Mentoring Case
JavonMotley
DistinguishingMentoringCoachingandAdvisingforLeadershipDevelopment.pdf
1 Mentoring, coaching, and advising are often confused as similar interactions with developmental intent, yet their scope, purpose, and utility in leadership development are distinct. The purpose of this chapter is to provide clarity as to what constitutes mentoring, coaching, and advising for leadership development and to compare and contrast each relationship type.
Distinguishing Mentoring, Coaching, and Advising for Leadership Development
Lindsay J. Hastings, Cindy Kane
Developing the “whole” student often requires identifying unique needs and helping students recognize when they need mentoring, coaching, and/or advising. While mentoring, coaching, and advising are all developmental interactions, their scope, purpose, and utility in leadership development are distinct. The purpose of this chapter is to clarify the distinctions between mentoring, coaching, and advising and synthesize their utility in leadership development. In doing so, we will be better prepared to recognize when mentoring, coaching, and/or advising will be the most powerful tool for student leadership development.
Mentoring
The concept of mentoring originated in Homer’s Odyssey when Odysseus beseeched his wise and loyal friend, Mentor, to bring Telemachus (Odysseus’s son) under his care and tutelage during Odysseus’s voyage. While mentoring research took several years to catch up to the eighth cen- tury BCE epic Greek poem, seminal authors in the 1970s and 1980s ranging from Chickering (1969) to Vaillant (1977) to Levinson, Darrow, Levinson, Klein, and McKee (1978), to Kram (1985) documented and suggested a positive relationship between mentorship and success.
Purpose and Hallmarks of Mentoring Practice. The purpose of men- toring is to develop the mentee’s ability to acquire knowledge, skills, and self-confidence to become a better student, employee, or organizational leader (Burke, 1984; Fagan & Walter, 1982). Hallmarks of mentoring
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP, no. 158, Summer 2018 © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/yd.20284 9
10 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
practice include a dyadic environment, long-term dedication by mentor and mentee, regular interactions, and both formal and informal investments in personal growth, career development, psychosocial development as well as leadership empowerment (Campbell, Smith, Dugan, & Komives, 2012; Castro, Terri, & Williams, 2004; Crisp & Cruz, 2009; Eby, Rhodes, & Allen, 2010; Nora & Crisp, 2007). While mentoring is designed to develop the mentee, the influence in a mentoring relationship is more reciprocal than unidirectional (Crisp & Cruz, 2009; Eby et al., 2010).
Mentoring is a process, not an event; thus, mentoring is not designed for short-term skill development. However, mentoring relationships could evolve from short-term leadership skill programs or organizational expe- riences. Because mentoring involves investment in personal development, mentoring relationships require willingness by mentor and mentee to en- gage in a close relationship. Additionally, mentoring cannot always be con- fined to scheduled meetings, but requires a willingness to help a mentee reflect and integrate their life experiences in the moment. Students have the unique life stage opportunity to experience mentoring both from the perspective of the mentee as well as the mentor through faculty mentor- ing (academic affairs or student affairs educators), peer mentoring (being mentored by peers and mentoring peers), and mentoring younger students.
Although mentoring research has not identified a single list of charac- teristics common among successful mentors, Bearman, Blake-Beard, Hunt, and Crosby (2010) argue the context of the relationship determines de- sired mentor characteristics. More globally, relationship-building qualities such as empathy have been identified in myriad studies as important men- tor characteristics (Allen & Eby, 2010). Keller (2010) noted mentor con- sistency and follow-through as essential, especially in youth mentoring. Additionally, Fries-Britt and Snider (2015) highlight the importance of au- thenticity, transparency, and vulnerability in mentoring women and under- represented minorities.
