The chronicle of mentoring & coaching最新文献

The Developmental Network Questionnaire (DNQ) is used in business to self-assess relationships with developers, or people who support one's career. The Mentoring Network Questionnaire (MNQ) is an online modification of the DNQ and includes two scales that rate developer's contributions to career or psychosocial help. The psychometrics of these scales for different populations are unreported. This study analyzed the construct validity and reliability of the two scales measuring support provided by developers of university faculty. Mentors and mentees (G=156) from multiple Southwestern and Mountain West universities rated 741 developers on the MNQ's five-item career- and psychosocial-support scales. Participants responded on a seven-point scale ranging from "never, not at all" to "to the maximum extent possible." Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) using Mplus and the multi-level reliability coefficient omega assessed construct validity and internal consistency reliability, respectively. Results supported the validity of two latent constructs of career- and psychosocial support, each measured by the established five-item scale: Comparative fit index (CFI)=.93, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)=.91, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=.06, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR): W=.09, B=.10. The measurement model was improved when the "removes barriers" item was removed from the career-support scale (CFI=.96, TLI=.95, RMSEA=.05, SRMR: W=.06 B=.09. Factor loadings at both the within- and between-levels were strong and statistically significant. Reliability omegas ranged from .85 to .92. Career and psychosocial support provided to university faculty by developers in their networks may be validly and reliably measured at both the within- and between-levels by a modified four-item career support scale and the original five-item psychosocial support scale from the DNQ and the modified MNQ. Limitations include reduced statistical power due to small sample size and lack of testing at the university level. Future work will assess the responsiveness of these scales to measuring change over time in the amount of support provided.

Many mentor training interventions in higher education focus on improving interactions between mentors and mentees. Existing measures of interactions are based on reported perceptions of the mentor or mentee. However, there are currently no objective assessments of the mentor's behavioral skill. The purpose of this study was to develop a Mentor Behavioral Interaction (MBI) Rubric as a measure of a mentor's behavioral skill during single-episode interactions with a mentee. Subsequently, the content validity was assessed. The six items (Part 1), evaluated by five mentoring experts as quantifiable behaviors in any mentor-mentee interaction, were based on the Mentoring Competency Assessment (Fleming et al., 2013). The experts developed scoring criteria (highest, middle, and lowest performance) for each item, and created another eleven items (Part 2) to characterize the content (yes/no) of the interaction. Seven content experts rated the items and scoring criteria using a scale ranging from very (4) to not relevant (1) (Lynn, 1986). Five of the six Part 1 items and scoring criteria, and nine of the eleven Part 2 items had item content validity indices (I-CVI) ≥ 0.86. The Part 1 "motivates" item and scoring, and the Part 2 "personal/professional preferences" item were revised based on expert recommendations. One Part 2 item was deleted. Average scale content validity indices (S-CVI/Ave) were ≥ 0.90. The MBI Rubric is the first measure developed to assess single episodes of videoed mentor-mentee interactions. The Rubric may be used with other measures to assess the effectiveness of mentor training. Limitations include: evaluation of the mentor's behavior without accounting for the mentee's behavior; inability to infer cognitive processes; and focus on the quality of one interaction, rather than the effectiveness of the relationship over time. Future work will assess inter-rater reliability, sensitivity to change, and construct validity for the Rubric.

Prior research shows that most Schools of Medicine faculty consider mentorship the most crucial factor in faculty development and retention. Many faculty are establishing developmental networks in lieu of hierarchical dyadic mentoring relationships. Clinicians are less likely than other newly hired faculty groups to seek mentorship despite having assigned mentors. The study's purpose was to determine the attitudes of newly hired faculty at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine (UNM SOM) regarding mentorship and developmental networks. Within their first year of hire, all newly hired faculty at UNM SOM are required to participate in a two-day orientation to the institution event called 'Quikstart.' During seven such events, new faculty [N=131] were surveyed anonymously on six single-response questions about their attitudes regarding mentorship and developmental networks, administered via online polls between September 2018 and July 2022. In this descriptive study, summary characteristics were analyzed. Newly hired faculty mentees reported that creating a developmental network was hampered by difficulties finding multiple mentors (55.3%), receiving conflicting advice from multiple mentors (22.4%), and gathering many mentors at the same location at the same time (11.8% ). Lack of clarity regarding faculty mentee needs (55.5%), mentors' unavailability (17.6%), and failure to find mentors (14.3%) were the most often mentioned difficulties during the initiation stage of mentorship (Hitchcock et al., 1995). Although the literature advocates moving from hierarchical dyadic mentoring relationships to developmental networks, this transition for Medicine faculty mentees will likely be hindered by a shortage of adequately trained mentors. Institutions need to identify and train mentors, incentivize and support mentorship, and encourage the creation and maintenance of self-selected development networks, possibly under the leadership of a transitional mentor.

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.