|
A
Peer into
Peer to Peer Mentoring
by
Les McKeown
|
In
the last year or so, the volume of requests we've had for
help
with the design of one particular form of mentoring -
peer
to peer mentoring - has risen considerably.
Recent
events, particular the downturn in employment
prospects
in the tech sector, mean that demand for this form
of
mentoring is likely to continue to rise, so here's our
take
on:
-
Why
peer to peer mentoring has grown in popularity
-
What
peer to peer mentoring is
(and what it isn't)
-
Common
peer to peer mentoring models
-
Where
peer to peer mentoring works best, and
-
Where
it doesn't work so well.
|
Why Peer to Peer
Mentoring has Grown in Popularity
In
our experience, peer to peer mentoring - the idea of one
person
'mentoring' someone else at the same 'peer' level
in the
organization - has grown, not because of any real
attraction
inherent in the concept itself, but because of a
shortage
of 'classical' (older, more experienced) mentors.
Four
things have contributed to this shortage of 'classical'
mentors:
1.
Bandwidth
Constraints.
Existing
managers are simply too busy to take on mentoring
as
another perceived task. Consequently 'volunteer' mentors
are
harder to come by, and conscription doesn't really work
well as
a mentor recruitment tool.
2.
Employee
Turnover.
As
we are all aware, people simply aren't staying around as
long as
they used to...so older, wiser mentors are harder to
find.
3.
Demographics.
There
are a lot more younger, start-up companies around,
many of
whom simply don't have 'grayhairs' on the payroll.
4.
Product
Cycles.
In
many industries, product cycles have come crashing down
(and of
course some high-tech industries are making it up as
they go
along), meaning that there *isn't* any 'older,
wiser'
perspective to be had - everything's (seemingly) new.
As
a result, for many organizations, peer to peer mentoring
has gone
hand in hand with 'battlefield promotions' as the
only way
to really deal with process-oriented information transfer.
What
Peer to Peer Mentoring Is (and What It Isn't)
Peer
to peer mentoring, therefore, in most organizations,
isn't
'mentoring' at all - it's really a form of
coaching.
In
other words, it concentrates on knowledge or skills
development
(as opposed to mentoring, which focuses on
personal
development).
Peer
to peer 'mentoring' is almost always an attempt to:
A. ensure
an organized, consistent transfer of
knowledge
within a team or group,
B.
using limited manpower resources.
example:
A
banking organization's software
development
team of nine people is
faced
with a tight deadline for
the
design, development and
integration
of a new internal,
mission-critical
program.
The
team supervisor is brand new,
but
three of the team members have
been
through this process together
before,
but on both occasions
everything
was very ad-hoc.
There
was no structured 'learning'
from
the previous design experiences
-
documentation was scrappy, and
other
than the software itself,
there
were no outputs in the form
of
design manuals, FAQ's etc.
To
maximize the knowledge of the
three
'veterans', and to manage
the
documentation process, the team
implement
a 'peer to peer mentoring'
program,
with the three veterans
'mentoring'
the other team members
(including
the supervisor.)
It's
not really surprising to discover that peer to peer
'mentoring'
is usually coaching in disguise...after all,
mentoring
(in its truest sense) is all about the person's
individual
development - with skills and knowledge as a
secondary
issue.
It's
hard to expect people to act as 'peer' mentors (and
even
harder to ask people to be 'mentored' by peers) - it
takes
a sense of respect and confidence that's hard to find
in
true peers.
So,
as you can see, peer to peer 'mentoring' is really
usually
peer to peer coaching, and as such is a close
relative
to two other processes -
Buddy Programs
A buddy program is really a low-level
peer coaching program.
The
differences between a buddy program and peer coaching is
usually
just a matter of content - the processes are very
similar.
Team Leadership
Peer coaching is often similar to team leadership
(particularly
when it is sudden and unexpected!), with the
main
difference being the issue of responsibility.
Team
leadership brings with it clear responsibility and
control
considerations (or it should do...). Peer coaching
is
usually viewed as NOT having responsibility or control
implications
- although the coach may be accountable for the
coachee's
progress, the coach is not the boss of the
coachee.
Discussion Point:
Some
organizations introduce 'peer coaching'
programs as a
way
to 'fudge' the appointment of clear team leaders (either
because
the jury is still out on the management skills of
the
individuals, or because there are internal politics at
work.
This
is what it seems - a fudge - and as such, tends not to
work.
The
'coaches' aren't being given the right tools (authority
and
accountability) to prove themselves as team leaders, and
in
any case, the skills required to be a good coach aren't
necessarily
the same as those required to be a good team
leader.
One
last thing before we leave the issue of what peer to
peer
mentoring really is:
There
are circumstances where 'peer to peer mentoring' is
genuinely
mentoring (i.e. concerned with the development
of
the individual, not just her skills or knowledge), and
those
circumstances tend to be in areas where there is rapid personal
development over a relatively short period of time.
Good
examples are the military, and university, where
individuals
can often undergo major personal changes in a
relatively
short period, thereby becoming competent to act
as
mentor to those not far behind them.
Implementation
Point
Is
the environment into which you intend introducing your
peer
program one of intense personal development?
If
so, you may genuinely be looking for a peer to peer
mentoring
program. Otherwise you probably should use the
phrase
'peer coaching' to accurately describe your program,
and
to avoid misperceptions on the part of your coaches and
coachees.
(In
the remainder of this article, we'll use 'peer to peer
mentoring'
to mean both 'peer to peer mentoring' and 'peer
to
peer coaching' - you should 'hear' whichever phrase
applies
to your circumstances.)