Expected Outcomes from Mentoring. For the mentee, outcomes across multiple contexts (youth, student-faculty, workplace) tend to en- hance psychological health, greater positive attitudes, and achievement (Lockwood, Carr Evans, & Eby, 2010). Specific to college students, pos- itive outcomes associated with mentoring include persistence, social and academic integration, and academic success (Crisp, 2010; Crisp & Cruz, 2009). Gallup-Purdue Index Report (2014) findings indicate that if college graduates had a professor who cared about them, engaged their excitement around learning, and encouraged them to pursue their dreams, their odds of workplace engagement and well-being more than doubled. Specific to youth, Blinn-Pike’s (2010) and DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, and Valentine’s (2011) meta-analytic reviews identified positive mentee out- comes across social, emotional, behavioral, and academic domains, such as attitude toward school and violence, academic performance, and improved parental relationships. Additionally, Peterson and Stewart (1996) reported
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 11
higher generativity (care for establishing and guiding the next generation; Erikson, 1950, 1963) among mentored youth.
For the mentor, positive outcomes include increased pride and satis- faction, sharpened leadership competencies, greater confidence, improved job performance, and higher generativity (Bass, 1990; Hastings, Griesen, Hoover, Creswell, & Dlugosh, 2015; Lockwood et al., 2010; Newby & Cor- ner, 1997). Allen and Eby (2010) argue an effective mentoring relationship fulfills the need to form and sustain positive relationships, which connects mentoring to positive affective, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes.
What is Mentoring’s Utility in Leadership Development?. Strains of research in K-12 and higher education have identified mentoring as an important tool in developing leadership, in particular socially respon- sible leadership (Campbell et al., 2012; Collins-Shapiro, 2006; Dugan & Komives, 2007; Dugan & Komives, 2010; Hastings et al., 2015; Komives & Collins-Shapiro, 2006; Komives, Longerbeam, Mainella, Osteen, & Owen, 2009). Mentoring for leadership development involves long-term invest- ment in both personal development and leadership empowerment (Camp- bell et al., 2012). Each type of mentoring will generate unique leadership de- velopment experiences and outcomes. For example, consider applications of the social change model—a model of leadership development designed to enhance student self-knowledge and leadership competence and to fa- cilitate positive social change (SCM; Higher Education Research Institute, 1996). While faculty mentoring is expected to impact the majority of lead- ership values associated with the social change model ranging from con- sciousness of self to handling controversy with civility, peer mentoring can fill in the gaps by impacting leadership values such as commitment and col- laboration (Dugan & Komives, 2007; Dugan & Komives, 2010). Addition- ally, peer mentoring increases in significance as students progress in their leadership identities (Komives et al., 2009). Peer mentors are more likely to understand ambiguity in complex situations and can cocreate shared learn- ing to build a community of practice (Parker, Hall, & Kram, 2008). Peer mentoring also further develops the leadership identity of the peer mentor focusing on generativity as documented in the leadership identity develop- ment grounded theory (Komives et al., 2005).
Coaching
Historically, coaching was reserved as a remediation strategy for under- performing managers and executives. Over time, use of coaching trended away from performance issues and moved toward developing high-potential employees for advancement (Bono, Purvanova, Towler, & Peterson, 2009; Feldman & Lankau, 2005). Now, the practice of coaching extends beyond business to include varying industries, including education, and is used as a behavioral development tool for a variety of leadership development
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
12 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
needs, ranging from problem-solving skill development to making mean- ing of leadership learning.
Purpose and Hallmarks of Coaching Practice. Coaching is branded as a custom-tailored developmental process in a one-on-one, formal, short- to medium-term counseling relationship focused on sustained behavior de- velopment and modification in the coachee (Bono et al., 2009; Feldman & Lankau, 2005; Korotov, 2016; Ladegard & Gjerde, 2014). More unidirec- tional than reciprocal, leadership coaching centers around developing the coachee’s understanding of leadership behaviors and the impact of their be- haviors on others. Because leadership coaching is focused entirely on the unique developmental needs of the coachee, no two coaching interventions are alike (Ely et al., 2010). Peer coaching is characterized as having simi- lar developmental intent but offering greatest relevancy in general personal and professional development (Parker et al., 2008). Critical qualities of peer coaching include: (a) equal status as partners (distinct from other coaching characterizations), (b) mutual focus on personal and professional develop- ment, and (c) integration of reflection on practice (Parker et al., 2008).
