Why are Mentors Worthless?

Do you offer specific rewards to mentors who develop your talent?

If you do, you are an exception.  That is the apparent conclusion from both my experience and my research.  Organizations seem to find no value in the process of mentorship that warrants reinforcement.  No enterprise could be found that paid a bonus, held a dinner or provided any other discrete total rewards element to mentors for their role in developing talent.  In a survey conducted from June 7 through June 17, 2010, absolutely none of the 25 human resource or compensation professionals randomly polled (most had called me on other matters) admitted to supplying any special reward for employees who train others in addition to other duties.  Oh, some mentioned that a mentor could be nominated for a spot bonus or a recognition award, if a manager saw fit to recommend so; but there were no reports of any formal programs for the care and feeding of the nurturers of tomorrow’s talent. 

When management fails to provide positive reinforcement to those who perform a vital service like mentorship, they may send the wrong message.  Never forget that the Total Rewards concept involves giving signals and communicating values as well as paying money.  The manner in which you deliver compensation frequently delivers a stronger impact than the amount dispensed.  The process usually communicates a lot more than the product says by itself.  The lack of a formal recognition option for mentors says something loudly.  Refusing to reward those who develop effective performers who excel in your enterprise is extremely short-sighted.  There is hardly anything more important to long-term organizational survival than cultivating competencies, instilling skills and grooming people who demonstrate superior abilities.  It is what makes humans resources.

Tracking the identity of the mentors responsible for successfully developing your current home-grown talent should not be that difficult.  Providing appropriate and meaningful rewards to reinforce their stalwart efforts is not impossible, either.  Simply ignoring their invaluable contributions, however, runs the risk of starving the goose that lays your golden eggs. 

People have this odd tendency of repeating behaviors that bring them meaningful positive consequences.  Helping others grow is usually a very rewarding experience for the mentor; but there is a limit to the power of intrinsic rewards, especially if they must operate separate from and even against the influence of the formal reward system.  Might as well use that powerful motivational instinct to inspire a useful result rather than ignore it.  The warm fuzzy glow that comes from Doing A Good Thing can be extinguished eventually by implacable organizational indifference.  Why take the risk?

Both Kris Dunn, when he wrote of the glue player, and Ann Bares, when she discussed the catalyst role indicated by the hockey plus-minus rating, have addressed other aspects of this syndrome.  There are people in your workplace whose most essential service is to assist others to perform better.  It would be a disaster if they stopped what they are doing.

What are you doing to support, sponsor and encourage mentors with a proven record of cultivating talent?

E. James (Jim) Brennan is Senior Associate of ERI Economic Research Institute, the premier publisher of interactive pay and living-cost surveys. Semi-retired after over 40 years in HR corporate and consulting roles throughout the U.S. and Canada, he’s pretty much been there done that  (articles, books, speeches, seminars, radio/TV, advisory posts, in-trial expert witness stuff, etc.) and will express his opinion on almost anything.

Image: Creative Commons Photo "Money Hand" by Neubie

Comments

[Vita Taylor]

Jim,
Thanks for conducting this survey and sharing it with us. It is a critical issue that many/most companies do not recognize. During a review of hourly jobs for a recent client, we uncovered this issue. At the same time, we were defining “what makes for an excellent Supervisor or Lead to hourly employees.” Through the interviews, many directors and managers noted that the promotion to a “lead” or “supervisor” position was based on the incumbent’s ability to mentor/lead/and generally work well with employees and others. It was clear that some of the best hourly workers, whose technical skills were impeccable, would not pass the test of working well with and mentoring others. So, what we found was that while there was no reward for mentoring per se, the gate to a lead or supervisory position depended heavily on the skill to mentor. To your point, it seems that rather than leaving it to chance and a natural proclivity to “mentor,” a plan in place to reward and encourage it could lead to a more well-rounded pool of employees that would be eligible for the lead or supervisory roles.

[Michael Haberman SPHR]

Hey Jim:
I think many people see mentoring as something people do to pass on knowledge and improve their own skills. They do it "out of the goodness of their own heart." I am sure that some people think that if we paid people for it they would then do it for the money and it would cheapen the process. The activity itself should be its own reward.

