Faculty Mentoring Programs:
Updates from the Field
Jeffrey Morzinski PhD, MSW
Dept of Family & Community Medicine
1
Problems in Academic Health
Sciences / Higher Education
 Instability
 Uncertainty
 Leadership gaps




Poor morale
Missed opportunities
Isolation
Unfulfilled careers
2
Mentoring: Hope & Challenge
 Optimism / opportunity in mentoring /
other forms of faculty development
 Challenges include: Cultural fit, program
design, cost, evaluation
Greatness is not where we stand, but in what
direction we are moving. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
3
Session Objectives:
1. Describe five stages of mentoring program
development
2. List and discuss several “lessons from the field”,
based on experiences gained during a longstanding mentor program
3. Appreciate importance of a “colleague network”
approach to optimize faculty development
4. Evaluate an emerging, four level categorization
for mentoring programs
5. Discuss any & all mentoring program questions
4
Session Activities
 Introduction
 Describe five stages of our mentoring program
 Answer your questions (at three specific
transitions / others as needed)
 Report findings of a study on Fac Dev features
that advance mentoring
 Review “lessons from the field”
 Integrate & discuss your plans for mentoring
practice
5
Speaker’s Interest and Setting
 Biology + Social Welfare + Admin Leader
 Rural Community Health + Faculty Dev +
Mentoring, Evaluation & Leadership
 Medical College of Wisconsin
 Where we are
 What we do
6
Mentoring Overview
 Odysseus from Homer’s Odyssey
 Recruited Mentor to guide Telemachus
 Athene sometimes speaks through Mentor
 Developmental relationship / transitions
 A Learning relationship aimed at helping the
mentee progress toward mutually defined goals*
 Risks
 Exploitation, careerism, favoritism
 Benefits
 Advancement, learning, succession planning, vitality,
networking
* Zachary L “Creating a Mentoring Culture”
7
Why Structured Mentoring?
 Do mentors / proteges find each other?
 Not frequent / not at right time
 When it do - within social / cultural strata
 Structured mentoring defined:
A structure and series of processes designed to
create effective mentoring relationships, guide
the desired change of those involved, and
evaluate the results for the protégé, the mentor
and the organization. -- Murray & Owen
8
Structured / Assigned Mentor
Programs
 Comparable outcomes as with nonassigned mentoring*
 Research variables to look for




Individual characteristics & training
Context (e.g., leader support, other Fac Dev)
How matching occurs
Objectives, monitoring & summative eval
* Chao, Walz & Gardner. Formal and informal mentorships…
9
Published Mentor Program
Outcomes (N=18)*
16
14
12
10
Improved
climate
Enjoyed
program
Socialization
8
6
Developed skills
4
2
Retained staff
0
* Morzinski & Fisher, Eval Practice
10
Myths of Mentoring
1. Can’t be effective if “matched” by a 3rd
party
2. Personalities must match
3. Gender-ethnic-discipline must match
4. Frequent in-person meetings
5. “Just right” timing
6. De-emphasize other relationships
7. Protégé will have less work to do
11
Why Mentoring &
Faculty Development
 Isolation among junior faculty
 Senior faculty - search for academic
vitality
 Rapid expansion and change in many fields
(including my field in academic medicine)
 Evidence that mentoring works
12
Integrated with Fac Dev: MCW’s
Five-stage mentoring Program
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Organizational readiness
Visibility and recruitment
Matching and orientation
Ongoing seminars, support & structure
Evaluation
13
Program Stages
1. Organizational readiness




Determine needs and interests
Gather input from leaders & Chair
Secure commitment of resources
Publicize goals
 In our program, trainee / jr faculty goals are:*
1. Understand values, norms and expectations of
academic medicine
2. Develop skills to proactively manage career
3. Develop / maintain a productive colleague network
*Bland et al, Successful Faculty…
14
Program Stages (cont)
2. Visibility and recruitment





Mentoring as part of the culture
Clarify purpose of two-year program
Confirm chair recommendations for mentors
Promote a norm of participation
“Short bridge” approach to recruiting
15
Program Stages (cont)
3. Matching and orientation
 Collect & distribute faculty biosketches
 For any reason - is there anyone you could not
work with?
 Mentor approves match / gets 30 minute
orientation
 Inspirational reception
 Mentor makes first 3-5 contacts
16
Program Stages (cont)
4. Ongoing seminars, structure & support




