!! INVENTING SITUATED MENTORING: A FEMINIST RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF WORKPLACE CULTURE By Elizabeth Jean Keller A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Rhetoric and Writing ÐÐDoctor of Philosophy 2015 !! ABSTRACT INVENTING SITUATED MENTORING: A FEMINIST RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF WORKPLACE CULTURE By Elizabeth Jean Keller Inventing Situated Mentoring: A Feminist Rhetorical Analysis of Workplace Culture extends current research and scholarship around mentoring, learning theory , and gender identity performance. In this project , I investigate the mentoring practices of eight executive -level employees at a Midwest medical manufacturing company and four Michigan State University alumni . The purpose of the study is two -fold. First, I explore how participants enact mentoring as a mode of learning in both informal and formal ways. Second, I highlight how a participantÕs gender identity greatly impacts the invention and sus tainability of mentoring in their respective workplaces . My proj ectÕs findings show that mentoring, like writing, helps a person convert information into useable and transferrable knowledge. In short, mentoring is a rhetorical skill, one that, over the course of an individualÕs career, acts as a powerful means to profe ssional success. I enact this theoretical framework and explain the methods I used for data collection. I situate this project in three connected activities: 1) examining the relationship between teaching and mentoring; 2) acknowledging the rhetorical inv ention of mentoring, and; 3) recognizing the intersection of gender identity and mentoring. These activities begin to build a framework for seeing and inventing value -added approaches to research and teaching practices in Rhetoric and Composition. !! I conti nue to frame these activities by extending the work o f Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, and Lev Vygotsky calling attention to the social discourses and practices that constitute learning and identity development for participants in this study. Central to this study is the focus of how mentoring acts as a rhetorical tool for building and maintaining moments of experiential learning. I end this study by pointing to implications for my projectÕs theoretical framework in other workplace and academic contexts. !! Copyright by ELIZABETH JEAN KELLER 2015!v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I had a lot of fun researching and writing this dissertation. I owe my positiv e experiences with this dissertation to my committee, my participants, and to being well supported financially and intellectually at Michigan State University. In my last two years at MSU, I benefitted greatly from a Dissertation Completion Fellowship and two RCAH Graduate Fellowships. This monetary and intellectual support helped me plan, research, and write this dissertation. My coursework and exams challenged me to expand how I understood workplace relationship building and mentoring, and how I would do the work I wanted to do and saw a need for in the discipline. My dissertation committee has been nothing short of amazing. Bi ll Hart -Davidson, Malea Powell, Da !nielle DeVoss, Trixie Smith, and Michelle Eble have been patient, kind, helpful, and encouraging. The conversations I have had with each of my committee members about rhetoric and writing practice have greatly influenced this dissertation project and my orientation toward Rhetoric and Composition and Technical Communication more generally. IÕve also been fortunate to learn from Jeff Grabill and Liza Potts , both of whom taught me to be accoun table to and for the research I am undertaking in this project. IÕm also incredibly thankful for Leslie Hart -Davidson (and her smart crew at Hart -Davidson Designs). Her approach to mentoring employees and interns at HDD gives me renewed hope that workplaces can and should invest in the personal and profe ssional development of their employees. Leslie, youÕre an excellent mentor and a super cool !!vi human being. Thank you for inspiring me to continue with my research on mentoring and relationship building. And, of course, I am also indebted to my research participants at HealthTech and RCAH, for sharing their stories and experiences of mentoring with me. Your mentoring experiences give me hope for alternative ways to mentor and teach, and for that I am forever grateful. And now all the other p eople in my life who made this dissertation possible! Many thanks to Melissa Arthurton, April Baker -Bell, Dianna Baldwin, Stuart Blythe, Kate Birdsall, Joanna Bosse, Phil Bratta, Marilee Brooks -Gillies, Matt Cox, Marsha Edington, Shenika Hankerson, Ben Lau ren, Julie Lindquist, Katie Livingston, Katie Manthey, Terese Monberg, Stacey Pigg, Suzy Rumsey, Dave Rumsey, Diana Shank, Dave Sheridan, Allegra Smith, and Douglas Walls. There are so many other people I could list here, all of whom have influenced my wor k. Words canÕt fully describe how thankful I am to each and every one of you. Seriously. YaÕll rock. Lastly but certainly not least, I am privileged to have friends and family who answered my late -night phone calls, talked to me about things outside of graduate school, and kept on supporting me as I entered the home stretch of this dissertation project. Mom, Randy, and Megan : you have been the best support network I could have ever asked f or. Your continued encouragement, guidance, and love has made this project possible. !vii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................ix CHAPTER 1 BUILDING AN INVESTMENT APPROACH TO MENTORING IN RHETORIC AND WRITING PRACTICE .......................................................................................................1 The Relationship Between Teaching and Mento ring in Technical Communication ................................................................................8 A Cultural Studies Approach to Teaching and Mentoring in Technical Communication ...........................................................................................9 A Deco lonial Approach to Teaching and Mentoring in Technical Communication .........................................................................................14 Mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition and Technical Communication .............19 Moving Beyond Traditional Models of Mentoring: On Mentoring and Gender .....23 Conclusion: Using Mentoring to Add Value to Rhetoric and Composition ...........27 CHAPTER 2 A FEMINIST METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH FOR LOCATING AND INVENTING MENTORING .................................................................................................................29 The Site in Pa rticular: HealthTech Industries ......................................................31 A Qualitative Framework for Exploring and Inventing Workplace Mentorin g......33 A Feminist Methodological Approach: On Storytelling, Rhetorical Listening, and Mapping .............................................................................................33 A Plan for Observing Situated Men toring at HealthTech Industries .........39 Field notes and General Observations .................................................................43 Metho ds with Individual Participants ...................................................................45 Audio -recorded inte rvie ws with individual participants .............................47 Participant -drawn mentoring maps ...........................................................50 Written work communication activity .........................................................52 Audio -recorded focus group interviews ....................................................52 Brief description of methods used for analysis .........................................53 Conclusion: Mentoring is Rhetorical Work ...........................................................55 CHAPTE R 3 HOW MENTORING IS SUPPORTED AS A MODE OF LE ARNING AT HEALTHTECH INDUSTRIES ..................................................................................................................56 Professional Development and Mentori ng at HealthTech Industries ...................58 How Mentoring Works at HealthTech Industries: A Critique of Communities of Practice and Legitimate Periph eral Participation .................................................60 Peers Helping Peers: The Zone of Proximal Development and Mentoring at HealthTech Indu stries ..........................................................................................64 Investment Instead of Enculturation: An Investment Approach to Mentoring !!viii at HealthTech Industries ......................................................................................67 An Investment Approach to Mentoring at HealthTech Industries: A Case Examp le..................................................................................................71 Implications and Risks of an Investme nt Approach to Mentoring ........................76 Conclusion: How Writing Programs Contribute to W orkplace Mentoring and Learning ...............................................................................................................79 CHAPTER 4 MENTORING IS RHETORICAL WORK THAT BUILDS RELATIONSHIPS ...................81 How Gender Identity Complicates an Investment Approach to Mentoring at HealthTech Industries ..........................................................................................85 Risks and Benefits of Non -Hierarchical Mentoring Networks ..............................90 Mentoring, Career -long Learning, and Gender Identity .......................................96 Conclusion: Costs of Non -participation i n Mentoring Initiatives at HealthTech Industries .............................................................................................................99 CHAPTER 5 IMPLICATIONS OF AN INVESTMENT APPROACH TO MENTORING FOR RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION ...................................................................................................104 Investment instead of Enculturation: Reflections, N egotiations, and Continued Work ..................................................................................................................107 What Gender Identity, Mentoring, and Experiential Learning Have in Common ...............................................................................................110 Situated Mentoring Applied to Rhetoric and Writing Research and Practice .....112 Distributed Work and Institutional Critique: From Mentoring Rela tionships to Mentoring Networks ...........................................................................................115 Micro and Macro -leve l Mentoring -based Institutional Cri tique ................118 Situated Mentoring for the Classroom and Beyond: Other Spac es for Pedagogical Intervention ........................................................................................................119 An Investment Approach to Mentoring as a Pedagogical Tool for Inve nting Relationships and Writing ..................................................................................122 Conclusion: Using an Investment Approach to Mentoring as a Framework for Seein g and Inventing Rhetorical Work ..............................................................123 WORKS CITED ............................................................................................................125 !ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Photograph: Participant -drawn mentoring map ...............................................51 Figure 2: Image: Representation of what the new employee can and cannot do with or without help ....................................................................................................................67 !!1 CHAPTER 1 BUILDING AN INVESTMENT APPROACH TO MENTORING IN RHETORIC AND WRITING PRACTICE Mentoring is a process. ItÕs about creating a cohesive element within a workplace. It can be about dress. And language. About l ong -term planning. And an awareness of the communi ty youÕre in. ItÕs about values. Common , core values and goals . --Alex, Residential Coll ege in the Arts and Humanities alumna In this chapter, I begin to build a broad framework for studying the connections among mentoring, rhe toric and writi ng practice, professional identity development , and experiential learning. The framework in this chapter draws from scholarship in contemporary rhetorical theory, writing studies, feminist studies, and technical communication. At its heart, this dissertati on project is a rhetorical analysis of mentoring ; that is, this project is a critical examination of how mentoring f acilitates career -long learning in both academic and non -academic places. To accomplish this analysis, my project explores the experiences and complexi ties of mentoring and learning in both school and non -school settings .1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 The non -academic site for this study is HealthTech Industries, a Midwestern, medical device manufacturing compan y, which is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2. !!2 During the 2013 -2014 academic year , I had the fortunate experience of being a Residential College in the Arts and Humanities (RCAH) Graduate Fellow . One of several residential colleges on the MSU campus, this residential college is Òbuilt on four cornerstones: world history, art and culture , ethics, and engaged learning.Ó 2 Students learn in a custom -built environment that includes their own classrooms, theater, art studio, gallery, media ce nter, and music practice rooms. WhatÕs more, RCAH Graduate Fellows are doctoral students who have Òinterests in teaching, learning, engagement, and assessment in higher education Ó.3 Each Graduate Fellow is required to design and exe cute a yearlong research project focusing on any aspect of teaching and learning within the RCAH that interests them. My first year as an RCAH Graduate Fellow in 2013-2014 coincided with the design and defense of my dissertation prospectus, in which I articulated a project that would examine both academic and non -academic mentoring practices and relationships. As part of this dissertation project, I worked with RCAH alumni by examining their professiona l development and mentoring practices inside and out of the residential college. During the 2014 -2015 school year, I expanded my Graduate Fellows project to include current RCAH students, specifically first -year students and students who self -identified as a minority in some way . Since the fall of 2013, I have interviewed RCAH alumni about their mentoring experiences inside and o utside o f the residential college. I was curious about mentoring !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2 For more an d detailed information about the RCAH, please visit http://rcah.msu.edu/ . 3 For more and detailed information about the RCAH Graduate Fellows program, please visit http://rcah.msu.edu/people/graduate -fellows . !!3 in both school and non -school settings, and I wanted to know how each alumna invented, located, defined, and mobilized mentoring that was learned while a part of the college. During this time, I interviewed four alumni (three women and one man) from the residential college. Alumni -participants shared with me that they o ccupy various levels of employment and leadership in their academic classrooms and industry workplaces across the country. I chose to interview recent college graduates because I was interested to learn about any professional development p ractices that beg an in the residential collage that may have transferred to their new work environments. The guiding interview questions I asked RCAH alumni and students were the same questions I asked HealthTech employees. In total, I interviewed 12 people for this study ÐÐ4 recent college graduates from MSU as well as 8 senior -level employees from HealthTech ÐÐto see if what I learned about mentoring in one place happens in another . This study assembles a methodology for industry professionals, and rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers to use for locating and inventing an investment approach to mentoring in their workplaces and classrooms. Throughout the write -up of this study, I use the word invention in its most literal sense; to inve nt something means to create, develop , or design a thing , process, or practice. Indeed, I use this definition of invention, but I also pay special attention to the personal, social, and collective motivation(s) for invention in the first place . Additionally, I use the word investment in two ways: 1) from the late 15 th century meaning to indicate the act of putting on vestments, or to dress oneself and 2) from the modern meaning to contribute to, especially in terms of human, social, or financial capital. In this study, investment means !!4 to ÒclotheÓ oneself as a professional by self -selecting professional development practices that best suit an individualÕs needs. It should be noted, too, that HealthTech employee -participants and RCAH alumni used this contemp orary meaning of investment to describe the mentoring opportunities available to them at work and school. Their experiences of mentoring, which I will show in Chapters 2, 3 , 4, and 5 are the literal framework for this study. Moreover, the definition of fe minism I use throughout this project draws from Jacqueline Royster and Gesa KirschÕs (2012) Feminist Rhetorical P ractices : New Horizons for Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies . They write that f eminism is the Òcommitment to justice, equality, empowerment, and peace, while keeping the contours of this notion dynamic and open, resisting the deep desire to speak as if there is no need for negotiationÓ (644). This explanation of feminism articulates a fr amework that is broad enough to locate all ki nds and types of mentoring , and also offers boundaries that are Òopen and dyna micÓ to under -represented or non -traditional stories of mentoring. What I have learned from participants in this study is that t he invention of sustainable and equitable mentori ng pr actices in a workplace are committed to these three feminist and decolonial criteria: 1) reciprocity, 2) self -reflexivity (or self -awareness), and 3) transparency (see Anzaldua 1987; Lather 1986; Tuhiwai Smith 1999; Mignolo 2003 & 2011; and Powell 200 8). In short, t his study shows how mentoring is a necessary component of individual and programmatic development. !!5 So, we see that i n this chapter, I begin to build the framework for understanding mentoring as rhetorical work. I draw most heavily from contemporary Rhetoric and Composition , and technical communication scholarship to describe how these bodies of scholarship engage mentoring , and mentoring in the workplace . Additionally, I draw from scholarship outside of Rhetoric and Composition, in order to more fully leverage important definitions and ideas that are used in the en tirety of this dissertation. Three sets of questions guide my study , and reflect the intensely personal, relational, and professional nature of mentoring: Do workplace culture s invent ment oring practices? If so, how? H ow is the invention of mentoring in a workplace culture negotiated in relation to oneÕs sex and/or gender? For the employee -participants at HealthTech, mentoring practices are invented and re -invented daily. We se e in Chapters 3 and 4 that this invention and re -invention of mentoring prioritizes an individualÕs ability to self -identify and self -develop as a professional in the workplace. Specifically in Chapter 4, employee -participants share how their gender identi ty is connected to and deeply informs their past, present, and future mentoring practices while at work. Are there connections between or among reciprocity, self -reflexivity (or self -awareness) , and transparency, and the invention of mentoring practices in a workplace? These three criteria can either Òmake or breakÓ a mentoring relationship. By Òmake or breakÓ I mean that a mutually beneficial mentoring relationship is invented !!6 when all involved in the mentoring relationship embrace reciprocity, self -reflexivity (or self -awareness), and tr ansparency. In Chapter 3, we learn that to invent sustainable and equitable mentoring requires individual and collective growth, and clear, honest communication. I argue that this approach to mentor ing is one of investment instead of enculturation. 4 What are the possibilities for understanding mentoring as rhetorical work? How can mentoring be used as a heuristic for an individualÕs professional identity development? Mentoring is rhetorical work, an d as employee -participants show in Chapters 3, 4, and 5, the kind of work that aids in an individualÕs career -long, experiential learni ng. In this way, mentoring can help an individual develop her/his professional identity without ignoring or covering up h er/his gender identity. As weÕll see throughout this dissertation, I answer the questions posed above in more detail , and provide insights that can guide programmatic and pedagogical decisions regarding the preparation of stud ents as technical communic ators. I explain later in this chapter, an d in greater detail throughout this dissertation , that this study explores the mentoring experiences and practices of ten participants, eight employees from HealthTech Industries, and two alumni from a residential college at MSU . What we learn from this project is how a participantÕs mentoring experiences can indicate the kind and level of value added to their work and home lives. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!4 I expand this point in greater detail in Chapter 3. !!7 What emerges from my framework, I argue, is a feminist methodology for locating, examining, and inventing value in Rhetoric and Composition through and investment approach to mentoring. 5 This study extends contemporary scholarship and recent conversations surrounding value or value -added approaches to teaching and research in Rhetoric and Composition, and especially in technical communication and professional wr iting (see also Eilola -Johnson 1996; Henr y 1998; Mead 1998; Redish 1995). The idea of mentoring as rhetorical work can help us better value the connections between rhetoric and writing programs and industry work , and how we , as teachers and researchers, can best prepare students for career -long, experiential learning. In the following sections, I introduce and begin to situate a heuristic fo r professional identity development that works through the following three, connected activities: 1) examining the relationship between teaching and mentoring; 2) acknowledging the rhetorical invention of mentoring , and; 3) recognizing the intersection of gender ide ntity and mentoring. These activities begin to build a framework for seeing and inventing value -added approaches to research and teaching practices in Rhetoric and Composition. I conclude this chapter by briefly reflecting on how mentoring can he lp build value in Rhetoric and Composition and technical communication programs. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!5 I expand on this methodology in greater detail in Chapter 2. !!8 The Relationship B etween Teaching and Mentoring in Technical Communication Teaching and mentoring are complementary modes of learning. And i n order for me to explain how mentoring can build value in Rhetoric and Composition and technical communication, I first need to discuss approaches to teaching that account for the cultural identifications of students and teaching practices . To begin, writing that is associated with technical communication is often taken up in two ways: 1) as an object of study and 2) as a process that visibilizes the structures of colonization still in place in various professions and workplaces (Longo 11) . Bernadette Longo (1998) describes a cultural study of technical communication that focus es on five themes: Òthe object as discourse, the object within cultural context, the object within historical context, the object as ordered, and the relationship of the object with the one who studies itÓ (12 - 14). With Longo Õs five themes in mind, I call upon and extend two significant approaches to teaching technical communication to mentoring .6 By extending these teaching approaches to mentoring, I articulate that the in vention of mentoring can give rhetoric a nd writing teachers a glimpse into how institutions organize and discipline the people who make up those institutions. Further, I argue that while a cultural studies approach to research and teaching in technical communication is a useful and much used through -point, a de colonial approach to research, teaching , and mentoring in rhetoric and writing enables writing researchers and teachers to, as Angela Haas (2008) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!6 The two teaching approaches I extend to mentoring are a cultural studies approach and a decolonial approach. What emerges from a combination of the se approaches is a feminist methodology for inventing and examining mentoring in workplaces. I discuss this methodology in greater detail in Chapter 2. !!9 writes Òinterrogate the colonial powers and discourses still at play in the ways we continue to make sense of the worldÓ (44) . A Cultural Studies Approach to Teaching and Mentoring in Technical Communication In the mid 1960s, a new academic field emerged at the intersections of critical theory and literary criticism. This new approach to understanding everyday lives closely examines the things, objects, and/or messages that are related to ideologies and discourses associated with race, social class, gender, and other critical ide ntity positions . According to cultural studies theorist Stuart Hall (1989), the production of an individualÕs cultural identity is never complete and always in process ; the articulations of an individualÕs identity are always contingent and are always p ossi ble (222). Cultural identity permits us to Òsee and recognis e the different parts and histories of ourselves, to construct those points of identif ication, those positionalities,Ó and ultimately participate in the construction of our individual and coll ective identities (Hall 237). Hall further explains identity development as continuous and on going, and therefore situated among the many categories of self an individual claims ÐÐin short, the actual linkage of rhetorical practice or articulation to identity construction. Hall notes that cultural identity: is a matter of ÔbecomingÕ as well as of ÔbeingÕ, where [...] cultural identities come from somewhere, have histories, [...] undergo constant transformation, [...] and are subject to the continuo us ÔplayÕ of history, culture , and power (225). !!10 Halls shows us that an individualÕs identity is not fixed , and is socially created ; it is unstable, decentered, permeable, and constituted by the multitude of ways s/he is positioned by and within narratives of the past, and within the dis courses of history and culture. A cultural studies approach to research and teaching seeks to understand Òthe relationship between these culturally -saturated local knowledges and practices, and economics, politics, hegemony, and agencyÓ ( Haas 65). Similarly, then, a cultural studies approach to understanding mentoring requires rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers to Òaddress relati onships between and among power and knowledge, multiculturalism, postmodernism, gender, conflict and ethicsÓ (Longo 1). T o do anything less would be irresponsible . Carolyn Miller (1979) offers humanistic connections between what technical communication is and what it s role is in communicative practice. She urges teachers of technical communic ation to improve the teaching and study of technical communication by re -evaluating reliance on positivist views of science and rhetoric. The positivist view of science, and by extension scientific and technical rhetoric, positions technical communication as the Òskill of subduing languageÓ so that language might efficiently and deliberately force minds into a particular kind of reality (610). A positivist approach to research and teaching in technical communication prioritizes report ing information efficiently, accurately, and objectively; Miller notes that, in this way, technical communication is devoid of emotion and human sentiment. So, t o combat this problematic view of technical communication, Miller points out that a Òhumanistic rationaleÓ for technical communication is needed, where : !!11 to write, to engage in any communication, is to participate in a community; to write well is to understand the conditions of oneÕs own participation ÐÐthe concepts, values, tradition s, and style which p ermit identification with that community and determine the success or failure of communication (617). In other words, technical communication researchers and teachers must convey to students that technical communicators are not merely interpreters of unfa miliar concepts or specialized writing , but rather participants in dynamic and shifting communication systems. We, and the students we teach, are participants in shifting systems of power and communication. It is in this moment of shift or change that the significance of relationship building takes center sta ge. I f we are seriously invested in teaching students how to write well, we must help them build humanistic and culturally aware relationships with one another, as well as with and for the communities i n which they belong and work . Another concern for technical communication researchers and teachers is the relationship among ideological and cultural production , discourse, and teaching . Carl Herndl (1993) writes that if technical communication teachers are uncritical in research and teaching Ò[students will not] perceive the cultural consequences of a dominant discourse or the alternate understandings it [the dominant discourse] excludesÓ (350). For Miller and Herndl, technical communication teachers and students must take responsibility for their be liefs and actions, and must understand those beliefs and actions as ideologically and culturally situated. As we see in Chapter 3 of this !!12 disse rtation, an investment approach to mentoring can help rhet oric and writing teachers and students to be accountable to writing they produce, and the decisions and actions their writing is part of. Herndl (1993) further asserts that once technical communication teachers abandon the current -traditional notion of rhe toric and writing practice as an indifferent, apolitical skill, they must Òrecognize that discourse is inseparable from institutions, from organizational structures, from disciplinary and professional knowledge claims and interests, and from the day -to-day interaction of workersÓ (353). 7 Technical communication teachers are Òunavoidably engaged in the production of professional and cultu ral power,Ó where it is easy to overlook contesting positions and, ultimately, cultures. (354). Therefore, r esistance beco mes an essential concept for a technical communication pedagogy aimed at political and cultural self -consciousness and liberation ( Herndl 352). We will see in Chapters 3 and 4 that mentoring, as a set of rhetorical practice s, can be used to reimagine all p ossible knowledges and positions without reifying confining and unequal structures of power. As I have previously mentioned, Bernadette Longo (1998) and other rhetoric and writing scholars advocate for a Òcultural turnÓ that seeks to manifest the struggle s for legitimating knowledge production in rhetoric and writing practice .8 This Òcultural turn Ó as Longo and Scott (2006) later note, is Òa narrow contextual focus on discrete organizational discourse communities, [a] mostly explanatory and pragmatic stance, and !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!7 See James Berlin and Robert Inkster (1980) for discussions on rhetorical devices, rhetorical situated ness, and current -traditional practice in Rhetoric and Composition. 8 See also Sullivan (1990); Herndl (1993); Blyler (1998); and Scott and Longo (2006). !!13 [an] elision of the politics of knowledge legitimationÓ (3). I n deploying critical and cultural theory as a way to inform writing research, Longo uses Michel Foucault (1972) to understand how discourses participate in power/knowledge systems (8). 9 In order to make Òvisible the invisible in technical communication ,Ó a cultural studies approach to research and teaching in technical co mmunication Òcan illuminate how the struggles for knowledge legitimation that tak e place within technical communication practices are influenced by institutional, political, economic, and/or social relationships and tensionsÓ (Longo 8 -11). As I show in Cha pter 4 , mentoring can, at the very least, make visible the social relationships and tens ions that colonize knowledge production. An investment approach to mentoring can facilitate discussions of power, polit ics, and other cultural tension s. Mentoring can help us further expose the complicatedness of technical communication itself. A cultural studies approach to research and teaching in technical communication makes space for otherwise invisible issues and complexities found within t echnical communication . These complexities include but are not limited to the ways in which technical communication can legitimate and subjugate certain knowledges, discourses, cultures , and individuals . A cultural studies approach to research, teaching, and mentoring helps us critique instances of writing that attempt to control and speak for others . Still, it falls short in equ ipping us with ways to interrogate our own and othersÕ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!9 Foucault writes that the task of discourse is to make differences: to constitute them as objects, t o analyze them, and to define their concept ( 229). In this study, I argue that mentoring can help Òreveal discursive practices in their complexity and density; to show that to speak is to do something Ðsomething other than to express what one thinksÓ namely to construct and legitimize knowledge (Foucault 230). !!!14 positions in relation to systems of power . Therefore, a cultural studies approach to mentoring in technical communication is a useful place to begin; however, a deco lonial approach to research, teaching , and mentoring in technical communication provides us better way to orient ourselves to the commitments and practices we value when we talk about and teach writing . A Decolonial Approach to Teaching and Mentoring in Technical Communication Several scholars promote a de colonial approach to research and teaching in higher education. 10 In this se ction I discuss a few contemporary theorists who se scholarsh ip is necessary in building this projectÕs framework for locating and inventing mentoring in workplaces . This decolonial approach calls upon contemporary decolonial scholars Michel de Certeau, Linda Tuhiwai -Smith, and Angela Haas, to illuminate how a decolonial appr oach to teaching and research in technical communication can be applied to mentoring. Unlike a cultural studies approach, a decolonial approach to understanding technical communication and mentoring insists that an individual resist power an d control by confront ing and delink ing from hegemonic, colonial institutional practices .11 So, to better understand how people resist structures of power and control , I turn to Michel de CerteauÕs (1984) work on the practices of everyday life. De Certeau analyzes a plurality of everyday, individual relationships, where these relationships !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!10 See also de Certeau (1984); Anzaldœa (1987) ; Tuhiwai -Smith (1999); Powell (2002); Mignolo (2003; 2011); and H aas (2007; 2012), among others. 11 See Mignolo ( 1995 and 2011). !!!15 make up culture or, according to de Certeau, are understood as Òsystems of operational combinationÓ (xi). De Certeau writes that everyday practices are Òways of operatingÓ like walking, reading, producing, and speaking (xi, 30). WhatÕs more, he asserts that everyday practices should not be understood as merely the background of social life, but should instead ex plain mass cultural productions. We see these cultural productio ns, for instance, in how technical and professional documents , and workplace relationships and ideologies are produced and reproduced. Everyday practices can subvert institutions of control and power. For de Certeau, this is accomplished through tactics. 12 Ordinary ( and often othered) people use tactics to alter the production of objects, traditions, and ways of knowing or being in relation to laws and language, which are manifestations of power relationships, or strategies. 13 This reappropriation of the thi ngs that constitute culture allows people to challenge and destabilize the tenets of the institutions (or the very institutions themselves) that impose ÔcorrectÕ or legitimated ways of knowing and doing on them. To this end, everyday practices must be fore -grounded in technical communication because everyday practices constitute the ways in which all texts and all cultures are produced, privileged , and/ or ignored. A tactical and I would argue a decolonial approach to mentoring affords individuals the chance to locate and explore their everyday practices, and how those !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!12 A tactic is Òa calculated action determined by the absence of a proper locus. The space of a tactic is the space of the otherÓ (de Certeau 37). 13 A strategy is Òthe calculation (or manipulation) of power relationships that becomes possible as soon as a subject with will and power (a business, an army, a city, a scientific institution) ca n be isolatedÓ (de Certeau 36). !!16 practices contribute to or challenge the top -down o r bottom -up structures of power, knowledge , and discipline. 14 De Certeau makes it clear to us that cultures are practiced into life every day. And, while not every act is in relation to a system of power, technical communication , and I argue, mentoring, are embedded in cultural practices that get remade eve ry time something is written, communicated , and/or performed . Practices, tactics, and strat egies can help us locate spaces of intervention within discourses of disciplinary, institutional , and professional power. Mentoring, when positio ned as a tactic, is not only a process of cultural study that can influence the texts , relationships, and cultures it produces, but also a set of practices a that encourage rhetorical intervention . In Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (1999) Linda Tuhiwai Smith proposes a methodology that seeks to undo the web of imperialism and colonialism of indigenous peoples. She notes that the past and present, local and global communities, languages , and social practices are Òspaces of marginalization [and] also spaces of resistance and hopeÓ (4). She writes that her decolonizing methodology is a Òframework of self -determination, decolonization , and social justiceÓ (4). Although Tuhiwai Smith offers a decolonizing methodology for the Maori of New Zealand, her work influences a decolonial approach to teaching , research, and mentoring in techn ical communication. A decolonial approach to mentoring can help technical communication students and teachers gain a Òcritical understanding of the underlying assumptions, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!14 See Foucault (1972) and Lyotard (1984) respectively . !!!17 motivations , and values which inform research practices ,Ó and other everyday and work place practices as well (Tuhiwai Smith 20) . A decolonial approach to mentoring in technical communication assists teachers in exposing how technical communication can serve cul tural and technical hegemony; this a pproach advocates resistance of imbalances of power. Mentoring, like research and teaching , can structure meaning -making systems and the practices and bodies associated with those systems (see also Herndl 1993). A decolonial mentoring network affords individuals the intellectual tools to visibilize the structures of colonization in cultural and textual production, to assess their position within those structures, and to not be shamed into silence upon their findings. Mentoring, as a set of rhetorical practices , is a web of relations that can reveal oppressive and hidden knowledge making systems found within many professional discourses and contemporary workspaces. Lastly, Angela Haas (2012) discusses cultural and critical race studiesÕ approaches to technical communication research and teaching . Spe cifically, Haas writes that it is crucial for technical communicators to understand Òhow race and place matter to technical communication research, scholarship, curriculum design, and pedagogyÓ (279). She challenges rhetoric and writing practitioners to co nsider how language might serve to reconstitute Òthe long standing legacies of colonialism and imperialism, particularly in the rhetoric that we choose to employ to represent our work and the work of othersÓ (288). Haas asserts that despite historical and contemporary scholarship concerned with the cultural influences and effects of technical !!18 communication practices, Longo (1998) explicitly made the case for technical communication scholarship that is grounded in cultural studies (280). 15 And, although Longo explicitly called for scholarship grounded in cultural studies, Haas argues Òthat technical communication also has a history of ignoring the ways in which our work is saturated with white male culture Ñwhich has real effects related to privilege and oppres sion on the lives and work of designers, writers, editors, and audiences of technical communicationÓ (284). Therefore, I argue similarly to Haas, that situated mentoring coupled with decolonial options for rhetoric and writing practice can enable us to re -imagine and reconstruct the recognition and negotiation o f cultural information to spur on social action. Put another way, we have the responsibility ÐÐthe obligation ÐÐto use mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition to make space for responsible discourse. Rhetoric, and by extension technical communication, is continuously cultural. A decolonial approach to mentoring supports the interconnectedness of bodies and things, a bridge connect ing cultural studies options with decolonial ones. For Haas, decolonial methodologies an d pedagogies serve two purposes: to redress colonial influences on perceptions of people, literacy, language, culture, and community and the relationships therein and support the coexistence of cultures, languages, literacies, memories , histories, places, and spaces ÐÐand encourage respectful and reciprocal d ialogue between and across them (297). !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!15 See also Katz (1992); Herndl (1993); Slack, Miller, and Doak (1993) . !!19 Thus, a cultural studies approach to research and teaching , combined with a decolonial one, is what I refer to in Chapter 2 as a feminist rhetorica l methodology for locating and inventing mentoring in s chool and non -school settings. This feminist methodology for studying and inventing mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition insists upon teachers and researchers to provide students with non -oppressive options for rethinking and reorganizing narratives of work, school, and rhetoric and writing practices. In short, the framework for this study helps us to more easily locate and invent an investment approach to mentoring, which is both equitable and sustai nable . Mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition and Technical Communication So, what do I mean when I talk about mentoring in this study ? According to the Merriam ÐWebster dictionary, the word mentor d ates to 1616, and is defined as Òa trusted counselor or guide; a coach, counsel, guide, or tutor.Ó This definition provides us a starting point in understanding who a mentor is, and the qualities a good mentor possesses. Rhetoric and writing scholars use Ò mentor Ó (or mentoring, mentorsh ip, mento ring relationship, and most recently mentoring network) to encompass a relationship or network generally consisting of two or more people with the express purpose of helping the individuals involved gro w intellectually, socially, and professionall y. While mentoring shifts based on context (e.g., location or physical space) and ava ilable resources, this shift also occurs because of the individual needs !!20 and wants of the mentor and mentee. 16 With that said, rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers often use the dictionary de finition as an entry point throughout much of our current scholarship, teaching practices, and informal conversations (see Eble and Lewis Gaillet 2008). To illustrate more specifically, Jennifer Clary -Lemon and Duane Roen (2008 ) write that networks of mentoring are multiple, and that a single network , or relationship, may nurture and shelter, and also isolate and alienate mentees and mentors from scholarly and social efficiency (see also Bloom 2007). Clary -Lemon and Roen assert that mentoring should be located Òas a scholarly practice,Ó and that a lack of contextual and critical definition of mentoring can lead to it b eing invisible, undervalued, or not valued at all (178). Further , Cindy Moore (2000) writes that mentoring i s Òso mewhere between service and teachingÓ and that mentoring becomes easily dismissed because of its often invisible and liminal nature. Moore carefully articulates how tricky it is to locate the personal in professional spaces; she writes that, for instance, some faculty avoid mentoring altogether for a variety of reasons, including the blurred personal and collaborative nature of mentoring, which can leave both mentor and mentee feeling vulnerable (152 -154). Mentoring , and the ways it is enacted in academic and other professional settings , must be understood, as I have previous ly discussed , in relation to and informed by ideological, political, and other social commitments . !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!16 For instance, an individual (mentee) might seek the guidance of a more experienced colleague to help her secure a promotion at work. If the mentee receives the promotion, it can be inferred that she no longer needs the support of her mentor, and therefore the relationship shifts to a new goal or ends altogether. I take up this point in greater detail in Chapters 3 and 4 of this project. !!21 Michelle Eble and Lyne” Lewis Gaillet write in their edited collection Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis (2008) that the essays in the book seek to Òdefine the current status of mentoringÓ in Rhetoric and Composition by giving Òinsight into the character of those rare individuals who embody the term mentorÓ (3). Eble and Lewis Gaill et write that the stories found in the collection are bound in place and time ÐÐare situated ÐÐand offer experiences of mentoring as students and teachers within English studies experience it. There are several sites in which to locate academic mentoring, and the professional discourses and practices that constitute mentoring are diverse and best defined in the of practice of everyday life (see also d e Certeau 1984; Herndl 1993) . In a similar way, Wendy Sharer, Jessica Enoch, and Cheryl Glenn (2008) write in ÒPerforming Professionalism: On Mentoring and B eing MentoredÓ that in order to grasp what it means to be professional, Rhetoric and Composition must expand current conversations that link professionalism and mentoring beyond teacher training . Instead, the connection between professionalism and mentoring must include Òmentoring necessary for becoming a well -rounded professional, for knowing how to juggle those myriad responsibilities and expectations that accom pany a faculty positionÓ (129). Further, they wr ite that m entoring can be one of the best experiences for teach ers and students because it cultivate s and expand s views of professional and personal success. Mentoring, for rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers , is most generative when mentor/mente e relationships are buil t on mutual benefit and respect. A nd yet, what we learn in this study is that m entoring is far more complex than any other type of relationship with a coach, counsel or, guide, or tutor. Mentoring span s across positive, !!22 negat ive, and indifferent experiences, and is informed by the personal , historical, and cultural identity categories that both mentor and mentee claim . I previously stated that mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition is commonly found in teacher training and graduate student support (see Barr Ebest 2002; Blackmon & Rose 2005). Mentoring is also understood in Rhetoric and Composition as an academic activity , that is, as the relationship between and/or among professors and students. 17 While this body of scholarship is indeed useful to my study, the complexities associated with mentoring in non -traditional learning spaces, non -academic environments, and for career -long development have largely gone unaddressed. 18 For example, much scholarship o n mentoring in Rhetoric and Composition does not directly address if and/or how women and other marginalized groups mentor and/or are mentored beyond the classroom and other aca demic settings .19 Researchers and teachers in Rhetoric and Composition recogniz e that mentoring is often positioned as the relationship between or among persons who come together for the purpose of advising, guiding, and /or training one another. Mentoring , ideally, consists of two or more individuals who are interested in reciprocal interactions and activities that allow both personal and professional growth for all involved, while simultaneously acknowledging a balance of power that flows from the mentor to the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!17 See Miller, Bruegemann, Blue, & Shepherd (1997); Bloom (2007); Baake et al. (2008); Clary -Lemon & Roen (2008). 18 I exp and on this point in greater detail in Chapters 3, 4, and 5. 19 See Chandler (1996); Moore (2000), (2013); Rickly and Harrington (2002); McGuire and Reger (2003); Ede (2004); Sharer, Enoch and Glenn (2008).!!!23 mentee. 20 Moreover, mentoring can afford individuals opportunities to conv erse with one another ( both verbally and written), share thoughts, feelings, concerns, questions, and other information with one another, thereby potentially transforming professional and personal productivity f or both the mentor and mentee . The framework for this study aims to make visible the often invisibility of power in mentoring relationships. And o ne way this framework begins to uncover power dynamics in mentoring is by prioritizing mentor and mentee gender identity in mentoring. Moving Beyond Trad itional Models of Mentoring: On Mentoring and Gender Previous academic scholarship in the social sciences and the humanities calls attention to a traditional model of mentoring, where masculinist values of hierarchy and competition directly influence (both negatively and positively) levels of professional activity and productivity. 21 In this way, an older, more -experienced expert helps a younger, less -experienced novice navigate various institutional settings and situations . While this model of mentoring presents itself in Rhetoric and Composition , and in non -academic spaces, too , alternative models of mentoring exist, which challenge traditional ways of mentoring and professionalization. For example, a commitment to feminist values of transparency, recipr ocity, and self -reflexivity (or self -awareness) can help mentors and mentees locate and use non -oppressive practices in mentoring relationships. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#!See Bloom (2007); Baake et al. (2008); Cole and Lyon (2008); Mosher Coggins and Trachsel (2008). 