The research mentoring relationship in family medicine: Findings from the grant generating project

Daniel R. Longo, David A Katerndahl, Daniel B. Turban, Kim Griswold, Bin Ge, John E. Hewett, Thomas W. Dougherty, Shari Schubert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mentoring has been acknowledged as a critical factor in the development of family medicine academicians. Specific aims were to describe the research mentoring in family medicine from the experience of both mentors and protégés and identify characteristics that mentors and protégés associated with a successful mentoring relationship. The Grant Generating Project (GGP) Fellowship, a training and mentoring program for family medicine researchers, provided a natural opportunity to study these issues and better understand what is successful in research mentoring. METHODS: Separate mentor and protégé surveys measured perceptions about the extent of mentoring assistance, perceived relationship success, costs and benefits of the relationship, and the nature and duration of the relationship. Correlations between demographic characteristics and the mentoring relationship were also examined. RESULTS: Mentors were generally professors (78%), male (82%), with a mean age of 53 years, while protégés were assistant professors (53%) and almost evenly divided between male (51%) and female (49%) with mean age of 44 years. Both mentors and protégés describe the mentoring relationship in general to be of benefit to both mentor and protégé. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences between mentor-protégé responses were found for nine of the 20 survey items. Mentors tended to give higher values in their ratings of specific mentor-protégé relationship variables. Significant positive correlations were found between benefit, quality of the relationship, and mentoring assistance and the number of hours per month of mentor-protégé interaction, the number of mentor-protégé meetings per month, and the number of months the mentor worked with the protégé. Mentor-protégé acquaintance before the GGP fellowship was significantly correlated with cost, benefit, and mentoring assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows agreement between mentor and protégé regarding the mentors' ability to promote the protégés, provide important technical skills, convey respect for the protégés, and serve as a friend and role model. Protégés tend to be more connected with their colleagues and with their profession, perhaps in part because the mentoring relationship facilitates networking opportunities provided by the mentor. In particular, excellent mentors can provide protégés with opportunities to meet other influential scholars at conferences and/or through various forms of correspondence. Such relationships can be helpful to the protégé in developing a constellation of mentoring relationships that may result in more successful research careers. Future studies should examine the relationship upon various outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)240-247
Number of pages8
JournalFamily Medicine
Volume43
Issue number4
StatePublished - Apr 2011

Fingerprint

Mentors
Organized Financing
Medicine
Research
Mentoring
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Aptitude

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Family Practice

Cite this

Longo, D. R., Katerndahl, D. A., Turban, D. B., Griswold, K., Ge, B., Hewett, J. E., ... Schubert, S. (2011). The research mentoring relationship in family medicine: Findings from the grant generating project. Family Medicine, 43(4), 240-247.

The research mentoring relationship in family medicine : Findings from the grant generating project. / Longo, Daniel R.; Katerndahl, David A; Turban, Daniel B.; Griswold, Kim; Ge, Bin; Hewett, John E.; Dougherty, Thomas W.; Schubert, Shari.

In: Family Medicine, Vol. 43, No. 4, 04.2011, p. 240-247.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Longo, DR, Katerndahl, DA, Turban, DB, Griswold, K, Ge, B, Hewett, JE, Dougherty, TW & Schubert, S 2011, 'The research mentoring relationship in family medicine: Findings from the grant generating project', Family Medicine, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 240-247.
Longo, Daniel R. ; Katerndahl, David A ; Turban, Daniel B. ; Griswold, Kim ; Ge, Bin ; Hewett, John E. ; Dougherty, Thomas W. ; Schubert, Shari. / The research mentoring relationship in family medicine : Findings from the grant generating project. In: Family Medicine. 2011 ; Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 240-247.
@article{87c2d5c888c748b79bcb14bc2f681f71,
title = "The research mentoring relationship in family medicine: Findings from the grant generating project",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mentoring has been acknowledged as a critical factor in the development of family medicine academicians. Specific aims were to describe the research mentoring in family medicine from the experience of both mentors and prot{\'e}g{\'e}s and identify characteristics that mentors and prot{\'e}g{\'e}s associated with a successful mentoring relationship. The Grant Generating Project (GGP) Fellowship, a training and mentoring program for family medicine researchers, provided a natural opportunity to study these issues and better understand what is successful in research mentoring. METHODS: Separate mentor and prot{\'e}g{\'e} surveys measured perceptions about the extent of mentoring assistance, perceived relationship success, costs and benefits of the relationship, and the nature and duration of the relationship. Correlations between demographic characteristics and the mentoring relationship were also examined. RESULTS: Mentors were generally professors (78{\%}), male (82{\%}), with a mean age of 53 years, while prot{\'e}g{\'e}s were assistant professors (53{\%}) and almost evenly divided between male (51{\%}) and female (49{\%}) with mean age of 44 years. Both mentors and prot{\'e}g{\'e}s describe the mentoring relationship in general to be of benefit to both mentor and prot{\'e}g{\'e}. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences between mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} responses were found for nine of the 20 survey items. Mentors tended to give higher values in their ratings of specific mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} relationship variables. Significant positive correlations were found between benefit, quality of the relationship, and mentoring assistance and the number of hours per month of mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} interaction, the number of mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} meetings per month, and the number of months the mentor worked with the prot{\'e}g{\'e}. Mentor-prot{\'e}g{\'e} acquaintance before the GGP fellowship was significantly correlated with cost, benefit, and mentoring assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows agreement between mentor and prot{\'e}g{\'e} regarding the mentors' ability to promote the prot{\'e}g{\'e}s, provide important technical skills, convey respect for the prot{\'e}g{\'e}s, and serve as a friend and role model. Prot{\'e}g{\'e}s tend to be more connected with their colleagues and with their profession, perhaps in part because the mentoring relationship facilitates networking opportunities provided by the mentor. In particular, excellent mentors can provide prot{\'e}g{\'e}s with opportunities to meet other influential scholars at conferences and/or through various forms of correspondence. Such relationships can be helpful to the prot{\'e}g{\'e} in developing a constellation of mentoring relationships that may result in more successful research careers. Future studies should examine the relationship upon various outcomes.",
author = "Longo, {Daniel R.} and Katerndahl, {David A} and Turban, {Daniel B.} and Kim Griswold and Bin Ge and Hewett, {John E.} and Dougherty, {Thomas W.} and Shari Schubert",
year = "2011",
month = "4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "240--247",
journal = "Family Medicine",
issn = "0742-3225",
publisher = "Society of Teachers of Family Medicine",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The research mentoring relationship in family medicine

