A Consulting Firm s Experience with a Formal Mentoring Program

A Consulting Firm s Experience with a Formal Mentoring Program Bill A. Cisco Abstract. In an effort to advance our staff s professional development, as well as to create and strengthen personal bonds within our consulting firm, Dowling Associates, Inc. implemented a formal mentoring program in the Fall of 2007. The program was open to all employees interested in participating and enlisted a set of mentors and mentees for a pilot period of 12-months. Depending on the success of the pilot program, the formal mentoring program may have been extended. A brief history of the measures employed by Dowling Associates to foster staff development and camaraderie is presented. Our experiences learning about how to create a mentoring program, our implementation of a mentoring program, and our operation of the mentoring program is then described. Additionally, data from questionnaires completed by both mentees and mentors at the 12-month finalization of the formal program are presented and interpreted to measure the program s effectiveness. Lessons learned and tips for future implementation of such programs are also shared. The experiences and outcomes of our firm s implementation of this mentoring program could serve to encourage and aid other transportation organizations with respect to implementing or modifying their own mentoring programs to foster employee professional development, personal growth and connectedness within their organization. INTRODUCTION This paper presents the experiences of Dowling Associates, a transportation engineering and planning consulting firm with offices in Oakland and Sacramento, California, implementing a formal mentoring program for its employees. The complete process from identifying the desire for a mentoring program, learning how to implement a mentoring program, soliciting employee participation, training mentors and mentees, mentoring meetings, participant evaluations and the post-program evaluation and recommendations for the future are presented. BACKGROUND Dowling Associates implemented a pilot formal mentoring program in September 2007 to improve staff development and workforce retention within our company. The motivation for developing a formal mentoring program was the desire to provide better professional development to our staff members. A number of our employees identified the need for our firm to do a better job at providing our staff members

(especially our younger staff members) with resources for their professional development and connectedness within our firm. Mentoring and other staff development opportunities were identified as ways to achieve these goals. We also viewed mentoring as a way to encourage staff retention. Factors that contributed to us beginning this program included our growing company size and the recent departure of a key associate staff person, which left us wondering what we could do as a company to be more proactive at fostering our employee s professional growth and personal relationships within the firm. Past History of Mentoring Years prior, we had a very loose informal mentoring system that did not work well and for all intents and purposes had dissolved. The previous mentoring system was informal and the impetus for all interactions was placed solely on the mentee. Those factors contributed to that program s (if it could be called that) demise. Simultaneous Efforts Another staff development venue we were improving around the same time frame as the creation of the formal mentoring program was a series of in-house training seminars that occurred once a week during lunchtime in a brown-bag seminar format. These seminars were administered and consistent meaning that these seminars occurred consistently on a weekly basis with presentations by various staff members. They served to expand our staff s learning opportunities, their skills presenting to an audience and their interconnectedness. LEARNING HOW TO IMPLEMENT A FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAM A steering committee of employees that were interested in pursuing ways to encourage staff development led the implementation of the formal mentoring program. This included two principals of the firm (Alice Chen and Kym Sterner), one principal associate (Bill Cisco), and our accountant/human resources person (Zulay Loftin). Our steering committee attended a webinar offered by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) titled Mentoring: Implementing a Program in Your Organization, by Stuart G. Walesh (April, 2007) to learn the essential skills to develop a formal mentoring program at our firm. We found this webinar to be very beneficial in: defining what mentoring is and isn t describing benefits to the mentees, mentors and the organization identifying the do s and don ts of mentoring presenting specific strategies for implementing a mentoring program