21 See McNenny and Roen (1992); Cain (1994); Okawa (2002); Bloom (2007); Henry and Bruland (20 10); Stowers and Barker (2010). !!!24 Christy Chandler (1996) writes that Òresearch on mentors suggests that mentoring relationships provide a unique perspective on career development in a variety of fields and vocations,Ó and yet much of that research is concerned with the male experience of mentoring, which does not necessarily reflect female and/or other minority groupsÕ experiences of mentoring (7 9). WhatÕs more, Chandler notes , there are typically two functions of trad itional, hierarchical mentoring . Of the two functions, she writes: The first is a career -enhancing function that includes sponsorship (e.g., nominating a prot”g” for promotion), coach ing (e.g., suggesting work strategies), facilitating exposure and visibility (e.g., bringing a prot”g” to meetings and conferences), offering challenging work, and protecting a prot”g” from criticism. All of these roles help the prot”g” establish credibili ty in the organization and prepare for advancement. The second prong is the psychosocial function, which involves the mentor as a role model, counselor, and friend and helps the young adult develop a sense of personal identity and competence (81). This tra ditional, master/ apprentice approach to mentoring may benefit both the mentor and mentee in particu lar environments and situations, especially in terms of physical safety. Still, traditional mentoring practices often do not recognize the gender identities of mentor and mentee as valuable attribute s to mentoring and its outcome(s). 22 In other words, as participants demonstrate in this study, failure to identify, recognize, and accept the influence of gender identity i n the mentoring relationship suppresses de sired !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!22 I take up this point in greater detail in Chapter 4. !!25 learning outcomes and growth. By shifting rhetoric and writing practice to focus on how mentoring is invented, and also how seriously we take identity markers that are central to all mentoring relationships, we can better recognize, re -evaluate, and address potential power imbalances that are part of the relationship. Gail McGuire and Jo Reger (2003) address issues of power imbalances found within traditional mentoring models and individual mentoring relationships. They advocate for a co -mentoring mod el, a model that is grounded in feminist theory and pedagogy. For McGuire and Reger, co -mentoring Òchallenges masculinist values of hierarchy, competition, and objectivity by emphasizing the importance of cooperative, non -hierarchical relationships for lea rning and developmentÓ (54). Moreover , Òfeminist co-mentoring seeks to dispel the view of the disembodied intellectual by attending to academicsÕ familial, personal, and emotional needsÓ, all of which affect mentoring and its possible outcomes ( McGuire and Reger 54). Despite the possible benefits of traditional mentoring (e.g., safety for the mentee, and/or credibility for the mentor), this kind of mentoring has its disadvantages. Most signi ficantly, traditional mentoring reinforce s power imbalances betwe en participants because one person in the relationship often has a monopoly on knowledge, skills, and resources. Acknowledging and embracing the personal, historical, cultural , and even emotional tendencies of mentoring can support growth and development f or both the mentor and mentee. Thus, a co -mentoring model, with its emphasis on mutual empowerment, can better balance personal and professional aspects of both the mentor and mentee Õs lives. In Chapter 4 of this dissertation, we see a kind of co -mentoring !!26 model ÐÐan investment approach to mentoring ÐÐthat works best for emp loyee -participants at HealthTech. As I have previously discussed, s cholars in both WomenÕs Studies and in Rhetoric and Composition comm ent on the two most common models of mentoring present in institutional spaces and places: a traditional model of mentoring and an alternative or co -mentoring model of mentoring. While both models of mentoring have their affordances and limitations, McGuir e and Reger (2003) assert that their co -mentoring model can and should replace traditional mentoring relationships that often prevent women from working together . All too common in work and/or other professional environments, women are Òencouraged to build barriers between themselves instead of working cooperatively in predominately male departmentsÓ (Caplan cited in McGuire and Reger 62). Values of reciprocity, self -reflexivity ( or self awareness), and transparency can be part of how mentoring is inven ted in workplace cultures. W e see in Chapter 4 of this study is if and how those values build inclusivity instead of barriers between or among women and other marginalized groups of people. Rhetoric and writing teachers and researchers often do and talk about mentoring in terms of formal and informal approaches to mentoring, and traditional and alternative models of mentoring. Mentoring , whether formal or informal, can manifest i n many ways. We see in Chapters 3 and 4 , for example, that while mentoring may beg in as hierarchical, it can evolve toward a co -equal relationship because of work and community relationships, and even through socializing and friendship -building activities (like talking, listening, and going out for drinks after work). Further, even thou gh !!27 mentoring relationships can be informal (read: not mandated by workplaces, departments , or programs), mentoring happens in ways both explicitly and implicitly, often at the same time (like asking a colleague or superior for help on a task ), and in a multitude of spaces, and with many and varied tools and technologies. Ultimately, whatÕs at stak e for Rhetoric and Composition and technical communication researchers and teachers is a re -envisioning of the extent that writing in school setting s truly does prepare students for writing at work. An investment approach to m entoring c an help student writers adjust to new and exciting workplace writing tasks and relationship building situations. Conclusion: Using Mentoring to Add Value to Rhetoric and Composition In this chapter, I have begun building a framework for locating and inventing mentoring that is culturally and socially situated. What emerges from this heuristic is an investment approach to mentoring, an approach that makes space for the self -identification of an individual who is part of a mentoring relationship. As we will see in Chapters 3 and 4, an investment approach to mentoring takes up Johndan Johnson -EilolaÕs (1996) call for an increase in collaboration among socially and cultura lly aware learners, writers, and communicators . He writes: By attempting to both learn from and change existing collaborative practices, we position ourselves and our students as socially responsible experts ÐÐin other words, we help students learn to be bo th effective participants and responsible community members (260). !!28 An investment approach to mentoring, I argue, extends Johnson -EilolaÕs call, and can also begin to shed light on Ginny RedishÕs articulation of what it means to Òadd value Ó as a technical and professional communicator s and how to do it (505) . In the following chapter, I describe how I enacted this research framework in order to theorize how mentoring helps emplo yee -participants at HealthTech I ndustries be both effective and respo nsible coworkers and community members. The experiences and narratives that make up the remainder of this dissertation are from participantsÕ celebrations and challenges with using mentoring to learn and build workplace relationships. !!29 CHAPTER 2 A FEMINIST METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH FOR LOCATING AND INVENTING MENTORING Voices are connected with the event; each voice can give us a slightly different story, and to develop one narrative suppresses the richer story. At the same time, to tell the richer stories al lows the dissonances to show. Such tensions drive research. --Patricia Sullivan and James Porter, Opening Spaces: Writing Technologies and Critical Research Practices , 182 I use this chapter as a way to sketch out my approach to uncover, locate, and be responsible to the questions guiding this dissertation project that I raised and began to answer in the previous chapter. WhatÕs more, this framework holds me, the researcher, accountable to the practices I claim for research, and the communities in and fo r which I work. In recent years, Rhetoric and Composition scholars have become more interested in writing as it intersects with professional development practi ces. In the last 16 years, we have seen analys es of the disconnect between academ ic and paired workplace writing , how power, knowledge, and texts are generated and accum ulated !!30 over time in a workplace , and genre and writing technologies in the workplace .23 Equally important, as I ha ve discussed previously in this dissertation, is the Stories of Mento ring: Theory & Praxis (2008) collection that addresses academic work experiences and academic perceptions of mentoring. While this body of research is certainly useful to my study, these studies do no t explicitly address how individuals use mentoring to learn over the duration of their career. Therefore, this dissertation project closely examines how mentoring helps individuals stay accountable to and respo nsible for the kinds of writing, communication, and relationship building practices in their workplace s. Rhetoric is the study of networks of meaning -making, and these meaning -making practices include writing, composing, and performing. This way of understanding rhetoric allows me to situate mentoring as a critical component of a individualÕs ability to learn, process, and retain information, and convert that information into useable and transferrable knowledge over the duration of their career. In short, as I will show in this chapter, mentoring i s rhetorica l work, work that can be located th rough observ ations, interviews, and mapping or diagramming . This chapter examin es the framework I built for studying mentoring at HealthTech Industries. This framework is enacted to show how workplace learning and workplace relationships are sustained at HealthTech . The methodologies and methods I call upon in this chapter connect workplace learning and workplace relationship building to the kinds of mentoring a person experiences throughout her/his career. In this chapter, I !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!23 See Dias, Freedman, Medway, and Par” (1999), Winsor (2003), and Swarts (2008) respectively. !!31 show how this approach to loca ting, examining, and inventing mentoring in the workplace is a powerful means to success over the many years an individual develops professionally and personally. What emerges f or the reader, in this chapter , is a set of practices that reveal how mentoring acts as a set of rhetorical practices for building and maintaining moments of experiential learning. The Site in Particular: HealthTech Industries HealthTech Industries is a medical device manufacturing company with locations all over the world. Specifically, the location for this project is one of HealthTechÕs main campuses located in north central Indiana , USA . HealthTech is nestled in a small er, close -knit community, a community that is politically, religiously, and socially conservative. For m any of the participants in this study, the surrounding community was crucial in their decision to work at HealthTech : One of the things that I wanted to do with my family was I wanted to be able to have a place that we could call Òhome.Ó That became import ant to me the longer I was married. We came back to [the area] because we felt like it was a good place to be able to call Ôhome,Õ a great place to be able to raise kids. It had [the economic support] here with the orthopedics industry that created a good living for the people in the community. And also : There really is a lot to do here . We have theater, we have concerts, and then we have just being an hour away [from bigger cities] . We have all that !!32 they [the bigger cities] have to offer, museums and all that. I think this area is a great place to raise children. I don't have children, but just the school system and what it has to offer is phenomenal. We even have lakes ! Spatially, HealthTechÕs main campus is composed of two large manufacturing buildings. The first building, building one, produces medical implants and instruments. The second building, building two, produces cases and trays for the implants and instruments made in building one . Each building has a lobby with receptionist area, and a number of different sized conference rooms for meetings. Despite the buildingsÕ similarities, it is obvious that much of the business conducted at HealthTech happens in building one. There are marked differences in each buil ding (e.g., number of executive offices, kinds of administrative technologies, etc.), but these differences are not the subject of this study , although they may contribute to participantsÕ experiences with mentoring while at work . I recruited participants for this study through Julie, a contact I had at HealthTech prior to this project. I emailed Julie, and explained to her the general design and purpose of my study. After our initial email conversation, Julie forwarded me a list of employees who were interested in participating in my study. I contacted the list of employees, and recruit ed seven other participants for this study , for a total of eight participants, four women and four men. As we learn throughout this project, e ach participant occupie s some kind of executive, managerial, or administrative position at HealthTech . Later in this chapter, I discuss the specific methods I used when working with participants. !!33 A Qualitative Framework for Exploring and Inventing Workplace Mentoring The methods used in this study re flect my commitment to cultural rhetorical research practices. The qualitative framework for this study adheres to three broader concepts for carrying out the research in this study : storytelling, rhetorical listening, and mapping. In relation to mentoring and other professional development practices, this framework helps rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers to not only value what mentoring is and why it is important in workplaces (e.g., career enhancement or possible advancement/promotion ) but to also value how these practices ÐÐthe se relationships ÐÐare located, invented , and understood in the first place. This study is a rhetorical analysis of workplace mentoring and relationship building. And, because of this study, we learn that the invent ion of workplace relationships and mento ring networks depends on the stories HealthTech emp loyees share with one another, that they tell themselves, and that they ask their friends and families to believe . A Feminist Methodological Approach : On Storytelling, Rhetorical Listening, and Mapping My preference for foregrounding participant voices in this study is familiar to workplace writing studies in technical communication (see also Yates 1989; Dias et al. 1999, among others). Pat ricia Sullivan and James Porter write in Opening Spaces: Writing Technologies and Critical Research Practices that researchers must be reflective of the methodological choices they make in all research endeavors . Researchers must Òembrace working across methodological interfaces [É] to expand !!34 critically and creatively the boundaries of researchÓ (188). Doing anything less greatly damages the larger goal of all research: Òthat is, to help empower and liberate through the act and art of writingÓ ( Sullivan and Porter 188). An important d ecision I made when designing this study was to prioritize participantÕs stories and experiences of mentoring. Instead of only reporting on what mentoring is for HealthTech employees, I wanted them to make clear for readers how mentoring is enacted daily at HealthTech . In this way, the function of participant voice in this study does what Sullivan and Porter write as showcasing the effort of everyone involved ÐÐfrom the researcher to the participants. My decision to conduct research in this way calls attention to the Òeffort [that] stresses their [participantsÕ] bodies, and ours,Ó which can be accomplished by using a feminist or a postmodern research methodology (Sullivan and Porter 159). We wi ll see in Chapters 3 and 4 that discussing workplace relati onships and mentoring can be potentially harmful to perso nal well -being and job security. However, acknowledging participant positions through individual voice is not only necessary, but also acts as a way to be accountable to participants Õ and researcher commitments to doing research well . I framed each chapter in this dissertation around participant sÕ experience s with mentoring. I n doing so, I hope I have designed a way to do research about mentoring that provides a diverse view of how mentoring is invent ed and sustained in workplace cultures. Feminist research practices, according to Liz Stanley and Sue Wise (1993), must be concerned with all aspects of social reality and all participants in it (31) (see also !!35 Royster and Kirsch 2012) . We see throughout this study, via participantsÕ stories and experiences of mentoring, a central belief of feminism ÐÐthat the personal is political . But beyond this, Stanley and Wise (1993) write: The pers onal is not only the political. It is also the crucial variable which is absolutely present in each and every attempt to 'do research', although it is frequently invisible in terms of the presentation of this research. It mustn't be absent from presentations of feminist research, because t his is to deny the importance of the personal elsewhere. In other words, academic feminism must take feminist beliefs seriously, by integrating these within our research. We see the presence of the researcher's self as central in all research (157). Ther efore, the framework for this study included ÐÐindeed it insisted upon ÐÐme, as the researcher, sharing my own experiences with mentoring in professional places and spaces with participants during our time together. Put another way, participant personhood cannot be left behind in research , cannot be left out of the research process , and must be made full use of. !!HealthTech employee -participantsÕ experiences of mentoring are built around past and current mento ring experiences. An individualÕs past and current experiences with mentoring create new understandings of what mentor ing is and how itÕs legitimized in a particular workpla ce culture. What we begin to learn in this study is how different accounts of and experiences with mentoring accumulate over t ime, and how those accumulations reflect and reinforce the beliefs , values, politics, and histories of that !!36 workplace .24 Ultimately, we learn that the work of an individual investing in her/his professional identity aids in sustainable organizational and workplace relationships. Generally speaking, the stories of a workplace can accept or challenge hierarchies; they can also work to eliminate biases of gender identity, race, class , and ability in personal and professional spaces (see also d e Certeau 1984; Brooks 2008). The narrative mentoring experiences of participants in this study are the foundation of my dissertationÕs methodological framework; their stories articulate how mentoring is located, understood, and invented in their workplace , and also the affordances and consequences of those mentoring practices for individual and company success . For the participants in this study, stories of mentoring and professional development illustrate, as Thomas King notes (2008), how stories have sh aped their ways of being and doing at home, at work, and in society. Their stories impact their personal beliefs , and their individual and collective workplace decisions. 25 The stories participants tell and cho ose to believe about mentoring shape not only their attitudes about professional development and mentoring, but also their current and future mentoring relationships and practices. We learn because of this study that participantsÕ stories challenge previous understanding s of mentoring as an object of stu dy, and instead move toward an understanding of mentoring as a culturally significant process or practice. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!24 See also Hayden White (1991). 25 In Chapters 3 and 4, I discuss participantsÕ experiences of and stories about mentoring as a mode of learning and as relationshi p building . !!37 As participants shared with me their experiences of mentoring, I audio recorded their stories, and then later I listened rhetorically to each participantÕs story .26 Drawing on Krista RatcliffeÕs (2005) idea of rhetorical listening, I listened to participantÕs stories while also examining my own personal and cultural beliefs and values. Rhetorical listen ing helps is one way to continually negotiate Òalways -evolving standpoints and identities, with the always -evolving standpoints of others Ó (Ratcliffe 209 ). The framework for this workplace study recognize s, similarly to Ratcliffe, that positions Ò are not autonomous points of static stases but rather complex webs of dynamically intermingled cultural structures and subjective agencyÓ (209 ). Using these methods can help HealthTech employees foster deliberate self -identifications that may, in turn, facilitate the sustainability of their professional, workplace relationships. The third and final component of this projectÕs f rame work for studying mentoring in a workplace is mapping. By mapping, I mean that participants physically drew and/or diagrammed a map of mentoring Ñthat is , a map or network of the people, places, and things that they associate with mentoring. The affordances of a mentoring map are two -fold. Firstly, maps give participants a way to visually, alphabetically, and non -alphabetically represent their experiences with and attitudes toward mentoring. This visual representation shows, as Clay Spinuzzi (2008) writes , how things, places, ideas, and people Òfrom different functional areas collaborate to solve problems, connecting in networks, that include different tools, objectives, rules, and divisions of labor, tools, and !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!26 I expand on this in more detail later in this chapter. !!38 artifactsÓ (4). 27 Secondly, when used with storytelling and rhetorical listening, mapping helps me understand how participantÕs relationships to and with ideas, artifacts, and other people encoura ge or limit different kinds of professional knowledge and/ or professional practices in their work environment. By using maps as a method in this project, participants made more visible the textual and literal geographies of their work environment , and, by extension, the mentoring stories and histories that matter to them. Mapping or diagramming help s HealthTech employees make visible the cultures claimed as home and as professional , and if, how , where, and why those cultures intersect. ParticipantsÕ mentor ing maps are contextual and deliberate articulations of their past an d present mentoring experiences. Each map shows the people, places, ideas, emotions, and things that infl uence or effect their mentoring. While each participant drew their mentoring map, they connected their mentoring stories and experiences to personal and professional (e.g., work) relationships, professional expectations (e.g., promotion within the company) and cultural artifact s. Maps, therefore, can help HealthTech employees position m entoring as always -already -active by focusing on its ability to ÒmoveÓ (or ÒgoÓ or Òbe mobileÓ), and not only be seen, talked about, or listened to. Mapping afforded employee -participants to visually represent how mentoring is Òcirculated, transformed, dis placed, hybridized, and developed to meet the needs of particular, localized workÓ (Spinuzzi 2008 4). !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!27 See also Clarke (2005) and Brooks (2008). !!39 A Plan for Observing Situated Mentoring at HealthTech Industries In the first chapter of t his diss ertation, I situated the connection between mentoring and teaching in technical communication. Then, in the beginning of this chapter, I introduced a qualitative framework designed to see mentoring and professional development in rhetoric and writing practice differently. I use the remainder of this chapter to elaborate on the set of methods I used to carry out the research for this project . In order to better understand how mentoring is invented in a given workplace, I adhered to four different methods of data collection focused on exploring employees -partici pantsÕ experiences of mentoring: 1) field observations, 2) individual interviews, 3) participant -drawn mentoring maps, and 4) focus group interviews. 2829 The first of four methods, field observation s, had me touring building one (implants and instruments) and building two (tray and casing) at HealthTech Õs main campus located in Indiana, USA . These initial and subsequent observations of both buildings helped me to get a feel for the kinds of activities in and across the buildings . These observations also he lped me further contextualize the kinds of work employee -participants would likely talk about in their individual and focus group interviews. 30 While I was not able to observe participants for one workday, they did agree to answer my !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!28 This research protocol was approved by a Human Subjects review board at Michigan State University , and by the empl oyees at HealthTech Industries. 29 These methods also correspond to the framework previo usly discussed in this chapter. 