Blend of group / individual activities
Recommend a minimum of 2 contacts / month
Coordinator reminds and monitors
Keep up contacts…meet at naturally-occurring
events
17
Program Stages (cont)
5. Evaluation & Reporting
Contact frequency and content
Social activities “count”
Public recognition at program end
Gather data to improve program and judge
impact
 Report results at appropriate venues




18
Internal Summary 1
 Reviewed mentor background & myths
 Presented mentoring’s evolution to
structured programs
 Detailed 5 development stages that both
guided & emerged from our program
experience
19
Transition / Discussion
 Mentoring Myths, Program Stages & Features
 Q&A
 Chat: Have you been “matched” in a mentoring
program? Were you a… mentor… a protégé?
 If you have been matched, name one factor that
either helped the program’s effectiveness, or was
a barrier to its overall effectiveness.
20
Mentoring & Faculty Socialization at
Other Schools
 Mentoring, or mentoring plus…?
 Inspired by research in business / management
The popular press has done a disservice by
implying that the key to career success is finding a
mentor. This is an oversimplification of a complex
web of work relationships that could be made
available to individuals in organizational settings
-- K Kram
21
Colleagues in Academic Careers
 Why Study / Foster Colleagues?
 Individual benefits
 Fac who often utilize C’s in res = 4 x pubs*
 Increased creativity, happiness
 Increased retention
 Group benefits
 Recruiting
 Succession planning
 If you were allowed only one line of inquiry to
predict a faculty member’s future success… **
*Jones et al. J of Dental Ed
**Hitchcock et al, Acad Med
22
Colleague Relationships & Fac Dev
 Instructional features of Fac Dev may be
associated with CR gains*
 Because CRs are valued, we wondered if /
how professional training helps to develop
mentors and other CRs?
 No one had asked learners to describe
training experiences that influenced CR
development
 No studies of a national sample of Fac Dev
* Bland et al, Successful Faculty…
23
Study Definitions
 FDPs: 52 Health Professions schools
received HRSA-BHPr FD grants*
 FD Director: Each (52) identified in grant
 Enrollee: Health professions faculty in
FDP for at least 6 months.
 Colleague Relationship (CR): career
supportive relationships (e.g., mentors,
peers) “initiated or strengthened” due to
FDP participation.
* See www.hrsa.gov
24
Study Design*
Mail Surveys: Two Phases (’99-00)
1. FD Directors provided program
descriptions and enrollee rosters
2. Enrollees provided data on
 CR gains, socialization, products and
achievements
 Two key Study Questions:
 How many career supportive colleagues
did you initiate or develop during your FDP?
 What FDP features contributed to your
developing CRs?
* Morzinski JA, Fisher. A nation-wide study...
25
Overview of Respondents
 37 of 52 (71%) FD directors
 351 of 543 (65%) enrollees
 male 65%; non-white 16%
 Average age at FDP start,
 male 40; female 37
 Yrs as faculty at FDP start
 male 4.5 years; female 2.7 years; non-white 1.9
years
 Distribution from all 10 US regions
26
Descriptions of
Colleague Types
 Mentors
 Often in advanced career stages
 Foster academic identity, advancement & goals
 Link to new opportunities, people
 Peers
 Often similar career stage
 Collaborate, informal feedback and friendship
 Academic Consultants
 Provide specialized help in activities and projects
 Aid efficiency and quality
27
Findings: Study Question 1*
 Enrollees reported 9.1 CRs due to FDP enrollment




