Effective mentoring is based on credible and influential relationships, and playing matchmaker to create those relationships can be intimidating. There are many ways learners and mentors can find each other. This excerpt from Mentoring Programs That Work covers the most common ones: self-selection, role and location, SME rotation, and skills match. 

Self-Selection

What if learners and mentors can find each other? Given enough information, participants can seek each other out, which allows for more ownership in the process, and in some cases helps in overcoming the awkwardness that can occur when mentoring relationships are forced. 

One way to facilitate self-selection is with a technology platform that automates the discovery and matching processes. Participants register in the system, which then matches them to potential mentors. Then participants can evaluate their matches using information mentors have uploaded into the system. This gives participants a feeling of ownership in the process, and also decreases the workload of program administrators, who might otherwise spend days or weeks in the matching process. 

Aside from using a dedicated software program, you can also assist the self-selection process by posting relevant info about mentors on a protected intranet site. Or you could organize a mentoring program launch event with a speed-dating component so participants can find their best match—no technology needed. 

Self-selection works well with all structures and schedules. For mentor-led and peer-mentoring programs, individuals usually don’t need to know much information to sign up for a group. With traditional or reverse mentoring, learners and mentors will need more information about one another so they can make educated decisions about who they will be working with. However, that extra effort to gather and provide the relevant information can pay dividends, because self-selected relationships are often more organic than other types. 

The two biggest factors in whether to choose this method of matching are: 

• Culture: Is your organization’s culture open, transparent, and egalitarian enough to promote individuals who want to find mentors across the entire business? In cultures that are heavily political or siloed, for example, a learner may feel pressure to choose a mentor for less-than-ideal reasons.

   

• Administration: Just because participants are expected to take ownership in finding a learning match, doesn’t necessarily mean that there are fewer administrative needs. Unless you are using some sort of software application to help, gathering and posting relevant information for self-selection can be a substantial undertaking.

Role and Location

One of the more common practices for matching learners and mentors is matching a learner with a mentor who is in a certain role, and (usually) geographically desirable. For example, a new salesperson will likely be mentored by an account executive (role) in the same office (location). 

The benefit of this method is that program administrators have more control, and are able to make sure mentor resources are applied equally and effectively. However, the risks of putting the matching process entirely in the hands of administrators are: 

• Artificial Relationships: Many participants express some concern about being matched with a total stranger, often complaining that the relationship feels forced.

   

• Effort: In very large programs, it takes a lot of time and effort to match everyone up effectively. 

Although this method works well for all structures, it works especially well for traditional, reverse, and mentor-led groups. Because these relationships include experts as mentors, an administrator will want the most control over when those experts are leveraged in mentoring relationships. 

Role and location is also a great matching method for open or ongoing programs. That way, when a new learner or mentor joins the program, the program administrator has a full view of potential matches for the individual. Overall, this method is most often chosen when the mentoring relationship is driven by specific content, such as a new hire onboarding program, sales preparatory program, or new manager leadership program.

SME Rotation

One of the less common methods for matching learners and mentors is through a subject matter expert (SME) rotation. In this model, the learners are matched with a series of SMEs over a set period of time, so they can learn and practice specific skills. 

This method can be very effective for programs in leadership development or for new supervisors. For example, a learner in a large company might be in a supervisory position that has six critical competencies she must work on during her first year on the job; however, the order does not matter. In a SME rotation, the learner would be assigned six different mentors who each excel in one of the competencies. She would participate in a two-month, one-on-one relationship with one SME mentor after the other, until she completed the program. 

This method works best for the traditional structure. It would be challenging, but possible, to use a SME rotation for reverse or mentor-led groups. However, it doesn’t work for a peer-led group because that method does not use an SME. 

SME rotation is most easily leveraged for a calendar-based schedule, because all learners and mentors are open and available for matching. However, the other schedule styles also work well. This is a great matching method to use if your mentor pool is depleted and you need to stretch it out without asking too much of their time. SME rotation is also a great matching method if part of your program’s goal is to increase the learner’s network, because he will be exposed to a greater number of SMEs.

Skills Match

While some programs are driven by specific content (new hire onboarding), other mentoring programs are established to help individuals develop their goals. In those programs, learners should be connected with mentors who are skilled in specific areas that will help them grow. The skills match process is often done with a tool such as an individual development plan (IDP) to capture learner goals. This gives program administrators a snapshot of each learner’s top areas to work on. 

On the mentor side, administrators can use a variety of tools to find mentors that match the learner’s IDP goals. For example, a performance review can show a mentor candidate’s skills in key areas. Surveys by mentors or supervisors, as well as 360-degree or multirater assessments, also provide valuable information about learner and mentor skills, how the learners view themselves, and how others perceive their behavior. After program administrators have gathered the learner’s IDP goals and performance data for mentors, they can begin matching learner needs to the available mentors who excel in those areas. Be aware that in large programs (for example, more than 100 learners), this is a very long and challenging process. 

The skills matching process is involved and requires a lot of effort from program administrators, so it does not work well with open or ongoing schedules. It works best for peer-led groups because only learners with similar goals need to be matched, but it can also work with any other structure. Just remember, the more relationships (for example, a traditional structure), the more work takes to match everyone effectively. 

One more warning: You will need a lot of mentors for this process, because you will want to find the best matches for each learner’s needs.

Random

Arbitrary assignment of learners to mentors is a viable option for programs with highly capable mentors. In general, if learners are seeking development in similar areas, and all mentors can effectively contribute to that development, this might be a reasonable choice. Another situation in which a random assignment occurs is in very small programs that do not have much choice. But beware of mismatches! The risk in using a random assignment is that learners are not able to get what they need for growth because of a match with an unqualified mentor.

Technology Solutions

There are a handful of applications on the market to help programs automate or streamline the matching process. Some stand-alone software platforms are databases that enable the online building of various mentor relationships. Additionally, some learning management systems include this functionality. If you are trying to empower program participants to make their own matches, a technology solution can be an effective way to achieve that goal. However, software licenses are an added (and possibly unexpected) cost to your budget.