352 HIGHER EDUCATION LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
that someone may have had a frustrating experience. A policy of confidentiality governs the
coordinator’s private communications with these individuals, and frequent monitoring is
recommended for enabling early intervention (Mullen, et al., 2008).
Tip 9: Build Cultural Capacity
Institutional leaders (e.g., department chairs, senior faculty members) and junior faculty
members may find it beneficial to participate in dialogue grounded in cases and focused on
the possibilities and limitations of formal faculty mentoring for their particular context. The
program that would evolve should ideally be developed with all representative stakeholders’
input and ideas on the table. The inclusion of faculty experts with the requisite expertise can
help jump-start this process by providing both a framework and/or set of principles for
developing such a program and real-world examples that illustrate those principles in action.
Faculty-initiated mentoring programs that are supported by administrative partners propel
desired changes in academic culture. Relatively minor changes can dramatically affect how
individuals (e.g., faculty members, academic leaders) behave and see themselves (Gladwell,
2002). Formal mentoring programs that gather momentum and garner respect impact new
academics and even seasoned faculty. Where these programs generate not modest but wide-
sweeping changes—as evidenced in the greatly enhanced reputation of an institution, the
magnetic attraction of new faculty and other constituents, or the desire of outsiders to adopt
what is viewed as a best practice—they will have reached a “tipping point” (Gladwell, 2002).
Through synergy and reinforcement, faculty mentoring becomes contagious. Programs that
are currently modest can become “movements” once faculty–faculty mentoring “sticks”
within the organizational culture (Mullen, et al., 2008).
Tip 10: Recognize That One Size Does Not Fit All
Not all seasoned faculty value mentoring others, and not all neophyte faculty benefit from
mentoring and networking. However, no problems result if the latter are able to make the
expected progress as tenure-earning faculty through acceptances from publishers, good
teaching evaluations from students, and whatever else may be valued at a particular institution
Johnson, 2006). Informal mentoring supports can work well within faculty cultures that are
synergistic and collegial. Some new and senior faculty members prefer developing mentoring
relationships that are natural and spontaneous (Johnson & Ridley, 2004), so their wishes must
be respected. Nevertheless, due to potential inadequacies resulting in the lack of mentoring for
many new faculty members, particularly females and minorities (Hansman, 2003), formalized
mentoring arrangements often prove necessary; when successful, this process can actually
stimulate collegiality and collaboration among colleagues across rank, discipline, and place.
CONCLUDING WORDS
Given the overall positive appraisal herein of formal faculty mentoring for education
leadership units, I wish to point out a few misgivings. For one, while empirical studies of
formal mentoring programs and their growth and efficacy are gradually increasing, these
remain very modest in number (Ellinger, 2002). For another, mentoring programs can carry a
note of paternalism, implying that new faculty members can only succeed with a parental
structure in place and/or that they are not capable of seeking out senior faculty on their own
(Selby & Calhoun, 1998). It is crucial, then, that mentoring programs are set up in such a way