Evidence Summary
Formal Mentoring Programs Can Provide Organizational and Professional
Benefits, but are Few and Far Between in Canadian Academic Libraries
A Review of:
Harrington, M. R., & Marshall, E. (2014). Analyses of mentoring
expectations, activities, and support in Canadian academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 75(6),
763-790. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl.75.6.763
Reviewed by:
Lindsay Alcock
Head, Public Services
Health Sciences Library
Memorial University of Newfoundland
St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada
Email: lalcock@mun.ca
Received: 17 Feb. 2015 Accepted: 12 May
2015
2015 Alcock.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0 International
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective – To determine the extent to which formal and
informal mentoring is present in Canadian academic libraries and how such
activities meet expectations for new librarians, practising librarians, and
library administrators.
Design – Online surveys.
Setting – Canadian college and university libraries.
Subjects – Three groups were defined and surveyed: graduates
from one Canadian MLIS program; librarians practising in a Canadian academic
library, and library administrators directing a Canadian academic library.
Methods – Participants were selected using stratified,
purposeful sampling and were invited to participate in an online survey in
December 2010. Three surveys were distributed in total; one for each of the
three target groups defined. The surveys contained both closed- and open-ended
questions. Students from one specific MLIS program graduating in December 2010
and Spring 2011 were directly invited to participate. An incentive was offered
to the student group and the librarian group to encourage participation.
Main Results – Mentoring programs in Canadian colleges and
universities are present but are largely informal. Mentoring activities are
positively correlated with student population, how long a mentor has worked
professionally, and whether or not librarians had been mentored early in their
careers. 83% of new graduates expected to be mentored when hired by a Canadian
academic library while less than one quarter of librarians and no
administrators reported having similar expectations when starting their
professional academic careers. Over 50% of the students who responded to the
survey reported that they had experienced some form of mentoring while
completing their MLIS, though that may be related to the cooperative placement
component of their educational program. All respondents, with the exception of
university administers, indicated that library colleagues are appropriate
mentors, while academic librarians and administrators felt that the mentorship
relationship would not benefit were the mentor also the supervisor.
Respondents placed the greatest weight of importance
on mentoring activities related to academic expertise, career guidance,
psychosocial support and role models, while indicating that evaluation was not
considered to have a significant place in the mentor-mentee relationship.
Networking, cultural complexities, general encouragement, and career counseling
were seen as important mentorship aspects for both new graduates and practising
librarians. Administrators in both college and university libraries were less
likely to support mentoring particularly in the areas of assisting with grant
writing, evaluation, and career counseling. In general, administrators were
reluctant to develop or support formal mentor programming even though a
significant percentage agreed that it would benefit succession planning.
Conclusion – New graduates and practising librarians expect to
participate in some form of mentoring activities yet there are very few
Canadian academic libraries providing formal mentorship programming. The value
of the mentor-mentee relationship with respect to organizational planning,
recruitment and retention, as well as career planning, is perceived as high
amongst new graduates, practising librarians, and administrators.
Commentary
The authors provide a thorough literature review on
librarian mentoring activities in academic institutions, noting a gap in the
literature in terms of formal and informal mentoring programs in Canadian
academic libraries. This is especially relevant given the importance placed on
the 8Rs Study (2005) that highlights
recruitment, retention, and restructuring, which the authors view as directly
intertwined with mentoring. Using a critical appraisal checklist (Glynn, 2006),
the study is determined to be valid.
Three data collection instruments for three different
groups provided the authors with a large amount of data that was compared and
described clearly, thus providing a multi-faceted view of the varying
perceptions of expectations and the importance placed on mentoring. It is
unclear whether or not the surveys were validated or exactly how they were
distributed, however the surveys were included thus allowing further
transparency. The response rates for the administrators and practising
librarians was stated, however no information was provided as to the expected
response rate or the power of the study. One may surmise that the exact number
of practising librarians and directors was known to the authors in order to
calculate an exact response rate, though this information is not clear. Given
the low response rate and the use of purposeful stratified sampling (typically
used for small sample sizes), it may not be possible to generalize results to
the broader population.
The choice to survey recent graduates from one
specific program is both interesting and controversial. While the program was
not directly identified, it is easy to glean which one it is given the author’s
description of the program. Knowing both the institution as well as the
graduating class dates compromises the privacy of this particular study group.
In addition, it is possible that students attending a program with a strong
placement component may respond differently than students from other programs,
thus presenting a potential bias. The authors note this as a study limitation,
implying that external validity may have been affected.
The perceived value of mentoring is clear for the new
graduates and practising librarians in terms of academic expertise and career
guidance, yet the primary benefits for these two groups relate to psychosocial
support and role modeling. It is interesting that administrators did not
indicate strong support for formal or informal mentoring programs in spite of
the fact that librarians at universities reported more informal mentoring
activities. It may be that administrators are unaware of informal mentoring
activities amongst librarians. That said, administrators provided valid reasons
for not supporting formal programs including a lack of available time and
resources, confines related to Collective Agreements, difficulty matching
mentors with mentees, and the general absence of a structured program with
defined outcomes. Without formal mentoring programs in place, informal
mentoring practices depend on individual time, interest and commitment to
continue. The conundrum presented is that this and other research points to the
fact that mentoring has a positive effect on organizational restructuring and
succession planning, suggesting that it may be in a library’s best interest to
encourage and support such formal programming.
References
8Rs Research Team. (2005) The
future of human resources in Canadian libraries. Edmonton AB: University of
Alberta.
Glynn, L. (2006). A critical appraisal tool for library and information
research. Library Hi Tech, 24(3),
387-399. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692154