Another everyday miracle...............
I came across an article NUERO - AXIOLOGY by 6 Advisors.

The average person thinks about 12,000 thoughts per day. Deep thinkers have as many as 50,000 thoughts per day. If you subtract 8 hours for sleeping, that comes to nearly a thought per second! That's a lot of noise!

Value drives the process.
We all recognize that our values impact our lives, but it is often difficult to clarify exactly how our values and our ability to make value choices (resolve conflicting values) shape our verythoughts, decisions, and actions - even automatic, subconsciously-driven reactions.People will often say things like,

“There’s nothing more important than my family”, and yet wesee them so wrapped up in their work that they seldom have time for home. Or “CustomerService is our business” and yet, upon examination, a business finds that their policies andpractices don’t really focus on their customers' needs.Why? Very simply, a person with normal brain function will always choose, consciously or subconsciously(through habit), what he/she perceives will produce the greatest net value in thatmoment. You have never made a single conscious choice that was not an attempt to maximizevalue. Even a person contemplating suicide is making a value choice - "will I be better off deador alive?" A father berating his son for not doing a “good job,” believes, in that moment, that heis doing the “right thing” for his son. An employee who steals from the company steals becausehe thinks it will deliver the greatest net value – in his mind the reward outweighs the risk.The problem is that our perception of what will add value may be, and often is, inaccurate. Why?Because our momentary perception is based upon a plethora of other thoughts, experiences,habits, values, assumptions, agendas, desires, fears, facts, priorities and sensory inputs.You plan your day based mostly on your priorities. Priorities are value judgments. Whensomething unexpected comes up, you are faced with making a choice as to whether or notdealing with the unexpected event is of higher value than your original plan. What you decide todo will be determined by the value you place on the two options. Note: all of this can occurbelow the level of consciousness when you are “running on automatic pilot.”Our subconscious, automatic habits of mind were developed from conscious thoughts, decisions,and reactions to sensory stimulation including what other people have told us. "I'm not goodenough," or "winning is everything" were learned somewhere along the way and repeated oftenenough to become a highly energy-efficient mental habit based upon the perception that it willsupport our success. They have become hardwired in our neuropathology, subconsciouslyimpacting our perceptions, choices, actions, and reactions.How does "I'm not good enough" support our success? It may protect us from the emotional painof failure by keeping us from trying new things. It might also galvanize us to take action in aneffort to compensate for the limiting belief or to prove that we are “good enough.”
Regardless of the justification, theunderlying drive to add value is ever-present.The key to success is being consistentlyaccurate in what actually adds the greatestnet value. By “net” value, we mean with allthings considered. An action may add valueto one part of life (work), but take awayvalue form another (family). The choice toquit smoking may add value to one’s health,but also be perceived as taking away thevalue of the “good” feeling that nicotinegives. Until the value of being a non-smoker,outweighs the value of the nicotine, theperson is not going to quit.From a practical leadership perspective, ifyou have employees whose behavior orperformance you want to improve, you mustwork to organically change their value thinking to support the desired performance.

How do you discover your real purpose in life? I’m not talking about your job, your daily responsibilities, or even your long-term goals. I mean the real reason why you’re here at all — the very reason you exist.

Perhaps you’re a rather nihilistic person who doesn’t believe you have a purpose and that life has no meaning. Doesn’t matter. Not believing that you have a purpose won’t prevent you from discovering it, just as a lack of belief in gravity won’t prevent you from tripping. All that a lack of belief will do is make it take longer, so if you’re one of those people, just change the number 20 in the title of this blog entry to 40 (or 60 if you’re really stubborn). Most likely though if you don’t believe you have a purpose, then you probably won’t believe what I’m saying anyway, but even so, what’s the risk of investing an hour just in case?

