Our mentoring policy ensures that all academic staff members, regardless of career stage or track, are able to benefit from mentoring.
1.1 A critical feature of Durham University’s academic strategy is to attract, develop, and retain the best scholars across all tracks. Effective mentoring will support this aim, helping academic staff to meet targets relating to excellence in research, education and citizenship. Mentoring will assist in the University goal of ‘job satisfaction, productivity and career progression’.
1.2 Good mentoring embodies our University’s characteristics to ensure we are welcoming, collegiate and inclusive. The objective of the revised University mentoring policy is to ensure that all academic staff members, regardless of career stage or track, are able to benefit from mentoring.
1.3 Mentoring has the potential to address the distinct needs of individuals across all aspects of research, teaching, and citizenship. Mentoring, by its focus on individuals, can offer a holistic approach to the different aspects of an academic’s work.
2.1 The objective of the University Academic Mentoring Policy is to develop a mentoring culture, in which high quality mentoring is actively sought, provided and valued.
2.2 Mentoring is concerned with the development of the individual and is not directly linked to promotion or performance, even if it supports individuals in planning career development.
2.3 Academic mentoring should be facilitated at the departmental level. Local practice can vary in accordance with the views of Boards of Studies and in light of disciplinary needs, mindful of the key principles outlined in this policy and best practice in other departments.
2.4 All academic staff should be able to access mentoring, irrespective of their career stage. Mentoring is relevant to academic staff at all stages of their careers, not just for staff who are on probation. Therefore, all academic staff should have access to, and understand the value of, mentoring at every point in their career.
2.5 Some groups of staff may benefit from additional specialist mentoring outside normal departmental structures (e.g., women in academia, BAME academics, LGBTQ+ staff, disabled staff, senior leaders).
2.6 High quality mentoring requires reflection and continuing development of mentors, supported by high quality training.
2.7 Mentoring should be supportive without being burdensome, building on existing processes. The absence of formal paperwork outside of line management relationships ensures the flexibility, discretion and informality that are essential to an effective mentoring relationship.
2.8 Departmental management of teaching, research and citizenship, and the DPC process, should be distinct from the mentoring relationship, even if discussions with mentors may inform mentees’ plans in these areas.
2.9 Mentoring relationships require trust between both parties. Mentoring conversations are confidential and cannot be used to inform DPC outcomes beyond input that a mentee takes from these sessions.
2.10 Being a mentor should be viewed as a key contribution to good citizenship as understood in the University’s progression criteria.
3.1 All academic, research and teaching staff (including those on fixed-term contracts) should have access to a named mentor.
3.2 Mentors will normally be allocated from within the mentee’s academic department. There may be instances where it is appropriate for a mentor to be requested and identified from another department, for example where the work of a particular staff member spans disciplines.
3.3 For staff on contracts of 0.2 FTE and less, enrolment in the academic mentoring scheme is optional. However, such staff should be offered the opportunity to be involved. This includes, for example, staff on casual contracts, such as PGR students who teach in departments.
3.4 Heads of Department should discuss with any academic staff member not automatically allocated a mentor whether they would benefit from a mentor relationship.
3.5 Departments should ensure that staff members are able to request a preference for a specific mentor, as appropriate to the individual’s needs.
3.6 Responsibility for confirming mentor-mentee allocations rests with the Head of Department but in practice can be devolved to a named Departmental Mentoring Contact.
3.7 At the start of the academic year, the University Mentoring Coordinator will send all departments a list of staff members who should be offered a mentor for the course of that academic year. The department should review the list and provide the University Mentoring Coordinator with the name of the mentor for each member of staff.
3.8 Mentoring allocations should be sensitive to existing line manager relationships within the department. For example, PDRAs should be allocated a mentor who is not their line manager.
3.9 Departments should ensure that they have a range of available mentors, mindful of the need for a diverse offer (e.g. in terms of gender) whilst not overburdening a small number of staff members, and noting empirical evidence underlining the importance of mentoring to issues of workplace equality and diversity.
3.10 Allocations should be confirmed for the academic year, but it is recognised that many mentoring relationships will extend beyond this period (i.e. they may roll over from the previous year).
3.11 Mentoring allocations for new starters during the course of any academic year will continue to be identified on appointment.
