Posted: March 2009 by Dr. Eric Sandelands

It probably isn’t within the spirit of a blog to draw so heavily on a past paper, but an article by Matthew Boyle in Training (2005) touched a sweet, or not-so-sweet, spot in direct, uncompromising style:

"Like diversity, ‘mentoring’ is one of those wonderful concepts that corporate America loves to prattle on about. But it's also one of the easiest things to screw up.”

He continues with a quote from Noel Tichy, Professor of Organizational Behavior at Michigan University and former director of GE Crotonville, General Electric's well-known leadership school from which many organizations have drawn inspiration. The quote is:

“Most formal mentoring programs suck”

Such sentiments provide an eye-catching start to a paper and, of course, such circular conversations are not confined to executives in the USA. However, it is what Boyle says next that states succinctly the central dilemma I’ve been faced with:

“Too much structure - training, guidelines, questionnaires, paperwork – frequently suffocates everyone involved. Conversely, too little structure can lead to lousy mentors, poor communication, and mentees who operate under the delusion that their mentor will not only get them promoted, but solve all their life's problems.”

Our recent and ongoing work with an Irish-based client has been deemed to be successful, so much so that the company has been nominated for a national award in the category of “Best graduate development”. Joey Tribbiani of Friends is our role model should we graciously have to accept defeat.

But the truth behind the mentoring programme has been in the determination of the senior leaders within the firm to make it “stick”, and for sensitivity in handling the dilemma of appropriate amounts of structure. Our programme has to work in Arctic Russia, the heat of the Middle East, Ireland and South Africa. Space for diversity and localization is vital, as is space for personalization – every mentee is different.

At the same time the company is ISO9001 certified, among other certifications, and operates a balanced scorecard performance measurement system – some conformity is vital.

Should others have confronted the challenge of appropriate structure in organization-wide mentoring programmes I’d be delighted to hear from you.

REFERENCE

Boyle, M. (2005), “Most mentoring programmes stink – but yours doesn’t have to”, Training, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp 12 – 15.