Here’s a story about Bruce Lee which sets the stage for this little exercise. A master martial artist asked Bruce to teach him everything Bruce knew about martial arts. Bruce held up two cups, both filled with liquid. “The first cup,” said Bruce, “represents all of your knowledge about martial arts. The second cup represents all of my knowledge about martial arts. If you want to fill your cup with my knowledge, you must first empty your cup of your knowledge.”

If you want to discover your true purpose in life, you must first empty your mind of all the false purposes you’ve been taught (including the idea that you may have no purpose at all).

So how to discover your purpose in life? While there are many ways to do this, some of them fairly involved, here is one of the simplest that anyone can do. The more open you are to this process, and the more you expect it to work, the faster it will work for you. But not being open to it or having doubts about it or thinking it’s an entirely idiotic and meaningless waste of time won’t prevent it from working as long as you stick with it — again, it will just take longer to converge.

Here’s what to do:

1. Take out a blank sheet of paper or open up a word processor where you can type (I prefer the latter because it’s faster).
2. Write at the top, “What is my true purpose in life?”
3. Write an answer (any answer) that pops into your head. It doesn’t have to be a complete sentence. A short phrase is fine.
4. Repeat step 3 until you write the answer that makes you cry. This is your purpose.

That’s it. It doesn’t matter if you’re a counselor or an engineer or a bodybuilder. To some people this exercise will make perfect sense. To others it will seem utterly stupid. Usually it takes 15-20 minutes to clear your head of all the clutter and the social conditioning about what you think your purpose in life is. The false answers will come from your mind and your memories. But when the true answer finally arrives, it will feel like it’s coming to you from a different source entirely.

For those who are very entrenched in low-awareness living, it will take a lot longer to get all the false answers out, possibly more than an hour. But if you persist, after 100 or 200 or maybe even 500 answers, you’ll be struck by the answer that causes you to surge with emotion, the answer that breaks you. If you’ve never done this, it may very well sound silly to you. So let it seem silly, and do it anyway.

As you go through this process, some of your answers will be very similar. You may even re-list previous answers. Then you might head off on a new tangent and generate 10-20 more answers along some other theme. And that’s fine. You can list whatever answer pops into your head as long as you just keep writing.

At some point during the process (typically after about 50-100 answers), you may want to quit and just can’t see it converging. You may feel the urge to get up and make an excuse to do something else. That’s normal. Push past this resistance, and just keep writing. The feeling of resistance will eventually pass.

You may also discover a few answers that seem to give you a mini-surge of emotion, but they don’t quite make you cry — they’re just a bit off. Highlight those answers as you go along, so you can come back to them to generate new permutations. Each reflects a piece of your purpose, but individually they aren’t complete. When you start getting these kinds of answers, it just means you’re getting warm. Keep going.

It’s important to do this alone and with no interruptions. If you’re a nihilist, then feel free to start with the answer, “I don’t have a purpose,” or “Life is meaningless,” and take it from there. If you keep at it, you’ll still eventually converge.

When you find your own unique answer to the question of why you’re here, you will feel it resonate with you deeply. The words will seem to have a special energy to you, and you will feel that energy whenever you read them.
Discovering your purpose is the easy part. The hard part is keeping it with you on a daily basis and working on yourself to the point where you become that purpose.
If you’re inclined to ask why this little process works, just put that question aside until after you’ve successfully completed it. Once you’ve done that, you’ll probably have your own answer to why it works. Most likely if you ask 10 different people why this works (people who’ve successfully completed it), you’ll get 10 different answers, all filtered through their individual belief systems, and each will contain its own reflection of truth.
Obviously, this process won’t work if you quit before convergence. I’d guesstimate that 80-90% of people should achieve convergence in less than an hour. If you’re really entrenched in your beliefs and resistant to the process, maybe it will take you 5 sessions and 3 hours, but I suspect that such people will simply quit early (like within the first 15 minutes) or won’t even attempt it at all.
Give it a shot! At the very least, you’ll learn one of two things: your true purpose in life -or- that you should not interact with people of my kind.
Steve Pavlina 

