In our introduction in Part 1, we mentioned that in May 2006, the Center for Global Workforce Excellence asked the three of us to participate in an international webcast, “Mentoring Around the Globe.” Linda described mentoring in the USA, Rey addressed mentoring in Canada, and Vince talked about mentoring in the United Kingdom as well as in the rest of Europe.

Although we recognize differences in how mentoring is implemented in our three geographies, we propose that many similarities exist. We are calling our emerging list “mentoring universals,” and we continue to welcome your opinions about whether or not these indeed cut across cultures and continents.

Last month we presented universals for the mentor-mentee relationship. This second set of universals focuses on mentoring programs, initiatives, or schemes.

1. Organizations might consider applying recognized mentoring standards.

Europe, including the United Kingdom, has taken the lead on developing and demanding mentoring standards for mentoring programs or schemes. These standards cover everything from purposes, selection of participants, measurement, what the mentors and mentees/proteges/partners do together, and more. The U.S. and Canada haven’t embraced a set of recognized mentoring standards, although many organizations establish their own standards of quality for mentoring.

Many people actually oppose the idea of external standards, believing such standards could homogenize mentoring and mistakenly be used to reinforce a “one size fits all” approach. Opponents of external standards argue that the elegant simplicity of mentoring is that it can be developed successfully at the local level, have its own unique practice, and fit the culture in which it’s intended. External standards, especially if formally adopted and pushed by a professional or political group could be seen as prescriptive and the “only way.”

The idea of formal, widely accepted mentoring standards is certainly worth debating and exploring further, and we anticipate much more interest in this topic in the future. For more information on European mentoring standards, contact Vince (vince@mentfor.co.uk).

2. Selecting a mentoring model that works for one organization or country and applying it wholesale to another is not likely to be successful.

The three of us have all observed and made our own mistakes in trying to apply our own mentoring models in other settings. Linda recalls a time when she was training mentors and mentees in Jakarta. During a roleplay of a mentor-mentee meeting (demonstrated by Linda and another American), the Indonesian participants were polite and silent. When coaxed for their reactions, they offered to do a second roleplay--their way. The second was much more in keeping with their culture of sensitivity, non-directness, and respecting the mentor. Linda and the group all laughed and learned together as they came up with a more appropriate training piece as well as an overall mentoring model for that culture.

3. A mentoring strategy/scheme works best when it builds on and fits the culture of the organization where it’s implemented.

The Business Peace Council, which is an organization of American businesswomen working with female entrepreneurs in Afghanistan, Rwanda, and other countries, has invested a great deal of time visiting and understanding the cultures it wants to serve. Mentoring takes on a different look and approach in each of these settings. For example, in Afghanistan, phone and email hasn’t proven particularly effective. BPeace raises funds to bring the mentees to the mentors for at least one intensive learning experience. In addition, an in-country mentee coordinator helps the U.S. mentors by communicating with the mentees, and many of the mentors spend their own money to travel to Afghanistan to work with the mentees face to face.

Rey describes a scenario in which a mentoring coordinator was hired by a major Canadian corporation to establish and develop a mentoring program. The coordinator had a successful track record of doing the same thing in a previous corporation, which was, in part, why the coordinator was hired. However, the coordinator found very little cooperation in the new company. Memos and email went unanswered for days; few people volunteered; budget requests were typically ignored. The reason: the coordinator came from a company where independence and solo initiatives were highly valued but was now working in a company where teamwork and peer interaction were the norm. The coordinator became aware of the need to have an advisory group to help plan and develop the mentoring program rather than doing all the planning alone. Once this cultural difference was recognized and integrated into daily practice, participation rates increased dramatically.

4. Expectations of the organization, mentoring coordinator, mentors, and mentees may conflict and yet can be managed.

Struggles with mentoring expectations seem to be universal. We’ve found that each of these entities has expectations, even if they’re not stated out loud. Uncovering these expectations and then coming to agreement on what will really happen in the program saves time in the long run and prevents resentment. Not only in the beginning, but also checking on (and trying to meet or correct) these expectations throughout the initiative leads to greater success.

5. Started and resourced well, a mentoring scheme/initiative will grow organically.

Mentoring initiatives take a great deal of work and involve myriad details, especially in the beginning. Mentoring teams that plan thoroughly, resource well, and roll out their schemes slowly and carefully find that before long the scheme takes on a life of its own. People find they enjoy mentoring and welcome the new thrust. On their own, individuals go beyond expectations and initial responsibilities. They promote and multiply mentoring relationships, and mentoring becomes part of the culture.

According to Vince, a scheme was established in the UK in a national corporation that is spread in centers throughout the country. The aim of the scheme was to ensure succession planning as the directors were nearing retirement. Promising management talent (mentees) traveled to senior mentors (often involving an overnight stay) on a regular basis. Initial doubts of line managers and some of the directors were dispelled. Before long, the mentees were involved in local mentoring within the business, and a mentoring culture grew naturally. Mentoring was seen as an essential part of people development. A well conceived and organized scheme can cascade throughout an organization.

We welcome your reactions to these ideas. Please email us at info@mentoringgroup.com. For more ideas on effective mentoring, check Rey’s website (www.peer.ca) and Vince’s (www.mentfor.co.uk).