|
 |
A more structured approach to mentoring
Lynn Seah
 MENTORING
has a long history. In fact, the word “mentor” can
be traced back to the time of the Trojan War. Brad Pitt is not
involved in this story but the character of Odysseus is. While
away fighting the war, Odysseus asked the goddess Athena to
help look after his son, Telemachus. Athena took the form of
Mentor — an old friend of Odysseus’ — and
wisely steered Telemachus on the right path as he grew up.
Since then, someone who is a counsellor, coach,
teacher and role model to another has been
called a mentor.
Mentoring, in one form or another, occurs
in all organisations. “No organisation
can survive without it,” says Mr George
Quek, director of LQ Goodman and Associates,
an organisational development and learning
firm.
However, most mentoring is ad hoc and informal.
“And because it’s informal, the benefits
are dissipated,” says Mr Quek.
He advocates a more structured approach. One advantage
of going this route is that the mentee gets to think
through his strengths and weaknesses and decide
on the areas he wants developed.
“Then the mentoring relationship can be more
focussed on conquering or overcoming these issues.”
On July 12 and 13, Mr Quek will conduct a two-day
workshop at the Singapore Institute of Management
for human resource practitioners who want to know
how to set up formal mentoring programmes in their
organisations.
Mr Quek believes mentoring is a valuable people-development
tool that is underused in many organisations.
“In many companies, you have years of cumulative
experience and skills. If only these could be harnessed
and passed on in a structured way. A formal mentoring
system can ensure this."
“And it helps build a learning culture.
My own people developing my own people ... it’s
a very beautiful idea.”
Besides passing on knowledge and skills, a mentoring
programme can have other benefits, such as lower
turnover.
Mr Quek cites the case of a certain multi-national
corporation that had a high pressure environment.
Although it paid its people well, the stress drove
some to consider quitting. However, mentors managed
to dissuade many from leaving the fold.
“By sharing their experiences, they were able
to show their mentees that there is a rainbow at
the end of the storm.”
However, in a busy organisation
where people are often tied up meeting workrelated
targets, it is difficult to ensure that mentoring
is carried out. Which is why a formal programme
beats an informal one, says Mr Quek.
In a formal programme, there is one person appointed
to be a coordinator. That person is responsible
for keeping things on track, ensuring that mentors
and mentees meet and that they benefit from the
meetings.
Such a programme lays out guidelines such as how
long the mentoring relationship lasts, who the mentors
and mentees are and how they are matched.
A mentor is never a direct supervisor of a mentee.
“A supervisor is more concerned
about work-related results. Many times, these things
will take precedence over personal developmental
aspects.”
A mentor has no such pressures and is thus able
to focus on nurturing the mentee.
A formal mentoring programme also provides training,
especially for the mentors.
Mr Quek wishes such training had been available
in the past when he had to mentor others.
“In my day, I did more telling. I wish I had
done less of that. It has more impact if you discover
the answer yourself."
“A good
mentor won’t give you the answers but will
help lead you to the answers.”
TODAY
• MONDAY • MAY 31, 2004
|
|