Turnaround Management involves the formulation and implementation of a strategic plan and a set of actions for corporate renewal and restructuring, typically during times of severe corporate financial distress. Often with the help of outside turnaround consultants or strategy consultants, a Root Cause Analysis is made and a turnaround plan is devised and executed, assuming that the firm still offers the potential to return to financial solvency, profitability and strategic viability. ROOT CAUSES OF STRATEGIC DISTRESS There are just a limited number of root causes for corporate strategic distress: "Acts of God" - Certain risks may occur and cause irreparable damage (despite proper anticipation and thorough preparation). Poor Vision / Understanding of the Market Poor Strategy Poor Business Model / Execution MORE IMMEDIATE CAUSES OF STRATEGIC DISTRESS Typically, when these root causes are not dealt with properly, they will cause a range of problems, which can then trigger a corporate crisis: Lack of expertise, experience or education, weak management Market circumstances, weak economy Business economical reasons, earnings crisis Bankruptcy of holding company Board level arguments Fraud, insufficient financial controls Overly optimistic sales projections Financing problems, liquidity crisis, excessive debt burden, undercapitalization Operating cost levels too high Very strong, successful competitor Overinvestment Insufficient resources, underinvestment Often these triggers are interrelated, and several causes are involved. Slywotzky and Drzik have categorized these triggers in 7 Classes of Strategic Risk. STEPS IN A TURNAROUND PROCESS The first step in a turnaround process is often to change the top management or leadership of the business and to appoint an experienced  turnaround manager. Often strong, Commanding Leadership or even Charismatic Leadership is exerted. The turnaround process typically consists out of the following key steps (in approximate chronological order): Assess the situation and future business viability Implement emergency steps ("stop the bleeding") Develop strategic survival plan Implement the plan, restructuring the business. Survive the crisis Return to normal operations, profitability and growth Prepare for departure of turnaround management

The Whole Brain Model from Ned Herrmann is a technique that can be used for analyzing personal and organizational thinking preferences.

People have markedly different ways that they perceive and assimilate information, make decisions, and solve problems. Once an individual understands his or her thinking style preferences, the door is open to improved communication, leadership, management, problem solving, decision making and other aspects of personal and interpersonal development.

The Whole Brain Model is a mental model that describes thinking preferences. These are the ways of thinking that satisfy us the most and seem natural for us at this point in our lives. These ways of thinking can change, often as a result of significant emotional experiences, life transitions and other important insights. Thinking preferences describe the patterns of what we prefer to pay attention to and what we don't prefer to pay attention to.

Thinking preferences can be different than our skills or the content of our work or our behavior, depending upon the situation. When we think or function differently than our preferences, even if we have excellent skills, it's more likely that we'll find it somewhat uncomfortable and consuming more of our energy.

The four thinking styles in the Whole Brain Model are:

1. Logician. Analytical, mathematical, technical and problem solving.
2. Organizer. Controlled, conservative, planned, organized and administrative in nature.
3. Communicator. Interpersonal, emotional, musical, spiritual and the "talker" modes.
4. Visionary. Imaginative, synthesizing, artistic, holistic and conceptual modes.

At the core of the most recent book of Ned Herrmann, lies his belief that the functioning of the human brain is driven by a four-quadrant interconnected set of mental processing modes. These four thinking styles, says Herrmann, originate in the brain's left and right cerebral hemispheres, and in the left and right half limbic systems, each resulting in significantly different and distinct behavioral characteristics in human beings. How this complex brain interaction determines thinking mode dominance and thinking style preferences, and how individuals and organizations can benefit from such understanding, are the main themes of Herrmann's book (see below).

Herrmann's work is widely used by training and development specialists. The Whole Brain Model supersedes "left brain/right brain" thinking in earlier  models. Also it has advanced new concepts of thinking research and their applications in business settings. Dominant thinking in one of the four thinking styles, causes the development of thinking preferences. Then these thinking preferences establish our interests, foster the development of competencies, and influence our career choices and ultimately our work. Argues Herrmann.
 

