Dataset Information

Mentor networks in academic medicine: moving beyond a dyadic conception of mentoring for junior faculty researchers.

ABSTRACT: Career development award programs often require formal establishment of mentoring relationships. The authors sought to gain a nuanced understanding of mentoring from the perspective of a diverse national sample of faculty clinician-researchers who were all members of formal mentoring relationships.Between February 2010 and August 2011, the authors conducted semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews with 100 former recipients of National Institutes of Health mentored career development awards and 28 of their mentors. Purposive sampling ensured a diverse range of viewpoints. Multiple analysts thematically coded verbatim transcripts using qualitative data analysis software.Three relevant themes emerged: (1) the numerous roles and behaviors associated with mentoring in academic medicine, (2) the improbability of finding a single person who can fulfill the diverse mentoring needs of another individual, and (3) the importance and composition of mentor networks. Many respondents described the need to cultivate more than one mentor. Several participants discussed the use of peer mentors, citing benefits such as pooled resources and mutual learning. Female participants generally acknowledged the importance of having at least one female mentor. Some observed that their portfolio of mentors needed to evolve to remain effective.Those who seek to promote the careers of faculty in academic medicine should focus on developing mentoring networks rather than on hierarchical mentoring dyads. The members of each faculty member's mentoring team or network should reflect the protégé's individual needs and preferences, with special attention toward ensuring diversity in terms of area of expertise, academic rank, and gender.

SUBMITTER: DeCastro R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3610810 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mentor networks in academic medicine: moving beyond a dyadic conception of mentoring for junior faculty researchers.

DeCastro Rochelle R Sambuco Dana D Ubel Peter A PA Stewart Abigail A Jagsi Reshma R

Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 20130401 4

<h4>Purpose</h4>Career development award programs often require formal establishment of mentoring relationships. The authors sought to gain a nuanced understanding of mentoring from the perspective of a diverse national sample of faculty clinician-researchers who were all members of formal mentoring relationships.<h4>Method</h4>Between February 2010 and August 2011, the authors conducted semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews with 100 former recipients of National Institutes of Health men ...[more]

PMID: 23425990

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceBecause mentorship is critical for professional development and career advancement, it is essential to examine the status of mentorship and identify challenges that junior surgical faculty (assistant and associate professors) face obtaining effective mentorship.ObjectiveTo evaluate the mentorship experience for junior surgical faculty and highlight areas for improvement.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study was an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study including an anonymous survey on mentorship followed by semistructured interviews to expand on survey findings. Junior surgical faculty from 18 US academic surgery programs were included in the anonymous survey and interviews. Survey responses between "formal" (assigned by the department) vs "informal" (sought out by the faculty) mentors and male vs female junior faculty were compared using χ2 tests. Interview responses were analyzed for themes until thematic saturation was achieved. Survey responses were collected from November 2022 to August 2023, and interviews conducted from July to December 2023.ExposureMentorship from formal and/or informal mentors.Main outcomes and measuresSurvey gauged the availability and satisfaction with formal and informal mentorship; interviews assessed broad themes regarding mentorship.ResultsOf 825 survey recipients, 333 (40.4%) responded; 155 (51.7%) were male and 134 (44.6%) female. Nearly all respondents (319 [95.8%]) agreed or strongly agreed that mentorship is important to their surgical career, especially for professional networking (309 respondents [92.8%]), career advancement (301 [90.4%]), and research (294 [88.3%]). However, only 58 respondents (18.3%) had a formal mentor. More female than male faculty had informal mentors (123 [91.8%] vs 123 [79.4%]; P = .003). Overall satisfaction was higher with informal mentorship than formal mentorship (221 [85.0%] vs 40 [69.0%]; P = .01). Most male and female faculty reported no preferences in gender or race and ethnicity for their mentors. When asked if they had good mentor options if they wanted to change mentors, 141 (47.8%) responded no. From the interviews (n = 20), 6 themes were identified, including absence of mentorship infrastructure, preferred mentor characteristics, and optimizing mentorship.Conclusions and relevanceAcademic junior surgical faculty agree mentorship is vital to their careers. However, this study found that few had formal mentors and almost half need more satisfactory options if they want to change mentors. Academic surgical programs should adopt a framework for facilitating mentorship and optimize mentor-mentee relationships through alignment of mentor-mentee goals and needs.

Dataset Information

Mentor networks in academic medicine: moving beyond a dyadic conception of mentoring for junior faculty researchers.

Publications

Mentor networks in academic medicine: moving beyond a dyadic conception of mentoring for junior faculty researchers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets