Mentoring relationships are socially constructed, and the power that mentors have and exercise within mentoring relationships can be helpful or hurtful to protégés. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to explore mentoring literature...
moreMentoring relationships are socially constructed, and the power that mentors have and exercise within mentoring relationships can be helpful or hurtful to protégés. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to explore mentoring literature and models from the fields of adult education, general education, and human resource development, examining issues of power in mentoring within this literature. Ways of planning for and promoting mentoring programs that account for power differentials and enhance adult learning and development within mentoring are discussed. Mentoring relationships have been long defined by myths . Perhaps the most acknowledged root of the ideas and definitions surrounding the concept of mentor is the wellknown story from Greek mythology: Odysseus, leaving for battle, asked his female friend, the goddess of wisdom Athena, to take on the male form of Mentor to watch and guide his son Telemachus while he was away. Thus, a name was given for beneficial people in our lives, and the themes encompassing mentors as helpful teachers were brought into consciousness. These conceptions of mentors have continued through the centuries and are reflected in the many definitions of mentors and in expectations of mentoring relationships . Early research (i.e., ) and models (i.e., Roche 1979) for mentoring were based largely on white males, or it was assumed that the gender, race, class, ethnicity, ability, age, or sexual orientation of either mentors or protégés were not significant and therefore did not affect the quality of the interaction between mentor and protégés. Other longstanding research (for example, suggests two major types of mentoring relationships: informal, where protégés and mentors form a relationship based on mutual interests, or formal mentoring programs, which are usually structured by organizations and involve a more controlled company sponsored mentor/protégé matching process. Because informal mentoring relationships may be unavailable to members of historically marginalized groups, formal mentoring programs created by organizations have become a panacea to provide opportunities for mentoring, to achieve racial balance among executives, and to foster workplace learning. In spite of organizational good intentions, however, many formal mentoring programs planned by organizations are unsuccessful and fail to remove barriers to advancement for marginalized groups . Consequently, formal mentoring programs may not address the individual needs of the protégés, but instead reflect the power and interests inherent within organizations, and the interests of the organization may be served at the cost of employee or human interests . Marginality and issues of power may affect how protégés and mentors interact and negotiate their relationships, both internally and externally, and ultimately affect the success of formal mentoring programs. Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2001, 2002) discuss mentoring as occurring on two dimensions: the internal dimension, which is the relationship between the mentor and protégé, and the external aspect that encompasses the mentoring pair and the sponsoring or host organization. Within both the internal and external dimensions, mentoring is a socially constructed power relationship, and the power that mentors have and exercise within mentoring relationships can be helpful or hurtful to protégés. The nature of mentoring relationships is that protégés have less power and may be vulnerable to the whims of their mentors and of the dominant culture within the sponsoring organization. For mentoring relationships to be successful and helpful to protégés, open discussions and negotiations of power and interests must take place among mentors, protégés, and the organizations in which mentoring relationships occur. However, as research has shown, this may not always be the case. Research shows that cross-race/cross-gender mentoring relationships can be problematic for protégés who are minorities. For example, African Americans may receive less psychosocial mentoring from cross-race mentors than they do from same-race mentors. People of color may perceive European American mentors as less helpful than a mentor of color (Harris 1999). Thomas (2001) found, some cross-race/cross-gender relationships can be positive relationships.