The chronicle of mentoring & coaching最新文献

Despite growing evidence for the need for work-life balance (WLB) for faculty at academic health centers, mentors frequently do not know how to advise their mentees on this topic. WLB impacts job satisfaction and intent to stay, and physicians are particularly at risk. In this study, we explored exit survey comments of faculty of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine citing work-life balance as a reason to leave (WLB-ARTL). Between July 2017 and December 2020, 59 faculty provided open-ended survey responses related to reasons for leaving, what they liked and disliked about being faculty, mentorship, and more. Using a qualitative descriptive design, we analyzed open-ended responses using a systematic, iterative, thematic approach via NVIVO software. We classified themes using Shanafelt's drivers of engagement and burnout: workload/job demands; efficiency/ resources; meaning in work; culture/values; control/flexibility; social support/community at work; and work-life integration. While there were numerous quotes across all themes, we chose to summarize emergent codes with the most faculty representation and those that can most easily be addressed through mentorship: career development, culture and people, and hours and schedule (related to themes of meaning in work, culture and values, community at work, work-life integration, and control and flexibility). To improve faculty retention, institutional leaders should focus on developing mentors' career coaching and mentoring skills. Additional focus should be placed on training mentors to discuss and address WLB among their faculty mentees.

Intrinsic and extrinsic awards may motivate mentors and thus strengthen the organizational mentoring climate (OMC). Several institutions offer extrinsic awards for mentoring to recognize exceptional mentorship by individuals who support junior faculty in their career development. Mentees, peers, or institutions may nominate mentors for these awards. However, the faculty's perception of the importance of these awards and the association between their availability and mentoring outcomes remain unclear. We conducted secondary data analysis of a cross-sectional survey of 298 individuals (5%) from a pool of 6,152 faculty from the University of New Mexico (Main Campus and Health Sciences Center) and Arizona State University. The mentoring award's importance to faculty subgroups and the relationship of its perceived availability with providing/receiving and confidence in mentoring was determined. Participants completed the online OMC importance and availability draft scales, containing one item each on the award. Of all participants, 60.4% rated an award as very or somewhat important. Only 7% reported award availability (reaching 19% for ASU faculty). Women and Hispanic faculty rated the award as more important than their respective counterparts. Although availability was not associated with providing mentorship, faculty reporting unavailability were less likely to be receiving mentorship than others. Mean self-reported confidence in mentoring was higher among those reporting availability than in other groups. University faculty, particularly women and Hispanic, rate a mentoring award as important, yet few report their availability. Although availability is not associated with providing mentorship, it is associated with receiving mentorship and confidence in mentoring. The study's cross-sectional nature, low participation rate, and inability to independently confirm award availability limit its findings. Organizations need to establish and raise awareness of a faculty mentorship award as part of efforts to strengthen the OMC.

Mentors at Academic Health Centers (AHC) are challenged by mentee attrition, with one in five physicians reporting an intent to leave in 2020. AHCs struggle with physician replacement costs, which are exorbitant. Data-driven efforts to mitigate attrition during the pandemic require an understanding of reasons to leave. This study compares characteristics of exiting faculty at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine (UNM SOM) two years before to two years after April 1, 2020. Demographic and reason to leave variables from exit interviews of 168 faculty that left UNM SOM between April 2018-to-March 2020 and 151 faculty that left between April 2020-to-March 2022 were compared. Exiting faculty were stratified into those resigning vs. retiring. Distributions of each variable were analyzed for statistically significant differences using a chi-square or Fisher's 2-sided exact test. The pandemic was associated with an approximately three-fold higher proportion of retirement contributing to total attrition than before (25.8% vs. 8.9%; p<0.001). Among those who resigned, the pandemic was associated with a higher proportion of physicians than before (84.3% vs. 72.8%; p=0.03). Hispanic faculty may be more likely to resign during the pandemic than before (p=0.06). Those who resigned during the pandemic may be significantly less likely to cite "inadequate adherence to FTE" or a "challenging work environment" (p= 0.048 and 0.053 respectively) but more likely to cite personal family matters (p=0.06) as reasons to leave than before the pandemic. The increased proportion of retirees during the pandemic presents challenges for AHCs by exacerbating the current shortage of mentors while providing leadership opportunities for those retained. Mentors need to be aware of the top reasons for faculty leaving (which have not materially changed during the pandemic): challenging work environment, personal/family matters, inadequate work-life balance, greater career opportunities, and inadequate salary.

