Mentoring From The Inside

By Lawrence Arnold

Mentoring is a professional ‘good’ but there is a knowledge gap on how it works, or could work, in practice. This article reflects on the experience of two Melbourne career coaches in the 2014 CDAA National Mentor Program. The mentor (MR) has substantial experience in private practice and tertiary career units, and the mentee (ME) was combining private practice and a school career counsellor role.

ME’s mentoring aims were to enhance business growth, upgrade computer-based services and technology and grow her professional network. MR was initially daunted by this list, feeling that his own marketing strategies were less than perfect, his computer knowledge was limited and his private practice role involved considerable professional isolation. Based on experience providing telephone training for the 2013 Victorian Mentor Program, however, MR decided that having only humility to offer was a good starting point. The CDAA Victoria Division Conference and PD materials of recent years were the lifelines rescuing both MR and ME.

Forming/storming

Despite early email and communication glitches, both parties adjusted their communication styles. These two different counselling styles were reflected in the approaches to the mentoring process. MR has an interest in structured tools (including the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and Strong Interest Inventory) and so initiated a more bureaucratic approach in order to establish a clear structure. ME’s counselling style relies heavily on interpersonal connection, so there was initial ambivalence around the use of tables and structured programs. ME had read the mentoring manual but was initially unsure of its value and felt snowed under by the early interaction. On meeting, both parties developed their own structure and it worked well.

A professional values card sort showed they shared only one!

MR’s values focused on tasks and autonomy, with ME’s leaning towards people and relationships.

ME prioritised school survival strategies, LinkedIn development, marketing, managing the external environment effectively and the school/private practice balance. MR saw school survival strategies as urgent but raised school/private practice balance to a higher level. It was clear that unnecessary duplication was resulting in repeating similar work in both sectors. A key outcome was seeing both roles as two sides of the same coin to improve ME’s efficiency and personal branding in both spaces.

The prioritisation exercise and meeting agendas developed by ME carried all the structure needed, and earlier CDAA conference materials were useful for specific activities.

Norming/performing

ME’s early need was for current online input, so MR directed her to the relevant CDAA documents and links. Referring to the people behind the resources fulfilled the need for building a network, as expressed in ME’s mentoring application. The Marketing Career Development session booklet for the 2012 Mini Conference, developed by Giorgio Migliaccio, was the resource used to develop ME’s marketing strategy and define the key target audience for her private practice.

MR’s major input was suggesting a strategic approach to control the school environment and align school activities with private practice by identifying overlapping activities. One of these activities was to establish a LinkedIn group targeting parents of VCE students throughout Victoria to give information on VCE and VTAC issues troubling parents. This would both enhance professional standing in the school and develop the role as a VTAC go-to for hassled parents.

An innovative development was to undertake a joint activity — developing ME’s LinkedIn skills by selecting a CDAA group post and joining a discussion on the topic. The aim was to practise submitting posts on complex issues and handle comments by other members. This was an ad hoc activity initiated during a mentoring session but it had no conclusive outcome, possibly due to the ephemeral nature of social media posts. Joint activities must be well planned to be successful.

Conclusions

• Identifying and adjusting communication styles at the pre-meeting stage is essential for a good start but attempts to ‘over adjust’ behaviour are unnecessary.
• Establishing professional values through an informal or formal values exercise and identifying different operational behaviours are essential.
• Despite the view that both parties should have similar values, having only one value in common is just fine!
• The mentor should not feel inadequate if some goals can’t be progressed within the relationship.
• While a clear framework enhances process, organic procedures the partners develop themselves are more beneficial.

Mentoring programs expend considerable effort matching pairs initially, but that may be less necessary as even ‘odd couples’ generate favourable outcomes once alerted to different values.

To sum up, the 2014 CDAA National Mentor Program provided specific benefits to both mentee and mentor and a contribution to understanding the mechanics of mentoring from the inside.