Common Peer to Peer Mentoring
Models
There are
four common peer to peer mentoring models:
1.
ONE-WAY
- A mentor/coach is appointed
to one or more protégés.
2.
TWO-WAY
- Individuals in a group act as mentors / coaches to each
other,
depending on the topic.
example:
Jane,
George and Sam work on the
same
production line.
Because
of their respective
backgrounds
and experience, Jane
coaches
George and Sam on health
and
safety issues, while Sam coaches
George
on production-related issues.
|
3.
SME
SEEDED, ONE-WAY
- A mentor/coach is
appointed to one or more protégés, with a
subject
matter expert (SME) available for assistance.
4.
SME
SEEDED, TWO-WAY
- Individuals in a group act as
mentors / coaches to each
other,
depending on the topic, with subject matter experts
available
for assistance. |
SME 'seeding' is necessary when the
coaching
topic is technical AND the
coachees
are inexperienced or
unsure
of
the content.
It's
also important to recognize the
skills differences between SME's and
coaches
- SME's however brilliant,
don't
necessarily make great coaches. |
Implementation Point
Which
peer to peer mentoring model will you implement?
One-way
(there's just one role for each person - coach or
coachee),
or two-way (each person can be both a coach and
coachee
at the same time)?
Will
you make SME's available to help the coaches with
coaching
content, or are they on their own?
Where
Peer to Peer Mentoring Works Best
Here
are the circumstances in which you are likely to get
the
best results from introducing a peer to peer mentoring
program:
1.
Critical but Incremental Process Change
If
you have a change in a well-accepted existing process,
peer
coaching is a great way to implement it.
Because
the basic process is known, just one or two people
can
be taught the incremental change. They in turn can 'peer
coach'
the others.
2.
Supervisor Delegation/Reduction of Manager Span of Control
Where supervisors make a
decision to (permanently) delegate
tasks
to operatives, or there is a one-off re-alignment of
managerial
responsibilities, then again, peer coaching is a
great
way to implement this.
3.
Employee Orientation
As we've already seen, peer
coaching is a near relative of
buddy
programs - often used in employee orientation.
The
two go hand in hand very well, with the buddy program
concentrating
on integration and mechanical issues, and the
peer
coaching focused on operational skills.
If
you're having difficulty scheduling orientation regularly
a
good buddy and peer coaching program combined can 'plug
the
gap' very well for a few weeks.
4.
Esoteric Skills Got
a need for occasional left-handed widget manufacture? Or
a
declining knowledge base in wicker-work handbag design?
Peer
coaching is a great way to transfer narrow skills.
Where Peer to Peer Mentoring
Doesn't Work So Well
At
the risk of some abuse :-( here are the areas where we've
found
it more difficult to introduce successful peer to peer
mentoring:
|
1.
Highly Structured Environments
Larger, more
established organizations find it hard to
introduce
peer mentoring programs.
Whether
they're coaching or truly mentoring, structured
organizations
tend to react constitutionally against peer
development.
Because
most larger, structured organizations are used
to
vertical, top-down communication, the lateral nature of
peer
to peer mentoring shakes the system too much. |
Tip: If you're in a
larger organization,
introduce
peer to peer mentoring
quietly,
in a responsive division
or
department, before contemplating
rolling
it out company-wide.
|
2.
24/7 Remote Environments
If your employees
never meet face to face, it will be
difficult
for peer to peer mentoring to 'take'.
Except
for the most straightforward,
factual coaching, there
needs
to be *some* personal input, however small,
particularly
at the start of a peer mentoring relationship,
for
it to gain traction.
|
Tip:
Fight hard for the resources to
get
your coaches / mentors and
peers
together at the start of
your
program - even if only for
a
brief while.
You'll
greatly increase the
chance
of your program's
success.
|
|
3.
Poor Supervision/Time Management
Environments where there
is poor time management overall
(everyone's
always in a rush, nothing ever gets completed on
time),
coupled with poor supervision, often fall on peer to
peer
mentoring as something of a magic bullet.
There
is sometimes a perception that if the managers and
supervisors
cannot exercise the right skills to adequately
lead
the employee teams, then maybe they (the employees)
will
be able to do it for themselves.
|
Tip:
Peer to peer mentoring isn't a
substitute
for poor management.
If
your supervisors aren't doing
a
good job, peer to peer mentoring
won't
fix it...
...the
best peer to peer mentoring
programs
work in strong management
environments. |
|
4.
Engineers
Here's where I really get
into trouble...:-)
While there are obvious
exceptions, in my experience getting
engineers
to coach (let alone mentor) is tough. They're
inclined
to want to tell others what to do, rather than show
them,
and that difference is important.
(In
the worst cases, engineers will sometimes do neither,
taking
the "Give it here, I'll do it myself" attitude.)
|
Tip:
In an engineering environment:
-
choose
your starting point
carefully
(find a group that
really
wants to work with you);
-
get
personal buy-in from all
the
participants before you start;
-
define
the process in writing;
-
agree
outputs in measurable
terms.
|
J. Leslie McKeown is the
President & CEO of Yellowbrick, a training company specializing in
employee orientation, retention and mentoring programs. He is the
creator of "The Complete Guide to Mentoring and Coaching" for
designing and implementing effective mentoring and coaching programs, and
the popular "How to be a Great Mentor...in under 30 minutes"
online mentoring training program. www.deliverthepromise.com
ExpertMagazine.com
Send
this article to others
Reader
feedback
top
of page
All articles & website © EXPERT Magazine
|
