26.10.2014 Views

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

These requisite conditions are not achieved easily, and a number of individual and<br />

organizational obstacles interfere with realizing them.<br />

MAJOR OBSTACLES TO MENTORING<br />

People in the organization may discount the importance of relationships at work or not<br />

have the skills needed to build supportive alliances. Studies of mentoring, superiorsubordinate,<br />

and peer relationships in numerous organizational settings indicate several<br />

obstacles to establishing effective mentoring relationships (Clawson, 1980; Kram, 1980;<br />

Kram & Isabella, 1985; Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee, 1978). These<br />

individual and organizational features, summarized in Table 1 and explained further in<br />

the following paragraphs, also have been noted by those who have attempted to set up<br />

formal mentoring systems (Klauss, 1979; Lean, 1983; Phillips-Jones, 1982).<br />

Obstacle 1: A reward system that emphasizes bottom-line results and, at the same<br />

time, does not place a high priority on human resource development. The reward system<br />

of an organization significantly influences how people behave and what they consider to<br />

be valued activity (Lawler, 1977). In a “bottom-line” context, people are inclined to<br />

view relationship-building efforts as a distraction from work. Thus, any attempts to<br />

provide mentoring to junior colleagues or to seek out supportive relationships with other<br />

colleagues will occur because of personal needs (Kram, 1983). Criteria for promotion<br />

are related only to technical performance. It is unlikely that a person will embrace the<br />

role of mentor when there are no organizational rewards for doing so.<br />

When recognition and rewards are tied to efforts to coach and mentor, people are<br />

more likely to seek out opportunities to do so. Research on well-managed companies has<br />

confirmed that rewards for subordinate development result in more attention to coaching<br />

and mentoring efforts and in an increase of highly talented managers for the<br />

organization (Digman, 1978; Peters & Waterman, 1982).<br />

Another aspect of the reward system that can hinder mentoring concerns the<br />

rewards available to those at mid-career who no longer have opportunities to advance in<br />

the organizational hierarchy. If there are no alternatives, people are likely to feel<br />

discounted and resentful (Hall, 1980). This contributes to self-doubt and to a lack of<br />

interest in supporting the growth of others. Indeed, the mentor relationship frequently<br />

becomes destructive when the mentor foresees no further advancement and no other<br />

rewards for his or her continued contributions to the organization (Kram, 1983).<br />

Finally, although a reward system may encourage mentoring by promoting those<br />

who develop talent for the organization, this practice can encourage developmental<br />

relationships only for those who have been labeled as high-potential candidates, rather<br />

than for a wider range of organizational members. Indeed, the coaching and mentoring<br />

functions sometimes are explicitly assigned to people who are two levels above those<br />

who have been labeled “fast trackers.” This has the effect of making mentoring available<br />

only to those who have demonstrated high potential early in their careers.<br />

248 ❘❚<br />

The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!