2
3
1
3
mentors
peers
acad consultant
“perceived” CRs
 CRs were important to enrollees’ academic
socialization and careers
 Six CRs directly assisted with multiple careerimportant products / achievements
 Three perceived to be “in the wings” if needed
* Morzinski JA, Fisher. A nation-wide study on the influence of FDPs on colleague
28
relationships. Acad Med.
CR Totals and Types
Peers
Mentors
Junior Faculty
Academic
Consult.
Perceived CRs
29
Details: FD Colleagues “Most
Influential”
 74% were “well or very well connected” to a
regional/national scholar network
 43% had primary affiliation external to subjects’
home institution
 41% had original meeting during training activities
 60% exchanged support & challenge
 Stimulate avg of 2-3 products/achievements
 Hands-on support most associated with products /
achievements
30
Study Question 2: FDP Features
 “What faculty development program features
contributed to your developing Colleague
Relationships?”
 269 of 351 enrollees (66%) made 624 usable
text responses
 Template approach resulted in 16 subcategories in 4 main categories*
 Inter-rater agreement 88%; Cohen’s Kappa
83%
*Crabtree & Miller; Constas.
31
Sub-Analysis (continued)
 We examined open-ended responses from
FD enrollees with
 Moderate to high CR gains
 CRs important or very important
 Final count of 335 text responses by 141
enrollees
32
Results: 335 Entries in Four
Main Categories
1. Concrete interaction (n=127; 38%)*
 “Presented our teaching to one another for
feedback”
 “Learned by group participation”
2. Learning context (n=105; 31%)
 “A safe group… mutual respect”
 “Meeting away from home and “pagers”
*Also see: Morzinski, “Influence of Academic Projects…” Family Medicine
33
Subcategories
Illustrative Comments
- Small group & Participation
- Coaching and peer feed-back
- Links with mentors
- Out-of-class faculty or staff contact
“Learning by group participation”
“Small group teams for discussion purposes”
“Participants taught each other”
“We assisted each other with research”
“Hands-on projects directly related to my work”
“Presented out teaching to each other for feed-back”
“Consistent supervision by one mentor”
“Coordinator attended some of my presentations”
Subcategories
Illustrative Comments
- Meeting frequency or proximity
- Social times, meals
- Relaxed, unhurried setting
“Locally done – all of us there at once”
“Overnight stays at same lodging”
“Time and relaxed environment to talk with colleagues”
“Meeting away from home and ‘beepers’”
“Atmosphere – safe group, mutual respect”
“Friendly atmosphere”
- Work on and present projects
- Effective group climate
34
Results on FDP Features (cont)
3. Instructional Experiences (n=46;
14%)
 “Frequently used participants’ programs to
illustrate teaching points”
 “Active instruction on learning styles”
4. Learners and Leaders (n=57; 17%)
 “Being together with my peers at all the
classes”
 “Faculty were well-connected with national
organizations”
35
Subcategories
Illustrative Comments
- Explicit attention to learner needs, goals
- Learned about colleagues, career planning,
“ropes”
“Frequent use of participants’ programs for illustration”
“Scheduled time to hear from fellow on problems, projects”
“Establishment of e-mail communications network”
“List serve”
“Instruction on conflict resolution and learning styles”
“We had special career development classes”
Subcategories
Illustrative Comments
- Internet and e-mail
- Expert faculty
- New and diverse learners
- Group continuity
- Leader support
“Interaction with state and national leaders”
“Several opportunities to interact with visiting professors”
“(Ours was) an interdisciplinary group”
“Meeting former students”
“Meeting as a group several times over the year”
“Continued faculty contact at national meetings”
“Chairman’s priority and encouragement”
36
Internal Summary 2
 Mentoring is a Faculty Development
method
 From a national sample of FDP enrollees
and programs, we learned:
 Positive career-impact of three types of CRs
 Power of instructional activities that include
hands-on help, concrete interaction & a
respectful learning context
37
Transition Discussion
 What about the study and its results?
 Q & A: Colleague Relationships as extension
of mentoring
 Chat: If someone has a strong network of
peers and acad consultants, do they still
need one or more mentors? Why / why not?
38
Lessons from the Field:
For Organizations
 Mentoring programs need objectives *
 Mentoring can’t be “window dressing” –
need appropriate learning context
 Promote “Small m” mentoring
 Establish a code of institutional
expectations and support for mentoring
*Zachary L. “Creating a Mentoring Culture”
39
Lessons from the Field:
For Mentors
 Ok to start before you’re certain you are
ready
 Balance challenge with support**
 Plan to be more directive / active early
 Provide hands-on support**
** Bower, Diehr, Morzinski & Simpson.
40
Lessons from the Field:
For Proteges




Proteges need objectives
Be ready emotionally – suspend judgment
Avoid mentor envy
Seek diversity – up to six to eight active,
career-support members
41
Role of Colleagues
Support and Challenge (Daloz)
High
Low
Support
High
*Adopted from Daloz LA, Effective teaching and mentoring.
42
Support/Challenge
High
Low
RETREAT
GROWTH
STASIS
CONFIRMATION
Support
High
43
Support Types
 Information. Aids decision-making;
clarifies uncertainty; increases awareness
of opportunities
 Feedback. Fosters quality and confidence
by offering comparisons or standards for
judging the quality of projects, behaviors,
performance.
44
Support Types (cont)
 Emotional support. Builds trust, friendship.
Could reduce beliefs of personal
competence
 Hands-on support.* Direct work, often
tangible and/or visible, that moves a
project toward completion. *Strongest
association with junior faculty products &
achievements
45
Examples of Challenge
Heat up dichotomies
Offer new language
Silence / give time
Dialogue on aims / purposes
Questions “Let’s assume..” / “What if…”
Set challenging tasks
Set and maintain high performance
standards
 Keep an eye on the clock / calendar







