hundred thirty visitors to our home page completed an Effective Mentoring Survey. The limits of this self-selection process are known. All we asked, as participants in the survey, was that they be partners not mentors and, that they keep their most effective mentoring relationship in mind as they responded to the questionnaire.

This article is based on the 130 respondents. Based on their E-mail top level domain name extensions, 73% resided in the United States; 18% were in International locations; 5%, 2% and 2% were from educational, government, and military organizations respectively.

This reminds us of our recent trip to Germany when after looking at the menu, our first question to the waitperson was, "English?" and the response, "A little".  As indicated in Chart 1, in excess of half the respondents felt their most effective mentor was their direct supervisor.

Mentoring is occurring both on a formal, organized basis and on an informal need basis. Who the mentor was, affected only the magnitude of the differences in determining most and least important attributes of an effective mentoring relationship, not the rank of the responses. The results will be presented based on the entire group. Bottom line, how satisfied were this group of respondents with this particular mentoring relationship? Very, on a 5 point scale, the average response was, 4.2.   This article attempts to understand what contributing factors lead to such a high level of satisfaction.

This was an open-ended question, resulting in a resounding YES! Only 9 respondents saw no difference between the three roles, 5 felt the coach and mentor played similar roles different from that of the supervisor and 3 felt the coach and supervisor, played similar roles different from that of the mentor.

In summary, the mentor is person-focused; the coach, job-focused; and the supervisor, results/productivity-focused.

"A mentor is like a sounding board, they can give advice but the partner is free to pick and choose what they do. The context does not have specific performance objectives. A coach is trying to direct a person to some end result, the person may choose how to get there, but the coach is strategically assessing and monitoring the progress and giving advice for effectiveness and efficiency. The supervisor’s ultimate responsibility is to make sure the job gets done, they hold the person accountable for the deliverables of the job."

"Mentor is biased in your favor. Coach is an impartial focus on improvement in behavior. Supervisor is the evaluator."

"A mentor is a guide, there when you want them. A coach helps you better get from point A to B. A supervisor manages."

The major theme for the mentor was one who had a deep personal interest, personally involved—a friend who cares about you and your long term development. The major theme for the coach was one who develops specific skills for the task, challenges, and performance expectation at work. The supervisor was almost unanimously seen as focusing on performance management, getting the job done as teller, director, and judge.

What was disturbing was the consistent negative view of the supervisor’s role, a view that will not be altered by just a cosmetic change in title to "coach". It appears that a supervisor who wants to enter into a mentoring relationship with a direct report must wear different hats during those mentoring, coaching, and supervisory discussions. Can it be done? Evidently, since more than half the respondents said their immediate supervisor was their most effective mentor.

This view of the mentor was further reinforced when respondents were asked to pick from a list of 14 descriptive words that best described your mentor’s dominant style. The top four are shown in Chart 2.

The four least chosen were Hard nosed, Spontaneous, Critical, and Gentle. Inclusion of the words "direct" and "logical" could lead to the conclusions that mentoring is not solely a passive Socratic process.

From the partner’s perspective, the mentor achieved the type of satisfaction that reinforces this helping, engaging, personal focus. When asked the open ended question, "What benefits(s) did your mentor get out of this relationship?" Only 3 said none and 9 didn’t know. Fifty nine percent of the responses fell into two themes: Affirmation of the value of and satisfaction from fulfilling a role as helper and developer of others; A learning experience for the mentor from my feedback and insight. The later gives weight to the view of a two-way, power free relationship.

Effective mentoring appears to be a learning and development process for both parties. This leads to this advice for current and potential mentors; explore and learn, don’t assume that you must be an all-knowing expert in this area, such a position could be detrimental to the mentoring process; mentoring is a fulfilling assignment—let both yourself and the partner learn from the process.

"In retrospect, he clearly saw his role at work and in life as a developer of young people and this allowed him to do so."

"The ability to look at situations from a different perspective, I am a Generation X and he is in his 60’s."

When asked "Why did you want a mentor?". Chart 3 shows the two run away favorites.

When asked to select those things this mentor did for them, the top group is shown in Table 1.

This strong theme of helper, development, and growth is reinforced in the response to the open ended question: "What is the one most significant thing your mentor did?" The following four themes, capture 62% of the responses:

What role do partner play in the relationship?

What was the nature of the mentor-partner interactions?

Is the mentor-partner relationship changing?

These results support the conclusion that mentoring is a power free, two-way, mutually beneficial, learning situation where the mentor provides advice, shares knowledge and experiences, and teaches using a low pressure, self-discovery approach. Teaching using an adult learning versus teacher to student model and, being willing to not just question for self discovery but also freely share their own experiences and skills with the partner. The mentor is both a source of information/knowledge and a Socratic questioner. It is not an either or proposition, instructor/advisor or friend and facilitator. This data suggests that the partners actively seek out and maintain relationships with mentors who have the background and skills to do both in a way that maintains the partners freedom of choice and decision.

About the Authors

Matt M. Starcevich, Ph.D. CEO, Center for Coaching & Mentoring and Fred L. Friend each have over twenty years experience in training and organization development, as internal change agents and external consultants.  For comments or additional information email Matt from the selection below.

Go to top of page