CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 62Innovations in Medical EducationMentoring and Academic DevelopmentDiversity and Career in Medicine

Multiple‐role mentoring: mentors’ conceptualisations, enactments and role conflicts

Open access
Meeuwissen, Stephanie N E, Stalmeijer, Renée E, Govaerts, Marjan·2019·Medical Education
DOI 10.1111/medu.13811PMC PMC6590242
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Introduction: Outcome‐based approaches to education and the inherent emphasis on programmatic assessment in particular, require models of mentoring in which mentors fulfil dual roles: coach and assessor. Fulfilling multiple roles could result in role confusion or even role conflicts, both of which may affect mentoring processes and outcomes. In this study, we explored how mentors conceptualise and enact their role in a multiple‐role mentoring system and to what extent they experience role conflicts. Methods: We conducted a constructivist grounded theory study at one undergraduate medical school. A purposive sample of 12 physician‐mentors active in a programmatic assessment system was interviewed. Data analysis followed stages of open, axial and selective coding through which themes were constructed. Results: Three predominant mentoring approaches were constructed: (i) empowering (a reflective and holistic approach to student development); (ii) checking (an observant approach to check whether formal requirements are met), and (iii) directing (an authoritative approach to guide students’ professional development). Each approach encompassed a corresponding type of mentor‐mentee relationship: (i) partnership; (ii) instrumental, and (iii) faculty‐centred. Furthermore, mentors’ strategies, focus, agency provided to students and perception of the assessment system characterised mentoring approaches and relationships. Role conflicts were mainly experienced by mentors with a directing mentoring approach. They used various coping mechanisms, including deviation from assessment guidelines. Conclusions: In multiple‐role mentoring in the context of programmatic assessment, mentors adopted certain predominant mentoring approaches, which were characterised by different strategies for mentoring and resulted in different mentor–mentee relationships. Multiple‐role mentoring does not necessarily result in role conflict. Mentors who do experience role conflict seem to favour the directing approach, which is most at odds with key principles of competency‐based education and programmatic assessment. These findings build upon existing mentoring literature and offer practical suggestions for faculty development regarding approaches to mentoring in programmatic assessment systems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/medu.13811

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Coach background, motivation, and ability influence coaching.

    “| Coach characteristics | Background, motivation, ability influenced coaching | [16,45,129] |”

    From Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) associates mentors’ professional background, work setting, commitments, and beliefs with their mentoring approaches, supporting the background and motivation elements. The cited passages do not establish that mentors’ ability influenced coaching, and the paper describes an association rather than a demonstrated causal effect. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Driessen E, Overeem K. Mentoring In: Walsh K, ed. Oxford Textbook of Medical Education, 1st edn Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press 2013; 265– 74.
  2. [26]Charmaz K. Constructionism and the grounded theory method In: Holstein JA, Gubrium JF, eds. Handbook of Constructionist Research. New York, NY: The Guilford Press 2008; 397– 412.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Meeuwissen, S. N. E., Stalmeijer, R. E., & Govaerts, M.
Affiliations
Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Meeuwissen, Stephanie N E
ORCID
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-02-05
Volume
53
Issue
6
Pages
605-615
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
DOI
10.1111/medu.13811
PMC
PMC6590242
OpenAlex
W2913039078
Cited by
62
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3
FWCI
7.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mentoring and Academic Development
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
Keywords
role conflict, programmatic assessment, mentoring relationships, competency-based education, outcome-based education, medical students, faculty development, mentoring strategies, coping strategies
MeSH terms
Formative Feedback, Empowerment, Adult, Competency-Based Education, Faculty, Medical, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Mentors, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Negotiating, Grounded Theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review