Whether Organizations Should Use Formal Mentoring Schemes - Essay Example

Critically discuss whether organizations should use formal mentoring schemes? It is essential that the employees are motivated back and forth so that their training needs are met in an adequate way. Also they must be told about the strengths of acquainting their own selves with training all this while so that they remain in the loop. Their confidence level must be increased so that their performance and commitment comes out apparently visible. They must be compensated for their interest that they show within the office domains and also given marks on exceeding performance expectations on their part. Thus it is quintessential that the elements outside of training are facilitated with the training regimes more and more and that there are no hindrances as such on the suggested levels (Dessler 2007). Employees’ morale holds the key for the eventual decisions that are made for them when it comes to imparting training and the related facilities. There must be an effort to mobilize the employees more and more and seek from them a feedback mechanism so that their role comes out significantly well within the related context of training regimes (Lick 1999). The formal mentoring schemes within the organizations of today are shaping up because there is a need to address the challenges which have come up. The employees know little with respect to social and personal pressures which engulf their domains and it is only natural to understand that formal mentoring schemes would help resolve these issues in entirety (Sanchez 2002). A mentor is defined as an individual who serves as a teacher or a trusted counselor whose main task is to act wise and thus guide and advise on different issues and matters (Truss 1999). As far as the formal mentoring schemes and activities are concerned, they are always very organized and have a serious disciplinary regime within them. Mentoring is more inclined with personal development relationship than anything else; focusing on the experienced senior who imparts the much needed knowledge and help towards the unknowing junior (Wheelan 1990). The former is regarded as the protégé or an apprentice who works to best effects to make sure that the person who is being given the formal mentoring remains on track and is guaranteed to receive the benefits of mentoring in the long run scheme of things (Pokora 2007). The formal mentoring happens through a professional development process, where formal communication hierarchies are embedded and information is passed across a number of different significant channels (White 2001). This formal mentoring is therefore very elusive and takes care of the areas which are not covered by informal mentoring regimes in place (Murdick 1997). One must comprehend the fact that formal mentoring requires face to face conversation and linkage, helping towards building long term credibility of the protégé and indeed the organization from a strategic perspective. The difference between formal and informal mentoring lies in the fact that since formal mentoring takes care of the employees from a very formal setting, the latter comes about in a haphazard and random manner. What this means is the philosophy that informal mentoring can be held anywhere within the domains of the organization and it basically takes care of the employees on a very one to one level, where the legal codes of inviting employees over for the mentoring programs and activities are not held as such (Reid 2008). This is because in informal mentoring procedures, the emphasis is on doing things right and that too without any grievances which might arise within the formal mentoring mechanism that are employed by the organizations from time to time, in order to make sure that the employees remain on line with the needs and requirements that have been set forth by the human resources management department, in consultation with the top management realms. Informal mentoring can happen anywhere, within the lobby, in the alley, in the office cafeteria or even in the staircase (Carter 1993). The main role of the protégé within such an informal mentoring regime is to find out how things are coming along with the person who is being mentored and how open he is towards mentoring in the first place (Schuler 2004). At other times, this informal mentoring is even discussed beforehand by the protégé so that the employee who is being mentored knows exactly what processes are being seen into with regards to the organization asking him to comply with the regulations and codes (Sims 2002). The difference between coaching and mentoring lies in the fact that coaching is performance of the same task by the coach so that the aspirant (employee within the organization) learns through adaptation. However mentoring is a totally different ballgame altogether where emphasis is based on dictating where an employee needs to learn and what traits he must have within his folds to achieve success in the long run. Therefore coaching and mentoring are two totally different areas that come under the aegis of an organization when the talk goes out loud regarding the formal mentoring schemes and how these are employed in essence within the reigns of an organization (Crutcher 2007). As far as the usage of mentoring through different activities and programs is concerned, one sees that these are pretty common and bring out the best within the functioning domains of the human resources management departments in the different organizations worldwide (Kraiger 2002). Since mentoring is a one-sided affair on most of the occasions where the employee who is being mentored is not given the right to implement the same guidelines and tips on the event of the mentoring process, it takes quite a long while before mentoring bears solid fruit for the sake of the employees and the organization in the long run (Barry 2009). This has been established through research and evidence of study that has come to the fore with regards to the mentoring programs which have taken place in the past. The organizations have been sound at learning a thing or two from such mentoring programs which are exclusive and have taken into consideration the grey areas which have hampered the smooth working regimes of the employees who are in need of mentoring in the first place. The reason why organizations are more and more focusing on formal mentoring programs is because these bring in solid results (Lee 2004). They have seen that other organizations have reaped a great amount of positives from such mentoring regimes in place and it is only natural to view these mentoring activities to bring in solid and long term results in essence for their own organizations (Kolberg 2003). In short, prior research into mentoring programs has been conclusive and it has been able to create its impact like none other. Coaching might come closer but it is formal mentoring program which does the trick for the organizations in the time and age of today (Cappelli 1999). The different formal mentoring techniques which are in use these days within the organizations include the five most commonly used ones, namely accompanying, sowing, catalyzing, showing and harvesting. These techniques have been evidenced through a research conducted in 1995 which are most closely related with business and its different nuances. These techniques are made use of by mentors in order to let the people know regarding the different formal mentoring techniques. However other techniques can be employed by mentors from time to time to resolve issues with employees, which have engulfed their normal working realms. On the same footing, training is imparted for the sake of the employees so that they can become acquainted with the changing norms and be at par with the times that are shaping up the future of the organization. At times, training is also substituted for mentoring and coaching within a number of companies (Taylor 1999). These are new terms with more or less similar attributes; however all of these have the same roles and responsibilities if seen from a proper context (Simon 2004). What training really does however is to create a sense of trust within the employees that their organization believes in them immensely and wants to give its best so that they develop and create their own market in the coming times (Fountaine 2005). The ulterior objective however remains that the organization must grow with the assistance of these very employees who have been trained in a proper way. Training within organizations does solve quite a few lingering issues (Ely 1999). It creates room for improvement and allows the employees to feel at par with some of the best industry professionals. Their horizon opens up and they start to comprehend new meanings within their professional skill sets (Sullivan 2004). If employees are loyal to their working regimes and believe in enhancing their skills and capacities, it would be good to explore their basis through working hand in hand with the top level management and thus asking them to allow them to train (Hawkins 2006). Similar patterns can also be seen within the coaching and mentoring perspectives where employees are told about their shortcoming and all-out efforts are made to plug the gaps between the good and the bad points that an employee has within his personality and professional domains. Providing a critical review of the findings, one see that the need for formal mentoring programs has been envisaged because both the mentor and the mentee have clear cut tasks to take care of. What this means is the fact that mentoring takes precedence within an organization whenever there is an issue which needs to be taken care of, at the earliest possibility that the organization can find for the situation that has crept up (Lepak 2008). The need for formal mentoring is also there because organizations want the most well-equipped employees within their fore and they would not appreciate if someone has issues with the management or does not adhere with the rules and policies of the workplace realms (Cronshaw 1999). Mentoring could arise in instances where employees feel that they are de-motivated in terms of their work ethics (Cooper 2004). The motivation aspects are looked into as well as the attitudinal shifts that are experienced within the employees, managers and just about everyone working within the domains of the office place. An effort has been made to come to terms with the understandings related with the employee relations as well as their unison which mars the disciplinary basis of the organization in essence (Varma 1998). The implications for this motivation within the organizations are that the middle management has come of age within the recent past. Organizations have started to realize that the middle tier is indeed the ‘brain’ of the organizations and thus they need to be provided pays which are in accordance with their respective skill sets. For this reason, specialists are hired more than mere managers in the current era of modern businesses (Egan 2001). This is an interesting aspect and it will continue to blossom in the times to come since the business world is experiencing a shift in its practices and the way it does things (Miller 1994). Setting up high performance teams under the domain of motivation and mentoring is a prerogative of any organization and in the business world of present times; it is very much a need rather than a desire (Colley 2003). The businesses have changed so as to create more room for teams than individual working ethos. This has given space to more facilitation within the working environments of teams since they bring combined efforts and usage of more brains than a singular person. Thus mentoring and coaching have worked hand in hand to facilitate the smooth flowing of organizational activities. In conclusion, one can list down the way forward and present suggestions and recommendations for the future. It is always in the best interest of an organization to turn towards mentoring as it is the need of the hour, and brings in a great amount of success and achievement for the people who are its own employees (Fink 1992). All said and done, it is essential to note here that formal mentoring programs and activities restore the confidence within the employees that they are the organization’s most prized resources, and thus they would be given the respect and care that an organization needs to give in order to extract best possible mileage out of their work routines (Loan 2006). This indeed would be the cornerstone of success as far as formal mentoring programs and activities are concerned. References Barry, B (2009). Public Management Mentoring: What Affects Outcomes? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 19 Cappelli, P (1999). Employment Practices and Business Strategy. Oxford University Press Carter, M (1993). The Return of the Mentor: Strategies for Workplace Learning. Falmer Press Colley, H (2003). Mentoring for Social Inclusion: A Critical Approach to Nurturing Successful Mentoring Relations. RoutledgeFalmer Cooper, C (2004). Reinventing Human Resources Management: Challenges and New Directions. Routledge Cronshaw, S (1999). Functional Job Analysis: A Foundation for Human Resources Management. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Crutcher, B (2007). Mentoring across Cultures. Academe, Vol. 93, July Dessler, G (2007). Human Resource Management. Prentice Hall Egan, M (2001). Workforce Diversity Training: From Anti-Discrimination Compliance to Organizational Development. Human Resource Planning, Vol. 24 Ely, R (1999). Mentoring Dilemmas: Developmental Relationships within Multicultural Organizations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Fink, S (1992). High Commitment Workplaces. Quorum Books Fountaine, D (2005). Human Resources: What's Your Plan? Public Management, Vol. 87 Hawkins, P (2006). Coaching, Mentoring and Organizational Consultancy: Supervision and Development. Open University Press Kolberg, S (2003). Coaching Competencies and Corporate Leadership. St. Lucie Press Kraiger, K (2002). Creating, Implementing, and Managing Effective Training and Development: State-Of-The-Art Lessons for Practice. Jossey-Bass Lee, M (2004). Human Resources, Care Giving, Career Progression, and Gender: A Gender Neutral Glass Ceiling. Routledge Lepak, D (2008). Human Resource Management. Prentice Hall Lick, D (1999). New Directions in Mentoring: Creating a Culture of Synergy. Falmer Press Loan, P (2006). The Manager as Mentor. Praeger Miller, E (1994). Diversity and Its Management: Training Managers for Cultural Competence within the Organization. Management Quarterly, Vol. 35 Murdick, R (1997). Self-Directed Learning: The Quiet Revolution in Corporate Training and Development. SAM Advanced Management Journal, Vol. 62 Pokora, J (2007). Coaching and Mentoring at Work: Developing Effective Practice. Open University Press Reid, E (2008). Mentoring Peer Mentors: Mentor Education and Support in the Composition Program. Composition Studies, Vol. 36 Sanchez, W (2002). Mentoring and Relational Mutuality: Proteges' Perspectives. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, Vol. 41 Schuler, R (2004). International Human Resource Management: Policies & Practices for the Global Enterprise. Routledge Simon, S (2004). Proteges' Negative Mentoring Experiences: Construct Development and Nomological Validation. Personnel Psychology, Vol. 57 Sims, R (2002). Organizational Success through Effective Human Resources Management. Quorum Books Sullivan, C (2004). How to Mentor in the Midst of Change. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Taylor, P (1999). Effects of Introducing a Performance Management System on Employees' Subsequent Attitudes and Effort. Public Personnel Management, Vol. 28 Truss, C (1999). Strategic Human Resource Management: Corporate Rhetoric and Human Reality. Oxford University Press Varma, A (1998). High Performance Work Systems: What We Know and What We Need to Know. Human Resource Planning, Vol. 21 Wheelan, S (1990). Facilitating Training Groups: A Guide to Leadership and Verbal Intervention Skills. Praeger Publishers White, E (2001). Beyond Teaching to Mentoring. Jossey-Bass Read More