30 All eight participants agreed to be interviewed; however , because of the competiti ve nature of HealthTechÕs work, all eight employees declined to be observ ed in their offices during one 8-10 hour workday. Despite this hiccup, I asked participants to fill out a worksheet I created with questions that reflected their daily and weekly work and communication activities. This method is detailed below. !!40 questions about the kin ds of work they do during a typical workday. The second method, individual interviews, had me focusing on employee -participants who agreed to talk with me about their experiences with professional development and mentoring inside and out of HealthTech. All eight participants agreed to b e interviewed, and it was after each individual interview that I coded and located patterns in their stories, which later formed the fourth method for this study, focus groups. The third method in this project occurred duri ng the individual interviews. During the individual interviews, I asked participants to draw their mentoring maps, indicating the people, things, beliefs and values, and places that factor into mentoring and other professional development practices. Lastly , four months after the individual interviews were completed, I conducted two focus groups with participants around t he patterns that arose during their individual interviews. 31 What follows, then , is a detailed analysis of my time spent with HealthTech employee -participants about their experiences with professional development and mentoring. In my analysis, I attempt to answer Lewis GailletÕs and EbleÕs challenge to Rhetoric and Composition to not only acknowledge and celebrate differences in mentoring ÐÐdifferences that occur across boundaries of race, class, gender, and ability ÐÐbut also to foster mutual benefit and respect between/among all involved in mentoring (309). Additionally, I articulate the tensions and challenges of researching an investment approach to mentoring through a feminist rhetorical lens, which positions mentoring as practice rather than an object of study. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!31 My initia l goal was to divide the eight participants into three focus groups. I conducted two focus groups with five participants in total. !!41 The methods I used in this study allowed me to explore mentoring as situated, as contextually bound in time, sp ace, and in participantsÕ stories and experiences of mentoring and of work. Still, there are many things about HealthTech Industries and about the employees who work there that may appear as gaps in my study. For instance, these eight participants are a sm all representation of HealthTech, and do not necessarily speak for other employees who work there. Further, after individual inter views with four out of the eight employee -participants, several other HealthTech employees voiced their interest i n participat ing in this project. A nd while I would have enjoyed talking with them to gain a more accurate representation of mentoring at HealthTech, I could not talk with them due to the time and scope of this project. 32 The stories and experiences of the participants in this study provide a small glimpse into the professionalization practices and mentoring relationships for HealthTech employees. Additionally, the founder and CEO of HealthTech was interested in and supportive of the research I was doing with and for h is company. I did not interview him for this study, but I did provide him with a general research findings report after the data collection and analysis period. In the findings report, I highlighted how employees understand and invent mentoring at HealthTe ch. Then, during a conversation in August 2014, the CEO and I discussed how mentoring matters to the employees at HealthTech , and we brainstormed strategies for sustaining and improving employeesÕ professional development experiences at work . I was encoura ged to have the support of the CEO, although I was acutely aware that a fine line exists between a boss endorsing research !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!32 These employees have since been contacted, and will participate in phase two of this research project, which will occur at a later date. !!42 and strong -arming employees into participation. 33 Nevertheless, I am happy to report that the CEOÕs support for this dissertation proj ect was sincere; he found genuine favor with this study because it corroborated company values associated with mentoring, career -long learning, and sustainable workplace relationships. Moreover , my study does not characterize every kind and type of mentoring relationship or experience in HealthTech , but focuses instead on what we can learn about an investment approach to mentoring for sustainable, career -long learning. In my time at HealthTech, I was an observer of the main campusÕ space (building on e and building two), as well as a listener of employee -participants who shared their experiences, stories , and mentoring maps with me. Similarly , in ironing out the details for this study, I relied on an Ôinside connectionÕ at HealthTech, a family acquaint ance who is also a participant in this project. With her help, I recruit ed employees for this study. It must also be noted that the employee -participants in this study have expressed, at one time or another in their tenure with HealthTech, interest and par ticipation in company professional development and mentoring initiatives and programs. The employees who agreed to participate in this study are from v arious executive and management -level posit ions at HealthTech Industries. In Chapter 1 , I suggest that we might understand mentoring as cultural and rhetorical , and as a set of rhetorical practices that keep individuals accountable and responsible to their writing, communication, and learning practices. With this premise in mind, it might have been go od for me to note other moments, texts, or documents of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!33 See Karen Jehn and Karsten Jonsen (2010) for a more detailed !discussion of a multi -method approach to study ing sensitive organizational issues. !!!43 mentoring for employees at HealthTech (e.g., monthly/quarterly division meetings, HR documents, etc.). However, the focus on employee -participantsÕ experiences of mentoring afforded me to create a study with a controllable boundary, as well as to focus expressly on employee -participantsÕ mentoring relationships more broadly, and also the specific, relational aspects of their networks that Lewis Gaillet and Eble call us to do. Therefore, my focus on participantsÕ mentoring relationships has directed this study by examining the tensions, problems, and challenges in employee self -identification, career -long learni ng, and workplace relationships. T his study has not taken up how employees use mentoring to nav igate other workplace networks , how digital and onli ne technologies affect mentoring, nor the effects of space and place on mentor ing relationships and practices, though these three additional themes are present in the data I collected while at HealthTech. 34 Fieldnotes and General Observations Prior to wor king with HealthTech employees, I knew very little about the company. I did not know what employees did there, nor did I know about the kinds of medical devices they produced and for whom. In the fall of 2013, t hrough a mutual contact , I connected with Hea lthTe ch, and briefly explained to my contact (Julie) the general goals of my study . It was because of Julie that I contacted and recruit ed the other employee -participants for this study. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!34 See Clay Spinuzzi (2008); Jason Swarts (2008); and Doreen Massey (1994), respectively. !!44 My first time at HealthTech Industries was in February 2014, for my field observations and the fi rst three individual interviews . After arriving at building one on HealthTechÕs main campus, I introduced myself to the central administrative assistant, signed in, and I sat in the lobby for a few minutes. I took Òmental notes Ó about what I saw and heard ÐÐemployees walking to and from one anotherÕs offices, customers and business partners coming and going to and from HealthTech, and also the names of people, meetings and their locations, and other technical jargon circulating t hroughout the buildingÕs intercom system. I arrived to HealthTech early for my first visit because I did not want to be late due to traffic and being unfamiliar with the geographical area. When I arrived at HealthTech, I asked to use the public restroom. As I walked through the halls of building one toward the restroom, I observed the general layout of offices, conference rooms, and the kitchen/eating space ÐÐthe atmosphere of their work environment. Since I couldnÕt observe participants for one workday, I recorded what I remembered from my quick observations (of being in the company while waiting for participants) later that day after my interviews. I applied this same strategy to the participant -led tours of buildings one and two. 35 In total, during the month of February 2014, I was at HealthTech for four days, over a two -week period, for four to six hours per day for participantsÕ individual interviews. Then, in Jun e and July 2014, I conducted focus groups with participants, and spent an additional six h ours with them at HealthTech. The time I spent with participants varied to accommodate their schedules, and also to make room for potentially long !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!35 See Spinuzzi (2013). !!45 interviews and focus group sessions . In sum, among individual interviews, focus -group interviews, and social meetings with participants in this study and other HealthTech employees (e.g., lunches and coffee b reaks), I spent approximately 30 hours with employees. Methods w ith Individual Participants In order to understand employee -participantsÕ experiences and stories of mentoring, I interviewed eight HealthTech employees who hold different kinds of executive and management -level positions within the company: Maria, Claire, Julie, Kris, Bill, Patrick, Kevin, and Randall. 36 In Chapters 3 and 4, I tell specific and contextualized stories about these eight employees, especially how they use mentoring to learn and write well, and also how mentoring helps them form and be accountable to their workplace relationships. But for now, in this chapter, my main focus is o n how I interacted with these employees so I could learn about how their mentoring experiences are connected to their development as a professional. Even though Julie i s a family acquaintance, I did not know whom I would be interviewing about their experiences with mentoring. What I did know, however, was that the company invested in their employeesÕ professional development and career growth; accordi ng to HealthTechÕs website, the company as a whole is committed to build ing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!36 All names used are pseudonyms per IRB guidelines. !!46 quality relationships first and products second. 37 So, any ideas I had of who I was going to interview at HealthTech were pretty open. I wanted to talk with anyone who wanted to share their mentoring stories with me, whether those stories were negative or positive. Additionally, all eight employee -participants expressed that mentoring is one part of their professional development Òtool box,Ó and that writing and other forms of communication (e.g., talking to one another in the hallway or during meeting s) factored into at least some part of their experiences with mentoring. Moreover, almost all employee -participants defined their workplace mentoring relationships as both ÒworkÓ and Ònot -work,Ó that is , something which is done in a work space and may be r equired, and y et, almost simultaneously does no t feel obliga tory. A s one participant noted, ÒI enjoy it [mentoring] because IÕm able to connect with my coworkers in ways that feel easy.Ó I suspect that their experiences of mentoring as both ÒworkÓ and Ònot -workÓ are because mentoring networks are often multiple and invisible, and yet there are moments of required visibility of mentoring (e.g., writt en performance evaluations, emails corresponding about mentoring meetings, and even social get -togethers) . Still, I believe that regardless of the invisibility and/or visibility of mentoring at HealthTech , mentoring nevertheless requires inte ntional, active actions. As we wi ll see in Chapters 3 and 4, mentoring is deeply connected to how employees self -identi fy their genders and learn while at home and at work . This point is central to understanding an investment !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!37 HealthTechÕs commitment to relationships ( which is the cornerstone of the company Õs vision and mission statements ) came up during several individual interviews. What I learned was their commitment to relationships is to both employees and customers. !!!47 approach to mentoring as situated and as an embodied rhetorical practice. 38 As I detail in Chapters 3 and 4, employee -participants work in different company divisions at HealthTech, and have worked at HealthTech for at least 10 years, with some participants having worked at HealthTech for twenty or more years. In order to maintain participants anonymity, I refer to the kinds of work they do at HealthTe ch as ÒexecutiveÓ ÒmanagementÓ Òsenior -levelÓ or som e combination of these terms. Audio -recorded interviews with individual participants My first interaction with employee -participants included the preparation for and completion of individual interviews with each person. A week prior to our scheduled interview times, I emailed the questions I was going to ask participants during each interview so that they could prepare for our interview. 39 When I arrived at HealthTech to interview participants and tour the buildings , I introduced myself and repeated a brief summary of my project, which was arti culated to them in the emails I ha d sent out previously asking for their participation in my study . I met with each participant, alon e, in either their office spac e or in a company conference room . Each in terview lasted a least one hour, with some interviews lasting two or two -and-a-half hours. I recorded each conversation using both a digital recording device and also the Garage Band application on my computer. Whe n appropriate, like if a participant said something I thought was !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!38 See Stacey Pigg (2011) for an in -depth analysis of embodied rhetoric and writing practice. 39 As I indicated in Chapter 1 and in the beginning of this chapter, t he interview questions were written to reflect my commitment to a feminist, qualitative methodology when interviewing participants. This approach to interviewing asks the interviewee to reflect on a wide range of experiences that may influence their present -day experiences. !!!48 important or worth remembering, I noted it in a Microsoft Word document on my computer. While interviewing participants in a semi -structured , story -based way was an important part of the m ethodology for this project, nevertheless a limitation of this method was that I collected data that was possibly too far Òoff topicÓ (i.e., conversations about children, or about extracurricular activities, etc.) and more tangential than is required for t his study (Miles, Huberman, and SaldaŒa 2014) . As a result, it was somewhat difficult to sift through each interview, to organize, code, and decide what to keep in and what to exclude from this study. Even though it took me extra time in coding and analyzi ng participantsÕ stories, participants told me that the interviews felt more like a conversation than an interview, and that they enjoyed our time together. For this reason alone, having participants feel comf ortable during our sessions, I would replicate my interview strategies for the next research project I undertake. Much of my study focused on how gender identity affects an individualÕs approach to mentoring. 40 As such, it was my top priority that participants could decide for themselves when to reveal things about their gender identity that affected their mentoring relationships and practices . For instance, if a question I asked made a participant feel uncomfortable, I assured them that they did not have to answer the question , and that their non -respo nse would not affect the rest of their interview or my analysis of their interview. I was very aware of my own interests in mentoring and identity formation and development, so I encouraged participants to share whatever !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!40 I expand on this point in greater detail in Chapter 4. !!49 experiences and stories they cared to share with me during our time together. As we learn in Chapters 3 and 4, most employees were comfortable talking about the gender identity and the ways it impacts their work place relationships. Despite my cautious yet open approach to interviewing part icipants, I found that five (Maria, Claire, Randall, Julie, and Patrick) employee -participants were eager to talk about and/or relate their gender identity to their experiences with mentoring, professional development, and their general approaches to work at HealthTech. WhatÕs more, all eight participants, as I detail in Chapter 3 , linked their experiences with and approaches to mentoring to school and non -school learning. B y the end of the eighth interview, it was clear to me that employees at HealthTech u sed mentoring as a way to not only continue their informal and formal education, but also to learn more about themselves and their commitments to building solid workplace and personal relationships. I ended each individual interview with two written activ ities , one to be completed while I was at HealthTech and the other to be completed and snail -mailed or emailed back to me. 41 In the first activity, I asked participants to draw their mentoring maps. I explained to each participant what a mento ring map is, s howed them my example map, and verbally gave them directions of what I wanted them to do. I supplied participants with an 8.5 in x 11 in sheet of white paper, and a pen and pencil for this activity. For the second activity, I gave them a two -page worksheet to complete in regards to their day -to-day work practices and workplace communication routines. The goal of this activity !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!41 I explain and analyze both of these activities in greater detail in the following two sections of this chapter. !!50 was for me to get a better understanding of how each participant worked in her or his particular division, and how work, writing, com munication, and mentoring intersect daily. Participant -drawn mentoring maps During individual interviews, I asked participants to draw their own mentoring maps. Befor e the interviews, I drew my mentoring map as an example; I gave this map to each particip ant, and verbally instructed them how to complete their maps by pointing to and referencing the different parts of my map. I told participants to put their names in the middle of the sheet of paper , circle them, and then begin to build their maps with the people, ideas, places, and things they find useful for mentoring and professional development. Once they completed their map, I encouraged them to rank the categories they drew on their map in order of most importance (1 being the highest and so on). The point of this activity was for participants to visualiz e and build their mentoring and professional development network, and for me to see how those maps corre sponded to their individual and focus group interviews. The figure below is an example of a !!51 mentor ing map from one of the employee -participants at HealthTech. I received six out of eight participant mentoring maps. Some participants completed their mentoring maps while I was at the company for their interview, and others needed more time to complete their drawings, and so they snail -mailed or emailed their maps to me within a week of our interview. I did not received two mentoring maps, and my conclusion for this is simply that two employee -participants forgot to complete the task. Figure 1. Photograph: Participant -drawn mentoring map !!52 Written w ork communication activity The second written activity I asked participants to complete was about their day -to-day work practices , and how they communicated with colleagues . I came up with this activity because I was not able to observe participants in thei r work environment for one work day . As with the mentoring map activity, participants were under no obligation to complete this written activity. I received six out of eigh t participant workplace communication worksheets . Again, I did not receive two communication activities, and my conclusion for this is because employee -participants forgot to complete the task. Once I completed individual interviews with participants , I began to code, sort , and analyze a participantÕs i nterview, mentoring map , and wo rkplace communication worksheet . I determined that the workplace communication worksheets would not be used in this dissertation project because I wanted to focus the studyÕs results chapters on specific and significant stories a nd experiences about mentoring. 42 As a result of my initial coding and analysis of these three activities, I decided to conduct focus group interviews with participants. Participants were placed into a f ocus group because of connected and/or similar experiences with or stories of mentoring. Audio -recorded focus group interviews My second formal encounter with participants was during focus group sessions. The focus groups for this study occurred in June a nd July of 2014. Participants were !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!42 Many participantsÕ workplace communication worksheet responses did not articulate mentoring, but rather the intricacies of a participantÕs daily work rout ine. I plan to return to this data set as the subject of a related research study . !!53 placed into a focus group because of connected and/or similar experiences with or stories of mentoring. As with the individual interviews, I emailed my focus group interview questions to participants a week before the foc us group, and explained to them that the focus group would last no more than an hour. 43 I conducted two focus group interviews, with 6 out of 8 participants. When I met with each group, I read aloud instructions that would guide the focus group. I encourag ed participants to respond to my questions by talking less to me, and more to one another. To my surprise, p articipants managed to do just that; during one focus group session, I observed that participants rarely made eye contact with me, and instead talke d and gestured toward one another, all while writing down key points and drawing one another diagrams to help convey talking points. Once I completed focus group sessions with participants, I began to code, sort, and analyze participantsÕ conversations. So me data from each focus group is used in this dissertation project. Brief description of methods used for analysis Once the individual and focus group interviews were complete, I began analyzing each individual interview through written analytical memos (Miles, Huberman, and SaldaŒa 1994; 2013) . The analytical memos , sometimes known as qualitative memos, are short , mini -analyses of data collected. These mini -analyses reflected what I learned as a result of int erviewing HealthTech employees and coding their mentoring maps. Each me mo was about one page in length, single -spaced , and was composed of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!43 As it turned out, participants reserved at least two hours f or our focus group sessions. Each focus gr oup lasted almost two hours . !!54 concepts, themes, and patterns that emerged from participantsÕ interviews . Based on the individual interviews alone, i n total , I wrote twenty analytical memos. Then, I categorized employees -participantsÕ experiences and analytical memos by locating moments where a participantÕs experience aligned with (or not) the research questions that framed this study. 44 While I wrote my an alytical memos, I also sorted and coded participantsÕ stories and other data with the help o f a listing exercise. To illustrate , my listi ng exercise was made up of three steps. I created a three -column spreadsheet in M icrosoft Excel. In the first column, I wrote a list of the claims I could support with my own , original data. These claims are straightforward and descriptive, and some are also obvious (e.g., mentoring happens at HealthTech Industries). E very claim I made was su pported by evidence from my interviews and written activities . Thi s evidence made up the second column. In this second column, I referenced the analytical memo (if one existed) I had written about the claim, and also any secondary scholarship that would support or refute the claim. Lastly , in column three, I referenced a ll of the primary source data I collected that supported the claim. The primary data I used to support these claims were moments in transcribed interviews, field notes, observatio ns, and collected artifacts. It i s important to note that I used, often, more than one of these primary sources as evidence to support a claim ; for example , a participantÕs mentoring map served as evidence for both of my results chapters in this dissertation. My over all goal in completing this listing exercise was to triangulate my data if possible, thereby making strong connections across participantsÕ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!44 I discuss and provide brief answers to these research questio ns in Chapter 1 . !!55 mentoring experiences that I may have no t realized before (Agar 1985; Lauer and Asher 1988). Once these three columns were completed, I began to sort them into ÒbucketsÓ or larger categories or themes (e.g., intersection s of gender and mentoring). This analysis exercise helped me build results chapters by using the grouped claims as outlines , and then fleshing o ut the connections between my work on mentoring and the wor k of previou s researchers and the orists in Rhetoric and Composition. In total, I had over 200 claims I that I could support with primary a nd secondary data. As we learn in Chapters 3 and 4 , I identify that mentoring is a mode of lea rning for HealthTech employees, and that mentoring is indeed useful in building sustainable workplace relationships at HealthTech. Conclusion: Mentoring is Rhetorical Work Mentoring has long been considered a useful and often necessary part of an individualÕs professional development in the workplace. However, mentoring is less considered rhetorical work, and is less assumed to be a critical component of an individualÕs ability to learn over the duration of their career. This limited understanding of mentoring negatively affects our approach es to acting and writing in school and non -school settings. Mentoring in this way prioritizes individual self -development and self -identification, and works within and across the interests of both employees and employers, and teachers and learners . In the following three chapters, I detail what I mean when I say that mentoring is rhetorical work by focusing on the invention of mentoring for HealthTech employeesÕ learning and relationship building practices. !!56 CHAPTER 3 HOW MENTORING IS SUPPORTED AS A MODE OF LEARNING AT HEALTHTECH INDUSTRIES And whether it's in a church setting or at work or in business when somebody comes alongside you and then helps you to be able to live your life better. In business or in other aspects of life. It could be those guys [who] get together for beer and cigars and wonder ÒH ow am I going to be a better dad ?