Leadership coaching in management practice over the past two decades has largely followed the Center for Creative Leadership’s leadership devel- opment model of assessment, challenge, and support (ACS; Ely et al., 2010; Ting & Hart, 2004). Coaching involves helping the coachee reflect and pro- cess daily activities as well as learning from a class, workshop, or leadership development activity (Korotov, 2016; Passmore, 2015). The coach works with the coachee to process assessment results (e.g., data from a multi-rater assessment of leader performance, formative or summative assessment data from a leadership course), make a formalized plan for behavior modification designed to improve leadership effectiveness, then support the facilitation of that behavior modification plan (see Chapter 4).
Relative to desired coaching characteristics, Bono et al. (2009) and Ely et al. (2010) agreed that relational qualities, such as rapport, collaboration, commitment, trust, listening, counseling skills, and confidentiality are im- portant considerations for coaching success. In the case of peer coaching, Parker et al. (2008) indicated the importance of unconditional positive re- gard, authenticity, and trust in selecting peer coaches. Bono et al. (2009) ar- gued that the needs of the coachee should determine the most appropriate coach. For example, if a student has assumed an organizational leadership role and needs to become familiar with leadership structures, processes, and functions, a peer coach who has recently vacated the position might be most appropriate.
Expected Outcomes from Coaching. Empirical research in execu- tive coaching, while lacking, has revealed the following positive outcomes relevant to a student population: (a) goal setting, striving, progress, and achievement; (b) positive psychological capacities such as self-efficacy, hope, and resilience; (c) enhanced mental health (reduced depression, anx- iety, and stress), quality of life, and well-being; (d) intrapersonal causal
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 13
attributions—attributing personal success to internal factors; and (e) need satisfaction—need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Grant, 2003; Grant, Curtayne, & Burton, 2009; Green, Oades, & Grant, 2006; Moen & Skaalvik, 2009). Feldman and Lankau (2005), using Kirkpatrick’s (1996) framework, suggest that the success of any coaching intervention should be determined by changes in affective reactions (how a participant feels about a coaching experience), learning, behavioral changes, and orga- nizational results.
What is Coaching’s Utility in Leadership Development?. Coaching is considered a promising tool in leadership development (Korotov, 2016; Passmore, 2015), but developmental readiness should be considered care- fully. The research behind coaching’s contribution to leadership develop- ment is lacking due to the individualized and often confidential nature of leadership coaching; however, several authors have offered the following benefits of coaching for leadership development in the coachee:
• Knowledge transfer and skill enhancement—leadership interventions can be personalized and customized plans can be developed for applying the newly developed knowledge and skills to the organization or leader- ship position (Korotov, 2016; Passmore, 2015)
• Increase in self-awareness and stronger personal confidence, self-efficacy, leader role efficacy, and/or self-regard (Ely et al., 2010; Ladegard & Gjerde, 2014; Passmore, 2015)
• Enhanced motivation to lead and improve job attitudes (e.g., job satisfac- tion, organizational commitment; Ely et al., 2010; Passmore, 2015)
• Increased well-being (e.g., stress reduction; Passmore, 2015) • Cognitive flexibility—successfully operate within complex and changing
circumstances (Ely et al., 2010) • Trust in subordinates (Ladegard & Gjerde, 2014).
Thus, while mentoring is more focused on general, long-term develop- ment of an individual, coaching is more strongly associated with an indi- vidualized, agile leadership development process.
Advising
Advising relationships between students and members of an institution’s faculty, staff, or administration may take place in the form of career advis- ing, academic advising, or student organization advising. For the purposes of this volume, we explore the student organization advising role and its promise and potential for supporting leadership development in students.
On any campus, the commitment from a student organization advisor ranges in continuum from one based on volunteer commitment to one tied to accountability and job performance. The common term “faculty advi- sor” describes advisors in this type of role with students since the origins
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
14 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
of this role rested with faculty in the history of higher education (Campbell et al., 2012; Dunkel, Schuh, & Chrystal-Green, 2014). When faculty, ad- ministrators, or staff serve in this role, it offers a pathway to faculty-student interaction in support of “enriching educational experiences” as measured by the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE; Center for Post- secondary Research and Planning, 2000). The structural relationship that student organization advising presents between faculty and student is a powerful predictor for gains in leadership outcomes as well as student en- gagement (Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning, 2000; Dugan & Komives, 2010).
