Measuring Satisfaction Measuring Satisfaction
What to measure in a mentoring program, and what makes people satisfied.
What this presentation covers
What this presentation covers
What this presentation covers
Why satisfaction matters
A good match beats having a mentor
Satisfaction with the relationship shaped work attitudes more than the program design did.
What to measure
Measure the relationship, not only attendance
Research rates three things: career help, personal support and relationship quality.
- Career help advice, contacts, visibility
- Personal support trust and encouragement
- Relationship quality how good it is
- Meeting frequency a number, not a feeling
What predicts satisfaction
Quality and career help lift satisfaction
Both went with higher satisfaction at work or school, across 173 samples.
- Relationship quality .38.38
- Career help .36.36
Similar pairs
Mentors rate similar pairs higher
Mentors who felt similar to their mentee reported better quality and more learning.
Input and training
Input and good training raise quality
A say in matching and training rated highly went with better mentoring.
- A say in matching
- Good training
- Better relationships
Mentor satisfaction
Personal support keeps mentors satisfied
Mentors who gave personal support and set an example liked the program more.
- Personal support linked to satisfaction
- Role modeling linked to satisfaction
- Career advice no link found
Commitment and clarity
Explain the program to win mentors
Design worked through mentor commitment and how well people understood the program.
- Program design matching, training, goals
- Understanding people know how it works
- Mentor commitment mentors want it to work
- Seen as effective by mentors and mentees
When to check in
Check in early, survey twice
A short pulse in month one finds stalled pairs before the mid-point survey.
- Week two has the pair met?
- Month one three-question pulse
- Mid-point full survey
- Close final survey
Acting on the answers
Act on low scores within a week
A low score is a reason to talk, rematch or retrain.
- Call the pair within a week
- Offer a rematch without blame
- Share common themes with mentors
- Report trends, never names
Sources
The research behind this presentation
- Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L. & Miller, J. S. (2000) Marginal mentoring: The effects of type of mentor, quality of relationship, and program design on work and career attitudes Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1177-1194
- Eby, L. T., Allen, T. D., Hoffman, B. J., Baranik, L. E., Sauer, J. B., Baldwin, S., Morrison, M. A., Kinkade, K. M., Maher, C. P., Curtis, S. & Evans, S. C. (2013) An interdisciplinary meta-analysis of the potential antecedents, correlates, and consequences of protégé perceptions of mentoring Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 441-476
- Allen, T. D. & Eby, L. T. (2003) Relationship effectiveness for mentors: Factors associated with learning and quality Journal of Management, 29(4), 469-486
- Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T. & Lentz, E. (2006) Mentorship behaviors and mentorship quality associated with formal mentoring programs: Closing the gap between research and practice Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 567-578
- Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T. & Lentz, E. (2006) The relationship between formal mentoring program characteristics and perceived program effectiveness Personnel Psychology, 59(1), 125-153
- Weinberg, F. J. & Lankau, M. J. (2011) Formal mentoring programs: A mentor-centric and longitudinal analysis Journal of Management, 37(6), 1527-1557
Ask early, then act
A few questions in month one tell you which pairs need help.