T H E L I M I T S O F F O R M A L M E N T O R I N G S Y S T E M S A N D T H E B E N E F I T S O F I N F O R M A L , E M E R G E N T

M E N T O R I N G

P R O F E S S O R J I M B R I G H T S C H O O L O F E D U C A T I O N A C U

PA R T N E R B R I G H T A N D A S S O C I A T E S C A R E E R M A N A G E M E N T

© Jim Bright 2014

B E W A R E A D M O N I T I O N S

• Everybody wants to give career advice

© Jim Bright 2014

W A D E C O O K

• “If you’ll do for a few years what most people won’t do, you’l be able to do for the rest of your life what most people can't do”

© Jim Bright 2014

D E F R A U D E D I R S

• Will get out medium security Federal Correctional Institution in Sheridan, Oregon Jan 22nd 2015….

© Jim Bright 2014

B E A R D S T O W N L A D I E S

• “If an investment seems to good to be true, it probably is. Don't fall prey to get-rich-quick schemes”

© Jim Bright 2014

2 + 2 = 2 3 . 4 % A N N U A L R E T U R N ?

• Actually when professionally audited = 9% return…..

• …..LESS than market indices

• book pulped after class action lawsuit

© Jim Bright 2014

L E T M E S E L L Y O U A T E S T. .

• “If you use an assessment process such as theHerrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) or Myer’s Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in the pairing process, you will increase mentor-mentee pairings success rates, providing all the other mentoring program components are in place.”

• http://www.hrmtoday.com/talent/human-resources-management/one-reason-why-mentoring-programs-fail/

© Jim Bright 2014

O H R E A L LY ?

• Dissimilar mentor-mentee personalities if anything had better outcomes in a High School student program where the effectiveness of mentoring was mixed at best

• Jolevski (2012)

© Jim Bright 2014

M E G G I N S O N & C L U T T E R B U C K , 2 0 0 4

“the identification and nurturing of potential for the whole person. It can be a long-term

relationship, where the goals may change but are always set by the learner”

© Jim Bright 2014

" S U P P O S E D " S U P P O R T R O L E S

Career Counselling

Motivators

Mentoring

Expert Tuition/ Training

Coaching

© Jim Bright 2014

M E N T O R I N G R E L AT I O N S H I P

High Clarity

Low Clarity

Low

Rapport

- Open dialogue- Shared expecatations- Openess to mutual benefit- Sense of urgency

- Task Focussed- Debate rather than Dialogue

- Friendship- Lack of direction- Opportunistic in Dealing with Issues- Short-term perspective- Friendship

- Going through the Motions

High

Rapport

(Adapted from Megginson & Clutterbuck, 2005)

© Jim Bright 2014

W H AT ’ S T H E F U S S A B O U T ?

• 1/8th of a standard deviation improvement as a result of mentoring

• (Dubois et al 2002)

© Jim Bright 2014

M E N T O R I N G M E TA A N A LY S I S

• 10% showed average effects in a negative direction (i.e., those who received mentoring were worse off),

• 1/3 yielded effects that were close to zero (i.e., neither positive nor negative),

• Remainder positive impacts ranged in size from small to large.

• Findings indicated that the typical yperson received only modest benefits from participating in a mentoring program

• DuBois et al (2002)

© Jim Bright 2014

I T S A L L D U E T O G O A L S

• “Mentoring program failure might occur because the program’s goals are either fuzzy, or they’re all over the place” Jan Rose, Capital H Group Principal

© Jim Bright 2014

O H R E A L LY ?

• “ SMART goals can dull responsiveness to the complex and emergent nature of organizational life, as well as the coaching and mentoring engagements that take place within it”p24

• Clutterbuck & David (2013)

© Jim Bright 2014

T O O S P E C I F I C

• [Setting and pursuing specific goals ] “may cause people to ignore important dimensions of performance that are not specified by the goal-setting system” (p. 8). Ordóñez et al. (2009)

© Jim Bright 2014

T O O S H O R T S I G H T E D

• [narrow goals can promote] “myopic, short-term behavior that harms the organization in the long run” (Ordóñez et al., 2009, p. 8)

© Jim Bright 2014

1 0 Q U E S T I O N S B E F O R E G O A L S E T T I N G

1.Are the goals too specific? Narrow goals blind people to important aspects problem.

2.Are the goals too challenging? What if goals are not met? Failure harm motivation & self-efficacy?

3.Who sets the goals?

4.Is the time horizon appropriate? Short-term goals may harm long-term performance.

5.How might goals influence risk taking? Unmet goals may induce risk taking.

6.How might goals influence unethical behaviour?

7.Can goals be idiosyncratically tailored for individual circumstances & preserve fairness?

8.How will goals influence organisational culture?

9.Are individuals intrinsically motivated? Goal setting can harm intrinsic motivation.

10.What type of goal (performance or learning) best for organisational objectives?

© Jim Bright 2014

K . K . S T E I N C K E , G O O D B Y E A N D T H A N K S ( 1 9 4 8 ) , Q U O T E S I T A S A P U N U S E D I N T H E D A N I S H

PA R L I A M E N T I N T H E L AT E 1 9 3 0 S .

“it is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future”

© Jim Bright 2014

© Jim Bright 2014 © Jim Bright 2014

© Jim Bright 2014

F O R M A L M E N T O R I N G FA I L S

• Treats individuals and the world as closed systems

• Assumes

• Linear progress towards goals knowable in advance

• Imposes rules and routines and fixed expectations

© Jim Bright 2014

F O R M A L M E N T O R I N G

• Policies, Procedures

• Career Ladders

• Transitions, Pathways

• Planning Goals

• Structured Mentoring

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T ( C O M P L E X ) S Y S T E M S

• Policies as guides not as rules,

• Exceptions, errors,

• Disruptive events (Behaviours, technologies), unplanned events,

• Limits of predictability,

• Emergent stability, dynamic order

© Jim Bright 2014

Gather round

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G

• Continual change,

• Unexpected change,

• Non-linearity,

• Continual reinvention,

• Flexibility, adaptability, creativity, opportunity awareness,

• Networks as interconnectedness,

• Leverage

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G

Clarity is not always high…

…shift happens

(Adapted from Megginson & Clutterbuck, 2005)

Emergent Mentoring

Edge of Chaos“sweet spot”

Dynamic Equillibrium

Emergent Mentoring Bright 2014

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G

• Mentoring can take only five seconds (non linearity)

• Structure and guidelines are a last resort when everything else is failed

• If progress reports are so good at keeping us on track how come we don't have progress reports about progress reports?

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G ( A C C O R D I N G T O S I R I )

• “Mean mandatory mentees makes Mormons mentoring magic mandatory”

• or

• “Me mandatory in cheese makes more mentoring mandatory”

• = “Motivated mentors make mentoring more meaningful”

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G ( A C C O R D I N G T O S I R I )

• Emergent mentoring arises out of positive interactions, chance encounters and sometimes necessity. Emergent mentoring is generally likely to be more successful and satisfying than more structured top down mentoring

© Jim Bright 2014

E M E R G E N T M E N T O R I N G

• Mentoring when done well is a two-way process and at times the mentee will become the mentor, particularly in areas such as passing on organisational intelligence, explaining new concepts or technologies. This process makes the mentor more approachable and models continuous learning

© Jim Bright 2014

F R A C TA L M E N T O R I N G

Mentoring recognised !

!

!

!

!

and rewarded at every level, across groups, schools,

faculties

Over time consistently

© Jim Bright 2014

L I G H T T O U C H R E G U L AT I O N

• No forms

• No “compliance”

• No progress reports

• No SMART goals

• No burden

© Jim Bright 2014

R E W A R D M E N T O R I N G

• KPIs of all staff

• Self - career trajectories, opportunity awareness,

• People - Pep conversations - prioritise, engage, positive

• Promotion criteria

• encourage staff to note mentoring exchanges

© Jim Bright 2014

A N D F I N A L LY. .

• “When you know what you are talking about, people will follow you, because it’s safe to follow you”

• Richard Fuld

• Commencement Address University of Colorado, Boulder, 2006

© Jim Bright 2014

L E H M A N B R O S C E O

• On Sept. 15, 2008, led Lehman Brothers into the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history…

• Fuld was hauled before Congress and made to answer for the firm’s demise. “If you haven’t discovered your role,” Republican Representative John Mica of Florida told him, “you’re the villain.”

© Jim Bright 2014

R E F E R E N C E S

• David, S, CLutterbuck, D, Megginson, D. (2013). Beyond Goals: Effective Strategies for Coaching and Mentoring. Gower: London

• DuBois, D., Holloway, B., Valentine, J., & Cooper, H. (2002). Effectiveness of mentoring programs for youth: A meta-analytic review. American journal of community psychology, 30(2), 157. Retrieved from Academic Search Elite database on June 4,2010.

• Human Resource Management. Retrieved from http://www.hrmtoday.com/talent/human-resources-management/one-reason-why-mentoring-programs-fail/ 14/5/2014

• Joleski, T. (2012). The personality matching of mentors and mentees in a youth mentoring program. Retrieved from https://ritdml.rit.edu/bitstream/handle/1850/15107/TJolevskiThesis4-9-2012.pdf?sequence=1 14/5/2014

• Megginson, D. & Clutterbuck, D. (2005). Techniques for Coaching and Mentoring. Elsevier: London

• Ordóñez, L.D., Schweitzer,M.E., Galinsky, A.D., & Bazerman, M.H. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systemic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23 (1), 6–16.