2008 - Marketing Educators' Association

McKenna, 1994). Evidence suggests female faculty
have fewer mentors, slower rates of promotion and
an increased likelihood of leaving a university
(Wasburn, 2007). Gibson (2005) reports female
protégés believe the best mentors are those who
really care and act in the protégé’s best interest,
while Burke (1984) found female protégés receive
more psychosocial support than male protégés.
Female protégés are more likely than male protégés
to stress caring, nurturing and teaching (Reich,
1986). Female protégés also consider the mentor’s
role of providing feedback about the protégé’s
strengths and weaknesses to be more important
than do male protégés (Reich, 1986). Opposite-sex
protégés have been found to use the mentor
relationship more effectively than same-sex
protégés (Noe, 1989).
Individuals who are extroverts, conscientious, and
open to experience tend to be the most effective
mentors (Niehoff, 2006). Mentor-protégé relationships
are less successful when someone is forced to
be a mentor or to accept a mentor. In addition,
effective mentoring requires mentors to see personal
benefits from investing in building a mentor-protégé
relationship. The effectiveness of a mentor-protégé
relationship should be measured by the job
satisfaction and performance of the mentor and
protégé (Niehoff, 2006)
A METHOD FOR STRUCTURING A FACULTY
MENTORING PROGRAM
It is common for marketing departments to have
mentoring programs for new faculty members as
they adjust from being a graduate student to
establishing their academic careers. At the same
time, a changing academic environment suggests
marketing faculty that are at various points in the life
cycle of their careers can benefit from mentoring
(Helms, Williams, & Nixon, 2001. In fact, Standard
11 of AACSB International requires accredited
business schools to provide processes for the
“guidance, orientation and mentoring” of faculty.
Four phases of mentoring have been identified in the
literature (Kram, 1988). The initiation phase involves
building a supporting relationship to provide the
protégé with knowledge of the operation of the
university and membership in the academy.
Building an effective mentor-protégé relationship
begins by identifying the dominant values, beliefs,
and assumptions within the university culture (Green
& Kawalilak, 2006). A key element of the initiation
phase is to build trust between the mentor and the
protégé. Possible actions that may be taken by the
mentor and protégé include discussions about the
94
university culture, professional organizations,
teaching and establishing a stream of research. The
protégé’s acclimation into the department might
involve coffee or lunches with colleagues. In some
cases the mentor may need to be an advocate for
the protégé to assist their membership in external
organizations and internal groups. Various outcomes
may be used to measure the success of the initiation
phase, including success in securing resources,
memberships in professional organizations, and a
willingness to acknowledge strengths and
weaknesses.
The second phase of mentoring is cultivation.
Cultivation refers to boosting the investment in the
mentor-protégé relationship to strengthen the
interpersonal bond between mentor and protégé.
Objectives of this phase may include developing the
protégé’s teaching and scholarship, promoting the
protégé’s accomplishments, and general growth of
the protégé’s professional career. The mentor may
take action by presenting opportunities to participate
in professional meetings, offering assistance in
designing courses and writing grant proposals, and
suggesting ways to promote the protégé’s
accomplishments. Measures of success in this
phase may include expanding the protégé’s
involvement in professional organizations, the
protégé’s success in establishing a stream of
scholarship and classroom performance, and
highlighting the protégé’s accomplishments in school
or university publications.
The separation phase involves defining a point
where the mentor and protégé begin to move apart
from one another. The mentor in this phase may
encourage the protégé’s independence to pursue
new directions in scholarship or teaching. The
mentor needs to turn from a “tell” mode to a “listen”
mode of communication and be supportive of new
ideas for scholarship and course development.
Outcomes of this phase may include the protégé’s
initiation of new streams of scholarship through
contacts with new peers and the teaching of new
courses.
The mentor-protégé relationship is usually redefined
within two to six years and involves the mentor and
protégé defining new roles for the relationship
(Perna, Lerner, & Yura, 1995). It is during the
redefinition phase that there is the greatest potential
for conflict between the mentor and protégé. The
mentor may feel that the protégé no longer respects
the mentor’s guidance. The protégé may feel the
need to gain a status equal to or surpass the
mentor.