Ó or whatever else it i s. [Mentoring for me right now is] really kind of ad hoc, if you will. It's not planned. It's not consistent. It's not comprehensive. It's not susta inable. It's just as I am able, and I take advantage of it. --Randall, HealthTech employee This chapter outline s the ways HealthTech Industries supports mentoring as a mode of learning for its employees . First, I analyze participant sÕ stories of mentoring, by critiquing Jea n Lave and Etienne WengerÕs (1991) communities of practice , and then by discussing Lev VygotskyÕs (1978) zone of proximal development (ZPD) . As we learn from the stories throughout this chap ter, mentoring for the e mployee -participants at HealthTech is formed because of self -directed motivations; an employee, for insta nce, articulates what she wants and/or needs, and then seeks out a coworker who shares her interests, beliefs , and values. This approach to mentoring a nd learning shifts away !!57 from Lave and WengerÕs communities of practice model, and spur s on what I suggest is an investment approach to mentoring. This new approach promotes individual self -development and self -identification, which often leads to accessibl e and sustainable mentoring and work place relationships for employees. Therefore, a n investment approach to mentoring, I argue, can constitute a more appropriate alternative to the hierarchical communities of practice model that Rhetoric and Composition accepts when we talk about school and non -school learning and mentoring . HealthTechÕs investment approach to mentoring is part of the professional development initiatives inside and outside of the company . These initiatives are both formal and informal, and experienced daily by employees . The stories I call upon in this chapter revea l that, for HealthTech employee -participants , an investment approach to mentoring supports a shift away from workplace practices that promote top -down enculturation of employees. Instead , this approach positions employee -participants as active contributors and advocates for their mentoring needs; we learn from them that mentoring is one way to build professional identity through continued learning . I end this chapter by discussing the implications and risks of an investment approach to mentoring, specifically the possibilities and challenges employees at HealthTech face when implementing, maintaining, and working with and within this mentoring appr oach. Company hierarchies and employee gender identities further complic ate this approach to mentoring. I take up this point in greater detail in Chapter 4 of this dissertation. !!58 Professional Development and Mentoring at HealthTech Industries In order t o understand how mentoring operates at HealthTech Industries, we must first unpack what professional development is for the employees at HealthTech. To explain, mentoring is one part of a HealthTech employeeÕs professional development network. According to the participants in this study, other professional development opportunities range from individual and group coaching, on -the -job training, workshops and seminars, to weekend/week -long retreats, company meetings, lunches and dinners, and conversations in the hallway. Collectively, these activities make up the professional development practices at HealthTech, and employees decide whether to pursue opportunities that may best help them develop personally and professionally. There fore, as weÕll see below, Mar ia and RandallÕs stories of mentoring illustrate how HealthTech supports a kind of situated learning through professional development and mentoring for its employees. Maria and Randall are senior -level employees at HealthTech, work in different divisions , and value professional development for b oth career and personal growth. Maria says of professional development at HealthTech: Professional development is having the availability of opportunities to improve [my] skills and knowledge. It [professi onal development] can be formal , like classes, seminars, meetings, or it can be informal, like conversations in the hallway where you donÕt really realize youÕre about to learn something. !!59 Maria continues by saying that professional development often includes me ntoring, and that mentoring at HealthTech Òcould be one -on-one or as a group, and sometimes with an awareness that itÕs happening and sometimes not . ItÕs deliberate versus unintentional, [and] sometimes itÕs structured and sometimes it isnÕt.Ó For Maria, t his kind of situated learning, or situated mentoring , is self -sought, collaborative, and accessible . Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (1991) write in Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation that people tend to assume that learning is an individ ual task, that it is confined in a particular time and place, and that it results from expert instruction. On the contrary, and as we see in MariaÕs explanation of professional development at HealthTech, Lave and Wenger write that learning happens collabor atively and socially . At HealthTech, employees facilitate their learning by distributing information and knowledge to and among fellow coworkers, through scheduled meetings, emails, and conversations in the hallway .45 For Lave and Wenger, these sites of col lective learning are known as c ommunities of practice . Communities of practice, they write, are everywhere, and participation in them happens in a variety of ways, whether at work, at home, or in other social and professional spaces. And communities of practice may in fact exist at HealthTech; however, the sites of collective learning associated with mentoring at HealthTech Òbust openÓ or Òpull apartÓ Lave and WengerÕs idea of communities of practice. We learn how this significant dis tinction plays out throughout the rest of this chapter, and most specifically in Chapter 4. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!45 See Morville (2005); Powell et al. (2014). !!60 Similarly to Maria, Randall reflects on professional development and mentoring initiatives that are part of HealthTechÕs career support network for its employees. For Randall, professional development is Òacquiring new skills and new knowledge that enhance career performance,Ó and it may lead to career advancement; professional development is a combination of personal, job -specific, and company -wide development acti vities. Further, Randall believes that mentoring, which is a crucial part of his professional development, should be identified Òso it can be comprehensive and sustainable.Ó The sustainability of mentoring, as Randall points out, requires commitment from t he mentor, the mentee, and other people who are part of a individualÕ s network (e.g., s pouses, significant others, supervisors , community leaders, customers, etc. ). WhatÕs more, Randall believes that HealthTech identifies its mentoring initiatives through planning committees, emails, written print memos, and word of mouth. For the purposes of this chapter, significant instances of mentoring at HealthTech form around mentoring that happens both inside and outside of the company. How Mentoring Works at Heal thTech Industries : A Critique of Communities of Practice and Legitimate Peripheral Participation Lave and Wenger might assume that Maria and Randall are part of many communities of practice at HealthTech. A community of practice involves much more than technical know -how or skill associated with completing a task. Communities of practice are groups of people who come together because of a shared passion for a !!61 particular task or activity. I n turn, these peopl e learn to do their task (whatever it might be) more effectively because of their regular interactions with one another. WhatÕs more, members of a community of practice are involved in relationships over time with other members, and thus a community forms around the things (e.g., values, policies, programs, beliefs, activities, etc.) that matter to them (Lave and Wenger 98). Maria reflects on a professional development group she was a part of at HealthTech. This group was essential to her growth as a manage r and leader within the company. She says: We have a lot of homegrown managers here [É] and [years ago] my management team and I decided to meet every other Friday for development time. We went through different books [in order] to grow individually and together as a group. It was understood in this group that you could share whatever you needed to. There were even times [when] you got to understand better how somebody else thought of you as a manager, which really helped. In this example, Maria shows us th at if mentoring is to function well , it needs to not only ground itself in shared ideas, shared commitments, and shared goals, but also give preference to the individual and her motivations for investing in the group in the first place. And while Lave and Wenger assert that the social dynamics involved in becoming a full participant in a community of practice include the l earning of knowledgeable skills, what they fail to address is the agentive self -identification of each member of the community of practic e. !!62 Further, Lave and Wenger note that f ull participants involved in a community of practice develop ways of being and doing that become established and recognized by other members of that particular group . In MariaÕs example above, for instance, each membe r understood that the group formed and was sustained because each employee wanted to become a better manager. So, in order to accomplish their collective goals of becoming better managers (and therefore potentially improving the productivity of their units ), they met bi -monthly to improve t heir management skills, to reflect on their own strengths and limitations as a worker, and to offer professional development advice for others in the group. Put another way, MariaÕs group of managers came together because they identified a need based on individual and shared values and concerns, and then created an opportunity for growth and development. In short, Maria and her colleagues actively invested in one anotherÕs learning by enabling engaged moments of involvement and investment at HealthTech Industries. A significant and problematic point in Lave and WengerÕs communities of practice model is the idea of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). According to Lave and Wenger, these legitimate periphera l moments: [Provide] a way to speak about relations between newcomers and old -timers, and about activities, identities, artifacts, and communities of knowledge and practice [that form] the process of becoming a full participant in a socio -cultural practic e. They also [suggest] that there are multiple, varied, more -or-less engaged and inclusive ways of being, located in the fields of participation defined by a community [É] and when !!63 it is enabled, suggests an opening, a way of gaining access to sources for understanding through growing involvement (Lave and Wenger 29, 36 -37). These moments are approved and recognized by the community of practice, and tangential to the core practices of the larger organization . It is assumed that within a community of practi ce, a s time goes on, the newer members of the group (those on the periphery) will become more like old-timers, or those members who ha ve been enculturated into the groupÕs ways of being and doing . The expectation is that, while in the LPP, n ewcomers acquir e concepts and language required to interact with more seasoned participants as well as with their peers. And herein lies the problem. A periphery, according to the Merriam -Webster dictionary, is the Ò marginal or secondary position in, or part or aspect of , a group, subject, or sphere of activity .Ó With this definition in mind, we see that Lave and WengerÕs LPP is not only disconcerting but also highly colonial. The risk with legitimate peripheral participation is that it is designed, possibly, to keep newcomers at the periphery. It is not merely an opening, a way of gaining access to sources for understanding through growing involvement. Rather LPP is a marginalizing space that grants newcomers full participation in the community of practice if ÐÐand only if ÐÐthey enculturate into the group through learning its customs and acceptable ways of being. 46 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!46 In this chapter, I am treating legitimate peripheral part icipation as detrimental to an individualÕs ability to learn over the duration of her career. A different workplace or context may prove the LPP as less problematic (e.g., the LPP can provide physical safety to a less experienced worker). Still, in both be st and worst case s cenario s these marginalizing dynamics exist. !!64 Unlike Lave and Wenger, Maria defines these mentoring moments not as peripheral, but rather as moments of professional investment , which are central to conti nued learning at HealthTech . MariaÕs mentoring experiences with her management team involved both formal and informal development moments, from scheduled meetings in Conference R oom A to conversations during her lunch break. It is through these investment interactions that Maria and her colleagues learn to become better managers. Peers Helping Peers: The Zone of Proximal Development and Mentoring at HealthTech Industries Lev Vygotsky (1978) writes in Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychologica l Processes that the zone of p roximal development (ZPD) is: the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collab oration with more capable peers (86). Randall shares a story that clarifies the ZPD, specifically telling how he came to mentor a new employee at HealthTech. He says: ThereÕs a young man here whoÕs been with us for about a year and a half. He was out of school and lookin g for work, and so he was hired . IÕve seen him doing things, mostly the character he exhibits in his daily work routines that makes me want to invest my time and energy in him [to !!65 mentor him]. HeÕs the guy who stops in my offic e at 6:00a.m with a cup of coffee [for me] and says, ÔHey, Randall, I saw your light on.Õ HeÕs not supposed to be to work until 7:30a.m, but he shows up at 6:00a.m. with a cup of coffee and says, ÔHey, I saw your light on.Õ The heck he did see my light on. Those kinds of people, those are the ones who I want to make an investment in, and so I [make time for them], even early in the morning. RandallÕs story further supports the self -motivation and self -identification of an individual who seeks a mentoring r elationship. What i s unique about this interaction, however , is that the new employeeÕs potential for career growth and potential promotion at HealthTech involves more than his technical skill and ability ÐÐit also involves the help or guidance of another e mployee , or a more Òcapable peer Ó (Vygotsky 68) .47 Further, Randall and the new employee have developed their own development group , one that is defined by shared interest (giving and receiving guidance so that the new employee can succeed at whatever he pu rsues) and commitment to that interest. Today, Randall and the new employee continue to develop a collection of resources that they share with one another, and with anyone else who may join their group . Their collection of resources includes past and pres ent personal and professional experiences, stories, tools and other material resources, and ways of addressing recurring dilemmas ÐÐin short, an invested p ractice developed out of individual, personal motivation . Since mentoring requir es purposeful and mutu ally beneficial interactions, we need to continue to closely examine the relationship between how a person learns in a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!47 See also Bill Hart -DavidsonÕs (2014) ÒLearning Many -to-Many: The Best Case for Writing in Digital Environments.Ó !!66 given context, the kind of mentoring s/he may receive , and the added value they contribute to the work environment . For the new employee in RandallÕs story, three spaces of personal and professional development exist for him in his new work environment (see Figure 2 ). In the fi rst space, the new employee canno t do or accomplish the tasks or goals assigned to that job. F or example, since the new employee is in the engineering d ivision, he i s not able to write and implement company -wide human resources documents, because his education and skill -set are engineering focused. Next, the second space, or the ZPD, is one where t he new employee can only accomplish the tasks or goals associated with that space with the assistance of another person. For instance, if the new employee wants a promotion, one way to facilitate advancement is to rely on , even briefly, supportive guidance from his network of Òmore capable peersÓ (Vygotsky 86). And lastly, the third space is the space where the new employee works for the company for the reasons he was hired; in this space, the new employee completes tasks and meets goals that rely most heav ily on his manual expertise, with little to no guidance needed from Randall or other peers at HealthTech . The figure below is an example of peer -to-peer learning, and the new employeeÕs ZPD. !!67 RandallÕs story shows us that peer -to-peer learning can help the new employee advance within HealthTech, if the new employee desires promotion . It can be assumed, too, that at some point later in their relationship, the new employee can help Randall with a new goal or situation . RandallÕs ZPD and the new employeeÕs ZPD is where their mentoring r elationship begins to matter most . Investment Inst ead of Enculturation: An Investment Approach to Mentoring at HealthTech Industries As I ha ve shown so far in this chapter, Maria and Randall Õs experiences of mentoring indicate to us that an investment approach to mentoring is necessary for sustaining the workplace relationships they ar e part of. An employeeÕs investment in Figure 2 . Image: Representation of what the new employee can and cannot do with or without help !!68 and motive for mentoring (as mentor and/or mentee), for example, can now be mapped; their mentoring can be traced back to their personal motivations, and then extended in relation to th eir professional network. T his mapping makes visible any gaps in knowledge or expertise an employee may encounter , and also shows the people, places, and things that are most valued in an individualÕs network . Then, with the help of any number of mentors, the employee can invest in the kinds of guidance s/he identifies as necessary for a particular situation or to accomplish a certain goal . WhatÕs more, for Randall, his mentoring relationships start because of a kind of threshold or tipping point, which is something that he identifies as being an opportunity for investment. These tipping points , as Randall describes them, are often small, Òfelt on the inside Ó or personal, and are the impetus for mentoring. They may manifest as formal or informal , but most importantly, these smaller moments must be encouraged by all HealthTech employees, regardless of their participation in a particular mentoring initiative . Investing in oneself turns into investing in others, as Randall continues, and eventually leads to satisfactory and sustainable workplace relationships. The investment approach toward mentoring at HealthTech, outlined by the employee -participants of this study, is situated in two different yet interconnected understandings of workplace culture . HealthTech Industries is a medical device manufacturing company, where devices are create d and ship ped for customers, while also ensuring customer satisfaction, thereby increasing He althTechÕs overall revenue and profit each year. At the same time, HealthTech is a company composed of thousands of employees who are responsible for everything like meeting and interacting !!69 with customers from around the world, to designing and making surg ical tools and bodily implants that make better the quality of life for patients. Therefore, in addition to employeesÕ unanimous implementation and maintenance of an investment appr oach to mentoring, employees must also understand the corporate and social motives that are part of the HealthTechÕs culture. S ince HealthTechÕs investment is two fold, in people (e.g., customers and employees) and products, HealthTech is responsible for not only production and material outcomes, but also the professional and personal growth of its employees. And while it is important to credit the high quality of HealthTechÕs devices, implants, and casings for its customers and for the patients who rely on those products, what is of most significance to this chapter is how both informal and formal mento ring, like weÕve seen in Maria and RandallÕs stories, directly contribute to the quality of those products produce d and delivered by HealthTech. This investment approach to mentoring positions colleagues as peers , which differs from a communities of practice model of mentoring that marginalizes most at the benefit of the few . To reiterate, an investment approach to me ntoring, as opposed to a mentoring approach that assumes what employees need and/or want from professional development, positions the employee (as mentor or mentee) as an active agent in deciding what is best for her/him in that particular relationship or situation. Indeed, as Maria and Randall have demonstrated, this contextualized approach to mentoring shifts from enculturation, or a kind of workplace colonialism, to investment, or a kind of workplace equity or fairness . An investment approach to mentorin g privileges all employeesÕ learning over rigid, !!70 organizational structures that, ultimately, put the needs of the workplace (as a product -driven manufacturing company) above the individual needs and wants of its employees. This reorientation for HealthTec h means that employees can not only locate existing instances of and opportunities for mentoring but also invent and sustain new and positive mentoring within their work environment. As I hav e said previously, an investment approach to mentoring is made up of formal and informal activities, and is experienced by employees while at HealthTech and outside of it. Formal instances of mentoring at HealthTech are useful for employees, and partic ipants shared with me that they would miss the formal programs and activities were they to be missing from HealthTechÕs prof essional development repertoire. Still, the informal mentoring moments like lunches, coffee breaks, and hallway conversations are equally if not more important for their professional and personal gro wth. These informal and sometimes invisible moments occur within and because of the daily, mundane work prac tices of employees. T he ability to mentor and/or be mentored in the here -and-now, as Maria emphasizes, is Òdirectly connected to timely and accurate shipment of product to customers now and in the future.Ó In short, employee learning and employee relationships directly correlate to customer and patient satisfaction. Maria understands this investment approach to mentoring at HealthTech as Ògenerative and cyclical, from the top to the bottom , or the bottom to the top .