How to seek useful guidance while keeping responsibility for your own professional decisions
By Arbab Naseebullah Kasi, Chief Executive Officer - CEO, Feel Worldwide Foundation Inc.
A mentoring conversation leaves the pen, and the next decision, in the learner’s hands.
There is something comforting about the idea of finding a mentor. Somewhere, perhaps, is a person who understands the confusing parts of a career and can explain what to do next. A conversation with that person might save months of uncertainty.
Sometimes guidance really does help us see a possibility we had missed. But the search becomes less useful when we expect another person to supply the direction of our life. Even an excellent mentor has incomplete information. They know their own experience better than they know our circumstances, responsibilities and appetite for risk.
A more workable ambition is to find someone who can help us examine a particular question, notice weaknesses in our reasoning and learn from what happens next. We remain the person making the decision. The relationship becomes valuable because it strengthens that ability rather than replacing it.
This matters whether someone is entering a profession, taking on management responsibilities or considering a change after years in the same field. Useful mentoring can begin with a small, honest learning need. It does not require a dramatic search for the person who will change everything.
Be hopeful without expecting a transformation
Research gives us a reason to take mentoring seriously, alongside a reason to keep expectations proportionate. A 2008 meta-analysis by Lillian Eby and colleagues combined 112 studies and reports across youth, academic and workplace mentoring. It found generally small favourable associations with outcomes. Many included studies were cross-sectional or nonexperimental, so the authors cautioned against treating those associations as proof that mentoring caused the differences. The review concerned traditional one-to-one mentoring, not every arrangement now described by that word. Read the original meta-analysis.
That is a more useful starting point than either enthusiasm without limits or complete scepticism. A mentor may help you ask a better question, recognise a recurring mistake or prepare for a difficult conversation. Those are worthwhile contributions even when they do not produce an immediate promotion or a striking career story.
It also helps to separate mentoring from access. Someone can offer thoughtful guidance without having the authority to hire you, recommend you for an opportunity or introduce you to an influential person. If an introduction is what you need, ask about that honestly. Do not make it an unspoken test of whether the relationship is working.
Bring a question that experience can illuminate
A broad request such as “Please mentor me” leaves the other person with considerable work before they can answer. They must guess what you want, how often you hope to meet and whether their experience is relevant.
A focused request is easier to consider. You might explain that you are learning to lead project discussions and would appreciate a conversation about handling disagreement without shutting people down. Or you might ask how someone assessed the trade-offs of moving from a specialist role into management.
The purpose is not to make every conversation narrowly transactional. It is to give the relationship somewhere useful to begin. Once people understand each other, wider questions may emerge naturally.
Before asking, write a short private note containing the situation, what you have already tried and the uncertainty you cannot resolve. Then ask whether the person has experience with that uncertainty. A highly accomplished professional may still be the wrong adviser for the question in front of you.
Consider this illustrative example. A new supervisor is worried that team members rarely challenge her proposals. “How can I become a better leader?” is a large opening. “I want to make it easier for colleagues to disagree with my initial proposal. Could we discuss how I introduce options in meetings?” gives both people something observable to work with. The mentor can ask about the meeting rather than delivering a speech about leadership in general.
Agree on a relationship both people can sustain
In its 2019 report on effective mentorship in undergraduate and graduate STEMM education, the National Academies emphasised explicit expectations and attention to both mentors’ and mentees’ goals, interests and priorities. It also described mentorship as a skill that can improve through reflection and feedback. This was a consensus report in a particular educational setting, not a trial proving one formula for every workplace. Read the report highlights.
My practical interpretation for professional life is straightforward: discuss how the relationship will work before relying on assumptions about it.
A first conversation can establish whether you are asking for one discussion or a continuing arrangement. If both people want to continue, agree on a manageable rhythm, how to prepare and how to reschedule. A short initial period with a review point may feel more realistic than an indefinite commitment.
Discuss boundaries as well as availability. Can you bring examples from your workplace, and what must be removed to protect colleagues or clients? Does the mentor also assess your performance, creating limits on what you feel comfortable discussing? What will happen if a question falls outside their expertise?