ORIGIN OF THE WHOLE BRAIN MODEL. HISTORY

In 1976, Ned Herrmann researched the brain as the source of creativity. At that time, he learned of the pioneering brain research of Roger Sperry, Paul MacLean, Joseph Bogen and Michael Gazzanaga. From their work it is clear that the brain has four distinct and specialized structures. Inspired by this research, Herrmann worked with EEG scans and, later, paper-and-pencil questionnaires to identify four distinct types of thinking, each roughly corresponding to one of the brain structures. The result of this research is the Herrmann Whole Brain Model. In August, 1979, after many tests, in-depth research, and mountains of data, Herrmann had developed a valid self-assessment that enables individuals to understand their own thinking style preferences - the HBDI (Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument.)

Team Management Profile (Margerison, McCann)

While the traditional unit of appraisal in an organization is the individual, increasingly the focus is on the team to get things done. The Team Management Profile, -Wheel and -Index (™) from Dr Charles J. Margerison and Dr Dick J. McCann constitute a method particularly useful for assessing work preferences in team context, and can also be used for assessing individual and organizational preferences.

The Team Management Profile Questionnaire is "a 64 item normative, forced-choice instrument which measures work preferences along the four key factors of relationships, information, decisions and organization. The scores on these constructs are then mapped on to the Team Management Wheel resulting in a major role preference and two related roles".

According to Margerison and McCann Types of Work Model, in general 9 essential team activities can be distinguished:

1. Advising. Gathering and reporting information.
2. Innovating. Creating and experimenting with ideas.
3. Promoting. Exploring and presenting opportunities.
4. Developing. Assessing and testing the applicability of new approaches.
5. Organizing. Establishing and implementing ways of "making things work".
6. Producing. Concluding and delivering outputs.
7. Inspecting. Controlling and auditing the working of systems.
8. Maintaining. Upholding and safeguarding standards and processes.
9. Linking. Coordinating and integrating the work of others.

Environments where diverse thinking is encouraged are believed to be conducive to innovation and finding better solutions.

Work preferences are measured in four main ways. First, preferences for extroverted and introverted work. Second, the balance between practical and creative work. Next, the influence of analysis and beliefs in decisions. Fourth, the extent to which you want to work in a structured or flexible way. These factors combined have a powerful influence on job choice, job satisfaction, motivation, teamwork, learning and development, and career moves.

This provides 8 team role preferences that people can perform in the Team Management Wheel (fig):

1. Reporter / Adviser. Supporter, helper, tolerant; a collector of information; he dislikes being rushed; knowledgeable; flexible.
2. Creator / Innovator. Imaginative; future-oriented; enjoys complexity; creative; likes research work.
3. Explorer / Promoter. Persuades, "seller"; likes varied, exciting, stimulating work; easily bored; influential and outgoing.
4. Assessor / Developer. Analytical and objective; developer of ideas; enjoys prototype or project work; experimenter.
5. Thruster / Organizer. Organizes and implements; quick to decide; results-oriented; sets up systems; analytical.
6. Concluder / Producer. Practical; production-oriented; likes schedules and plans; pride in reproducing goods and services; values effectiveness and efficiency.
7. Controller / Inspector. Strong on control; detail-oriented; low need for people contact; an inspector of standards and procedures.
8. Upholder / Maintainer. Conservative, loyal, supportive; personal values important; strong sense of right and wrong; work motivation based on purpose.

The Linking Role is shared by all team members. Work preferences reflect the psychology of the emotions and desires that you and others bring to the job. Where there exists a low alignment, or mismatch, then people tend to either adapt the job to their preference, or move to another job.

ORIGIN OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. HISTORY

The study of group dynamics began after the end of the Second World War. The terms teams and teamwork, although common in sport, did not become commonly used within organizations until the 1970s. Work Preferences has links to the theory of Carl Jung on Individuation and Peter Drucker on developing personal strengths in the work context. It is the alternate to Type Theory, where assessments tend to stereotype people. Work preferences reflect choices that people make, rather than being stereotyped.