GETTING APPROVAL FOR A PILOT FORMAL MENTORING PROGRAM After attending this webinar, the steering committee reported back to the Board of Directors, recommending that our firm institute a formal mentoring program on a pilot (or trial) basis for a 12-month period of time. The Board approved the pilot program within a set of parameters described later in this paper (in the Implementation discussion). SETTING UP THE PROGRAM Providing an informational session about the pilot formal mentoring program, getting responses from those interested in participating in the program, as well as matching the mentees and mentors were key steps in setting up our mentoring program. Informational Session for Prospective Participants After getting approval from the Board to have a one year mentoring pilot-program, we led an informational session with our staff to introduce the program and seek participants both as mentors and mentees (June, 2007). During this informational session, we presented: What mentoring is. A relationship between a junior and a senior that exists primarily to support the personal and professional development of the junior person 1. Why to have mentoring. That it helps someone learn something that they may eventually learn less well, more slowly, or not at all 2. What a mentor is. A person investing time, know-how, and effort in enhancing another person s growth, knowledge, and skills, to prepare the individual for greater productivity and achievement 3. The power of mentoring benefits to mentees. Through the input of the mentor s knowledge, skills and attitudes and the mentee s interest in personal and professional growth, there are immediate results such as the mentee s increased awareness and improved knowledge, skills and attitudes, as well as long-term goals such as the mentee s increased contribution to co-workers, clients and community, as well as increased career security 4. The power of mentoring benefits to mentors. Mentors also benefit with improved listening, a greater appreciation for diversity of goals, knowledge, skills and attitudes, and also from the satisfaction of helping someone 5. That mentoring is a major commitment. A formal mentoring program requires major commitments in both time and trust. The time commitment would be for one year and include many hours of preparation, meetings and follow-up activities. The trust commitment would include mentees revealing their goals, strengths, weaknesses, fears, and potentially other information, and the mentors would need to maintain confidentiality and strive to help 6.

The Do s and Don ts for both the mentors and the mentees. There were a list of 8 items related to both the mentors and mentees, and additional 11 items strictly for the mentors, and 4 more items strictly for the mentees. The process for the pilot program. We described that we would first gather participants (mentors and mentees), match the mentors and mentees, notify them of their pairings, hold a kick-off meeting at the start of the program to provide additional information and instructions, provide guidance and support throughout the process, maintain regular communication and perform evaluations at the 6- month and 12-month time points. The parameters for the pilot program. We described that the mentoring program would include meeting once a month for the one-year pilot period. The time and expense of the meal would be covered by the company. The preparation and follow-up work would be covered up to two hours on company time, with any remaining time done after work hours (if necessary) for each session. Lastly, the mentee would be responsible for documenting the session with a brief written summary of topics discussed, action items, date and time for the next meeting, and the topics to be discussed. They would submit the written summary of each session to their mentor, but it would not be given to the company management. Responses to Participate We gave response sheets where staff could sign-up to be mentors, mentees or both (late June 2007). We asked mentees to list names of potential mentors that would like to be matched with as well as any names of potential mentors that would not like to be matched with. We asked mentors to list whether they d like to mentor one or two mentees, and to name any mentees that they would like to be matched with. We had 24 employees respond with interest in participating as either mentors or mentees (or both) in the program. That represented over 50% of all of employees of the firm. Matching Mentees and Mentors Shortly thereafter, the steering committee and one other interested principal (Mike Aronson) met to establish the mentor/mentee pairings based on the feedback from the response sheets. In order to meet the demand for mentors, some mentors agreed to have 2 mentees, so that all who wanted to be mentored were able to do so. To the best of our abilities, we matched the mentees with mentors based on their preferences. There were 10 mentors and 16 mentees involved in the program (23 unique staff participants, with 3 participating as both mentors and mentees).

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MENTORING PROGRAM Another instructional session was held for mentors and mentees with more instructions and resources provided to the program participants. We employed the tools presented in the webinar to implement our formal mentoring program. The formal pilot-program began in September 2007 with the following stipulations: The pilot-program would last 12 months and then be evaluated for possible continuation. Meetings between mentors and mentees would occur once per month and be the responsibility of the mentor to ensure meetings were scheduled. The time for the meeting and the expense of the meal would be covered by the company (mentor pays and gets reimbursed). Prep-work and follow-up time would be paid up to 2 hours per month, with any remaining effort done on personal time. Mentee would be responsible for completing a form documenting each meeting and submitting the form to mentor. The mentor/mentee relationship would maintain strict confidentiality on matters discussed. 6 month check-in and evaluation would be completed. 12 month evaluation would be completed. An information brochure was made available to the program participants that summarized the key aspects of the program as well as listed tips for establishing and maintaining their mentoring relationship, including addressing aspects of preparing for meetings, setting up a time and place for meetings, optional exercises to complete during the meetings, and how to maintain their mentoring relationship. The formal mentoring pilot program then began in September 2007 and ended in August 2008. There were 10 mentors and 16 mentees involved in the program (23 unique staff participants, with 3 participating as both mentors and mentees). OPERATION OF THE MENTORING PROGRAM The formal mentoring pilot program was implemented and operated pretty much as planned. The steering committee was available to provide help or resources as needed to the mentors and mentees. Throughout the life of the pilot program, two mentor/mentee pairings did not survive. One was due to a mentee leaving the firm and the other due to a mentor never establishing contact with the mentee. However, that mentee was able to be matched up with a different mentor during the last half of the program. The frequency of the mentor/mentee meetings varied greatly amongst the participants. Only one pair met all 12 months, and one pair only met 1 month (exclusive of the two