Purpose and Types of Advising. Advising is practiced at educational institutions through a range of approaches and commitments to student organizations. One group of advisors is assigned to this role-based job description. Student affairs professionals typically serve as advisors to many organizations, such as when an Assistant Director for Student Involvement may be the assigned advisor to the leadership honor society, programming board, and the Inter-Fraternity Council. These roles are typically built by institutions, outlined in job descriptions, with the educator’s success in these roles typically evaluated as part of an ongoing performance appraisal. While support for the advising role may emerge from a campus activities department, it would be rare for this department to be large enough to accommodate direct advising needs for all organizations registered on a campus.
Therefore, a second group of advisors are connected with student lead- ers in a role outside of their typical campus responsibilities. In this case, the advising role is not identified as part of any one faculty or staff mem- ber’s job. With this type of advising role, student leaders would identify student organization advisors as a condition for campus recognition (Coun- cil for Advancement of Standards, 2015). In some cases, there is a logical tie for recruitment of advisors, such as the journalism department for the student newspaper, where this voluntary role aligns nicely with the edu- cator’s “day job” (See Lebrón, Stanley, Kim, & Thomas, 2017). This group of advisors likely has vested interest in the opportunity that advising offers to extend the impact of classroom learning into the experiential, student- led environment that student organizations represent. At a college or uni- versity, advising by faculty members to student organizations connected to the department may be regarded as institutional service for promotion and tenure, but expectations are also likely in place that members of an aca- demic department serve as advisors to corresponding academic clubs. For example, a faculty member in communication studies may advise the col- lege debate team. In other cases, a student group not logically aligned also needs involvement from an advisor. These groups offer just as much po- tential for leadership learning, but student leaders depend on availability of generous faculty and staff willing to engage in a role that is typically voluntary, completed after hours, and accepted in addition to assigned job
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 15
responsibilities such as the outdoor adventure club, Key Club, or the LGBTQ student alliance.
Hallmarks of Student Organization Advising Practice. As student groups became politically active in the 1960s and universities became more involved in their activities, the discussion of student organization advising became more present. An important frame of the advising role came from Bloland (1967) when he analyzed the function of the student organization advisor into three types of roles including maintenance roles, growth roles, and program content roles.
One of the most understood frames of student organization advising is in the area of maintenance roles, emphasizing the advisor’s role in interpret- ing university policies that support the work of the student organization. When the advisor is a staff member in a campus activities area, they are also frequently responsible for developing policies and practices for all student organizations, facilitating leadership development programs for leaders of student groups, and offering ongoing resources to other student organiza- tion advisors (Dungy, 2003; Rentz & Zhang, 2011).
While many on campus would be familiar with these activities, Bloland’s (1967) other two roles offer direct connection to leader devel- opment. Growth roles focus on the advisor’s support of group development and the success of individual leaders in facilitating group processes (Dunkel et al., 2014). The third type of role, the program content role, places the ad- visor as a teacher in the cocurriculum. In the example of the Computer Sci- ence Club, an advisor is able to guide students through experiential learning opportunities relating to the Computer Science field. For example, an ad- visor could connect members with a case study opportunity to help a small business tackle a current challenge they are facing or advise them in enter- ing the regional robotics competition.
What is Advising’s Utility in Leadership Development?. There is a continuum of advising approaches, from the transactional and reactive to the transformational and highly engaged. One common practice for advi- sors is to come together with individual student group leaders in one-on- one officer meetings. Others will prefer a group resource approach, offer- ing willingness to attend organization meetings and an open-door policy when students need support or problems arise. An additional model may position the advisor interacting with the executive officers as a group, with less individual interaction but contributing as an informed observer sharing commentary on the work of the group and intentionally leading reflective activities and planning.