You do not need a complicated contract for every informal conversation. You do need enough clarity that neither person mistakes friendliness for unlimited access. A mentor can care about your progress and still be unavailable for an urgent message. You can appreciate their help and still decline advice that does not fit your situation.
Treat advice as a view to examine
Experience is valuable, but it comes from somewhere. Advice may reflect the conditions of a particular organisation, profession or period. A decision that worked well for one person can be unsuitable for someone with different resources or obligations.
Ask what made the advice work in the mentor’s situation. What alternatives did they consider? What did they underestimate? Which part of their experience would they hesitate to generalise?
These questions are not challenges to the mentor’s credibility. They help you understand what the advice actually contains. There is a difference between a principle, such as preparing carefully for a negotiation, and a tactic that depended on having another offer available.
A useful mentor should also be allowed to say, “I do not know.” If you require certainty, you may unintentionally reward confident answers over careful ones. Leave room for the person to distinguish direct experience from an impression or a suggestion.
When advice conflicts, resist turning the disagreement into a contest over who is wiser. One adviser may prioritise stability while another values rapid learning. Their recommendations can differ because they are solving different problems. Returning to your own priorities makes the difference easier to interpret.
Keep the work between conversations in your own hands
SCORE offers a concrete public example of this division of responsibility. Its official business-mentoring descriptions, checked in October 2026, ask clients to bring goals, challenges and questions. Mentors advise and guide rather than do the client’s work; clients prepare and act between meetings. The programme also allows people to seek additional mentors when they need other expertise. This is a description of SCORE’s service model, not independent evidence that every pairing succeeds. See what SCORE says to expect.
The broader lesson is useful even outside business mentoring. A conversation should leave you with something to consider or try, not simply more admiration for the adviser.
Return to the illustrative supervisor. After discussing meeting habits, she might decide to circulate two possible approaches before the next discussion and invite colleagues to identify weaknesses in both. She can then observe whether the conversation changes and what difficulties remain. She should not claim that one meeting proves a new leadership method works. She can bring a concrete experience back for discussion.
This creates a different kind of follow-up: “Here is what I tried, here is what happened, and here is what I still cannot explain.” The mentor now has material to respond to. The supervisor is practising judgement rather than collecting instructions.
Not every suggestion needs an experiment. Some involve decisions that are costly, irreversible or outside your authority. In those cases, the next step may be to gather information, consult an appropriately qualified professional or discuss the proposal with the person responsible. Mentoring does not remove those responsibilities.
Build room for more than one perspective
One person rarely understands every dimension of a career. A colleague may be excellent at discussing technical practice, while someone elsewhere can offer a broader view of professional options. Another person may know how a particular organisation actually makes decisions.
You do not need to assemble a formal advisory board for yourself. Start by noticing which question each person is equipped to help you explore. This prevents you from asking one mentor to be a technical expert, confidant, career strategist and source of opportunities all at once.
Be considerate about overlapping conversations. Do not use another adviser’s name to pressure someone into agreement, or share a private comment without permission. You can compare reasoning without circulating people’s confidences.
There is also no obligation to adopt every recommendation. You might explain, respectfully, that you considered a suggestion but chose another route because of a constraint the mentor did not know about. That is part of a mature learning relationship. Gratitude does not require obedience.
Notice when the relationship has done enough
A mentoring relationship can be successful without continuing forever. The original question may have been resolved. Your work may have changed. The mentor may no longer have the time or relevant experience to help.
Review the relationship by asking what has become clearer, what you have acted on and whether the conversations still address a real need. If they have become repetitive, revise the purpose or bring the arrangement to a considerate close.
A useful closing message can name the specific contribution: a question that improved your thinking, a decision you approached more carefully or a practice you now understand better. Avoid attributing your entire progress to the mentor, and do not invent a result to make the thanks sound impressive.
The strongest outcome may be quieter than either person expected. You become better at preparing a question, recognising the limits of advice and taking responsibility for the next step. You may still seek guidance, but you no longer need another person to make uncertainty disappear before you can move.
What is one professional question you could bring to a mentor now, and what part of answering it must remain your own responsibility?