46
Tool for Reviewing CR Networks
 List your active, career-supportive CRs:
 Mentors ___________, ___________.
 Peers __________, ___________, __________.
 Academic consultants __________, _________.
 Plan for adding diversity/filling gaps______
____________________________________
 Reflect on exchanges with existing CRs:
 Support / challenge balance?
 How to improve balance___________________
47
Emerging Program Lesson:
Levels of Formality
 How Formal Should Y/our
Program Be?
48
Tuxedos to Blue Jeans:
Four Mentoring Levels*
1. Formal mentoring includes matching /
monitoring
2. Facilitated mentoring the dept still arranges
meetings and monitors (does not match)
3. Intentional mentoring, where chairs or
directors recommend individual action, with no /
limited follow-up
4. Coincidental mentoring relies on luck
At MCW… all levels represented
* Morzinski JA. STFM Messenger.
49
Internal Summary 3
 Lessons from the field
 Mentors, protégé and organization
 Support and challenge
 Lesson for programs – mentoring level
(formal, facilitated, intentional,
coincidental) to fit different situations
50
51
Discussion on “Lessons”
Q&A
 Questions from your experiences / final
comments?
52
Next Steps at MCW
 Institutional Awards for mentoring (not
restricted to mentors)
 Through faculty council, networking lunch
“drop in” sessions on CVs/portfolios, cosponsored by Rank and Tenure Committee
 Maintain written an on-line resources for
mentors
 Grad level course (elective) on mentoring
53
Overall Conclusions
 Start modest and build
 Match mentoring level with level of
commitment you can sustain
 Get periodic “mentoring” about your
mentoring program
 Consider evidence, lessons, and then…
54
Conclusion (cont)
Grey-eyed Athene spoke… likening herself
to Mentor in voice and appearance,
“Telemachus, already your… companions
are sitting at the oars, and waiting for you
to set forth. So let us go, and not delay
our voyaging longer.”
- The Odyssey of Homer
Thank you!
You can reach me at jmorzins@mcw.edu
55
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Achinstein B, Athanases S. (Eds). Mentors in the Making: Developing New Leaders for New Teachers. New York:
Teachers College Press. 2006.
Bland C, Schmitz C, Stritter F, Henry R, Aluise J. Successful Faculty in Academic Medicine. New York: SpringerVerlag. 1990.
Chao G, Walz P, Gardner P (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring functions and
contast with non-mentored counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, 619-36.
Daloz L. Mentor. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1997.
Hill SK., Bahniuk MH, Dobos J, Rouner, D. (1989). Mentoring and other communication support in the academic
setting. Group and Organizational Studies. 1989; 14(3): 355-368.
Hitchcock MA, Bland CJ, Hekelman FP, Blumenthal M. Professional networks: The influence of colleagues on the
academic success of faculty. Academic Medicine. 1995; 70(12): 108-1116.
Jones JE, Preusz GC, Finkelstein SN. Factors associated with clinical dental faculty research productivity. Journal
of Dental Education. 1989;43(11):638-45.
Kram KE. Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman,
1985.
Morzinski JA. The influence of academic projects on the professional socialization of family medicine faculty.
Family Medicine, 2005;37(5):348-53.
Morzinski JA. Mentors in tuxedos or blue jeans. STFM Messenger, an international newsletter. Jan 2007.
Morzinski JA, Simpson DE, Bower DJ, Diehr S. Faculty development through formal mentoring. Acad Medicine.
1994;69(4): 267-69.
Morzinski J, Fisher J. An evaluation of mentoring studies and a model for their improvement. Evaluation
Practice, 17, 37-50. 1996.
Morzinski JA, Fisher JC. A nation-wide study on the influence of faculty development programs on colleague
relationships. Acad Med, 77(5); 402-406. 2002.
Morzinski JA. Mentors, Colleagues and Successful Health Science Faculty: Lessons from the Field. Journal of
Veterinary Medical Education. 2005; 32(1), 5-12.
New Teacher Center @ USC. www.newteachercenter.org
Murray M, Owen M (1991). Beyond the myths and magic of mentoring. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Ragins BR, Kram KE. The Handbook of Mentoring at Work. Sage:2007.
56
Zachary LJ. Creating a Mentoring Culture. Jossey-Bass. 2005.