Ó To illustrate, Maria says that because her boss participates in positive mentoring relationships, he then encourages her to seek mentoring opportunities that best suit her !!71 needs . And, as we might assume, she in turn encourages those within her unit to seek mentoring opportunities that make the most sense for them . She recalls: IÕve learned to make time for, to take the time out of my day -to-day routine, to do mundane, simple thing s, like making time f or opportunities and learning, like scheduling seminars, scheduling to [take] a class or even walking down the hallway to grab a pop and learn something from a coworker I see or pass by . These formal and informal professional developme nt investments remind me of McGuire and RegerÕs (2003) co-mentoring model, where initiatives between and among employees at the same or different divisions occur frequently within the company. And one reason co -mentoring initiatives are possible at HealthT ech is because of professional development organizations outside of HealthTech that work with HealthTech employees in finding and working with a mentor/mentee. These external organizations, for instance, provide HealthTech employees with valuable material resources , as well as networks of other business and medical professionals. An Investment Approach to Mentoring at HealthTech Industries: A Case Example HealthTech employees have the option to participate in an organization outside of the company whose mission it is to support, mentor, and develop executive, managerial, and production -level professionals in the Midwest. This case example focuses primarily on the Midwest organization as a whole, as well as a specific mentoring initiative in which Maria i s involved. What follows, in this section is a !!72 rhetorical analysis of how this organization contributes to HealthTechÕs investment approach to mentoring. As we will learn in this section, t his Midwest organization supports a model of professional developme nt that promotes consisten t interaction and learning, which enables all members to perform roles and tasks safely with low risk. This organization, no doubt, further supports an investment approach to mentoring at HealthTech Industries. HealthTech Industri es is a part of a Midwestern non -profit organization, or as Maria calls it Òa learners group,Ó which was founded a few years ago by busin ess professionals in the region . The organization is dedicated to supporting the professional interests of women and me n in the Midwest by inspiring, supporting, and empowering them to a chieve personal and career success . The organization offers educational opportunities to its members in the form of workshops, invited speakers, and group and paired mentoring . These opport unities build individual leadership skills and business connections, and support mentoring relationships between and among members. WhatÕs more, being part of the organization offers many tangible and/or material benefits, including: ¥ Connecting with other professionals in the Midwest; ¥ Building a cross -industry network of engaged professionals; ¥ Developing knowledge and leadership skills through organization -sponsored programs and events; ¥ Supporting mentoring through a separate mentoring program; ¥ Volunte ering in regional and local communities , and; ¥ Honing professional skills by being part of the organizationÕs many committees and/or Board of Directors. !!73 Additionally, the organization promotes many intangible benefits, too, like being associated with a lea ding organization, and being recognized for oneÕs professional and/or career -advancing accomplishments. As of June 2014, the organization had over ten company sponsors to assist with event planning and event execution, and to help with the total financial stability of the organization. Moreover, the organization sponsors many events throughout the year, and makes available other material resources to its members. Recent events include how to build oneÕs personal and professional brand, how to ta ke full advantage of oneÕs strengths for personal and professional growth, and speed networking with other business professionals. Additionally, the organization offers print and online resources like documents/print texts, website links, video links, and other downloadable materials to its members. This additional information can be used for continued and sustained personal and professional development across time and space. Perhaps most interesting to this case example and dissertation is that the Midwes t professional development organization has a mentoring program available to its members. Maria has found the mentoring program to be beneficial to both mentees and mentors. And, a ccording to documents from the mentoring program, the lists below reflect th ese benefits to both mentees and mentors respectively: For mentees ¥ Develop strengths and overcome weaknesses ¥ Develop new skills and knowledge ¥ Create career and professional development plans !!74 For mentors ¥ Invest in others ¥ Be recognized as an expert and leader ¥ Gain exposure to fresh perspectives, ideas, and approaches ¥ Develop leadership and coaching style A person can serve as both a mentor and mentee (e.g., Maria has been both a mentee and a mentor in her duration with t he program), and mentees have access to one -on-one and/or group mentoring. Other programmatic activities and resources include monthly mentoring meetings, meet -and-greet events (where mentor/mentee pairings and/or groupings take place ), and facilitation to ols (like guide books, workbooks, and online and print resources ). As a member of the mentoring program, an individual must parti cipate in monthly, self -initiated mentoring sessions, and all associated program events. The minimum amount of time a mentor devotes to the mentoring program is one hour a month, and s/he is required to help with at least three organization events during the year. The minimum amount of time a mentee devotes to the mentoring program is one hour a month, plus planning and follow -up activities, of which no specific amou nt of time is indicated. Mentors are also required to attend three organization events during the year. Before HealthTech committed to financially and ideologically supporting the organizationÕs (and by extension the mentoring program) mission, Maria and another female colleague were Òapproached [ by the CEO of HealthTech] [to do] some experiential research , and see if this [the organization] was something that HealthTec h !!75 Industries needed.Ó So, Maria and the other female colleague asked the Midwest organizationÕs Board of Directors to attend on e of the organizationÕs events free of charge, so they could observe and interact with other members of the organization. The Board of Directors agreed, and plans were made f or Maria and her coworker to attend the upcoming event. Still, even after plans were solidified, Maria recalls that she was hesitant to attend an event . For Maria, previous professional development and mentoring experiences that were particularly unhelpful heavily influenced her willingness to participate in other and future development initiatives .48 Still, the employees at HealthTech have found the regional, Midwest organization appropriate to their development needs. Since joining the Midwest organization almost two years ago , the employees at HealthTech have reaped many benefits as members, and as mentors and mentees. Maria puts it nicely , saying : ItÕs been a very rewarding experience since I can go outside my comfort zone to be mentored by different peop le. So, by connecting with a bigger group of people, and bringing in ideas from multiple facets, because you have so many people from different industries who are part of this organization, it expands my reach in being able to give and receive support like this, and to help maintain a program like this. Being part of it [the organization and mentoring program] has really helped me professionally, mostly because I surround myself with people who share their life experiences inside and outside of work. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!48 I address MariaÕs hesitations with mentoring initiatives in Chapter 4. !!76 Health Tech employeesÕ experiences with the Midwest organization have been largely positive. Since HealthTechÕs approach to business focuses on building lasting relationships between employees and with customers, we see how with the help of this professional deve lopment organization, HealthTech can continue to support its employees . The professional development opportunities available to employees can lead to better quality products, and happy and satisfied customers. These development opportunities give employees , as Randall states, avenues Òto talk to smart people, [and] to take advantage of those opportunities where we can find a mentor or two .Ó In sum, this regional organization is a needed and supported addition to HealthTechÕs investment approach to mentoring because its impact on the employees at HealthTech reaches not only their professional careers and home lives, but also the many people with whom they do business. Implications and Risks of an Investment Approach to Mentoring I end this chapter by discus sing the implications and risks of an investment approach to mentoring. These implications and risks raise a few important questions about mentoring as a mode of learning not only for HealthTech Industries but also for rhetoric and writing practice . Specif ically, I address the advantages and consequences of developing an investment model of mentoring that is collaborative and inclusive . !!77 Then, I begin to respond to the way mentoring relationships and networks are built and sustained are complicated by an ind ividualÕs gender identity. 49 Formal and informal mentoring are generative in allowing mentors and mentees time to meet and discuss issues of prof essional and personal interest .50 And, a s I ha ve shown, Maria and her manage ment team thrived off of formal, bi-monthly meetings that were organized around shared practices, motivations, and interests . WhatÕs more, these managers, both new and old, could talk about personal and professional goals, ranging from family planning and self -esteem building, to workplace promotions and building their professional network s. In short, whether formal or informal, mentoring is successful when it consists of peer -to-peer learning. Additionally, for Randall, Amaury Nora and Gloria CrispÕs (2009) four mentoring constructs are up held in both formal and informal mentoring instances that occur inside and/or outside of HealthTech. Nora and Crisp posited that the most positive and productive mentoring relationships adhere to four principles: 1) psychological and emotional support, 2) support for setting goals and choosing a career path, 3) subject knowledge support aimed at advancing a learnerÕs knowledge relevant to his or her chosen field, 4) and the specification of a role model. We might accurately assume, then, that RandallÕs past experiences with mentoring, whether positive or negative, heavily influence his approach to mentoring the new employee referenced at the beginning of this chapter. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!49 In Chapter 4 , I focus exclusively on mentoring as rhetorical work that builds relationships. 50 See Berkenkotter, Huckin, and Ackerman (1988, 1989); Barr Ebest (2002); Rickly and Harrington (2002); Lauer et al. (2008).!!!78 Interestingly , what emerged from Ma ria and RandallÕs interviews was a fifth construct not proposed by Nora and Crisp : mentee willingness .51 A menteeÕs willingness to participate in and support a culture of mentoring depends in large part on the menteeÕs previous perception s and/or experiences with mentoring. Henry, Huff Bruland, and Sano -Franch ini (2010) write that mentee willingness is Òthe presence of a mentee is a self -evident necessity for mentoring, [but] the degrees of engagementÓ can vary significantly. Limited mentee engagement or even refusal to participate in the mentoring relationship or activities, for instance, often leads to unnecessary stress for both the mentor and mentee. While f ormal mentoring is a vital part of non -academic workplaces and academic institut ions across the United States, i nformal mentoring also occurs in workplaces and academic institutions. A s Maria and Randall have shown, informal mentoring often happens a longside and as an extension of formal mentoring .52 Informal mentoring relationships are fruitful in allowing mentors and mentees to meet and discuss issues of professional and personal interest when and how itÕs convenient for them; however, a distinguishing characteristic between formal and informal mentoring is that the informal relationship is often characterized by mentors and mentees comi ng together because of shared and/or similar personal interests, personality types, and even friendship .53 For Randall especially, the informal support he gave and continues to give and receive from the new employee has allowed their relationship to evolve toward a co -equal one. A t !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!51 A similar construct was observed in Henry, Huff Bruland , and Sano -FranchiniÕs 2010 article about class -attached mentoring and mentee willingness. 52 See Chandler (1996); Moore (2000); Bloom (2007); and Leon and Pigg (2011). 53 In Chapter 4, I discuss this p oint in greater detail. !!79 HealthTech, mentoring can happen when employees least expect it, and as Maria notes, ÒthatÕs pretty darn cool.Ó Mentoring occurs in a multitude of spaces and places, and with many and varied tools and technologies . In some ways, too, mentoring is also used to subvert and rebuild existing social/ideological structures within the company to allow for more and better opportunities of collaboration and inclusion .54 Conclusion: How Writing Programs Contribute to Workplace Mentoring an d Learning Amy Goodburn, Donna LeCourt and Carri e Leverenz (2013) write that it i s important for Rhetoric and Composition Òto represent those alternative [professional development] narratives and, through those narratives, argue for expanding predominant d efinitions of professional successÓ (ix -x). Taking up Goodburn, LeCourt, and Lev erenzÕs call, in this chapter I ha ve shown that mentoring is rhetorical work that can help us expand our current understandings of what constitutes success not just in our res earch, teaching, and service commitments, but also for our students. An increase in the awareness and visibility of how important mentoring is to the professional development of both th e mentee and mentor can remedy the Òlack of publicly visible demonstrations of ÔsuccessÕ ÐÐor rather, a range of possible successesÓ within Rhetoric and Composition , Technical Communication, the academy more broadly, and also for the students we teach ( Goodburn et al., xviii). Redefining success means rethinking how we invest in ourselves, in our colleagues, and ultimately in our ability to learn over the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!54 I el aborate on this point in Chapter 2. !!80 duration of our careers. If our attitudes of what counts as professional development and success shift and expand to include and investment approach to mentoring, we can more easily observe the ways in which we as writing teachers invest in collaborative learning for our students and ourselves. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!81 CHAPTER 4 MENTORING IS RHETORICAL WORK THAT BUILDS RELATIONSHPS I knew an employee of mine needed work, needed development, needed mentoring, needed something. She says she wants to be mentored , but sometimes I think she doesnÕt want to hear the truth, face her past . I know that priority is getting product out the door, and thatÕs very important , but thereÕs more to it than that. And I tell her Ò IÕm an open door, IÕm going to stop what IÕm doing and I will meet with you.Ó I guess, i tÕs about looking in the mirror every day, saying, ÒIÕm a great pers on, I love this person that I see.Ó Because, a t the end of day, itÕs about understanding your core self, and how you feel about yourself. --Julie, HealthTech employee Lynee Lewis Gaillet and Michelle Eble write in the introduction of the 2008 edited collection Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis that the bookÕs purpose is to Òdefine the current status of mentoringÓ in Rhetoric and Composition by giving Òinsight into the character of those rare individuals who embody the term mentorÓ (3). They note that the stories found in the book are temporally and situationally bound, and each story offers different conceptions of mentoring as students and teachers within English studies experience it. And while each chapter is contextually different, the stories offer, according to the editors, Òeffective model s of mentoringÓ while providing Òheuristics for building mentoring programs that view mentoring as a scholarly activityÓ (306). !!82 These strategies, anecdotes, and experiences about mentoring, as Lewis Gaillet and Eble write, do not seek to provide a definit ion of mentoring, but rather glimpses into the professional and personal relationships that constitute academic institutions, departments, and programs. Academic mentoring, writes Eble in the concluding chapter of the book, assumes many forms including but not limited to Òco -teaching [and] dissertation directing [É] advising [É] and modeling effective administrative and professional activitiesÓ (307). Stories of Mentoring is representative of particular moments in time, and is not exhaustive of all kinds an d situations of mentoring. As I ha ve previously discussed, mentoring, when done well, is mutually beneficial for and respectful toward all persons involved. However, too often, mentoring is not reciprocal nor is it respectful, and Òresistance to mentorin g exists and power/authority struggles are realÓ (Lewis Gaillet and Eble 309). A close examination of power and authority struggles between mentors and mentees reveals how mentoring matters to rhetoric and writing practice. To illustrate , Dorothy Winsor (2 003) examines how engineers and engineering students learn to write in their organization, and navigate the organizationÕs workplace networks. Winsor argues that writing does more than communicate knowledge: it generates new knowledge, trains new knowledge creators and workers, and can support the organizationÕs hierarchical power structure. 55 And like WinsorÕs view of writing, mentoring can also support or subvert an organizationÕs workplace structure. As Miles and Burnett (2008) note, when the Òlittle thin gsÓ of mentoring like gender identity are explored, the sometimes hidden social motives of the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!55 See also Bill Hart -Davidson, Clay Spinuzzi, and Mark Zachry (2006). !!83 workplace are exposed (127). Therefore, citing the work of James Sosnoski and Beth Burmester (2005), Lewis Gaillet and Eble challenge Rhetoric and Composition to continue to rethink the colonial master/apprentice models of mentoring where Òapprenticeship helped maintain the distance between masters and apprentices, in the conditions of their labor and wagesÓ (6). Lewis Gaillet and Eble call for future research on mentoring to Òfocus on fostering mentoring relationships that occur across boundaries of race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, and disabilityÓ, that is, research that celebrates identity differences, while fostering mutual benefit and respect between/ among mentors and mentees (309). With their challenge in mind, I focus this chapter on how mentoring is rhetorical work that can build workplace relationships, and how an individualÕs gender identity complicates these relationships. Specifically, I argue that mentoring, like an individualÕs gender identity, has a performative dimension to it. So, in this chapter, I primarily focus on women Õs experience of mentoring, or mentoring experiences that involve women at HealthTech. I focus on their stories because the women in this study identified their gender identities as affecting their mentoring relationships . WhatÕs more, many of the women participants in this study indicated that their gender identity and mentoring relationships intersect in ways that not on ly put the ir mentoring relationships at risk but also their jobs. I end this chapter by beginning to answer Jeffrey JablonskiÕs (2005) charge to rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers to create and work with Òprofessionalizing strategies [that] are appropriate in career contextsÓ (37). In discussing the appropriate, professionalizing strategies put forth by Jablonski, I extend his !!84 argument to consider the cost(s) of non -participation in mentoring and other professionalizing relationships . For the p urposes of this chapter, I define how I use feminism and gender identity, respectively. In Chapter 1, I referenced Royster and Kirsch (2012) , borrowing their definition of feminism as the Òcommitment to justice, equality, empowerment, and peace, while keeping the contours of this notion dynamic and open, resisting the deep desire to speak as if there is no need for negotiationÓ ( Royster and Kirsch 644). And, in this chapter, we wi ll learn that the employee -participantsÕ stories of mentoring make space f or open and dynamic understandings of gender identity. Additionally, I draw upon Judith Butler's (1990) notion of performativity to inform how I talk about participantsÕ gender identities. To be clear, in this chapter and disse rtation project, I do no t u se the word performativity; rather, I articulate the performative dimension of an employee -participantÕs gender as it is socially constructed and shap ed by relations of power. As we wi ll see, the ways a HealthTech employee identif ies her/his gender , and/ or is identified by her/his gender are multiple, complex, and contribute to the sustainability of mentoring within the company. The employee -participants in this study identified a s female or male, man or woman, and gay or straight. Additionally, all parti cipants referred to themselves as male and man, or as female and woman, with no distinction between sex or gender. For the scope of this chapter, then, I am using their self -identifications within the context of their interviews and analyses of their mento ring experiences. I am not intentionally implicating any further meaning(s) about their gender identities or identifications . !!85 How Gender Identity Complicates an Investment Approach to Mentoring at HealthTech Industries I donÕt think [ my gender affects the way I mentor others at HealthTech]. [When it comes to mentoring women], I think thereÕs a sensitivity side [to mentoring them], and being able to understand that sensitivity side may impact [the relationship] and how I mentor [women at HealthTech ]. But, I treat everybody the same. And yeah, sometimes I do nÕt get the sensitivity side of [mentoring women ]. [And if I need help], I ask a female employee to help me. So, I guess, I donÕt see gender as a big deal. --Patrick, a HealthTech employee , individual inte rview PatrickÕs story is not new or all that surprising. He is a senior -level employee at HealthTech, and identifies as a straight man. He has worked for HealthTech for many years, and in his division the majority of employees he works with are men. And because of his story , we see more clearly what we already know ÐÐthat especially in male-dominated industries like engineering or manufacturing, certain kinds of identities are more acceptable than others . PatrickÕs story shows us that his gender identity is most likely considered standard or usual at HealthTech. Patrick does not need to see Ògender as a big deal,Ó because his gender identity is part of the dominant structures that his discipline (i.e., engineering) identifies as normal (e.g., straight, male, man). We might assume, then, that his approach to mentoring follows suit, and can result in him !!86 either asking a fema le coworker for help in mentoring, or, as he later clarified, opting out of difficult, ÒsensitiveÓ mentoring situations altogether. We have seen in previous chapters that mentoring helps HealthTech employees learn not only a skill or trade but also helps them learn about the beliefs and values that make up their work environment . Perryman -Clark and Craig (2011) point out that a workplace culture most certainly is complicate d by gender identity. They write that all institutional structures, which would include HealthTech, have Òparticular investitures around identity that align relations of power to representationÓ (39). Further, they posit, certain identity categories like those that represent race (e.g., white) and gender identity (e.g., man and male) align more easily with top -down, power structures and ideologies. In Patrick Õs story, we learn that he is able to keep his gender identity separate from his mentoring relation ships. We can infer, then, that while HealthTech supports an investment approach to mentoring, some employees have to work harder at investing than do others. As I stated previously in this chapter and in Chapter 3, women employees at HealthTech experienc e their approaches to mentoring and their gender identities as deeply connected. In addition to the Midwest organization discussed in Chapter 3, women employees at HealthTech were associated with a national organization committed to providing women in biotechnology with opportunities to devel op in their work environments. Maria, speaking for herself and other women employees too, remembers that the national organization: !!87 just wasnÕt the right fit for us. The women on that board, theyÕre good people, rea lly, but they wear suits to work every day , and we, uh, donÕt . [And] everything we did [for professional development and mentoring] had to be approved by them, which was also approved by [our] corporate structure. [The national mentoring group] was like [b eing part of] another business. For Maria, we learn that her gender identity is closely tied to, in this example, what she wears to work . We also observe that, for her, wearing suits to work indicates a more rigid, enculturating approach to mentoring , whi ch, in fact, was the case with the national organization . And because of this, HealthTechÕs involvement with the national organization did not last much more than a year. O nce again, we are reminded that mentoring is affected by the personal, social, and i deological motivations of an individual and a workplace. Moreover, Claire, another senior -level employee at HealthTech, says that her gender identity influences not only how she performs her role as mentor and/or mentee, but also how others expect her to p erform her gender and mentoring roles at work. And this group [the Midwest organization] wanted me to come and help them out [with their mentoring program]. I [was] like, ÔWell, what if these ladies find out about me [my gender and sexual orientation] and they donÕt want me there because I might not be the right kind of É whatÕs the word I want É role model for them.Õ I guess I worried about how my coming out would affect things, whether it would be directly here at HealthTech or out !!88 in the larger communi ty. I was afraid that I would be a blemish on HealthTech, or that the ladies in the [Midwest organization] would find out about me, if they didnÕt already know, and [say to me] ÔYou canÕt be in this group É weÕre trying to be good examples for people .