xRead - Mentorship in Otolaryngology Trainees (March 2026)

15314995, 2013, 8, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lary.24043 by Lyndy Wilcox , Wiley Online Library on [14/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

Mentors and mentees closely agreed on the quantity of mentoring provided in the areas of career planning and emotional well-being in our study, but for every other topic mentors reported relatively greater propor tions of mentorship than mentees (Table III). A possible explanation for the disparities could be that mentors are overestimating the mentoring they provide or that there is a level of miscommunication between residents and faculty. Such miscommunications can be avoided by establishing and clearly defining goals and objectives of the relationship. In the study conducted by Huskins et al., a junior researcher described that “good mentors articulate what their expectations are of you.” 15 The study concluded that identifying and aligning expecta tions between mentor and mentee is important to build ing a mentoring relationship. Such efforts would also minimize the differences between mentor and mentee perceptions of certain aspects of their relationship and result in greater retention and value for the trainee. It is interesting to note that the perception of men tor and mentee, as far as quantity of mentorship pro vided, demonstrated that the greatest disparity is in the area of clinical judgment. This may represent a mis alignment of expectations as the mentors may feel they need to provide advisement in clinical training, as per the classic Halstead model of surgical education. The contemporary mentees may not be looking for this tradi tional model of education with emphasis on clinical skills and judgment in their interactions with their mentors. This may reflect a shift in the mentees’ perception of the purpose of mentorship to meet broader needs beyond traditional surgical education. There is no evidence in the current study suggesting that choosing a mentor leads to a significantly better men torship experience than having one assigned ( P > 0.15). However, consideration should be given for mentees to have the flexibility to choose their mentor if they wish; prior studies indicate mentee preference is important in the potential success of a mentoring relationship. 13,16 Previous studies have shown that residents have expressed greater satisfaction with mentors through for mal mentoring programs than through informal mentor ing. 12,15 The structured formal relationship provides a dedicated setting for residents to discuss their careers and objectives. However, informal mentorship interac tions have also been demonstrated as being important to the development of a mentor-mentee relationship; such relationships are defined not only by career development but also by personal rapport. 16–18 Informal relationships are important grounds for continuous growth of the rela tionship, and more easily executed without the need for mandatory structure and scheduling. 17 Ideally, a men torship relationship would encompass both a formal pro gram with additional informal relationship building. Past mentorship studies have focused primarily on mentees, but to improve the mentoring relationship a stronger focus needs to be paid to the mentor side of the relationship as well; the relationship will primarily change from their side. 19,20 Recognizing this importance, the current study gave equal attention to mentors, eval uating both the mentor and mentee side of the same

TABLE V. Proportion of Mentee Agreement on Various Mentor Qualities.

Proportion of mentees in agreement

Mymentor…

Is approachable

98%

Is supportive and encouraging

95% 79%

Motivates me to improve my work product Challenges me to extend my abilities Provides constructive critiques of my work

79%

79%

Is helpful in providing direction and guidance

72%

otolaryngology mentorship programs by analyzing the differences in how mentors and mentees perceive their relationship. The results are useful to identify areas of potential disagreement and weakness in order to improve the effectiveness of mentorship programs. The results demonstrated at least 90% of mentees meet with their mentor at least twice a year, with 48% meeting more frequently. Both faculty and trainees were questioned about the time availability of the faculty men tor. While only 46% of mentors agreed they have an appropriate amount of time to mentor, 95% of mentees agreed that their mentor is accessible, demonstrating that they believe their mentor is able to allot enough time for mentoring ( P < 0.001). The disparity in the per ception of availability of the mentor may indicate that faculty believe that with greater availability, they would be able to provide even better and more effective mentorship. 11 Mentees in the current survey appear to be gener ally satisfied with the mentoring they receive; however, mentors do not appear equally satisfied with the mentor ing they provide as only 65% of faculty members agreed that they are effective mentors. Fifty-six percent of sur veyed faculty said that they believe they would be better mentors with some formal training. Other studies have found that providing resources such as training to men tors is an important factor in the success of mentoring programs. 11–14 Mentees were least satisfied with men tors for providing effective critiques, offering helpful guidance, and inspiring motivation (Table V). Mentors agreed they could improve in the areas for providing feedback and emotional well-being with more training. A push for mentorship training for faculty could increase the value of the experience. However, time is again an obstacle when it comes to the planning and implementa tion of such courses. A mentor involved in a study con ducted by Straus et al. stated, “It’s a wonderful idea to have training. The challenge is that people don’t have the time to mentor, never mind to learn how to do it.” 11 This concern was also expressed by the faculty involved in the current study. Across all three institutions, the major hurdle in providing effective mentorship as expressed by mentors was lack of time. Greater empha sis and support at the institutional level are needed to address the issues of time and training for mentors.

Laryngoscope 123: August 2013

Lin et al.: Otolaryngology Training Mentorship 1879