CALCULATION OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. FORMULA

Measured by the Team Management Questionnaire, a 64 item set of questions to provide a 5000 word personal profile.

USAGE OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. APPLICATIONS

Has been used by over 1000 organizations in more than 100 countries for:

• Teamwork improvement.
• Project staffing and management. Work allocation.
• Basis for continuing professional / individual development.
• Basis for leadership and talent management. Counseling.
• Cross functional teamwork communication.
• Recruitment and selection, career development and promotion.

STEPS IN ASSESSING YOUR INDIVIDUAL PROFILE. PROCESS

1. Self assessment via completion of the Team Management Questionnaire.
2. Receipt of personal Work Preferences Feedback Profile.
3. Reading and discussion on applications to work.
4. Action on the issues agreed.
5. Review of the results and the learning en route.
6. Sharing the above with colleagues and clients to improve performance.

STRENGTHS OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. BENEFITS

• Particularly useful for putting together and managing project teams.
• Strengths of people are leveraged in teams.
• While individuals should be encouraged to work in areas that match their preference, it is the responsibility of the team as a whole to make sure all types of work are covered.
• Understanding work preferences, both your own and other people's, are vital to successfully managing colleague and client relationship, and improving personal performance.
• What we prefer we tend to practice, and what we practice is where we tend to perform well.
• Focus is on personality in work, less on personality / life in general.

LIMITATIONS OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. DISADVANTAGES

• Focus is on personality in work, less on personality / life in general.
• Focus is on working in teams, less on individual scores or organizational scores.
• The dynamics of a group are the constantly changing relationships and influences that occur between the people within that group. Because of changing
  team composition and changing objectives, the dynamics of a team are rarely stable for very long.
• Conflict can be the result of having diverse personalities in a group, but a team that is committed to diversity will use conflict and disagreement to their advantage.
• Method is based on self-assessment. Not everybody is capable of making the right judgments and willing to be honest.

ASSUMPTIONS OF THE TEAM MANAGEMENT PROFILE. CONDITIONS

• Work preferences are important to people.
• People tend to practice what they prefer.
• People perform better in those areas that match their work preference.
• People do their best to ensure that these are satisfied in their jobs (or they will move on elsewhere).

Identifying factors that are critical for building and developing teams. Explanation of the Stages of Team Development of Bruce Tuckman. ('65)

WHAT ARE THE STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT? DESCRIPTION The Tuckman Stages of Team Development can be used for identifying factors that are critical for building and developing small groups. Tuckman's Stages of Team Development model seeks to explain how a team develops over time. The five stages of development are: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning. The Adjourning stage was added later in 1977. According to Tuckman, all of the phases are necessary and inevitable - in order for the team to grow, to face up to challenges, to tackle problems, to find solutions, to plan work, and to deliver results.   ORIGIN OF THE STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT. HISTORY Bruce Wayne Tuckman (1938- ) published in 1965 a short article "Developmental Sequence in Small Groups". In 1977, he added the fifth stage: Adjourning (Stages of Small Group Development Revisited). The model of group became influential in group development theory, partly thanks to its rhyme. USAGE OF TUCKMAN'S STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT. APPLICATIONS Build and develop teams. Analyze the behavior of teams. THE STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT. PROCESS Forming. Project team initiation phase. Project Team is initially concerned with orientation, accomplished primarily through testing. Such testing serves to identify the boundaries of both interpersonal and task behaviors. Coincident with testing in the interpersonal realm is the establishment of dependency relationships with leaders, other group members, or pre‑existing standards. Team Members behave quite independently. They may be motivated but are usually relatively uninformed of the issues and objectives of the team. Some team members may display traits of uncertainty and anxiety. Project Manager must bring the team together, ensuring that they trust each other and have the ability to develop a working relationship. Directing or "telling" style. Sharing the concept of "Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing" with the team can be helpful. Storming. Various ideas compete, often fiercely, for consideration. Project Team gains confidence, but there is conflict and polarization around interpersonal issues Team Members are showing their own personalities as they confront each other's ideas and perspectives. Frustration or disagreements about goals, expectations, roles and responsibilities is being expressed openly. Project Manager guides the project team through this turbulent transition phase. Coaching style. Tolerance of each team member and their differences needs to be emphasized. Norming. Rules, values, behavior, methods, tools are being established. Project Team effectiveness increases and the team starts to develop an identity. Team Members adjust their behavior to each other as they develop agreements to make the teamwork more natural and fluid. Conscious effort to resolve problems and to achieve group harmony. Motivation levels are increasing. Project Manager allows the team to become much more autonomous. Participative style. Performing. The interpersonal structure becomes the tool of task activities. Roles become flexible and functional, and group energy is channeled into the task. Project Team is now able to function as a unit. It gets the job done smoothly and effectively without inappropriate conflict or the need for external supervision. Team Members have a clear understanding of what is required of them at a task level. They are now competent, autonomous and able to handle the decision-making process without supervision. A "can do" attitude is visible. Offers to assist one another are made. Project Manager lets the team make most of the necessary decisions. Delegating style. Adjourning. The tasks are being completed and the team is disassembled. Project Team. Some authors describe stage 5 as "Deforming and Mourning", recognizing the sense of loss felt by group members. Team Members' motivation levels can decline as uncertainty about the future begins to set in. Project Manager: Good point to introduce new projects in order to recommence the forming stage of team development. Detaching style. STRENGTHS OF THE STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT MODEL. BENEFITS Provides a level of guidance for team development. LIMITATIONS OF THE STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK. DISADVANTAGES Note that the model was designed to describe stages in small groups. In reality, group processes may not be as linear as Tuckman describes them, but rather cyclical. Characteristics for each stage are not set in stone, and as the model deals with human behavior, it is sometimes unclear when a team has moved from one stage to another. There may be overlap between the stages. The model does not take account of the individual roles that team members will have to undertake. Compare: Belbin Team Roles There is no guidance on the timeframe for moving from one stage to another. This is a subjective as opposed to an objective model.

WHAT IS MENTORING? DESCRIPTION

Mentoring could be described as the facilitation of learning towards long term goals. Dr Beverly Kaye (2003) pronounced that ‘behind every successful person, there is one elementary truth: somewhere, somehow, someone cared about their growth and development, this person was a mentor’. In researching mentors one finds that the name of a mentor appears in the history of many successful people with an almost expectant frequency:

• Freddie Laker mentored Richard Branson (Business).
• Aristotle mentored Alexander the Great (Historic Politics).
• Mel Gibson mentored Heath Ledger (Acting).
• Eddy Merckx mentored Lance Armstrong (Cycle Racing).
• Haydn mentored Beethoven and Mozart (Music).
• Merlin was the mentor of Arthur (Legend).

To many people ‘informal mentoring is part of everyday life through friends, relatives, acquaintances and strangers, as helping is a common human experience’ (Pegg, 1999).

CULTURAL ASPECTS OF MENTORING

Cultural aspects are highly relevant in the definition of mentoring, the traditional American 'career orientated' mentoring, termed 'sponsorship' has been unpalatable to the European market, the concept of a ‘father figure’ doesn’t sit well with the greater need for self-direction. The European 'developmental mentoring', with the focus on 'personal growth and learning' (Clutterbuck, 1998) has centered on ‘mutual support’, to European sensibilities this ‘feels’ a healthier option. Though whatever the point of reference one approaches defining the term, at its core mentoring encompasses a ‘strong learning theme’ (Egan, 2002) and acts as a ‘change catalyst’ (Johnson et al, 1999).