3.12 Staff members who are undertaking the PGCAP are allocated a departmental mentor to support their participation in the programme. In order to avoid unnecessary duplication, this mentor may combine the role of mentor for the purposes of the programme and the broader mentoring role as outlined in this paper.
3.13 The core role of the mentor is:
3.14 Given the above, matters that may fall within the scope of mentoring are broad-based and will vary according to the needs of individuals, but may include:
3.15 The nature and frequency of mentor meetings will vary according to the needs and position of the staff member. Mentoring may be undertaken on a one-to-one basis or in the context of a mentoring group.
3.16 For staff on probation and for the first two years in post, meetings should normally take place at least once a term. After this, meetings can take place as and when they are needed. Given the informal and voluntary nature of mentoring, it is acknowledged that mentoring often takes place outside of specifically scheduled meetings.
3.17 All departments should identify a Departmental Mentoring Contact who will oversee and review mentoring arrangements within the Department, liaise with the University Mentoring Coordinator and ensure that training takes place for the Department. The University Mentoring Coordinator will provide opportunities for Departmental Contacts to share best practice across departments.
3.18 Mentoring arrangements should form part of departmental 5-year reviews to encourage reflection on how local mentoring arrangements can be enhanced.
3.19 Success of mentoring should be assessed by: (i) informal feedback to mentor coordinators, and (ii) an additional question on Staff Surveys (e.g. “I have been allocated a mentor and I am happy with mentoring in my department”).
3.20 Mentoring rests on supportive relationships and challenging conversations between mentors and their mentees, so should not introduce new paperwork or University procedures other than the expectation that the Departmental Mentoring Contact liaises with the University Mentoring Coordinator annually to review arrangements in the department.
3.21 Mentors and mentees may wish to take notes of mentoring meetings, but these should be confidential to the mentoring relationship and should not be used to inform other departmental processes. Mentors should not reveal identifiable information discussed with the mentee without explicit permission, except where legally obliged, as in the case of safeguarding. In some circumstances, a mentor and mentee may, however, agree that it is appropriate for a mentor to raise an issue on the mentee’s behalf with a member of a department’s senior management team, e.g. matters relevant to the University’s duty of care of staff.
3.22 Training for Departmental Mentoring Contacts is essential. All mentors should be offered initial, light touch training by a trainer experienced in academic mentoring. Thereafter, the University should offer an annual series of opt-in workshops or webinars for mentors to help develop our mentoring culture and best practices. Training for mentors should be strongly encouraged at the departmental level.
3.23 Mentoring schemes aimed at special interest groups (e.g., women in academia, BAME, LGBTQ+ and disabled staff, first generation academics, senior leaders) and open to all staff (i.e. not just academics), should be retained and, where possible, enhanced through the work of the University Mentoring Coordinator. Academics may choose to supplement the academic mentoring they receive in their departments with involvement in these centrally organised schemes. Involvement in such schemes is voluntary, confidential and entirely separate from academic mentoring offered in departments.
3.24 The progression process should prompt applicants to detail their experience as mentors as one way to demonstrate citizenship. Guidance for promotion to Professor and for progression within Professorial pay bands should place due emphasis on contributions to mentoring, as verified by the Head of Department’s supporting statement.
3.25 Staff time commitments in relation to mentoring should be understood as part of the general administrative load undertaken by all our academic staff. However, in recognition of the time involved in mentoring, departments may wish to link mentoring responsibilities to their workload models.
4.1 Mentoring is concerned with the development of the individual but is not directly linked to progression or performance review. As such, academic mentoring is entirely separate from the DPC process. As part of the developmental function of mentoring, a mentee may wish to share elements of their DPC submission with their mentor and should discuss feedback from their submission with their mentor. (To avoid ambiguity, the DPC is the formal mechanism for feedback with respect to progression.)
4.2 Similarly, some departments require research track staff to complete an annual Personal Research Plan (PRP) separate from their DPC submission. Mentees may wish to consult their mentor on their draft PRP before submission in order to gain support and advice. Mentees and mentors may wish to use the PRP as a way of discussing the mentee’s ongoing development.
/prod01/prodbucket01/media/durham-university/research-/intensive-industrial-innovation-programme-iiip/69677-1-1995X617.jpg)