The utility of advising in leadership development is seen in the interac- tions between advisors and students over time. In many cases, the student who is appointed or elected to a student leadership role may be experi- encing their first positional leadership role or exploring their potential as a leader for the first time (Dunkel et al., 2014; Komives, Longerbeam, Owen, Mainella, & Osteen, 2006). As such, the advisor plays an important role
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
16 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
in realizing the educational promise of the advising relationship. One-on- one meetings may start as times to discuss operational aspects of effective student organizations, but will quickly advance. An advisor who is commit- ted to supporting leadership development is able to assess existing talent within both individuals and groups and design an approach that will culti- vate individual leader development in an environment of shared leadership with peers.
Synthesis: Comparing and Contrasting Mentoring, Coaching, and Advising
Mentoring, coaching, and advising are all characterized as developmental relationships, yet comparing and contrasting these interactions will better prepare us to recognize when mentoring, coaching, or advising will be the most powerful and precise tool in developing a student’s leadership capacity.
Table 1.1 summarizes our model for mentoring, coaching, and advis- ing for leadership development as it relates to context, duration, content, outcomes, and relationship. To enable comparison across type of develop- mental interaction, Table 1.1 highlights mentoring, coaching, and advising for leadership development in light of intended goals for a program and purposes in the relationship.
Context. Leadership coaching occurs in a formal one-to-one rela- tionship, whereas mentoring occurs in both formal and informal contexts. Advising roles are structured at institutions, while mentoring and coaching roles have more potential to evolve organically. The context of mentoring plays a critical role in determining appropriate mentor characteristics, while the unique developmental needs of the coachee should determine which coach will be most effective. Advisors may serve as a content expert for the focus of an organization while a coach or mentor may or may not need specific content expertise.
Duration. Coaching relationships tend to be shorter in length than mentoring relationships while the duration of advising relationships de- pends entirely upon the life cycle of the organization.
Content. Mentoring and advising for leadership development may take on similar developmental processes regardless of mentee or advisee. Mentoring will involve career development, psychosocial development, per- sonal development, and leadership empowerment and advising will involve leadership learning around responsibilities of a leadership position or orga- nizational need. Coaching for leadership development, on the other hand, requires a flexible approach, changing to meet the unique skill and behav- ioral development needs of each coachee.
Outcomes. Advising is utilized for individual and group develop- ment, whereas mentoring and coaching are dedicated toward individual de- velopment. Coaching is more focused on coachee behavior change through goal setting and action planning whereas mentoring may or may not have
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
T ab
le 1
.1 C
o m
p ar
is o n
s A
cr o ss
M en
to ri
n g,
C o ac
h in
g, an
d A
d vi
si n
g
C on
te xt
D u ra
ti on
C on
te n t
O u tc
om es
R el
at io
n sh
ip
M en
to ri
n g
O n
e- o
n -o
n e;
m ay
b e
st ru
ct u
re d
o r
u n
st ru
ct u
re d
L o
n g-
te rm
• C
ar ee
r d
ev el
o p
m en
t •
P sy
ch o
so ci
al d
ev el
o p
m en
t •
P er
so n
al d
ev el
o p
m en
t •
L ea
d er
sh ip
em p
o w
er m
en t
D ev
el o
p p
ro té
gé ’s
ab il
it y
to ac
q u
ir e
k n
o w
le d
ge ,
sk il
ls ,
an d
se lf
-c o
n fi
d en
ce in
h o
p es
o f
b ec
o m
in g
a b
et te
r st
u d
en t,
em p
lo ye
e, o
r o
rg an
iz at
io n
al le
ad er
R ec
ip ro
ca l
b en
efi t
C o
ac h
in g
O n
e- o
n -o
n e
St ru
ct u
re d
V ar
yi n
g le
n gt
h s
L ea
d er
sh ip
b eh
av io
r d
ev el
o p
m en
t an
d m
o d
ifi ca
ti o
n ta
il o
re d
to co
ac h
ee
D ev
el o
p co
ac h
ee ’s
u n
d er
st an
d in
g o
f th
ei r
le ad
er sh
ip b
eh av
io rs
an d
th e
im p
ac t
o f
th o
se b
eh av
io rs
o n
o th
er s
U n
id ir
ec ti
o n
al an
d d
es ig
n ed
to b
en efi
t th
e co
ac h
ee
A d
vi si
n g
G ro
u p
o r
o n
e- o
n -o
n e;
ti ed
to a
p o
si ti
o n
o f
ad vi
so r
w it
h a
sp ec
ifi c
o rg
an iz
at io
n o
r gr
o u
p
B as
ed o
n th
e li
fe cy
cl e
o f
an o rg
an iz
at io
n
L ea
rn in
g- ce
n te
re d
b as
ed o
n th
e re
sp o
n si
b il
it ie
s o
f a
gi ve
n le
ad er
sh ip
p o
si ti
o n
, o
rg an
iz at
io n
p ro
je ct
, o
r o
rg an
iz at
io n
al n
ee d
D ic
ta te
d b
y n
ee d
s (r
es p
o n
si b
il it
ie s
o r
ac ti
o n
s) o
f o
rg an
iz at
io n
o r
in d
iv id
u al
n ee
d s
(s u
ch as
le ad
er sh
ip sk
il l
d ev
el o
p m
en t)
M u
lt ip
le gi
ve n
th e
ro le
o f
ad vi
so r
an d
n ee
d s
o f
th e
o rg
an iz
at io
n o
r in
d iv
id u
al ;
M u
tu al
ly b
en efi
ci al
in o
rd er
to b
e p
ro d
u ct
iv e
18 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
goal attainment focus, but could focus on general personal development. Peer mentoring, coaching, and advising for leadership development offer unique outcomes by developing a sense of community, greater academic and social integration, a rich resource and referral network, and a stronger propensity for persistence and completion (Shook & Keup, 2015).
Relationship. Developing a bond between mentor and mentee is im- portant due to the focus on personal development, whereas coaching and advising do not necessarily require the development of a personal bond. Thus, while mentoring may be considered reciprocal, coaching and advis- ing may be considered unidirectional in their respective influential intents. Peer coaching, however, is characterized as mutually beneficial and recip- rocal (Parker et al., 2008), similar to a mentoring relationship. Ultimately, however, positive relationship-building qualities are essential for success in mentoring, coaching, and advising.
Therefore, our definitions for these concepts are: Mentoring for leadership development is a long-term, one-on-one dy-
namic process of role modeling and reflection designed to amass knowl- edge, skills, and self-confidence for personal development and leadership empowerment.
Coaching for leadership development is a formal, one-on-one individ- ualized process designed to develop understanding of leadership behaviors and the impact of those behaviors for improved personal and/or organiza- tional leadership effectiveness.
Advising for leadership development is a structured relationship be- tween students and leadership educators built around the need to sup- port thriving student organizations that contribute to the educational environment.
Conclusion
In roles as leadership educators, we may engage in all three types of devel- opmental interactions for leadership development and sometimes draw in- tersections between mentoring, coaching, and advising. Figure 1.1 outlines the intersections between mentoring, coaching, and advising for student leadership development.
The “sweet spot” of mentoring, coaching, and advising for student leadership development is that all three developmental interactions iden- tify positive relationship building as critical for success, with an ultimate goal to develop and transform the student and student organizations. Men- toring, coaching, and advising for leadership development will all involve hallmark elements of leadership development interventions: (a) assessment of student leadership talents, needs, and opportunities, (b) challenge lead- ership growth, and (c) support the leadership development process (Van Velsor & McCauley, 2004). Ultimately, mentoring, coaching, and advising are powerful tools because they build necessary bridges between student
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 19
Figure 1.1. Intersection between mentoring, coaching, and advising for leadership development.
experience and student transformation. By providing clarity around similar- ities and differences in mentoring, coaching, and advising’s utility for leader- ship development, we are better prepared to precisely develop student lead- ership capacity according to need, accurately deliver what we promise in our leadership mentoring, coaching, and advising initiatives, and promptly translate leadership learning to transform student leaders.
References
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2010). Common bonds: An integrative view of mentoring relationships. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 397–419). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Bearman, S., Blake-Beard, S., Hunt, L., & Crosby, F. J. (2010). New direction in mentor- ing. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 375–395). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing.
Blinn-Pike, L. (2010). The benefits associated with youth mentoring relationships. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple per- spectives approach (pp. 165–188). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing.
Bloland, P. A. (1967). Student group advising in higher education. Alexandria, VA: Ameri- can College Personnel Association.
Bono, J. E., Purvanova, R. K., Towler, A. J., & Peterson, D. B. (2009). A survey of exec- utive coaching practices. Personnel Psychology, 62, 361–404.
Burke, R. J. (1984). Mentors in organizations. Group and Organization Studies, 9, 353– 372.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
20 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
Campbell, C. M., Smith, M., Dugan, J. D., & Komives, S. R. (2012). Mentors and college student leadership outcomes: The importance of position and process. The Review of Higher Education, 35, 595–625.
Castro, S. L., Terri, A., & Williams, E. A. (2004). Validity of Scandura and Ragins’ (1993) multidimensional mentoring measure: An evaluation and refinement. Management Faculty Articles and Papers, Paper 7. Retrieved from https://scholarly repository.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://scholar.google.com/&http sredir=1&article=1006&context=management_articles
Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning. (2000). The NSSE 2000 re- port: National benchmarks of effective educational practice. Retrieved from https://nsse.indiana.edu/pdf/NSSE 2000 National Report.pdf
Chickering, A. (1969). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Collins-Shapiro, C. (2006). Mentoring and leadership development. Leadership Insights
and Application Series #21. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.
Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (2015). Campus activ- ities programs. In CAS professional standards for higher education (9th ed., pp. 1–48). Washington, DC: Author.
Crisp, G. (2010). Impact of mentoring on success of community college students. Review of Higher Education, 34, 39–60.
Crisp, G., & Cruz, I. (2009). Mentoring college students: A critical review of the litera- ture between 1990 and 2007. Research in Higher Education, 50, 525–545.
DuBois, D. L., Portillo, N., Rhodes, J. E., Silverthorn, N., & Valentine, J. C. (2011). How effective are mentoring programs for youth? A systematic assessment of the evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 57–91.
Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2007). Developing leadership capacity in college students: Findings from a national study. A Report from the Multi-Institutional Study of Leader- ship. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.
Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2010). Influences on college students’ capacities for socially responsible leadership. Journal of College Student Development, 51, 525–549.
Dungy, G. J. (2003). Organization and functions of student affairs. In S. R. Komives & D. B. Woodard (Eds.), Student services (4th ed., pp. 339–357). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dunkel, N. W., Schuh, J. H., & Chrystal-Green, N. E. (2014). Advising student groups and organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Eby, L. T., Rhodes, J. E., & Allen, T. D. (2010). Definition and evolution of mentoring. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 7–20). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Ely, K., Boyce, L. A., Nelson, J. K., Zaccaro, S. J., Hernez-Broome, G., & Whyman, W. (2010). Evaluating leadership coaching: A review and integrated framework. Leader- ship Quarterly, 21, 585–599.
Erikson, E. H. (1950 1963). Childhood and society. New York, NY: Norton. Fagan, M. M., & Walter, G. (1982). Mentoring among teachers. Journal of Educational
Research, 76, 113–118. Feldman, D. C., & Lankau, M. J. (2005). Executive coaching: A review and agenda for
future research. Journal of Management, 31, 829–848. Fries-Britt, S., & Snider, J. (2015). Mentoring outside the line: The importance of au-
thenticity, transparency, and vulnerability in effective mentoring relationships. In C. S. Turner (Ed.), New Directions for Higher Education: No. 171, Mentoring as trans- formative practice: Supporting student and faculty diversity (pp. 3–11). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gallup, Inc. (2014). Great jobs, great lives: The 2014 Gallup-Purdue Index report. Retrieved from https://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2014.ptw.%2860%29.pdf
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 21
Grant, A. M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goal attainment, metacognition and mental health. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 31, 253–263.
Grant, A. M., Curtayne, L., & Burton, G. (2009). Executive coaching enhances goal attainment, resilience and workplace well-being: A randomised controlled study. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 396–407.
Green, L. S., Oades, L. G., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral, solution- focused life coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being, and hope. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 142–149.
Hastings, L. J., Griesen, J. V., Hoover, R. E., Creswell, J. W., & Dlugosh, L. L. (2015). Generativity in college students: Comparing and explaining the impact of mentoring. Journal of College Student Development, 56, 651–669.
Higher Education Research Institute. (1996). A social change model of leadership develop- ment: Guidebook version III. College Park, MD: National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.
Keller, T. E. (2010). Youth mentoring: Theoretical and methodological issues. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 23–48). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1996). Great ideas revisited: Revisiting Kirkpatrick’s four-level model. Training and Development, 50(1)54–59.
Komives, S. R., & Collins-Shapiro, C. (2006). The critical role of mentoring in leadership development. Concepts and Connections, 14(3), 9–11.
Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F., Osteen, L., & Owen, J. E. (2009). Lead- ership identity development: Challenges in applying a developmental model. Journal of Leadership Education, 8(1), 11–47.
Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of College Student Devel- opment, 46(6), 593–611.
Komives, S. R., Longerbeam, S. D., Owen, J. E., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2006). A leadership identity development model: Applications from a grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 401–418.
Korotov, K. (2016). Coaching for leadership development. In T. Bachkirova, G. Spence, & D. Drake (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of coaching (pp. 139–158). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Scott, Foresman & Co.
Ladegard, G., & Gjerde, S. (2014). Leadership coaching, leader role-efficacy, and trust in subordinates: A mixed methods study assessing leadership coaching as a leadership development tool. Leadership Quarterly, 25, 631–646.
Lebrón, M. J., Stanley, C. L., Kim, A. J., & Thomas, K. H. (2017). The empowering role of profession-based student organizations in developing student leadership capacity. In D. Rosch (Ed.), New Directions for Student Leadership: No. 155, The role of student organizations in developing leadership (pp. 83–94). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Levinson, D. J., Darrow, D., Levinson, M., Klein, E. B., & McKee, B. (1978). The seasons of a man’s life. New York, NY: Knopf.
Lockwood, A. L., Carr Evans, S., & Eby, L. T. (2010). Reflections on the benefits of mentoring. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 233–236). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Moen, F., & Skaalvik, E. (2009). The effect from executive coaching on performance psychology. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 7(2), 31– 49.
Newby, T. J., & Corner, J. (1997). Mentoring for increased performance: Benefits and key principles. Performance Improvement, 36(4), 10–13.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
22 ROLE OF MENTORING, COACHING, AND ADVISING IN DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
Nora, A., & Crisp, G. (2007). Mentoring students: Conceptualizing and validating the multi-dimensions of a support system. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 9, 337–356.
Parker, P., Hall, D. T., & Kram, K. E. (2008). Peer coaching: A relational process for accelerating career learning. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7, 487– 503.
Passmore, J. (Ed.) (2015). Leadership coaching: Working with leaders to develop elite per- formance (2nd ed.). London, England: Kogan Page.
Peterson, B. E., & Stewart, A. J. (1996). Antecedents and contexts of generativity moti- vation at midlife. Psychology and Aging, 11, 21–33.
Rentz, A. L., & Zhang, N. (2011). Student affairs practice in higher education. Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas.
Shook, J. L., & Keup, J. R. (2015). The benefits of peer leader programs: An overview from the literature. In J. R. Keup (Ed.), New Directions for Higher Education: No. 157. Peer leadership in higher education (pp. 5–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ting, S., & Hart, E. W. (2004). Formal coaching. In C. D. McCauley & E. Van Velsor (Eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership development (pp. 116– 150). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Van Velsor, E., & McCauley, C. D. (2004). Our view of leadership development. In C. D. McCauley & E. Van Velsor (Eds.), The center for creative leadership handbook of leadership development (2nd ed., pp. 1–22). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Vaillant, G. (1977). Adaptation to life. Boston, MA: Little, Brown, & Company.
LINDSAY J. HASTINGS is the Clifton Professor in Mentoring Research and director of Nebraska Human Resources Institute at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.
CINDY KANE is the director of student involvement and leadership and special assistant to the provost for academic innovation at Bridgewater State University.
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP • DOI: 10.1002/yd
Copyright of New Directions for Student Leadership is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
