(a) What is the mentee’s purpose for having the conversation?
(b) What do they hope to accomplish?
(c) What would be an ideal outcome?
Once this is discussed and agreed, the real conversation unfolds.
3.5.1 Conversation Opening and Initial Assumptions
The mentor initiates the conversation knowing there will be differences in each of their perspectives. From the outset, the mentor is modelling a framework that the mentee may learn from and emulate to some extent with others outside of the mentoring relationship. During the initial phase of thefirst conversation and over the next few subsequent meetings, gaining the trust of the mentee is utmost. The mentor needs to be perceived as responsible and effective. One way of achieving trust is by the mentor listening carefully to each of the mentee’s aims and reasons for seeking a mentor as well as descriptions and responses to the questions they pose.
Eventually and usually not in the initial meeting, the mentor begins to focus on assisting the mentee question their assumptions about some issues or observations aimed at helping the mentee make a difference. Initially, this approach rarely produces a major breakthrough and needs to be recycled sensitively through mul- tiple conversations. In fact, it may simply open another avenue to explore, exac- erbating the complexity of the situation for the mentee. If this is the case, then it is all the more reason for the mentor to permit the mentee to choose the lines of inquiry as well as the pace of the exploration.
The mentor, picking up from the pace of the mentee, guides the mentee using their experience and knowledge base, and this is likely to lead to more moments of insight for the mentee than rejecting their theories-in-practice as it were. The mentor only accelerates the process, if the mentee is dragging it for reasons of not wanting to engage in the process. At this point, a diversion might need to be taken to investigate the perceived blockage. Mentees may befinding it difficult to consider breaking with the current patterns of working, relating to others, or seeing things differently. It may be that they are weighed down by the assumptions and positions of others, and this is imposing on their aspirations and capacity to think differently or develop new ways of doing things.
3.5.2 The Continuing Conversation
The conversation between the mentor and mentee is about sharing information with the aim of mutual learning. Almost never should it be about getting the“facts right” per se as this is fruitless and largely irrelevant. Facts cannot be proved one way or the other (see Losch2009). It is not about what is true or not, rather what is important for the mentee. People’s perspectives and explanations (theories-in-practice) shape how they see and experience the world. Many of these have been programmed by their socialisation since early childhood and from there positively reinforced throughout their further schooling, education and professional development. This does not mean that these explanations are not real or factual. They are for those who see and experience it that way. If there is a close correspondence of the two, then it is deemed
“true”or real for the mentee. The role of the mentor is to assist in exploring and discovering a better understanding of the mentee’s context towards observing the proximity of the association between perceptions and actions.
The mentee’s explanations need to be understood in the context of the rela- tionships amongst the significant players in a specific context, for example, the supervisor, the supervisor’s boss, peers, subordinates and so on. In other words to appreciate how the social structure that overrides the context provides value, meaning and shapes interests of each of the players including the mentee. It is also important to understand the signs that the mentee is selecting to understand their significance in context.
The mentor as a listener has a significant role to play which cannot be under- stated and is conspicuous in the interpretation of what they hear. For example, insights occur when both the mentee and mentor interweave their understanding. If the mentor uses the mentee’s assumptions and ideas rather than their own, the insights will occur on familiar ground and therefore, can be more readily inter- nalised and called upon in action (see Koestler1964).
There are a number of ways of achieving this. For example, insights can take the form of elaboration with the mentor adding new information to that brought up by the mentee. Alternatively the mentor could facilitate the mentee into re-coding the way they have represented the issue, colouring it differently while building on the original concept. Another way for developing familiar insights for the mentee is for the mentor to ask what if that “rule” or that “assumption” did not apply in this situation, what would you do then? This leads to a relaxing of perceived constraints for the mentee. Another approach might be for the mentor to consider re-sequencing the order of events or steps in the problem to be“solved”or asking the mentee to seek a different form of information or further evidence (based on Cunningham et al.2009).
In the main most problems proffered by the mentee probably do not require a major discontinuity in their thinking rather an evolution of thinking building on what they know or do not know they know. This is particularly the case in the early part of mentoring. It may progress to more radical form. However, this should only occur once a rapport and trust has been established.
Further, mentors need to be aware that a context can be analysed according to how it is constructed and related by the mentee. The following parameters could be utilised to achieve this:
1. Cognitive context: constructed by the mentee’s own perceptions or that of other’s which they are“owning”intentionally or otherwise, as their own; how perceptions cohere with what else is known.
2. Cultural context: values, language.
3. Socio-political context: relationships, interests.
The mentoring conversation is focused on how the mentee considers conflicting perceptions, interpretations and values. This process is orchestrated by the mentor.
However, mentors ought not to assume they know the intentions/emotions of the mentee. A consideration of the difficulties that a mentee may be having with others is useful here:
a. Experienced/assumed disagreement: conflicting views translating into a win-lose situation
b. thinks they are right
c. thinks they’re wrong on most things, and their supervisor is always right d. feeling aggrieved
e. believes that their behaviour (even if inappropriate) is justified f. overly sensitive to criticism
g. feels shame
h. shifts blame to someone or something else
i. thinks their position should not be questioned if the role they have one of authority
j. believes they always have the best interests of their organisation or someone else k. doesn’t want to make the same mistake again
It is important for the mentor to check with the mentee to see whether they understand what others may want from the situation they are describing.Are their similar needs or ones different to their own?The mentor needs to work with the mentee on the real aspects of the problem and to work on ameliorating them.