failed pairings mentioned above). On average, the mentoring meetings occurred 6 times during the pilot period. Unfortunately, in the middle of the eleventh month (July, 2008) of the mentoring program, the company pulled part of the funding for the program in reaction to the onset of a national banking and economic crisis. This was done abruptly and may have contributed to some meetings not occurring at the very end of the program. EVALUATION While the true effects of the mentoring program are much greater than what can be evaluated quantitatively, we did evaluate the program based on participant feedback and based on costs to the company. Twelve-month Participant Evaluation Questionnaire We asked participants to complete a 12-month review form evaluating the pilot mentoring program. They were asked to rank their responses on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 being strongly agreeing with the statement, 1 being strongly disagreeing with the statement) on 11 statements, including: 1. Overall program met expectations 2. Meetings were held regularly 3. Appropriate amount of time was devoted to the program 4. Personal and professional goals were accomplished 5. Topics defined for discussion were covered 6. Trust and confidentiality were established and maintained 7. Mentoring partner listens well 8. Program was worthwhile 9. Learned a great deal from mentoring partner 10. Experienced continual improvement in program 11. Program follow-up throughout the year was sufficient Additionally, they were asked how many times they met during the 12-month period, whether they were interested in continuing to be involved in future mentoring and whether they d want that to continue as a formal program or not. We received responses from 10 of the mentees to this questionnaire (Figure 1), and from 7 mentors, covering a total of 11 mentee pairings as some of the responding mentors had mentored more than one mentee (Figure 2). On the whole, the mentees ranked the program very highly, with the average of all 11 indicators being 4.3 on the 5 point scale. All of the 10 responding mentees indicated that they would like to continue participating in a mentoring program and 9 of them stated that they d prefer it to be a formal program.

Figure 1 Twelve Month Evaluation - Mentees Mentee: C D E L G M K P Q R 12-month Mentor: I III III I II IV II VII VIII IV Averages Ranking: 5-strongly agree, 4-agree, 3-nuetral, 2-disagree, 1-strongly disagree 1. Overall program met my expectations 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 4 4.2 2. Meetings were held regularly throughout the year 4 4 4 5 5 3 5 5 3 2 4.0 3. Appropriate amount of time has been devoted to program 3 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 3 4 4.2 4. Personal and professional development goals were accomplished 3 3 4 3 3 5 4 5 4 4 3.8 5. Topics defined for discussion were covered during the program 3 3 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 4.3 6. Trust and confidentiality were established and maintained 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4.8 7. Mentoring partner listens well 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 4.7 8. Program was worthwhile 3 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 4.6 9. Learned a great deal from my mentoring partner 3 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 5 4.6 10. Experienced continual improvement in program since beginning 3 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 5 4 4.1 11. Program follow-up throughout the year was sufficient 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 3 4.3 Average of all indicators 3.4 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.2 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.5 4.2 4.3 12. How many times have you met? 10 6 8 10 12 4 10 12 2 3 7.7 "1" = Yes, "0" = No 13. Are you interested in continuing to be involved in future mentoring? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.0 14. Would you want it to continue to be a formal mentoring program? 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.9 Figure 2 Twelve Month Evaluation - Mentors Mentor: II I VIII III I II IV IV IV V VII 12-month Mentee: K C Q E F G H O R S P Averages Ranking: 5-strongly agree, 4-agree, 3-nuetral, 2-disagree, 1-strongly disagree 1. Overall program met my expectations 5 4 2 4 4 5 5 3 4 3 4 3.9 2. Meetings were held regularly throughout the year 5 5 1 4 3 5 5 2 3 2 3 3.5 3. Appropriate amount of time has been devoted to program 5 5 1 5 4 5 5 3 4 2 4 3.9 4. Personal and professional development goals were accomplished 5 4 1 4 4 5 4 3 4 2 4 3.6 5. Topics defined for discussion were covered during the program 5 4 5 3 4 5 4 3 4 4 3 4.0 6. Trust and confidentiality were established and maintained 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 4.6 7. Mentoring partner listens well 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 4.6 8. Program was worthwhile 5 5 1 4 5 5 4 3 5 2 5 4.0 9. Learned a great deal from my mentoring partner 4 5 1 4 5 5 4 3 4 3 5 3.9 10. Experienced continual improvement in program since beginning 5 4 1 3 3 5 4 4 4 2 4 3.5 11. Program follow-up throughout the year was sufficient 5 4 1 4 2 5 4 3 3 2 4 3.4 Average of all indicators 4.9 4.5 2.1 3.9 3.9 5.0 4.4 3.3 3.9 2.9 4.2 3.9 12. How many times have you met? 10 11 2 6 9 12 4 2 3 3 8 6.4 "1" = Yes, "0" = No 13. Are you interested in continuing to be involved in future mentoring? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.0 14. Would you want it to continue to be a formal mentoring program? 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.9

