Mentoring Survey Results: Key Findings and Recommendations for Program Enhancement

1. Results of Survey on the Mentoring Component: May 2006 Northern Plains Area Dr. Will Blackburn Ms. Barbara King

2. Survey • Four versions: • Protégé, 25 questions, 82% return rate • Mentor, 25 questions, 88% return rate • RL of Protégé, 6 questions, 86% return rate • RL of Mentor, 6 questions, 37% return rate • Average completion time estimated at less than 15 minutes

3. Survey Results: Protégé • 86% reported no conflicting advice between mentor and RL • 86% say mentor has been helpful in transition issues • 86% say mentor has helped them see ARS as long-term career • 72% say their RL is somewhat or very supportive of the mentoring program

4. Results: Protégé, cont’d • High rates of satisfaction in discussions with their mentors about: • career planning, ARS structure, ARS research expectations, and collegiality • Advice on balancing work and family: • most useful from mentors (72%); • then Location staff (64%); • and lastly RLs (28%) • Other location scientists and RLs most useful in helping to develop research plans

5. Results: Protégé, cont’d • Pressing concerns included: • administrative duties • Identifying their role at the location/RU/ARS • Preparing the first case report • Other comments: • Excellent; worthwhile; wonderful • Post-doc experience with ARS very helpful • Not as helpful due to different research interests

6. Results: Protégé, cont’d • Learned of the job vacancy from: • someone at the location – 50% • USA jobs – 29% • Faculty adviser – 7% • other sources – 14% • scientific journals – 0%

7. Results: Mentors • ALL have enjoyed their role and nearly all (94%) think they have been very useful to their protégé • 94% like the current structure • 56% said they have gained new technical knowledge through their protégé • 31% said they would like required training

8. Results: Mentors • General comments: • Keep it informal • It’s very good – keep it as it is • Different locations and great distances hinder building a strong relationship • Would have liked to have this program 20 years ago • Should include post-docs

9. Results: Protégé RLs • 100% have discussed the program with their new SY • 75% say the program has been useful • 92% are not concerned about their advice conflicting with that of the mentor

10. Survey Results: Protégé RLs • General Comments: • Concerned that the mentor has not contacted me • Mentor not that helpful since I am open with the new SY • Seems to be working well • Should be optional • Mentoring is a RL’s job

11. Survey Results: all four groups • Mobility: • Majority of mentors and RLs, and 45% of protégés live more than 1000 miles from their home town; • Time commitment: • Nearly all protégés, mentors and protégé RLs said that mentoring activities did not take too much time

12. Survey Results: all four groups • Who helped in integrating to first ARS worksite: • Protégés: technical and clerical staff and other location scientists most helpful • Mentors: other location scientists most helpful, with technical and clerical staff and RL second most helpful • Protégé RL: RL most helpful, then other location scientists, then clerical, then technical • Mentor RL: Clerical staff, RL, technical staff, and other location scientists all about equally helpful

13. Lessons learned • Overall, high satisfaction from protégés and mentors • RLs of protégés find the program useful but some resistance exists • Expand Mentoring Guides to include a training component for mentors and proteges • Investigate ways to improve location and community integration • Re-visit recruitment methods • AO very satisfied with the program