PROFESSIONAL MENTORING

The professional coach can have specific views that ‘mentoring invents a future based on the expertise and wisdom of another…mentors freely give advice and opinions regarding strategies and policies’ (Zeus and Skiffington, 2005). The primary differential for Mentoring is that it has ‘overtones of implying that the older and wiser mentors will be passing on their advice and also that they may be able to act as a patron to the mentee’ (Rogers, 2004), which can be directly linked to the etymology of the word itself, to the practitioner/academic mentoring is positioned much more around the ‘whole person and the big picture’ (Cranwell-Ward et al, 2004). Mentoring is the more strategic, organic and holistic process. ‘Mentors talk about their own personal experience. With experience, any leader can act as a mentor and offer advice and a hand up’ (Rosinski, 2003). Though as recently as the 1990’s leading writers in the field were stating that ‘it is necessary to dazzle the protégé with knowledge and experience’ (Clutterbuck, 1991). And that a mentor is a ‘professional person who is a wise’ (Caruso, 1992). A ‘career friend’ (Rolfe-Flett, 1996).

RECENT VIEW TOWARDS MENTORING

The approach of a new millennium engendered a more commercial viewpoint around the validity of mentoring and coaching. We see a shift to a focus on the mentor being ‘an experienced, objective sounding-board with the power to influence events’ (Conway, 1995) and the application of a learning organization alignment. ‘To help and support people to manage their own learning in order to maximize their potential, develop their skills, improve their performance and become the person they want to be’ (Parsloe, 1999). The move to 2000 identifies a shift to a more rounded and inclusive approach, with the mentor as a person who, ‘embodies a whole spectrum of roles’ (Connor et al, 2000). A person who ‘provides guidance and support, facilitates, enables’ (Henley Management College, 2000). Most recently this has been extended to the mentors role being ‘holistic’, based on ‘reflective learning’, being ‘akin to pastoral care’ (Clutterbuck, 2004) and being ‘big picture’ (Cranwell et al, 2004).

COMPANY DEFINITIONS OF MENTORING

Interestingly within each business that identifies itself as operating a mentor program, there appears the need to define for a niche internal audience. So different companies have subtlety different descriptions of mentoring.

• For Avaya, 'Mentoring is a term used to help, advise and guide employees through the complexities of business'.
• At EDS, 'Mentoring is a mutual learning partnership in which individuals assist each other with personal and career development through coaching, role modeling, counseling, sharing knowledge and providing emotional support'.
• Within Abbey, 'Mentoring is a relationship, not just a procedure or activity, where one person professionally assists the development of another outside of the normal manager/subordinate relationship'.
• For Bennetts, 'A mentor is a person who achieves a one-to-one developmental relationship with a learner and one whom the learner identifies as having enabled personal growth to take place'. (Cranwell-ward et al, 2004).

The question whether Coaching is a subset of mentoring indicates that appropriate roles may change as the mentoring relationship develops…. coach, facilitator, sounding board, critical friend, networker, role model. (Connor et al, 2000), giving the impression that mentoring sits in the lead position with a subset of aligned roles; with non academic writers also suggesting that mentoring is the model for coaching and that mentoring as a working title is too formal, thus they utilize the word coach as it is a more readily palatable (Hudson, 1999).
 

ORIGIN OF MENTORING. HISTORY

The concept of a mentor stretches back through recorded time, the term Mentor first appears in Homer’s Odyssey (875BC:Conjecture) where Mentor is charged by King Odysseus to watch over his son Telemachus and his palace while he was fighting in the Trojan War. Telemachus was Athena's favorite (Rieu, 1946) stating that she would 'always stand by Telemachus's side and guard him throughout all his adventures'. Athena, the goddess of 'War & Wisdom', took Mentor's form so as to guide counsel and empower both Odysseus and his son at various points in the Odyssey.

On studying the etymology of the word ‘mentor’ we find it originates from the Greek: Men-'one who thinks', 'tor' masculine suffix (Klein, 1967). Linking this to the actual guidance coming from a woman, we can deduce that the creation of the word relates directly to the time in history when men were a dominant power, by hierarchical rather than intellectual capacity. This use of the word mentor as a ‘trusted guide’ has proliferated to this day.

The first recorded modern usage of the term can be traced to a 1699 book entitled Les Adventures de Telemaque, by the French writer Francois Fenelon (Roberts, 1999). In this book the lead character is that of Mentor, ‘Telemaque’ itself was an imitation of Homer’s classic The Odyssey. The word mentor did not seem to appear in the English language before 1750 (Anderson and Shannon, 1995), the Oxford English Dictionary stating that the word was first used in 1750 by Chestere in ‘Letters to Son, 8th March’. It is this timeline that would lead some to believe that mentoring disappeared and re-emerged, when in actuality, regardless of its title, the process has been consistent throughout European history. Starting with the ongoing monastic mentoring as written about by Saint Bede, editor of the critical edition of De Corpore. The monastic mentor continues throughout history to this day. It is recorded in 1511 that Luther and his monastic mentor, Johann von Staupitz sat and discussed multiple themes (Christianity today, 2006). The ‘apprentice to the craftsman’ was also a prevalent phenomenon throughout the industrial age. In 1640 apprenticeship actually meant to be ‘indentured’, which was akin to ownership. An apprentice served up to 12 years or until the age of 21.

Today in comparison the focus is on competence as opposed to time served. Generally ‘little consideration is given to the British apprentice system doubtless owing to the lack of evidence’ (Thomas, 1929). Though instruction of sons by fathers is admittedly ancient, there was also a formal method by which a young person would be taught by the master craftsman, though interestingly the young apprentice was considered a chattel; which would indicate a less than equal relationship, which years later is demonstrated in the ‘developmental vs. sponsored’ forms of mentoring. Mentoring made its preview via Levinson’s (1978) work ‘The Season's of a man’s life’, with its reference to a 'life cycle', it acted as a catalyst for the 1990’s in mentoring on a wider forum. This work argued ‘the need for mentors to improve the transition from 'young adulthood' to 'authoritive maturity'. Levinson’s developmental theory consists of universal stages or phases that extends from the infancy state to the elderly state. During the last decade there has been a distinct parallel between the perceived validity of mentoring and coaching, with writers reporting a 'paucity' of information on the theory of the mentoring role (Wynch, 1986) and cautioning against the abundant 'pragmatic' activity around mentoring is at odds to the scarcity of 'empirical' activity (Little, 1990). The defining of Mentoring as a term does little to increase the confidence of the potential client in this regard.
 

USAGE OF MENTORING. APPLICATIONS

• Developmental mentoring.
• Sponsored mentoring.
• Workplace mentoring.
• Life mentoring.
• Peer mentoring.

STEPS IN THE MENTORING. PROCESS

A Mentoring process could have the following typical steps (phases):

1. Confirm developmental need Stage.
2. Facilitate self-management of learning Stage.
3. Support learning Stage.
4. Assist in evaluation.

STRENGTHS OF MENTORING. BENEFITS

• Enables the long term patronage/development of an individual.
• Demonstrates personal/corporate commitment.
• High ROI (Return On Investment) in relation to attracting and maintaining talent.

LIMITATIONS OF MENTORING. DISADVANTAGES

• When perceived as being controlled by the a Head Office function or highly monitored, the process can become highly mechanical and false, thus loosing its inherent value.
• Can allow the reinforcement of 'face fitting', if mentors are able to cherry pick who they mentor.
• Try telling your boss she is a lousy mentor!

ASSUMPTIONS OF MENTORING. CONDITIONS

• Mentoring is a hugely complex arena, of which this information scratches the surface.
• By its own definition mentoring is a process rather then a model. As such models enable mentoring activity.
• Mentoring is a complex activity, with the potential for great reward or devastation to a business and or individual. If this is being considered within a business context, utilize the help of professionals.