T2 - Findings from the grant generating project

AU - Longo, Daniel R.

AU - Katerndahl, David A

AU - Turban, Daniel B.

AU - Griswold, Kim

AU - Ge, Bin

AU - Hewett, John E.

AU - Dougherty, Thomas W.

AU - Schubert, Shari

PY - 2011/4

Y1 - 2011/4

N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mentoring has been acknowledged as a critical factor in the development of family medicine academicians. Specific aims were to describe the research mentoring in family medicine from the experience of both mentors and protégés and identify characteristics that mentors and protégés associated with a successful mentoring relationship. The Grant Generating Project (GGP) Fellowship, a training and mentoring program for family medicine researchers, provided a natural opportunity to study these issues and better understand what is successful in research mentoring. METHODS: Separate mentor and protégé surveys measured perceptions about the extent of mentoring assistance, perceived relationship success, costs and benefits of the relationship, and the nature and duration of the relationship. Correlations between demographic characteristics and the mentoring relationship were also examined. RESULTS: Mentors were generally professors (78%), male (82%), with a mean age of 53 years, while protégés were assistant professors (53%) and almost evenly divided between male (51%) and female (49%) with mean age of 44 years. Both mentors and protégés describe the mentoring relationship in general to be of benefit to both mentor and protégé. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences between mentor-protégé responses were found for nine of the 20 survey items. Mentors tended to give higher values in their ratings of specific mentor-protégé relationship variables. Significant positive correlations were found between benefit, quality of the relationship, and mentoring assistance and the number of hours per month of mentor-protégé interaction, the number of mentor-protégé meetings per month, and the number of months the mentor worked with the protégé. Mentor-protégé acquaintance before the GGP fellowship was significantly correlated with cost, benefit, and mentoring assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows agreement between mentor and protégé regarding the mentors' ability to promote the protégés, provide important technical skills, convey respect for the protégés, and serve as a friend and role model. Protégés tend to be more connected with their colleagues and with their profession, perhaps in part because the mentoring relationship facilitates networking opportunities provided by the mentor. In particular, excellent mentors can provide protégés with opportunities to meet other influential scholars at conferences and/or through various forms of correspondence. Such relationships can be helpful to the protégé in developing a constellation of mentoring relationships that may result in more successful research careers. Future studies should examine the relationship upon various outcomes.

AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mentoring has been acknowledged as a critical factor in the development of family medicine academicians. Specific aims were to describe the research mentoring in family medicine from the experience of both mentors and protégés and identify characteristics that mentors and protégés associated with a successful mentoring relationship. The Grant Generating Project (GGP) Fellowship, a training and mentoring program for family medicine researchers, provided a natural opportunity to study these issues and better understand what is successful in research mentoring. METHODS: Separate mentor and protégé surveys measured perceptions about the extent of mentoring assistance, perceived relationship success, costs and benefits of the relationship, and the nature and duration of the relationship. Correlations between demographic characteristics and the mentoring relationship were also examined. RESULTS: Mentors were generally professors (78%), male (82%), with a mean age of 53 years, while protégés were assistant professors (53%) and almost evenly divided between male (51%) and female (49%) with mean age of 44 years. Both mentors and protégés describe the mentoring relationship in general to be of benefit to both mentor and protégé. Nonetheless, statistically significant differences between mentor-protégé responses were found for nine of the 20 survey items. Mentors tended to give higher values in their ratings of specific mentor-protégé relationship variables. Significant positive correlations were found between benefit, quality of the relationship, and mentoring assistance and the number of hours per month of mentor-protégé interaction, the number of mentor-protégé meetings per month, and the number of months the mentor worked with the protégé. Mentor-protégé acquaintance before the GGP fellowship was significantly correlated with cost, benefit, and mentoring assistance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows agreement between mentor and protégé regarding the mentors' ability to promote the protégés, provide important technical skills, convey respect for the protégés, and serve as a friend and role model. Protégés tend to be more connected with their colleagues and with their profession, perhaps in part because the mentoring relationship facilitates networking opportunities provided by the mentor. In particular, excellent mentors can provide protégés with opportunities to meet other influential scholars at conferences and/or through various forms of correspondence. Such relationships can be helpful to the protégé in developing a constellation of mentoring relationships that may result in more successful research careers. Future studies should examine the relationship upon various outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79955093961&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79955093961&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 21499996

AN - SCOPUS:79955093961

VL - 43

SP - 240

EP - 247

JO - Family Medicine

JF - Family Medicine

SN - 0742-3225

IS - 4

ER -