Well that is nice, and I do some of that as well. But there is enough of a mercenary streak in me to want to get paid for it as well. Just remember you often get what you pay for. Free mentoring may be worth just that... nothing.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Vita: Right. When you promote your best hourly worker to supervisor, you always lose your best hourly worker and frequently get your worst supervisor. The KSAs required for supervisor are different and often not visible in the hourly work. Testing them first as mentors may solve that.

Michael: Also right. Don't want to over-commercialize and possibly extinguish the intrinsic rewards of teaching, so mentor rewards must walk a fine line. Perhaps some non-cash formal recognition of the value added is possible, plus assurances that mentors will get credit for their extra services.

[Sue Corralz]

Bravo Jim. Great post! Additionally, I believe organizations would benefit by adjusting the traditional performance standards for their mentors. That is build in mentoring time by carving out some of their other expected deliverables. For example, dialing down a sales goal in recognition of a mentor's coaching efforts so they aren't penalized for making valuable mentoring contributions to the company.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Sue: Thanks for a perfect example of an effective sensible option that truly belongs in the Total Rewards category.

[Sidney]

When interesting topics come up on employee development, I turn to Dan McCarthy for authoritative information. I have found him to be a reliable and knowledgeable person on these matters which is not my field.

I recently posed a series of questions on this topic to Dan and here are his replies which I thought might benefit others and tend to confirm my thinking.

http://www.greatleadershipbydan.com/

Sidney -
Wow, that's a lot of questions - worthy of a seperate post, but here are my short answers for now:

1. "Do you think that it's appropriate to reward mentors in some way, such as a special bonus?"
I suppose you could, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, some may see it as insulting. Most mentors give back becuase they want to.

2. "Are most mentors the employee's supervisor or next level person?"
Usually not the immediate supervisor, often 2 levels higher, but not always.

3. "Are mentors generally volunteers?" Yes.

4. "Is it necessary to reward people to get them to be mentors?"
See #1.

5."How are mentors selected in general?" Usually there is criteria, sometimes training, and the mentee should have a choice.

Monday, June 21, 2010 6:07:00 PM EDT

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Pretty much agree on most of those answers, except I might quibble on #1, where the answer is laudable, normal and totally appropriate for hobbies or nonprofit activities. However, it could be dangerous for businesses to rely on officially unappreciated volunteers to groom their future talent. This may be more a question of management development policy than a "pay" question, because all rewards do not come via cash.

[Vita Taylor]

Thanks, Jim - for an engaging post, many angles to consider, and a wonderful follow up of each comment.

[Randy Lesch]

I worked at a Fortune 5000 company with 50,000 salaried employees and we successfully used volunteers to perform important, but infrequent duties---diversity awareness group facilitators and process improvement specialists---without a financial inducement.

We felt that we were getting our best employees and that they were attracted by the opportunity to set themselves off from the crowd by acquiring new skills that would help them get promoted and enhance their marketability. We also believed that some of the people we attracted were doing these duties out of sincere interest in their importance to the company (diversity awareness) and that they were in essence giving back to its welfare.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Randy: You are quite correct that volunteer special assignments and task force memberships are wonderful classic developmental training and testing opportunities for mutual enrichment. Recognition is a powerful intrinsic motivator and not all rewards jingle.

[Vita Taylor]

Here's a new development in the Federal Government:

Per the Government Executive.com site, "The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed en bloc the 2009 Federal Supervisor Training Act (S. 674)."

2009 Federal Supervisor Training Act (S. 674)

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=45554&dcn=e_wfw

Seems that the Federal Government may be leading the way to better supervisory training. It seems widely accepted that it is needed, and I wonder if it includes the "mentor like" qualities that we discussed here within the Cafe.

"Both bills would establish a program to educate supervisors on a range of common managerial issues, including developing and discussing goals with employees, communicating progress and conducting performance appraisals. In addition, supervisors would receive training on prohibited personnel practices and employee collective bargaining rights."

We will see how this develops.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Good catch, Vita.

[Derek Irvine, Globoforce]

Excellent post, Jim. That's one reason, if a company values mentorship (and it should), then "mentoring" should be a formal value included as a reason for recognition. And it should be made clear that "mentoring" doesn't necessarily always come from a formal, designated mentor. In my career, I can name numerous people who have mentored me as I learned and grew, but who were never designated as my formal mentor. In cases such as these, those who have been mentored should be able to say "thanks," formally and significantly.

[E. James (Jim) Brennan]

Great observation, Derek. Maybe others will suggest options to accomplish that very thing.