1 Mentoring of Scientists and Engineers: A Study of Organization Intervention and Mentor/Protégé Homogeneity Mike Lyon

2 Manpower crisis looming? Average age of US aerospace and defense worker: 51 50% of DoD civilians will be eligible to retire in the next 5 years Percentage of students entering college in the US who plan to major in engineering: 5.5% in 2002 (8.6% on 1992) Defense News 28 June 2004, p. 24 Gov Exec magazine 1 Aug 2004, p.10

3 Mentoring “The mentor is usually a senior, experienced employee who serves as a role model, provides support, direction, and feedback to the younger employee regarding career plans and interpersonal development, and increases the visibility of the protégé to decision-makers in the organization who may influence career opportunities.”

4 Effective Mentor Characteristics 1. They are higher up in the organization 2. They are an authority in their field 3. They are influential with a “voice” in the profession 4. They are close to the lines of authority and power 5. They are interested in the protégé’s growth and development 6. They are willing to commit time and emotion to the relationship

5 Why Mentor? Mentoring has long been recognized as a means to pass along business “ rules of thumb ”, provide introductions to “ the right people ”, and provide a buffer layer to the new employee as he or she learns the basics of the business. The goal of mentoring is to facilitate job success for the prot é g é and for the prot é g é to become a satisfied, productive employee. Comparisons of mentored versus unmentored individuals indicate that mentoring can benefit three distinct entities: the prot é g é, the mentor, and the organization.

6 Program Structure Informal mentorships not constructed by the organization arise spontaneously not managed, structured, or formally recognized by the organization. Formal mentorships organizationally managed generally created by assignment or mentor selection designed to pair up employees with peers, seniors, or outside consultants

7 Mentoring Program Structure Elements of structure Is the mentoring program developed or implemented by the organization? (Initiation) Is the mentoring program coordinated or directed by the organization? (Direction) Are mentoring relationships encouraged by the organization? (Sustainment) Is the mentoring program reviewed by the organization? (Monitoring) Is progress of the mentoring relationship evaluated by the organization? (Improvement) How do the mentor and protégé meet? (Facilitization)

8 Career Development Mentoring

9 Psychosocial Mentoring

10 Dyads “Dyad” refers to the mentor-protégé pair Dyads are described as either Homogeneous -- mentor and protégé share similar characteristics Diverse – mentor and protégé differ Are typically categorized based on Gender Race

11 Gender as a Dyad Variable Women make up 46% of US labor force Women hold 10.6% of the engineering jobs. In 1999, women held 5.1% of “clout” titles Mentoring barriers for women Fewer females to serve as mentors for young females Women less plugged into informal networks (fewer interactions with persons in power) Visibility resulting from affirmative action scares mentors Misinterpretation of relationships (cross-gender)

12 Literature Indicates….. Men see mentors as: Developing leadership Developing ability to take risks Giving direction Communication Women see mentors as: Giving encouragement and support Instilling confidence Providing growth opportunities Giving visibility within organization

13 Objective of Study To study: How are mentoring activities related to structural factors ? How do these vary with dyad homogeneity?

14 Survey Instrument (Structure portion) 1. The mentoring program was developed or implemented by my organization. Not at allTo a small degreeTo a large degreeFully 2. Our mentoring program is coordinated or directed by my organization. Not at allOnly occasionallyFrequentlyConstantly 3. Mentoring programs are encouraged by my organization. Not at allOnly occasionallyFrequentlyConstantly 4. Our mentoring program is reviewed by my organization Not at allOnly occasionallyFrequentlyConstantly 5. My mentoring progress is evaluated by my organization. (e.g. it is part of my performance appraisal process) Not at allOnly occasionallyFrequentlyConstantly 6. How I met my mentor Spontaneous. We just seemed to “hit it off” when we met One of us sought out the other based on comments of other employees We met in a meeting set up by our organization to bring together perspective mentors and proteges Our organization paired us without our input.

15 Survey Items - roles 1. Mentor has shared history of his / her career with you. 2. Mentor has encouraged you to prepare for advancement. 3. Mentor has encouraged me to try new ways of behaving in my job. 4. I try to imitate the work behavior of my mentor. 5. I agree with my mentor’s attitudes and values regarding education. 6. I respect and admire my mentor. 7. I will try to be like my mentor when I reach a similar position in my career. 8. My mentor has demonstrated good listening skills in our conversations. 9. My mentor has discussed my questions or concerns regarding feelings of competence, commitment to advancement, relationships with peers and supervisors or work / family conflicts. 10. My mentor has shared personal experiences as an alternative perspective to my problems. 11. My mentor has encouraged me to talk openly about anxiety and fears that detract from my work. 12. My mentor has conveyed empathy for the concerns and feelings I have discussed with him / her. 13. My mentor has kept feelings and doubts I have shared with him / her in strict confidence. 14. My mentor has conveyed feelings of respect for me as an individual.

Mentor reduced unnecessary risks that could threaten the possibility of advancement. 16. Mentor helped you finish assignments / tasks that otherwise would have been difficult to complete. 17. Mentor helped you meet new colleagues. 18. Mentor gave you assignments that increased written and personal contact with higher levels in the organization. 19. Mentor assigned responsibilities to you that have increased your contact with people in the organization who may judge your potential for future advancement. 20. Mentor gave you assignments or tasks in your work that prepare you for a leadership position. 21. Mentor gave you assignments that present opportunities to learn new skills. 22. Mentor provided you with support and feedback regarding your performance. 23. Mentor suggested specific strategies for achieving your career goals. 24. Mentor shared ideas with you. 25. Mentor suggested specific strategies for accomplishing work objectives. 26. Mentor gave you feedback on your performance in your present job. 27. Mentor has invited me to join him / her for lunch. 28. My mentor has asked me for suggestions concerning problems he / she has encountered at work. 29. My mentor has interacted with me socially outside of work. Survey Items - roles

17 Analysis Taxonomy

18 Survey Instrument (Other metrics) Dyad genders, races, ages Miscellaneous demographics Org. size, years in present job, term of mentoring relationship, proximity of offices “Success” factors (subjective statement from protégé) Most important mentoring role Least important mentoring role

19 Demographics of Surveyed Organizations American (88%) International (12%) Ment. Prot. MaleFemale Male74.3%2.0% Female19.3%4.4% < 1 yr1-5 yrs 6-12 yrs >12 yrs 11%31%18%40% Protégé’s Years with Organization 202 Engineers and Scientists working in 4 countries

20 Mentor has shared personal experiences as an alternative perspective to my problems. Mentor has encouraged discussions about anxiety and fears that detract from work. Mentor has conveyed empathy for the concerns and feelings discussed with him / her. Mentor has kept feelings and doubts shared with him / her in strict confidence. Typical trend Significant Findings:“Encouraged by Organization” I try to imitate the work behavior of my mentor. I agree with my mentor’s attitudes and values regarding education. I respect and admire my mentor. I will try to be like my mentor when I reach a similar position in my career. Mentor has encouraged trying new ways of behaving in the job. Mentor has conveyed feelings of respect for the protégé as an individual. Mentor provided support and feedback regarding performance. Mentor reduced unnecessary risks that could threaten the possibility of advancement. Mentor helped finish assignments / tasks that otherwise would have been difficult to complete. Mentor has shared history of his / her career. Mentor has encouraged preparation for advancement. Mentor suggested specific strategies for achieving career goals. Mentor shared ideas. Mentor suggested specific strategies for accomplishing work objectives. Mentor gave feedback on performance in present job. Coaching Providing Challenging Assignments Protecting from Adverse Forces Acceptance Role Modeling Counseling “Sustainment”

21 Typical trend Mentor has asked for suggestions concerning problems he / she has encountered at work. Mentor reduced unnecessary risks that could threaten the possibility of advancement. Mentor helped finish assignments / tasks that otherwise would have been difficult to complete. Mentor has shared history of his / her career. Mentor suggested specific strategies for achieving career goals. Mentor suggested specific strategies for accomplishing work objectives. Mentor gave feedback on performance in present job. Coaching Protection from Adverse Forces Acceptance Significant Findings:“Evaluated by Organization” “Improvement”

22 Typical trend Mentor has conveyed feelings of respect for protégé an individual. Mentor has asked protégé for suggestions concerning problems he / she has encountered at work. Mentor has interacted with protégé socially outside of work. Friendship Acceptance “Facilitization” Significant Findings:“How I Met My Mentor”

23 Homogeneous Faired Better, but not Broadly Mentor has interacted with protégé socially outside of work. Mentor provided support and feedback regarding performance. Friendship Providing Challenging Assignments

24 Structure Interactions Overall Program Effectiveness H

25 Structure Interactions Overall Program Effectiveness H

26 Other Demographics Formality varies with Organization Size Typical result P=.000 P= The mentoring program was developed or implemented by my organization. 2. Our mentoring program is coordinated or directed by my organization. 3. Mentoring programs are encouraged by my organization. 4. Our mentoring program is reviewed by my organization 5. My mentoring progress is evaluated by my organization. (e.g. it is part of my performance appraisal process)

27 Typical trend Duration of Mentorship

28 Most Important Role of Mentor Assigning responsibilities that increase the protégé’s contact with people in the organization who may judge the protégé’s potential for future advancement Providing support and feedback regarding the protégé’s technical performance Providing assignments that increase written and personal contact with higher levels of the organization

29 Least Important Role of Mentor Interacting with the mentor socially outside work Having the mentor invite the protégé to join him/her for lunch

30 Protégés Want More Mentor suggesting specific strategies for achieving protégé’s career goals

31 Findings Two activities most strongly relate to overall protégé career development: Getting assignments with high levels of visibility in the organization Getting assignments that are recognized as preparatory for leadership position Organizations over 300 employees have lower mentoring program structure Male and female protégés seem to want the same things out of a mentoring relationship US mentorships = non-US mentorships

32 Findings (con’t) Program structure does influence mentoring roles. The influence is generally positive. Organizations should have a reasonably structured and monitored mentoring program. Sufficient to let the protégés know that the organization is concerned about them as employees and as individuals Should not dominate or dictate the relationship. Dyad homogeneity has a relatively minor influence on mentoring roles – homogeneous dyads fair better Protégés should seek out mentors who can and will identify and provide the protégé with challenging assignments that have high visibility within the organization.

33 Additional Studies are Needed Compare mentoring by teams rather than individuals. Investigate reasons for drop in involvement when orgs reach 300 employees. How do the organizational structure and processes (e.g., rotational assignments) affect mentoring relationships? Does the structure of an organization's reward system affect the amount and type of mentoring present? Explore how relationships that provide only SOME of the mentoring functions differ in their impacts. What are the dynamics of mentorships in which the mentor is close and age or younger than the protégé?

34