Mentoring In Undergraduate Business Management Programmes
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Lisbon, 11-14 September 2002
Authors
Professor Jim StewartVanessa Knowles
Department of HRMSenior Lecturer in HRD
Nottingham Business SchoolDepartment of HRM
The Nottingham Trent UniversityNottingham Business School
Burton StreetThe Nottingham Trent University
NottinghamBurton Street
UKNottingham
NG1 4BUUK NG1 4BU
Tel: (0) 115 8482064Tel: (0) 115 8484629
Fax: (0) 115 9486512Fax: (0) 115 9486037
Email: ail:
MENTORING IN UNDERGRADUATE BUSINESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of the role and contribution of mentoring in the context of an innovative degree programme, which involves undergraduate students spending the second and third year of their degree in-company. As well as describing the process within the context of the degree, the paper also examines the particular mentoring design features. One of these of specific interest is the shared mentoring role of academic members of staff and in-company managers. Each student therefore has an academic and work-based mentor. Another feature of interest is the variety of roles adopted by each of these mentors. These include, coacher, facilitator, networker, counsellor. In addition, the mentors share a role in assessing students work in relation to their skills development. The latter focuses on what are generally termed as transferable skills, namely; communication, teamworking, adaptability and leadership. Hence the mentoring relationship aims to provide assistance and encouragement to the student in three distinct areas; namely academic, professional and personal development.
This paper draws upon findings of primary research conducted with the mentoring teams that exist both within the wide range of consortium companies that sponsor the second and third years of the degree programme and Nottingham Business School (NBS). Additionally, the research includes the review of students on all 3 years of the BA (Hons) Business Management degree (BABM). The findings compare and contrast the perceptions of students, work-based and academic mentors in relation to the role and process of mentoring within the degree programme. The paper reports the perceived benefits of such a mentoring process for academic and practitioners working in partnership to support and enhance the students’ learning experience.
Key Words
Mentoring, Undergraduate Programmes
Authors
Professor Jim StewartVanessa Knowles
Department of HRMSenior Lecturer in HRM
Nottingham Business SchoolCorporate Business Unit
The Nottingham Trent UniversityNottingham Business School
Burton StreetThe Nottingham Trent University
NOTTINGHAMBurton Street
NG1 4BUNOTTINGHAM
NG1 4BU
Tel: (0115) 8482064Tel: (0115) 8484629
Email: ail:
MENTORING IN UNDERGRADUATE BUSINESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES
Introduction
This paper is concerned with the application of mentoring as a development process within undergraduate programmes in business and management. We have examined the case for more vocationally orientated first degree programmes elsewhere (Stewart & Knowles 2000 and Stewart & Knowles 2001) and so, for the purpose of this paper, we take the value of that emphasis as an accepted context factor. The programme which provides the focus of this paper is the BA (Hons) in Business Management (BABM) at Nottingham Business School (NBS). While this represents a singular and particular example, we believe that some general principles can be derived from the experience of mentors and mentees on that programme. Our purpose here therefore is to report that experience as a basis for identifying principles which may be of value to others considering utilising mentoring as a design feature of undergraduate programmes. More specifically, the paper is intended to achieve the following objectives.
To provide an overview of the role and contribution of mentoring in the context of the BA (Hons) Business Management degree programme.
To report the perceptions of the mentoring process from three different perspectives, namely; the academic mentors, the work-based mentors and the students (mentees).
To compare our findings on both the role and process of mentoring with existing knowledge in this field.
The paper is structured into five parts in order to achieve these objectives. First, we provide brief details of the programme, with particular emphasis on the role and purpose of mentoring in its overall design. Second, a brief review of the literature on mentoring is provided. This does not claim to be comprehensive or exhaustive. The purpose is simply to identify some of the factors currently argued to affect the success or failure of mentoring in order to compare those with the main findings of our study. This will in turn affect the level of confidence that we and others can place on the generalisability of our findings. The third part of the main content describes and justifies our research design, while the fourth reports the findings of the study. We then go on to offer some interpretation of the findings through identifying some possible general principles on the use of mentoring in first degree programmes in business and management. The final part of the paper offers some general, though tentative, conclusions.
The BABM Degree Programme
The published papers cited in the introduction provide detailed descriptions of the NBS BABM programme, and so our overall description will be brief. The programme is designed and operated in partnership with a consortium of employers which includes household names such as Boots plc and Toyota (GB) plc as well as smaller and regional companies such as Frudd Building Services Ltd and Femcare Ltd. Students spend their first year at NBS being taught as a cohort and covering a similar Level One content as students on all undergraduate degrees in the School. At the end of the first year, students undergo a selection process conducted by the employers in order to gain a placement for the second and final years. They then become employees of their placement companies for those two years, and return to NBS twice each year for 3 week long study blocks. The study blocks are intensive study periods which cover a similar academic content as other degrees in the School. A schedule of the second and final year course structure is attached to this paper in Appendix 1. It will be clear from this brief description that the work placement is an integral part of the programme, and that it is intended to provide a significant component in the learning and development of students. Mentoring as a development process in the programme is intended to support and maximise the opportunities provided by that component.
Within the BABM programme, and for its specific purposes, mentoring is defined as follows.
Supporting individual development through promoting the notion of the independent learner, by guiding and encouraging the learning of mentees.
Each student is allocated two mentors; the first is an academic member of staff in NBS and the second is a member of staff in the placement organisation. Each student keeps the same academic mentor throughout their final two years. The academic mentor is assigned to the student at the beginning of the second year. Practice with regard to work based mentors varies across employers. In some, the student again keeps the same person as a work-based mentor throughout their placement. In those cases, that person may be a HR practitioner or a senior line or operational manager. In other cases, the work-based mentor changes during the placement. Usually, this is related to students moving around the organisation; functionally and/or geographically; during their two years with the employer. The programme design does not specify a model that has to be adopted by employers. It does though specify the expected role and support to be provided by both academic and work-based mentors. In summary, these are as follows.
- Coaching - this involves the mentors helping and encouraging the student to understand both work and course related issues and helping them to develop their skills and capabilities.
- Facilitating - the student’s mentors will be familiar with the aims and objectives of the course and will be in a position to help the student ‘make things happen’.
- Networking - the mentoring system will provide an important framework for communication within the course. In this context it will be the mentors’ responsibility to support the students in developing their own network in addition to adding value through existing formal and informal channels of communication.
- Counselling and Supporting - mentors may be required to advise and support the student over a number of issues such as; stress management, motivation, work relationships, performance problems and moral support. Whilst mentors will not be qualified to provide all the advice required over some of these issues, they will normally be the first point of contact and should advise the student of professional counselling services if it is thought necessary.
- Assessing – both mentors will be required to assess and grade skills development reports and plans that are produced at the end of each in-company work period. Furthermore, mentors will be expected to provide both written and verbal feedback on the reports.
A major focus for the mentoring process within the programme is the skills development component. Students are required to produce a skills development plan, based on a self-assessment, for each of the four work placement periods, i.e. the periods following the end of the first year and those following each of the four study blocks in the second and third years. Each of the work periods have a specified skills theme. Hence, four themes run through the duration of the programme, namely Communication Skills (work period 1), Teamworking Skills (work period 2), Adaptability Skills (work period 3) and finally Leadership Skills (work period 4). The skills development plan is discussed by the student in a joint meeting with both mentors who have to agree it before implementation during the placement period. Following implementation, the student produces a skills development report. This is independently assessed and graded by the two mentors, who then meet to agree a mark. A further joint meeting is then held with the student where verbal and written feedback is provided by both mentors.
Face-to-face contact and both formal and informal meetings between students and their work-based mentors are, in general, continuous throughout each of the work placements. Similar contact with academic mentors is limited to their visits to employers to hold the meetings concerned with skills development, and to meetings which can be held during the study blocks at the School. However, telephone calls and emails are used to varying degrees to maintain contact during work placements. While practice can and does vary, in general such contact is the responsibility of the student to initiate as and when required.
Mentor training is also available in the programme. Academic mentors were provided with 9 hours training prior to launch of the programme with the first cohort in 1998. Since then, ad-hoc academic mentor review meetings have been arranged to discuss practice and experience. Work-based mentors are offered briefing sessions which are provided by the NBS co-ordinator, who is one of the present authors. Whether this offer is taken, and the length of the session, is determined by each individual company in the consortium. They also determine whether or not work-based mentors meet as a group to share experience and practice. All mentors are provided with a manual to support and guide their practice. The manual was produced by the NBS co-ordinator and agreed by the employers. A copy of its content page is provided as Appendix 2 to this paper.
This brief description of the empirical context shows that the mentoring process has a very specific and essential focus in the BABM programme. This is the skills development of students during their work placement, which as a component was included in response to the consortium companies who were involved in the initial design and validation of the programme. The description also illustrates that the process has some unusual features. First, there is the joint mentoring provided by academic and work-based mentors. Second, for some students the person performing the latter role will change. Third, the element of assessment and the role of mentors as markers is unusual in mentoring programmes (see Megginson and Clutterbuck, 1995). Finally, the geographic distance between academic mentors and mentees in most, but not all, cases is a factor which is not usually true of mentoring programmes. We will now move on to a brief examination of some of the academic literature to identify additional points of interest.
Mentoring – The Theoretical Context
The BABM programme in general and its mentoring process in particular can be seen as a response to a growing recognition of the importance of work-based learning (see CIPD 2000, Raelin, 2000). Research by Billett (2000) for example clearly shows the value and importance of learning at and through work, and the significant role in that learning that can be performed by mentoring processes. However, Billett’s work , and that by Sambrook (2001) also shows that work-based learning cannot be assumed or taken for granted since its effectiveness is influenced by a wide range of factors. In the case of mentoring, these factors will include the degree of formality in the mentoring process (Megginson, 2000), the attitude and abilities of mentors and mentees (Sullivan, 2000), the context of the mentoring process (Kleinman et al 2001) and, perhaps (see Ragins 1999) the quantity and quality of training received by mentors (Gregson 1994). However, it seems to be the case at the moment that while these factors are generally recognised as being significant, little is known or understood about their actual effects and, therefore, what if any principles should be followed in the design of mentoring processes (Megginson, 2000).
Part of the reason for this ambiguity in understanding the role and impact of influencing factors may be the lack of agreement on what mentoring is and is not (Clutterbuck and Megginson, 1999). Megginson (2000) questions the possibility and value of arriving at definitive understandings of the concept, though he does support the need to differentiate the term from others such as counselling and coaching. For Gregson (1994) mentoring clearly emerged from the tradition of counselling and its growth in employment contexts and applications. He also suggests that changes in education, and in particular a growing emphasis on ‘practical’ and work-based assessment are a major reason for the growth of mentoring as a development process. Gregson’s argument on this last point certainly concurs with the rationale for the BABM degree and its mentoring component. He uses his analysis to support the following definition of mentoring.
‘Mentoring is an attempt to transfer experience and expertise from experienced individuals in an organisation to the less experienced. It is often used as a king of ‘”fast-track” support scheme where one (relatively) senior manager oversees the activity and performance of a more junior colleague who is earmarked for rapid progression”. (Gregson, 1994:26)
This definition suggests many of the features traditionally associated with mentoring, though it does reflect the career orientation which Clutterbuck and Megginson (1999) argue is associated more with American conceptions of mentoring than those adopted in Europe. Stephen Billett (2000) adopts a view of mentoring based on the work of Rogoff (1995, see Billett 2000), as ‘guided learning’. While this resonates with the first part of Gregson’s definition, and with the European conceptions suggested by Clutterbuck and Megginson, it is not particularly helpful in meeting Megginson’s (2000) call for differentiating different sets of practices. ‘Guided learning’ could be applied for example to coaching and instructing. Sullivan (2000), in common with Megginson, recognises the difficulties and problems inherent in defining mentoring. Within that context, Sullivan suggests the purpose of mentoring is as follows.
‘The role of (mentoring) is to enable the (mentee) to reflect on actions and, perhaps, to modify future actions as a result; it is about enabling behavioural and attitudinal change.’ (Sullivan, 2000:163)
This definition can again be criticised on the grounds that it fails to differentiate mentoring since it could be applied to any form of development process. However, it does have merit in emphasising the ownership of learning and decision making as resting with the mentee, and in highlighting the importance of reflection in those processes. Both of these features are central to the conception of mentoring adopted in the BABM programme as described in the previous section.
Sullivan goes on to identify two primary functions served by the mentoring process. The first reflects the career orientation of US models and focuses on developing skills and knowledge, including political and social skills required to succeed in a given organisational context. The second is what is termed the ‘psychosocial’ function. Here, the focus is on ‘a sense of competence, clarity of identity and effectiveness in a professional role’. (Sullivan, 2000:169). Kleinman et al (2001) suggest three functions. The first of these they label ‘vocational’ which is, in essence, the same as the career orientated function suggested by Sullivan. The second is similarly the same as Sullivan and uses the same label of ‘psychosocial’. The additional function identified by Kleinman and his colleagues is that of ‘role modelling’. This simply refers to the mentor demonstrating expected attitudes and behaviours in the context of the particular profession and/or employing organisation. This last function obviously relies on a degree of regular and continuous interaction between mentor and mentee so that the behaviour of mentors can be observed by mentees. Sullivan also highlights the importance of such interaction based on his research, but for a different reason. This is what he describes as ‘just-in-time’ mentoring interventions which characterises the greater efficacy of mentoring which is available at significant or critical points in the ongoing experience and development of the mentee. Both ‘role-modelling’ and ‘just-in-time’ elements of the mentoring process would support the value of work-based mentors.
This feature of the process in the BABM programme is only one which we would suggest serves the functions identified by Sullivan and by Kleinman and his colleagues. Many of the design features described earlier are congruent with those functions. The findings of these two pieces of research are though of particular importance to the role of work-based mentors in the programme. Kleinmann et al (2001) found that role-modelling is significant in achieving learning outcomes on the part of mentees, especially outcomes associated with skills development. The point on role-modelling is supported by the work of Billett (2000) who reports that mentees in his study rated the value of coaching and role-modelling provided by mentors very highly. Immediate or early availability of mentors in response to critical incidents experienced by mentees was found by Sullivan to significantly influence the effectiveness of the mentoring process. Based on these studies therefore, it might be argued that the BABM programme is correct to utilise work-based as well as academic mentors.