The mentors reported favorably regarding the program as well, with the average of all 11 indicators being 3.9 on the 5 point scale. Similar to the mentees, all of the responding mentors indicated that they would like to continue participating in a mentoring program and all but one of them stated that they d prefer it to be a formal program. Program Costs The costs for the pilot program were tracked by the time charged by the mentors and mentees, as well as the cost of the meals that were reimbursed by the company. On average, mentors and mentees spent roughly 1.5 hours per month and expensed about $25 per month for the meal. The labor cost throughout the 12-month program totaled approximately $14,500. The expenses for the meals totaled roughly $1,800. The fully loaded labor opportunity cost was about $47,500. LESSONS LEARNED A number of lessons were learned through this process. In order to be able to meet the demand of mentees who wanted to be mentored, we had some mentors that took on two or even three mentees. While this was done wholeheartedly, by the end of the program many of the mentors with multiple mentees expressed that it really would be best for each mentor to only have one mentee. The preparation time, meeting time and follow-through afterwards is quite a commitment and having that multiplied by more than one mentee proved to be a challenge throughout the pilot program. It was also stated that it was challenging to have a mentor/mentee relationship where one was in the Oakland office and the other was in the Sacramento office. This was because of the extra travel time on top of the meeting itself. It was requested that more principals of the company take more of a role in the program, especially since there would be a need for more mentors if we only have one mentee per mentor in the future. RECOMMENDATIONS The steering committee met to review the results of the pilot program (November 2008) and to make recommendations regarding the continuation of the mentoring program. It was our recommendation to continue a formal mentoring program in upcoming years with some minor alterations, based on the feedback received. We recommend a company sponsored program that, while still considered formal, would be more flexible to meet the unique styles of each mentor/mentee pair. The program would remain mentor-driven, with the mentor responsible for keeping the meetings going, etc. We would pair one mentor with only one mentee. There would be a short

agreement the pair will sign to acknowledge some minor paperwork, a regular meeting schedule and any initial goals they have come up with. The minor paperwork would only include a 6 month and end of year feedback form. The meeting schedule would be up to each pair and what would work best for them. They could meet monthly, weekly, or every other month, but each person could charge no more than 6 hours per quarter. The mentor of each pairing would receive $90 per quarter to cover the cost of lunch, coffee etc., during the mentoring sessions. STATUS Due to concerns based on the overall economy and income of the firm, the mentoring program was not extended in any company-sponsored form beyond its pilot program which concluded in August 2008. AUTHOR INFORMATION Bill Cisco, P.E. Principal Associate Dowling Associates, Inc. 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 250 Oakland, CA 94612 P. (510) 839-1742 x 102 F. (510) 839-0871 bcisco@dowlinginc.com 1 Mentoring: Implementing a Program in Your Organization, by Stuart G. Walesh ASCE Webinar, April 18, 2007. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid.