Advertisement

Mentorship Styles

  • Raphael E. Pollock
Chapter
Part of the Success in Academic Surgery book series (SIAS)

Abstract

The mentor is not synonymous with preceptor, coach, tutor, role model, or supervisor. A mentor has a deeper, more pervasive, more enduring, and more personal relationship with the mentee. The relationship is formative and interactive, there is a give and take; the goal is to engender both personal and professional growth. The mentor is a guide, not a supervisor; advice is offered in contrast to orders being issued. The mentorship relationship is distinguished from other types of interactions by both its breadth of scope and depth of focus; it is a “uniquely encompassing relationship.” The five characteristics of the traditional mentoring model have been identified by Bussey-Jones: teaching, sponsoring, guidance, socialization into a profession, and provision of counsel and moral support. On the personal level, mentors are outgoing, interactive, kind, and just people. In the realm of academic surgery, they are collaborative, skilled clinically, and intellectual in their personal orientation.

Keywords

Mentor Mentorship style Career guidance Mentee Professional development 

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    Sambunjak D, Straus SE, Marusic A. A systematic review of qualitative research on the meaning and characteristics of mentoring in academic medicine. J Gen Intern Med. 2010;25(1):72–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bussey-Jones J, Bernstein L, Higgins S, et al. Repaving the road to academic success: the IMeRGE approach to peer mentoring. Acad Med. 2006;81(7):674–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Straus SE, Johnson MO, Marquez C, Feldman MD. Characteristics of successful and failed mentoring relationships. Acad Med. 2013;88(1):82–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cho CS, Ramanan RA, Feldman MD. Defining the ideal qualities of mentorship: a qualitative analysis of the characteristics of outstanding mentors. Am J Med. 2011;124(5):453–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jackson VA, Palepu A, Szalacha L, Caswell C, Carr PL, Inui T. “Having the right chemistry”: a qualitative study of mentoring in academic medicine. Acad Med. 2003;78(3):328–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhagia J, Tinsley JA. The mentoring partnership. Mayo Clin Proc. 2000;75(5):535–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feldman MD, Arean PA, Marshall SJ, Lovett M, Osullivan P. Does mentoring matter: results from a survey of faculty mentees at a large health sciences university. Med Educ Online. 2010;15(1):5063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zerzan JT, Hess R, Schur E, Phillips RS, Rigotti N. Making the most of mentors: a guide for mentees. Acad Med. 2009;84(1):140–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kashiwagi DT, Varkey P, Cook DA. Mentoring programs for physicians in academic medicine. Acad Med. 2013;88:1029–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guise J-M, Geller S, Regensteiner JG, Raymond N, Nagel J. Team mentoring for interdisciplinary team science. Acad Med. 2017;92(2):214–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pololi LH, Knight SM, Dennis K, Frankel RM. Helping medical school faculty realize their dreams. Acad Med. 2002;77(5):377–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Angelique H, Kyle K, Taylor E. Mentors and muses: new strategies for academic success. Innov High Educ. 2002;26(3):195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pololi L, Knight S. Mentoring faculty in academic medicine. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(9):866–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of SurgeryThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical CenterColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations