Shaping Supportive Academic Communities: Reflections from a Cross Schools Mentoring Pilot Programme.

This poster reports early findings from a cross‑school academic mentoring pilot launched in September 2025 at Heriot‑Watt University. The initiative seeks to foster an inclusive, supportive mentoring culture by strengthening academics’ sense of belonging and shared purpose across disciplinary boundaries. Colleagues from different schools are paired in structured mentoring relationships grounded in openness, respect, and mutual support. Initial recruitment engaged a diverse pool of participants, and matching was largely effective, with conflicts of interest promptly addressed. Interim evaluation indicates positive early impacts, including constructive relationships, reflective professional dialogue, and increased confidence, alongside challenges related to time constraints and workload pressures.

Description
Last September marked the beginning of a cross‑school mentoring pilot aimed at enriching the professional and personal experience of academics by creating space for genuine dialogue and shared learning. Supported by the Research Culture Enhancement Fund, the programme was designed to bring together colleagues from EPS, EGIS, SoSS, the Learning and Teaching Academy, HR and POD, forming a community that draws strength from diverse perspectives, disciplinary backgrounds, and professional journeys. Rather than focusing on formal structures alone, the initiative set out to nurture an environment where colleagues could learn from one another in ways that feel organic, encouraging exchanges grounded in curiosity, empathy, and mutual respect.

To build the foundation for this emerging community, the team organised two initial workshops. The first introduced mentoring as a developmental relationship, outlining how both mentors and mentees could benefit through shared exploration of priorities, careers, and aspirations. The second clarified expectations, emphasising the value of clear agreements and thoughtful preparation, and it provided an opportunity to recruit volunteers from across schools keen to support the initiative. The response demonstrated strong interest: colleagues at different career stages came forward, motivated by a desire to support others, to broaden their own understanding, and to connect beyond their usual disciplinary circles.

These efforts resulted in a mentor pool marked by disciplinary breadth and variation in experience, enabling pairs to be matched with attention to interests, working styles, and areas of development. While the matching process was largely successful, a few pairings raised issues linked to line‑management structures or potential conflicts of interest; challenges that were resolved promptly once identified; ensuring that the relationships could develop in a space of openness and psychological safety. These instances were reflected in interim participant feedback and have already informed improvements to the matching process moving forward.

The interim feedback collected from mentors and mentees offers early insight into the programme’s impact. Participants repeatedly described their conversations as open, constructive, and grounded in mutual learning. Many mentees reported that discussions helped them reconsider priorities, identify opportunities, and navigate professional questions with renewed clarity. Mentors noted that working with colleagues from different fields brought fresh perspectives and strengthened their own reflective practice. Several pairs highlighted that meeting regularly, using simple structures such as shared agendas or agreed‑upon actions, supported momentum and focused on their conversations.

Alongside these positive developments, participants shared candid reflections on the challenges they encountered. For many, time and workload remained the main barriers to sustaining regular meetings, an issue not of programme design but of wider academic pressures. Some mentors expressed uncertainty when supporting colleagues in unfamiliar fields or close in career stage, signalling the value of light‑touch guidance and early conversations to clarify expectations. Suggestions also included informal networking opportunities and shared resource spaces to extend benefits beyond individual pairs.

Together, these early outcomes reveal a pilot that is already fostering meaningful connections while generating insights that will shape its continued development. By building an environment where colleagues can learn from one another with openness and imagination, the programme contributes to a healthier and more supportive institutional culture, one small step towards a more connected academic community.

References
Higher Education Pedagogy & Policy. (2009). The ‘Silo Effect’ in Academia and Its Consequences. [online] Available at: https://glinton.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/the-silo-effect-in-academia-and-its-consequences/.[Accessed Date: 25/4/2025]
Nick, J.M., Delahoyde, T.M., Del Prato, D., Mitchell, C., Ortiz, J., Ottley, C., Young, P., Cannon, S.B., Lasater, K., Reising, D. and Siktberg, L., 2012. Best practices in academic mentoring: A model for excellence. Nursing research and practice, 2012(1), p.937906.
Detsky, A.S. and Baerlocher, M.O., 2007. Academic mentoring—how to give it and how to get it. Jama, 297(19), pp.2134-2136.
Mathews, P., 2003. Academic mentoring: Enhancing the use of scarce resources. Educational management & administration, 31(3), pp.313-334.