Organizational culture is the shared, often unspoken, basic values, beliefs, and assumptions. Underlying culture influences organizational climate, the observable policies, practices, and procedures that faculty experience. Yet little is known about mentoring culture and climate in higher education. The purpose of this study was to a) conduct a psychometric evaluation of the 4-item Organizational Culture Mentoring Values (OCuM-V) scale and b) determine if organizational culture, operationalized as values related to mentoring, is associated with organizational mentoring climate (OMC) and involvement with mentoring. 298 [55 under-represented minority (URM)] faculty from University of New Mexico and Arizona State University completed a cross-sectional survey, including the OCuM-V scale and the 15-item OMC Availability (OMCA) scale. Items for both scales were rated No (1), Don't know (0), or Yes (1). Faculty reported if they were being mentored or providing mentoring. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and Cronbach's alpha were used for scale evaluation. Spearman correlation and logistic regression were used to assess OCuM-V association with climate and mentoring involvement, respectively. Overall, 24% of faculty were being mentored (27% for URM), and 43% were mentoring (38% for URM). OCuM-V items loaded on a single factor in EFA (Cronbach's alpha=0.84 for all; 0.88 for URM). OCuM-V was positively correlated with OMCA (including institutional expectations, mentor-mentee relationships, and resources subscales) for both all and URM faculty (r>0.4 p<.001 for all). Greater OCuM-V was associated with an increased odds of being mentored (OR=1.75±1.19-2.61) and providing mentoring (OR=1.83±1.30-2.58). Mentoring culture is associated with mentoring climate. Faculty who perceive stronger OCuM-V report a stronger OMC (available structure, programs/activities, policies/guidelines) and are being mentored or providing mentoring more often. Limitations include a small sample size for the URM group and cross-sectional data collection. Organizational leaders should explicitly promote values related to mentoring to strengthen both mentoring culture and climate at their institutions.

'Critical' career milestones for faculty (e.g., tenure, securing grant funding) relate to career advancement, job satisfaction, service/leadership, scholarship/research, clinical or teaching activities, professionalism, compensation, and work-life balance. However, barriers and challenges to these milestones encountered by junior faculty have been inadequately studied, particularly those affecting underrepresented minorities in science (URM-S). Additionally, little is known about how barriers and challenges to career milestones have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic for URM-S and non-URM faculty mentees in science. In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 31 faculty mentees from four academic institutions (located in New Mexico, Arizona, Idaho, and Hawaii), including 22 URM-S (women or racial/ethnic). Respondents were given examples of 'critical' career milestones and were asked to identify and discuss barriers and challenges that they have encountered or expect to encounter while working toward achieving these milestones. We performed thematic descriptive analysis using NVivo software in an iterative, team-based process. Our preliminary analysis identified five key themes that illustrate barriers and challenges encountered: Job and career development, Discrimination and a lack of workplace diversity; Lack of interpersonal relationships and inadequate social support at the workplace; Personal and family matters; and Unique COVID-19-related issues. COVID-19 barriers and challenges were related to online curriculum creation and administration, interpersonal relationship development, inadequate training/service/conference opportunities, and disruptions in childcare and schooling. Although COVID-19 helped create new barriers and challenges for junior faculty mentees, traditional barriers and challenges for 'critical' career milestones continue to be reported among our respondents. URM-S respondents also identified discrimination and diversity-related barriers and challenges. Subsequent interviews will focus on 12-month and 24-month follow-ups and provide additional insight into the unique challenges and barriers to 'critical' career milestones that URM and non-URM faculty in science have encountered during the unique historical context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Organizational climate is the shared perception of and the meaning attached to the policies, practices, and procedures employees experience. University faculty can assess their organizational mentoring climate (OMC) using recently published, reliable, and valid OMC importance (OMCI) and availability (OMCA) scales. Factors affecting the OMC's importance and availability are, however, not known. By studying these factors, organizational leaders can determine whether and how to change the OMC to improve faculty mentoring outcomes. In this cross-sectional study, 300 faculty from the University of New Mexico (Main, Health Sciences Center [HSC] and branch campuses) and Arizona State University (a non-HSC campus) completed the online OMCI and OMCA scales, each with three subscales: Organizational Expectations, Mentor-Mentee Relationships, and Resources. OMCI scale items were rated from very unimportant (1) to very important (5); and, for OMCA, -1 (no), 0 (don't know), 1 (yes). The study used linear regression analysis after normalizing the scales to M=0 and SD=1. Although not explicitly targeted for recruitment, the respondents were predominantly women, non-Hispanic White, senior, tenure-track faculty members who were neither providing mentoring nor receiving mentoring. In the multivariable models, women faculty attached greater importance to mentoring climate components than men. HSC faculty and those receiving mentoring reported greater availability of mentoring climate components than their respective counterparts. Underrepresented minority (URM) faculty did not rate OMCI or OMCA differently than non-URM faculty. Faculty subgroups in this study attached varying levels of importance to the OMC and rated the availability of climate components differently. Factors impacting the importance of the OMC differed from those affecting the perceived availability of the climate components. Based on their relative importance and lack of availability, organizational leaders should create, modify and implement structures, programs, and policies to improve organizational mentoring expectations, mentor-mentee relationships, and mentoring resources, thereby strengthening their OMC.

Mentoring can help promote faculty retention at academic health centers (AHCs). Faculty retention is important to optimize patient care and reduce replacement costs. Nationally "work life balance" (WLB) is identified by faculty as a reason to leave (ARTL) AHCs (Alexander & Lang, 2008). To help mitigate faculty attrition at AHCs, we examined work life balance as a reason to leave (WLB-ARTL) and other associated factors at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine (UNM SOM). Faculty responses from 255 faculty that left UNM SOM between July 2017 and December 2020 were analyzed using logistic regression with the outcome WLB-ARTL. Distributions of each variable were tabulated. Odds ratio associations from logistic regression between WLB-ARTL and each variable were obtained. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was performed with backward selection at p<0.05. Of the 255 faculty who exited the University of New Mexico School of Medicine (UNM SOM), 25% had WLB-ARTL, 48% were women, 72% were physicians, 58% were clinician-educators, and 13% were from racial/ethnic underrepresented minorities (URMs). Multivariate modeling found four factors associated with increased WLB-ARTL: compensation, time for academic pursuits, spousal and family support, and dislike of patient care conditions and environment. Two factors associated with lower WLB-ARTL were better leadership and periodic reviews addressing job satisfaction. Gender, URM, and physician status were not found to be significant. Similar to previous studies (Whittaker et al., n.d.), we found that WLB-ARTL at UNM SOM was associated with specific "work" and "life" factors. Faculty retention efforts should focus on "work" factors such as providing protected time for academic pursuits and improving patient care conditions, and "life" factors such as addressing compensation and supporting families.

