McNamara, E T; Howarth, T A P; Hill, C J and Stoneman, G R W (1997) Mentoring construction graduates: Bridging the gap between academia and industry. In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
The paper reports on an investigation into the rôle, operation and effectiveness of mentoring in training, developing and retaining novice staff in a range of construction-related employment environments. The roles of both mentors and associates are defined and examined. The characteristics of normative mentors and associates are proposed and evaluated. Issues of significant concern to novice staff and to incipient mentors are identified and reported. Value added to the skills and qualities of the participants is investigated and reported. The effectiveness of mentoring programmes, undertaken over a continuum within a cross-disciplinary construction-related employment environment, is evaluated.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction graduates; mentoring; personal qualities; skills |
| Index terms: | effectiveness, academia, programme, employment, mentoring, mentors, investigation |
| Subjects: | project controls, performance management, training, management, data collection methods, practitioner, educational institutions |
| Topics: | Education, Time Control, Quality Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Human Resources |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here