Exploring the lived experiences of mutuality in diverse formal faculty mentoring partnerships through the lens of mentoring schemas

• Author: Kevin J. Rose,Holly M. Hutchins,Ague M. Manongsong,Rajashi Ghosh
• Published date: 01 September 2020
• Date: 01 September 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21386

QUALITATIVE STUDY

Exploring the lived experiences of mutuality

in diverse formal faculty mentoring partnerships

through the lens of mentoring schemas

Rajashi Ghosh

1

| Holly M. Hutchins

2

| Kevin J. Rose

3

|

Ague M. Manongsong

4

1

Department Chair, Policy, Organization, and

Leadership (POL), School of Education, Drexel

University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

2

Human Development and Consumer

Sciences (HDCS) Department Chair, College

of Technology, University of Houston,

Houston, Texas

3

University of Louisville, College of Education

and Human Development (CEHD), Louisville,

Kentucky

4

School of Education, Drexel University,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Correspondence

Rajashi Ghosh, Department Chair, Policy,

Organization, and Leadership (POL), School of

Education, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA.

Email: rajashi.ghosh@drexel.edu

Abstract

Mentoring programs continue to be an important HRD tool

as they provide faculty, regardless of career stage, an oppor-

tunity for professional learning and development. However,

the traditional hierarchical mentor–mentee model may limit

the quality and utility of these relationships. A solution pro-

vided by emerging literature is the relational mentoring per-

spective that calls for a mutual approach to mentoring.

Nonetheless, mutual learning and growth in diverse mentoring

might be difficult for underrepresented faculty mentees and

their mentors. Our study offers a unique contribution to the

mentoring literature by identifying how mentoring schemas

may guide experiences of the factors that challenge and culti-

vate mutuality within diverse formal mentoring relationships.

Findings indicated that difference in career stage and culture/

power-distance challenged the mentoring partners' ability to

experience mutuality, especially if they had a traditional men-

toring schema. Interestingly, they managed to overcome these

challenges and experience mutuality in their mentoring part-

nerships if they were paired with a senior mentoring partner

with a relational mentoring schema who was skilled to nurture

mutual learning and growth. Also, similarity between men-

toring partners in deep-level diversity characteristics such as

research interest, work styles, and approach to career building

facilitated experiences of mutuality. Guided by the findings,

DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21386

© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Human Resource Development Quarterly. (Fall) 2020;31:319–340. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/hrdq 319

we recommend that program designers solicit information on

how cultural identities might have shaped mentoring schemas

as part of the matching process and engage mentoring partici-

pants in a discussion about how these differences may influ-

ence the way mutuality is conceptualized and practiced early

in the mentoring process.

KEYWORDS

diversity, mutuality, relational mentoring

1|INTRODUCTION

Mentoring relationships are critical for one's career advancement and there is ample evidence that effective

mentoring influences a range of career outcomes such as the development of leadership skills, promotions, and

socialization (Joo, Yu, & Atwater, 2018; Son, 2016). Mentoring has been traditionally defined as an interpersonal

relationship where senior and more experienced organizational members provide psychosocial (e.g., affirmation,

counseling, and friendship) and career related support (e.g., sponsorship, advocacy, and coaching) to their junior col-

leagues (Kram, 1983). The traditional model of mentoring is best exemplified by the story of the “mythological Men-

tor, the elder guiding Telmachus, son of Odysseus and Penelope, in a hierarchical, unidirectional role as committed

teacher and sponsor”(Gammel & Rutstein-Riley, 2016, p. 29). The traditional perspective on mentoring is limited in

scope as it does not challenge the mentor to consider how they may benefit from the relationship. Realization of

possible benefits can motivate mentors to volunteer more time for mentoring and to engage in co-learning with their

mentees (Ghosh & Reio, 2013).

As an alternative to the traditional mentoring approach, Ragins (2011) suggested that a relational mentoring per-

spective would expand the scope of mentoring to a bi-directional, mutual, interdependent, generative, and develop-

mental relationship that benefits both the mentor and the mentee. Relational mentoring seeks “to re-define the

power imbalance, hierarchy, formality, objectivity, directionality, and limited focus”(Gammel & Rutstein-Riley, 2016,

p. 29) of the traditional model. The relational perspective does not dismiss the traditional notion of mentoring,

instead it offers a model of extraordinary mentoring where both mentors and mentees actively learn and grow from

each other (Ragins, 2011). Ragins and Verbos (2007) envisioned traditional and relational mentoring to represent a

continuum of mentoring relationship quality levels with relational mentoring symbolizing a higher-quality level of

mentoring relationships. In a review of extant mentoring literature, we noted few studies that have used the rela-

tional perspective and examined career benefits accrued by mentors (Chun, Sosik, & Yun, 2012; Lentz & Allen, 2009;

Wanberg, Kammeyer-Mueller, & Marchese, 2006). Furthermore, there is a dearth of empirical research on both the

conditions needed for and the challenges associated with sustaining relational mentoring relationships that can be

mutually growth-enhancing for both the mentor and the mentee.

The need to examine conditions supporting mutual mentoring relationships is even more pronounced in acade-

mia where faculty mentoring efforts have been heralded as an “important panacea”for overcoming barriers to fac-

ulty success (Lewis & Olshansky, 2016, p. 384). Though faculty mentoring relationships often follow a traditional

pattern characterized by a “senior”person providing support and guidance to a “junior”person, emergent research

suggests that a less hierarchical and more relational approach where mentors and mentees provide mutual influence,

support, and expertise offers a more effective mentoring relationship for both parties (Zambrana et al., 2015). The

experience of mutual influence can be especially critical for diverse faculty mentoring relationships. Diverse men-

toring refers to relationships where the mentor and mentee belong to different demographic groups or experience

320 GHOSH ET AL.