The growing application of social network-based theories and methods (Burt et al., 2013) in scholarship on mentoring illustrates that mentoring goes beyond dyadic relationships comprising a senior mentor and a junior protégé (Higgins & Kram, 2001). However, limited data exist on the state of developmental networks of university faculty. This study examines developmental network characteristics among mentors and mentees participating in an ongoing intervention that aims to enhance career success through improved mentoring. Cross-sectional data come from 81 faculty mentors and mentees at three universities in the Southwestern United States. Using the online Modified Mentoring Network Questionnaire (MNQ), participants provided information on relationships with developers, who are people that have taken concerted action, and provided professional and/or personal guidance to help participants advance in their careers. An individual's developmental network comprises relationships with developers. We conducted exploratory analyses examining key characteristics of mentors' and mentees' developmental networks. Participants received psychosocial and career support from an average of 4.9 developers (4.8 and 5.1 for mentors and mentees respectively) from 2.3 arenas (2.2 and 2.4 arenas for mentors and mentees, respectively). While the most common arena was the respondents' current job/position (62%, 64% and 59% for all participants, mentors, and mentees respectively), developers were from graduate school (11%, 6% and 17%); prior jobs/positions (13%, 16% and 9%) and family (8%, 5% and 11%). Our preliminary findings suggest that developers are important for university faculty and that methods and insights from social network analysis can be applied to examine their support networks. As our study is part of an ongoing longitudinal intervention, these findings will inform future analyses that will examine changes in developmental network characteristics and its impact on participants' careers.

National data indicate about 50% of junior faculty leave a School of Medicine (SOM) within eight years of hire. The long-term goal of the study was to determine innovative strategies for promoting SOM faculty retention. The study objective was to determine factors influencing SOM faculty to exit, and what would encourage them to stay or return. All faculty exiting the University of New Mexico (UNM) SOM were surveyed and their responses analyzed to the following items: (a) If something could have been done differently that might have resulted in staying at UNM, what would it have been? (b) What would need to change at UNM SOM for you to return? and (c) general comments offered. Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses used an iterative process and systematic thematic approach and NVivo software. 173 faculty respondents surveyed between July 2017 and June 2019 included 86 women, 33 non-Caucasians, and 14 Hispanics. A total of 110 faculty reported an MD degree and 117 were assistant professors. Seventy-eight faculty were on clinician educator track. The 367 responses to the three questions were categorized into 10 themes. The most common themes included (a) people (leadership and others) and workplace culture (25.1% of responses); (b) extent of career support and resources (15.3%); (c) organizational systems and administration (13.6%); and (d) faculty feelings of autonomy and value (10.9%). Exiting faculty frequently discussed the need for a change of leadership and changes in organizational climate and culture, which may have influenced their willingness to stay or to return to UNM SOM. To retain faculty, SOM leaders need to strengthen and/or modify organizational climate and culture components. Innovative strategies for this purpose may include organizational interventions followed by evidence-based leadership training programs, and the use of exit surveys for monitoring interventions.

National data indicate that 50% of assistant professors leave a School of Medicine (SOM) within eight years of hire. At-risk for attrition in some studies are women, racial/ethnic underrepresented minorities (URM), and clinical faculty. Retention of faculty is not adequately studied in the Southwestern US, where at-risk faculty constitute the majority group. The study hypothesized that at-risk faculty have lower retention rates than those not at-risk. Identification of factors predicting retention of at-risk faculty may help institutions devise novel and targeted retention strategies. Prospective time to event analyses studied assistant professors hired at the University of New Mexico's (UNM) SOM from 2008-2019. Eight factors, measured at the time of hire, included: rank, race/ethnicity, gender, MD degree, academic track, department type, salary, and fiscal year of hire. Univariate analyses included graphical analysis of Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard ratios with years to departure measuring the main event to resignation. 844 full-time junior faculty included 50% women, 81% physicians, 42% clinician educators, and 18% racial/ethnic URM. Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, Black faculty (HR = 2.24, 1.25-4.03) and faculty with non-US degree (1.53, 1.19-1.94) had a higher risk of leaving. Faculty in clinician educator (2.01, 1.06-3.82) or visiting research tracks (2.41, 1.20-4.84) both had higher risk of leaving than tenure track faculty. Although URM faculty did not have an overall higher risk of departure, male faculty had higher risk of leaving than women when they are URM or unknown-URM status. In our analysis of junior faculty, we showed that faculty who were Black, had an international education, and in clinician educator or visiting research tracks were at greater risk of leaving, but women and Hispanic faculty had similar retention rates as their respective counterparts at UNM SOM. The differential retention rates among several at-risk subgroups of junior faculty may indicate the need to refocus the existing diversity and faculty development programs at UNM SOM.