Õ Claire is an active member of the Midwest professional development organization discussed in Chapter 3 , and she spends much of her time within the organization growing the mentoring program. Still, because of ClaireÕs gender identity, and recent coming out as gay (both in personal and professional spheres), she frequently wonders how her gender identit y an d sexual orientation affect her value as a mentor and/or mentee. We see in ClaireÕs mentoring experience that her gender identity is intimately connected to her experiences with mentoring. We also learn that Claire worries (almost constantly) that her gen der identity will make it difficult for her to get the mentoring she needs for personal and professional development. And, unlike Patrick, we can infer that ClaireÕs gender identity is no t considered normal. For Claire, she might be seen as , according to h er, Òtoo different or too difficult to work withÓ by the Midwest organization , and therefore encouraged to leave the group. Luckily for Claire, this has not been the case , and she remains active with the organization today . Claire states that the intersec tions of her gender identity and mentoring helps her educate others at work and in the community about tolerance, acceptance , and accountability. She says: !!89 Going back to my perso nal experience [of coming out], there were and still are opportunities I have to be an example to people. And there are informal opportunities for mentoring since IÕm one of the faces of Health Tech in the community. ThereÕs this huge dynamic [in coming out], and I finally just had to let [the negativity] go and say, ÔI hope I can make a difference, and that if there are people in the [Midwest organization], for example, [who] have an issue with me, that I can change their mind. I want them to think Ôy ouÕre just one of us, and youÕre here for the same reas on as we are. To learn.Õ Patrick, Maria , and ClaireÕs mentoring stories remind us that gendered bodies operate within a matrix of power, which is often invisible and confusing to navigate. When we consider how mentors and mentees use their gender identity to mark themselves and others in the workplace, then we begin to see how the ways in which we mentor are shaped by Òour beliefs that how one identifies racially, politically, or by gender gauges literacy practices , and how one shapes relationships with ot hersÓ (Mitchell and Weiler x as cited in Perryman -Cla rk and Craig 48). The ways Patrick, Maria, and Claire engage with others at HealthTech and in the Midwest professional development organization is dependent on two criteria: 1) how they understand their own gender identities, and 2) how they interpret othersÕ genders as a signification of and expectation for how mentoring should happen between themselves and others at work and in the community. !!90 The complexities associate d with gender identity in traditional mentoring relationships are often not acknowledged or recognized as valuable attributes to its goals and outcomes. Failu re to identify, recognize, and accept the influence of gender identity in the mentoring relationshi p not only suppresses desired learning outcomes and growth for both the mentor and mentee, but also quickly shifts the focus of the relationship to the unspoken or ignored intricacies of mentoring. T o better understand how mentoring helps build relationshi ps between and among men and women, this section address ed how and why an individualÕs gender identity acts as the impetus for forming and sustaining mentoring relationships. Risks and Benefits of Non -Hierarchical Mentoring Networks The matrix of power that restricts certain gendered bodies and influences workplace mentoring relationships is, according to Rebecca Rickly (2000), manifested most significantly as the Òold boyÕ s networkÓ (2 ). According to Rickly, the Òold boyÕs networkÓ approach to mentoring is often associated with master/apprentice models of advising and guiding, and other practices that foster hierarchical and patriarchal ways of navigating institutional settings. In this way, mentoring is a disciplining mechanism, one that keeps cer tain people in (straight, male, man) and others out (straight, gay, female, woma n). And yet, while women and other minorities are usually not welcomed in these more traditional Ònetworks ,Ó they often do not desire these types of exclusive, competition -driv en relationships in the first place. Rather, as we have learned so far in this chapter, women prefer to invest in mentoring relationships that are mutually and inclusi vely supportive and productive. These kinds of relationships Òavoid the problems !!91 associat ed with the traditional model, withstand the stress of career interruptions and family responsibilities,Ó and promote inclusive lear ning for both mentor and mentee (Chandler 1996, 94). An investment approach to mentoring , as I have argued, has the potentia l to do just this ÐÐto acknowledge an individualÕs gender ident ity as significant to and an essential part of mentoring and learning . Cindy Moore (2000) remarks , however, that all too often women experience poor and even hurtful mentori ng, or no mentoring whatsoever (149). Poor mentoring or a lack of mentoring altogether often occurs because of unequal distribution of material resources, a lack of respect for both the mentor and mentee, and even personal differences like not being friend s ( Moore 150). The mentoring experiences throughout this study , and in this chapter specifically, reveal that a communities of practice approach to mentoring thrives off of exclusion rather than inclusion; in this way, not being friends with one another, f or instance, can be grounds for an individual not becoming a full participant in the mentoring community. It i s also important to note t hat for some women employees at HealthTech, informal mentoring relationships are more easily flattened or non -hierarch ical, are positive, and lead to personal fulfillment and career growth. According to Baake et al. (2008), an informal mentoring relationship is often characterized by mentors and mentees coming together because of shared or similar interests and personalit y types. These informal mentoring relationships often focus on relationship building, by placing an equal focus on the ways two more people are connected to each other, as well as the objective goals of mentoring, like career advancement. Moreover, these i nformal !!92 mentoring relati onships are crucial to helping an individual transition into new work roles as professional collaborators, with the emphasis on developing productive and lasting relationships as colleagues ( Baake et al. 65). And while Baake et al . provide a useful starting point for us in understanding the importance of building a mentoring relationship around shared interests, personality traits, and even friendship, what they fail t o address is the significance an individualÕs gender identity pl ays in not only developing a mentoring relationship but also sustain ing it. For example, Julie discusses an informal mentoring experience she had as a member of local womenÕs group. Julie explains: IÕve always been invo lved in womenÕs groups both [associated with HealthTech] and outside of work. [These] groups are fun; a lot of [them] are about networking and even mentoring, and a lot of the women in [these] groups are also professionals, or teachers or executives . I also belong to two [informal] groups of girls Õ night out, one from here at work and one outside [of work] . And to some degree, weÕre all friends who are all professionals. For us , itÕs [about] networking and just spending time [outside of work] together. But personally, for me, itÕs about keeping my friends and common interests close, which I think is also crucial for mentoring . For Julie , the relationships she fosters with women both at work and in other social and professional arenas are positive, and critic al for her personal and professional growth. And we learn that Julie relies on and values informal opportunities to make up her !!93 mentoring network. Her relationships are firstly built on shared personal interests and experiences, and these shared qualities are found at work, at home, and in her hobbies (e.g., one of the groups Julie belongs is a group of women who are dedicated to fun, fitness, friendship , and leading an over all fulfilling life). Julie is not required by her supervisor at HealthTech to atte nd these formal and informal mentoring activities ; rather, she seeks out these moments , treating them as vital to her growth as a wom an and as a professional. Elsewhere in this dissertation, I have called attention to a feminist, relational, investment model of mentoring that Òseeks to dispel the view of the disembodied intellectual by attending to [an individualÕs] familial, personal, and emotional needs,Ó all of which, as I have shown, affect mentoring and its professional and personal goals and outco mes (McGuire and Reger 54). And we have further learned, via Julie Õs story , that HealthTech employee -participants value a kind of co -mentoring or investment model of mentoring , one that Òemphasiz[es] the importance of cooperative, non -hierarchical relation ships for learning and development ,Ó and also makes explicit the need to take seriously how an individualÕs gender identity impacts mentoring (McGuire and Reger 57 ). With the addition of JulieÕs story, we have a clearer understanding of how an investment approach to mentoring at HealthTech is enacted. An investment approach to mentoring supports , indeed it insists upon , the mentor and mentee to seriously consider the relationship they a re about to enter together. By this I mean that b oth the mentor and mentee must talk about, write, draw or map out the expectations of the relationship. Moreover, an investment approach to mentoring acknowledges and attends to the !!94 practices and positionalities held in common (or not) by the mentor and me ntee. We see in JulieÕs story, a co -mentoring model, with its emphasis on mutual empowerment, positions her better to not only feel safe in learning and growing as a woman and professional, but also helps her create safe spaces for other similar women to, in her words, Ò see if thereÕs anyone out ther e, who [they] can relate to.Ó And while many female employees at HealthTech value relationship building and attendance to shared interests and practices in their mentoring endeavors, nevertheless some women at HealthTech are invested in mentoring that encourages masculinist values of hierarchy and competition. Co nsequently, JulieÕs story does no t speak for all women at HealthTech. Vertical advancement within a workplace, and even lateral promotion are risky for women, especially when management and executive -level positions are occupi ed by women who are or were a part of the Òold boyÕs network.Ó To illustrate, I turn once more to Maria, who talks openly about her experiences of being part of mentoring relationshi ps with women at HealthTech and in other professional spaces . Unlike Julie, MariaÕs mentoring experiences with women are more negative than positive. According to Maria, women, more than men, tend to hold on to personal and professional bitterness in the workplace, which can lead to an uncomfortable and, at times, hostile work environment. In MariaÕs view, so me women in professional spaces are Òtwo -facedÓ in their approach to helping other women succeed. Maria recalls a specific instance of mentoring, outs ide of HealthTech yet connected to it where Òsomewhere [in our smaller group] , [the failure of the group] had to do with some of the !!95 other women. Like I said before, you know how women can be together. We hold on to grudges [more than men do].Ó For Maria, while mentoring can be a useful and necessary way to build and sustain her relationships at work, mentoring can also create an aggressive tension between and among the women in her professional network . This tension is often spurred on by intense competiti on for attention and recognition by peers and supervisors, and also highly coveted resources, like the newest technology and time off. Maria further clarifies her mentoring experience by saying: [This] hypocritical thing goes on. ÔHey, you want to get toge ther? Want to grow together?Õ And we do grow together, but only in certain Ôrah -rahÕ spaces. And sure, [some of us women ] eventually have a support group at HealthTech. Yet , others claim to be all about mentoring walk by my office everyday, and the least [ they] could do is say ÔhiÕ since they see me sitting there, but they donÕt. They just keep on walking. We can conclude from MariaÕs story that the who, the when, and the where of mentoring are also an integral part of an investment approach to mentoring for HealthTech employees. The who, the when, and the where of mentoring can come with a hefty price , as we ha ve seen previously in this chapter . For women, t he price of being Ôone of the boysÕ is often a willingness to turn against other women colleagues, especially if maintaining the hegemonic workplace status quo means job security. The tendency to compete with one another further marginalizes womenÕs access to support and information, and even continued informal and formal mentoring !!96 opportunities. Therefore, while mentoring in one space is considered safe and conducive to learning, in another space, mentoring presents a kind of threat to an individualÕs professional relevancy. And b ecause the risk ÐÐperceived or actual ÐÐassociated with c areer advancement for women is lived daily for most women, mentoring relationships th at traverse professional spaces and places is sometimes tricky at best and the cause for workplace in security and paranoia at worst. Mentoring, Career -long Learnin g, and Gender Identity We have learned so far in this chapter that w orkplace mento ring relationships can be positive and negative, informal and formal, and most of all they can be the nexus by which c areer advancement happens . And when examining how career advancement happens, career studies theorist Michael Arthur (1994) notes that we must: Move beyond seeing careers as artifacts of any single organization. Instead, our interest must lie in how careers are linked to the foundin g, discovery, evolution, learning, networking, and all iance -building of organizations (297) . For Arthur, and other career studies scholars, contemporary careers are not tied to specific worksites or institutions. While careers may be located in a particula r workplace (e.g., HealthTech), the work that workers do travels across organizational lines. In this way, careers are seen as boundaryless (Arthur 1994; Arthur and Rousseau 1996). Over the la st thirty years, many workplaces have evolved into e nvironment s that are marked by highly skille d knowledge workers (Arthur 297-98). This new and flexible !!97 understanding of work has re placed the normative view of an individualÕs career as a stable a nd lifelong commitment. A boundaryless career can be one full of possibility, opportunity, transitions , and higher career satisfac tion as well as instability, as other career theorists have argue d. Significant to this dissertation, however, is that the development of a b oundaryless career depends on an individualÕs rela tionships with colleagues, friends, and professional organizations and personal connections. The ability of mentoring to build productive and mutually beneficial relationships can be , as Jeffrey Jablonski (2005) suggests, an appropriate strategy for navi gating todayÕs fluid or boundaryless work environment. In his article Ò Seeing Technical Communic ation from a Career Perspective : The Implications of Career Theo ry for Technical Communication T heory, Practice, and Curriculum Design ,Ó Jablonski writes that rhetoric and writing research and teaching focus es on writing as a spatially and temporally bound activity , which severely limits the possibilitie s of the writer and her writing. WhatÕs more, this way of understanding writing potentially Òoverlooks fundame ntal shifts in our global economy and the behavior of workers Ó (Jablonski 7). For Jablonski, rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers must shi ft their intra -organizational per spectiv es to an inter -organizational one, one that closely examines individu al and group career practices that may shape larger, societal ways of being and doing. These individual and group career activities, as HealthTech employees have indicated, include all kinds of mentoring that add up to an investment approach to mentoring. This approach, as I hav e revealed throughout this study, affect s how they !!98 complete their daily work duties and build relationships with one another . An investment approach to m entoring can make more obvious the social actions and expectations within insti tutions that inform the career trajectories of employees. Earlier in this dissertation, employee -participants talked about how mentoring at HealthTech feels both like ÒworkÓ and Ònot work,Ó often at the same time. We can deduce now that because of the kind of work they do, they experience boundaryless careers, at least in some part. And yet, what a career studies perspective on learning and mentoring fails to address is how an individualÕs work performance and gender identi ty are either in sync or in interference with one another. Some of MariaÕs experiences with workplace mentoring have been less than ideal, and yet her stories raise an important consideration for us: if mentoring happens, according to Maria, Òinside this [pa rticular space] but not outside of itÓ and if Òwe were all supposed to be the same, in this equal groupÓ then whatÕs at stake for : 1) an employeeÕs access to the kinds of mentoring s/he needs in order to learn over the duration of their career and 2) women and other minorities to mentor and be mentored in ways that are most appropriate for them? Patrick, Maria, Claire, and JulieÕs stories point to a n important cultural shift within the company , a shift that takes seriously the need for an investment approa ch to mentoring to help mediate the intersections of work, mentoring, and gender identity at HealthTech . !!99 Conclusion: Costs of Non -participation in Mentoring Initiatives at HealthTech Industries I end this chapter by briefl y highlighting some of the co sts of non -participation in mentoring for HealthTech Industries. I suggest that each potential case of non -participation plays an important role in making visible the cultural shift HealthTech may experience addressed at the end of the previous section in this chapter. What I mean is, guys have to be open to women being able to be successful. Some men here are just É well, thereÕs still that mentality [here at HealthTech] of guys [being superior to women]. And even if they are asked to be a mentor [to a woman], they [men] might come into it [the mentorin g relationsh ip] with kind of a poor attitude about it because they arenÕt really invested in growing, but more about whoÕs better than who . In the a bove quote , Claire notices that when male employees opt out of mentoring at HealthTech , their opting out is related to their assumptions about women employeesÕ ability to be successful in their jobs at HealthTech. WhatÕs more, Claire shows us that for some employees at HealthTech, building and investing in sustainable relationships is not a top priority. And failure to bu ild productive relationships can cause employees not only to resent one another, but to also opt out from any or all development opportunities at HealthTech including but not limited to mentoring. What can result, then, is a kind of !!100 workplace isolation , wh ich we have learned about in many of Maria and ClaireÕs mentoring experiences and workplace stories. Additionally, as Maria shows us in this study , learning is collaborative and collective. MariaÕs story in Chapter 3 about not finding the right kind of mentor for her shows us that some of Nora and CrispÕs (2009) mentoring constructs were broken; Maria believes she did not receive the personal and professional support she needed for setting and achieving goals nor was she able to find a role model. One m ight assume that MariaÕs poor experience with mentoring was partially her fault. And while mentee willingness is indeed crucial for the sustainability of mentoring, we see that for Maria, a sixth mentoring construct manifested: mentor willingness. Maria re calls not being able to find a role mo del was not for lack of trying; she recalls several instances of seeking out a mentor only to find colleagues who were Òtoo busy.Ó Moreover, as with some other corporate and company -wide practices and policies at Heal thTech, the implementation and sustainability of mentori ng initiatives across multiple physical locations becomes difficult to do. The recent growth and expansion of HealthTech, for instance, makes it difficult to not only provide consistent, formal mentor ing programs for employees, but also ensure that the mentoring that does happen can be measured, if needed. Maria reflects on this issue, saying Òone of the problems that IÕve seen going through [HealthTech] is as the company has gotten bigger, [weÕve] ju st gotten so focused on growing the company that those [development opportunities] have become less important to care about.Ó Similarly, Randall talks about the difficulty of making mentoring sustainable, saying Òthe size of HealthTech is what !!101 makes profes sional development hard to maintainÓ but also noting that simply because sustainability of mentoring is difficult to achieve, does no t mean trying to sust ain it should no t be a goal that i s regularly attempted. We have learned from employeeÕs experiences a nd stories of mentoring that when one person, or even a group of people renounce the shared beliefs and goals of mentoring at HealthTech , the ties in the larger network (e.g., the Midwest organizati on, the outside mentoring program) have the potential to b reak or fade away . As a result, the access to guidance and reso urces can disappear, because it i s assumed that the advice from more capable peers is no longer needed or wanted by the employees at HealthTech . Simply put, when all HealthTech employees are no t willing to participate in the mentoring initiatives supported by the company, then employees receive mixed messages about the value of mentoring and other professional development practices within the company. Patrick, Maria, Claire, and Julie experience mentoring in vastly different ways . We also know now that the professional needs of women employees and the assumptions made by men employees about womenÕs needs must be addressed through contextually appropr iate mentoring models. While it i s important to remember that Patrick, Maria, Claire, and Julie, are, in some way, ÔboundÕ to their careers (as evidenced by their job titles and routine work duties), all four employees are knowledge workers, and require careers that are adaptable, careers that allow fo r personal interruptions, travel time, and experiential learning (Spinuzzi 2008). Put another way, an investment approach to mentoring helps Maria, Claire, and Julie locate their individual !!102 needs, scaffold those needs alongside HealthTechÕs organizationa l goals, and determine if they ar e adding value (or not) to themselves, their career, and the company . Their experiences and practices, in turn, can hopefully help Patrick (and other male employees) interrogate his privilege and the ways he understands prof essional development at HealthTech . We ha ve seen so far in this project that mentorin g is one way for HealthTech employees to build and sustain relationships both inside and outside of the company . In this chapter, I analyze d employee -participantsÕ experie nces with mentoring by extending the arguments I made in Chapter 3 that mentoring is a mode of learning for HealthTech employees. The feminist methodology I proposed in Chapter 2 helps me emphasize that mentoring is rhetorica l work, which connects workplace learning and workplace relationship building. The stories I call upon in this chapter reveal that an employeeÕs gender identity affects the investment approach to mentoring at HealthTech discussed in Chapter 3 in both positi ve and negative ways. This chapter prioritizes HealthTech employeesÕ stories and experiences of mentoring as each experience is related to her/his gender identity . During and after interviews with the employee -participants, I began to better understand j ust how complicated and difficult it is to sustain mentoring. ParticipantsÕ experiences of mentoring almost always included a mention or reference to how they performed or were expected to perform their genders either at home or at work. It was not surpris ing, then, that many of the women HealthTech employees interviewed for this study talked extensively about their gender identity affecting their workplace !!103 relationships, including their mentoring relationships with other women and men at the company .56 Still, while no male employee -participant talked explicitly about being mentored by a female employee, nevertheless the male employeesÕ stories reveal that gender identity is a factor that contributes to how they mentor or have been mentored in the past. As we learn throughout this study , an employeeÕs gender identity is connected to her/his ability to opt out of mentoring, and the cost of opting out or non -participation is higher for some than it is for others. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!56 It sho uld be noted that only one female participant talked about mentoring that occurred b etween her and a male colleague where she was the mentor and he was the mentee. !!104 CHAPTER 5 IMPLICATIONS OF AN INVESTMENT APPROACH TO MENTORING FOR RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION Mentoring helps build a community of scholars and ensures that knowledge -building continues in each new generation. --Michelle Eble, Stories of Mentoring: Theory and Praxis , 311 I think of me ntoring like this. Engage their heart. Engage their mind . And then get the hell out of the way. Because theyÕll be unstoppable. --Bill, HealthTech employee In Chapters 1 and 2 of this dissertation project , I introduced a feminist, cultural framework for examining professional identity development and experiential learning through an investment approach to mentoring . I carried out this framework by showing, through participantsÕ experiences of mentoring how mentoring acts as a mode of experiential learning as well as how a personÕs gender identity complicates and enriches mentoring practices. As such, the final chapter of this study proposes implications of and recommendations for an investment approach to mentoring for two seemingly separate yet connected audiences ÐÐindustry professionals, like the employees at HealthTech, and rhetoric and writing teachers and researchers ÐÐboth of whom are !!105 interested in building mentoring into their institutions, d epartments, and programs. As we wi ll see by the end of thi s chapter, acting and writing in school and non -school environments is not, as Dias, Freedman, Medway, and Par” (1999) argue, Òworlds apart.Ó This dissertation project has left me pleasantly overwhelmed with the stories I heard , and the things I learned f rom participants about mentoring in different workplaces . The mentoring experiences of HealthTech employees and RCAH alumni have taught me that mentoring i s not merely ÒorganicÓ and does no t Òhappen out of the blue ;Ó rather, mentoring is si tuated, relation al, and intentional . Because of the participants in this study, I more clearly understand the added value of mentoring in making accessible and sustainable moments of experiential learning. Mentoring is one way to facilitate career -long learning while simultaneously helping to redefine success for the participants in this study, the students we teach, an d the kinds of work that is valued in our research, teaching, and service endeavors. The experiences and stories of mentoring participants shared with me predict possible other mentoring and professional development relationships and practices they will have over the duration of their careers . In the time since this study began in November 2013, HealthTech has grown both geographically and intellectually. In Septe mber 2014, I learned that HealthTech was in the process of expanding their global operations, and more importantly to this study, were planning to implement change management at their main Midwest campus (with plans to implement change !!106 management practices worldwide). 57 According to Chris, another senior -level employee at HealthTech, the need for change management practices at HealthTech stemmed largely from this study. These new workplace policies and practices, she happily reported, will consider all emplo yees from Òproduction workers to executive -level staff.Ó So, to continue with the final chapter of the dissertation, I reflect briefly on some of the implications and recommendations of the framework I developed and enacted i n this study , as well as the kn owledge about experiential learning and identity development that came from it. First, I explica te what I have learned about the implications of an investment approach to mentoring , and its impact on an individualÕs career -long learning trajectory, specifi cally focusing on experiences of mentoring and other data collected from this project. 58 These findings are important to both Rhetoric and Composition and technical communication scholars, as I expand upon in the following sections. Next, I articulate recom mendations for HealthTech employees and rhetoric and writing teachers and researchers, and how I understand this heuristic for identity development after employing it in a non -academic workplace. Finally , I briefly focus on future research and pedagogical interventions emerging from this project. I put the findings from this study in conversation with recent scholarship focusing on the intersections of writing , mentoring, and distributed cognition and knowledge work. 59 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!57 For HealthTech, change management will apply to all employees. This systematic change is from the perspective of an organization and an individual employee. 58 The other data includes participantsÕ mentoring maps and workplace communication worksheets, which I discussed in detail in Chapter 2. 59 See Winsor (2003); Morville (2005); Hart -Davidson, Spinuzzi, and Zachry (2006); Swarts (2008); Lewis Gaillet and Eble (2008); Potts (2009). !!107 Investment Instead of Enculturation: Reflections, Negotiations, and Continued Work As I point to in Chapter 1 , I began this dissertation project with a set of questions that pointed to a specific problem, and theory that attempted to address that problem. In the beginning of this study, I believed that Rhetoric and Composition , and technical communication more specifically, could benefit from approaches to research and teaching that used feminist rhetorical theories and methodologies to investigate the invention of mentoring in workplace cu ltures. To address how mentoring is invented in workplaces, I designed and implemented a way of collecting and analyzing participantsÕ stories of mentoring. What I developed because of this study is a methodological approach to grappling with the seriousne ss of mentoring , and its implications as a rhetorical heuristic for an individualÕs professional and personal identity developmen t. Like other s before me who ha ve studied mentoring and mentoring in the workplace, I could have seen the mentoring relationshi ps between, among, and concerning HealthTech employees as mere extensions or slight modifications of the hierarchical master/apprentice models of mentoring that are commonly found in workplaces today. 60 However, what I decided to do was to draw upon feminis t and decentralized theories of being and doing, and theories of individual and collective learning; my goal in working with the participants in this study was to locate through their experiences of mentoring how mentoring practices get invented in both sc hool and non -school settings. My decision to prioritize participantsÕ experiences of mentoring was !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!60 See Kram (1985); Kram and Isabel la (1985); Clutterbuck (1999); Showunmi (2006). !!108 simple; their experiences of mentoring seemed likely to produce a set of practices that would help rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers understand h ow mentoring can engage our students to write for their own success. Simply put, it is in this shift of what mentoring is to how it is invented and legitimized in Rhetoric and Composition that I see my study and the methodology I have proposed most useful. At this point in my dissertation, I have addressed the benefits and drawbacks of a mentoring as rhetorical work, so that I can now reflect on what I have learned about this framework, which has guided my research project. First, the methodology for this p roject helped me to prioritize and participate in the retelling of mentoring experiences of participants, rather than only report the outcomes of each mentoring relationship or situation. This means that not only was I giving preference to participantsÕ st ories of mentoring as a way to build and sustain this framework, but also I was able to share with them my professional and personal mentoring experiences. As Chris noted, Òthis interview was the most comfortable interviewing process IÕve ever been through [É] it didnÕt even feel like you were interviewing m e. It was so conversational.Ó Chris and I shared our mentoring stories and experiences with one another, and thus a connection between researcher and participant was made. With a different research site , or with a different grouping of employees from HealthTech, I may have focused more on how mentoring relationships facilitate other kinds of work or writing tasks. Instead, for the purposes of this study, I focused on the ways individuals invent and susta in professional workplace relationships ÐÐhow they invest in themselves and in one another. My focus, as I have shown in Chapters 3 and !!109 4, is as real -time as possible, with special attention given to employeesÕ investment approach to mentoring, their gender identities, and their perceptions of the intersections of gender, work, and mentoring. Still, while the site is certainly important to the context of this study, I have learned that employee relationships and employee attitudes toward mentoring matter mos t in understanding how mentoring facilitates other kinds of work within the company. This study is about the mentoring relationships between and among employees in a specific workplace, and, resultantly, I have learned that mentoring is a concrete way to measure an individualÕs professional identity development over the duration of their career . I am reminded of Heather J. Hicks (2000), that workplaces are often hegemonic and are also sites where social norms dictate what should be performed and when (see also Donna Haraway 1991). She writes: If work has become the site where our very gender, once understood as the most essential element of our identities, may be so blatantly, publicly reconstituted, [then] work must also be the site where other essential transformations of selfhood can be and must be enacted (59). As I end my dissertation project, I have a better grasp of how gender identity and mentoring intersect, and how this intersection relates to the success and/or long evity of employee relationships . The participants in this study have taught me that workplace !!110 relationships indeed affect their personal and commu nity -based relationships, and vice versa .61 Over the duration of this project, I have come to understand that this framework for understandin g mentoring in the workplace is not only tied to non -academic workplace cultures and the employees who work for them . Rather, this framework enables Rhetoric and Composition teachers to focus on how mentoring unfolds in local ways, ways respons ive to local conditions of their workplace s or departments. With this local understanding of how mentoring functions in a particular workplace, we can rewrite the fieldÕs understandings of professional development and success in rhetoric and writing practi ce. Put another way, this project articulates how the invention of mentoring is connected to the larger ideological and socio -cultural commitments of each participant. T he stories and experiences participants shared with me helped me to add to or challenge my (and othersÕ) conceptions of what mentoring is and how it facilitates career -long, experiential learning . What Gender Identity , Mentoring, and Experiential Learning Have in Common While there were limitations to my study, I positioned mentoring as a r hetorical heuristic for professional identity development. This allowed me to create a framework for examining and developing sustainable writing curricula and writing programs that are centered around mentoring. Rhetoric and Composition teachers and resea rchers use a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!61 I was curious about if and how participantsÕ gender iden tities affecte d their approaches to mentoring. During this project I did not directly consider how their race, class, or ability affected their experiences of mentoring. Instead, I focused explicitly on participantsÕ gender identities affecting their mentoring. !!!111 variety of different curricular and pedagogical approaches to teaching and research that reflect what we claim to value in our discipline. The policies that govern our programs, departments, and larger field often yield good results (i.e., gra duates of our programs). And yet, while we have a healthy respect for mentoring in our field, we nevertheless have limited perceptions of the power mentoring has in shaping positive, long -term interactions with students and colleagues. As we have seen in t he stories of Randall, Maria, Claire, and other participants, mentoring influences their relationships with one another and with customers, affects their home lives and personal commitments to family and friends, and even informs other daily work tasks. Up on close reflection, I find that the stories and experiences of participants are not unlike my own experiences of mentoring. My study reveals to me that an investment approach to mentoring is a more appropriate model rather than one that promotes encultura tion at the cost of learning. Interestingly but not surprisingly, some participantsÕ gender identities highly affect their mentoring practice s and their approaches to work. Several female participants in this study noted that, for them, mentoring is mor e high stakes than for their male colleagues. With this information, IÕm reminded of Donna HarawayÕs ÒSituated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial PerspectiveÓ (1991) when she writes: [Women] need an earth -wide network of connections, including the ability partially to translate kn owledges among very different ÐÐand power differentiated ÐÐcommunities. We need the power of modern critical theories of how meanings and bodies get made, not in order to deny !!112 meanings and bodie s, but in order to live in meanings and bodies that have a chance for a future ( 187). For Maria and Claire especially, issues of identity related to their gender and/or sex further complicate t heir access to and experiences of mentoring . As I ha ve shown throughout this study, an investment approach to mentoring celebrates diverse knowledges and positions, and can be difficult to sustain if participants refuse to take responsibility for their worldviews and actions with the company . In this way, Lucy SuchmanÕs located accountability (1994; 2000) and Stacey PiggÕs situated accounts of practice (2011) can help individuals take ownership for how their personal identifications affect their pro fessional mentoring practices. Borrowing from both scholars , I argue that s ituated accounts of work are both visible and invisible. And these situated accounts of work must make connections across experiences, texts, bodies, and technologies that inform rhetorical, locatable, and critical knowledges. In this study , I have expanded SuchmanÕs located accountability by showing how various forms of visible and invisible work is more Òall -or-nothingÓ for some groups than it is for others. Simply put, employeesÕ situated experiences of mentoring are g endered. Mentoring i s, in fact, a real, bodily, and lived experience, an experience that has myriad outcomes, both good and bad. Situated Mentoring Applied to Rhetoric and Writing Research and Practice I have shown throughout this dissertation project that situated mentorin g experiences provide a useful through -point to understanding professional identity !!113 development both for our students and us. I turn once more to Pigg (2011) when she describes situated accounts of practice as Òculturally situated, [É] d etailed portraits o f the work of rhetoric and writing Ó that can (and perhaps should) become the foundation of many kinds of disciplinary action of contem porary Rhetoric and Composition. What I have highlighted in this study, especially so, is that situated accounts of mentor ing provide a way to tackle the difficult questions surrounding what counts as success in our teaching, research, and service practices in Rhetoric and Composition. Situated accounts of mentoring within academic and non -academic workplace cultures present us with explicit and visible moments to better value mentoring as a mode of career -long, experiential mentoring. The idea of Òmentoring networksÓ provides a useful frame to locate existing mentorin g practices and invent new ones. For instance, when a ment oring network is constructed in a learning space (e.g., a classroom), moments of learning are easier to pinpoint, trace, and mobilize to other situations. As I have shown in Chapter 3, mentoring happens in a variety of ways, and is not tie d to one specific space or department at HealthTech. Indeed, mentoring facilitates and promotes learning. In fact, its traceable quality is what makes its many performances unique and worthy of continued study. Mentoring in academic and non -academic settings reflect curre nt understandings of what constitutes work, practice, and relationship building; the experiences of mentoring drawn upon in this study reveal similarly to Berkenkotter et al. (1989) that moments of initiation into a specific discourse community manifest th ems elves in written text and also through interaction with superiors and with peers (193). By understanding !!114 mentoring in this way, we are more capable of locating writing and mentoring alongside one another. Each writing act and mentoring experience are moments of identity building through which an individual learns the customs and conversations that would help her enter into desired professional communities. In short, mentoring makes visible and accessible the multiple languages and discourses that susta in networked relationships for the employees at HealthTech, and for other kinds of professionals as well. The feminist, qualitative framework on which this project is built enables us to continue the work of Goodburn, LeCourt and Leverenz (2013) in redefining professional success in Rhetoric and Composition. Moments of Òc areer training, knowledge -making, and disciplinarityÓ work together to regulate the field through assumptions that manifest themselves in multiple ways (x). We see this manifestation in our undergraduate majors and minors, grad uate training and career advice and, as I have argued in this project, in our mentoring relationships and other professional development practices . The lack of publicly visible demonstrations of ÔsuccessÕ ÐÐor ra ther, a range of possible successes within Rhetoric and Composition is indeed disheartening; however, a renewed understanding of mentoring can create room for richer and more contextualized approaches to informal and formal learning. Rhetoricians building from this feminist rhetorical framework for locating and inventing mentoring now have the opportunity to listen to other stories of mentoring, to collect and analyze artifacts associated with mentoring, and most importantly to continue b uilding value arou nd the spaces and places, technologies, and ways of being !!115 and doing that support experiential learning in our discipline and beyond. When we understand mentoring to be not only inventive and rhetorical, but also multiple, situated, and always -already conne cted to gender identity, we are positioned to revise our current understandings and assumptions of what counts as success in our field. I n the following section , I outline two areas for continued research emerging from this study : 1) the distributed, knowl edge work practices of mentoring and 2) the need for a mentoring -based institutional critique. Distributed Work and Institutional Critique: From Mentoring Relationships to Mentoring Networks In this study, I looked for ways that mentoring is invented in workplaces. I did so by u sing the methods I detailed in Chapter 2 , which have led me to argue that mentoring is a mode of career -long, experiential learning for HealthTech employees as well as a set of practices and relationships that are connected to the ir gender identities. In terms of the implications of these findings for future research, in this section I make explicit how the mentoring experiences of participants I have described in previous chapters are tied to knowledge work, distributed work/knowl edge, and institutional critique. The methodological approach found in this study, which I described in Chapters 1 and 2, and on which I reflect in the previous sections of this final chapter, have l ed me to understand how mentoring, work, and gender are always already deeply connected to one another. For the participants in this study, how they mentor and work inform the constructions of their gend ers and vice versa. A s I detail in Chapter 4, this central !!116 finding comes from participantsÕ interviews about their gender identities affecting their mentoring and work practices at HealthTech. Previous to this study, gender and other identity categories (such as race and class) were positioned as add -ons to the mentoring relationship; however, this study shows t hat an individualÕs mentoring, work, and gender intersect in ways that combine personal, social, and professional commitments and roles. As an example, the participants in this study talked extensively about their roles as a spouses or a partners, as careg iver s to elderly parents, and as members of local and regional community organizations (e.g., loca l churches, and area 4-H clubs) . The many personal and professional roles participants occupy influence and indeed inform how an individual develops as a prof essional. The macrostructures and micro structures by which mentoring, work, and gender are made visible intersect with a range of current Rhetoric and Composition and technical communication research and scholarship. An investment approach to mentoring, w hich is the crux of this dissertation, requires more complex understandings of mentoring, especially for marginalized groups who may not have access to or benefit from traditional, top -down mentoring relationships. A networked model of an investment approa ch to mentoring is a viable alternative to hierarchical approaches to mentoring. Networks of mentoring are one way to support knowledge creation in both academic and industry settings. Echoing Michelle Eble and Lynee Lewis Gaillet in their forthcoming chap ter ÒRe -inscribing MentoringÓ in Realizing the Dream: Essays in Pursuit of a Feminist Rhetoric , mentoring networks enable individuals to see more clearly the distributed work of mentoring, work that is sometimes invisible in workplaces. Similarly, !!117 Clay Spinuzzi (2007) writes that distributed work is Ò the coordinative work that enables sociotechnical networks to hold together and form dense interconnections among and across work activities that have traditionally been separated by temporal, spatial, or disciplinary boundariesÓ (268). Mentoring networks rely on Ò negotiation, trust, alliances, agility, persuasion, and relationship building ;Ó these networks are not constrained to space, place, or time. Therefore, as Eble and Lewis Gaillet note: Focusing on th ese specific collaborative ÐÐand we argue, mentoring ÐÐskills helps highlight the possibilities inherent within a network that can lead to the synergistic and reciprocal relationships which constitute productive mentoring networks. These relationships, based on a network of people, disrupt the hierarchical nature of the traditional expert/prot”g” relationship that can be so exclusionary. Mentoring networks depend on multiple, culturally situated knowledges and resources both human and non -human. A distributed work understanding of mentoring allows for a more fluid transfer of knowledge throughout the network . A distributed work approach to mentoring by disrupts and flattens hierarchies that are professionally exclusionary at best and personally destructive at worst. This study shows that s tories about and experiences of mentoring are plentiful at HealthTech . Participants use mentoring to interact with one another and other coworkers, and they also use mentoring to share information and kn owledge about HealthTe ch.62 Participants distribute knowledge to others in the ir network (and across !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!62 See Morville (2005). !!118 networks, too) , and build supportive learning groups at HealthTech . This distributed network can reinforce an investment approach to mentoring by making information immediate and accessible to all others in the network . With this new understanding of how mentoring is invented, rhetoric and w riting researchers and teachers (especially those in technical communication) have the potential to learn how individuals build relationships in their workplace that have a direct impact on their learning and writing practices. Micro and Macro -level Mentoring -based Institutional Critique Separating writing from mentoring, or positioning writing as more important than mentoring, is a common practice in Rhetoric and Composition. To clarify, rhe toric and writing teachers and r esearchers have not traditionally a ddressed mentoring as a set of rhetorical skills or practices that help writers improve their writing, or help us value our writing, tea ching, and service equally. However, research and scholarship has been devoted to accounting for the ways in which intellectual and service work might be more equitably treated in the academy. This research provides another way to see mentoring as rhetoric al work. In Grabill et al.Õs ÒInstitutional Critique: A Rh etorical Methodology for Change Ó we learn that institutional critique is a Òrhetorical practice mediating macro -level structures and micro -level actions rooted in a particular space and time ,Ó whic h move s beyond the classroom and the university (612). This type of macro and micro -level critique can, over time, produce rhetorical and material change by validating actions and practices that !!119 have long been discredited as Ò mere service workÓ (Grabill et al. 627; 631-632). A mentoring -based institutional critique can instead position those discredited actions and practices as a reinterpretation of what counts as Ôintellectual workÕ ( see also Clary -Lemon and Roen 2008 ). Mentoring, as I discussed in Chapte r 1, is often positioned as an undervalued service to Rhetoric and Composition, and yet is done with more frequency than our teaching and research efforts combined. Therefore, a mentoring -based institutional critique positions mentoring as the kind of work that helps us interrogate our attitudes toward not only writing at the micro -level but also our allegiances to the larger, macro -level structures ÐÐthe networks ÐÐthat contribute to what counts as knowledge creation, research, and teaching in Rhetoric and Composition. Situated Mentoring for the Classroom and Beyond: Other Spaces for Pedagogical Intervention My dissertation project explores the invention of mentoring in school and non -school settings. Mentoring is situated and relational, and as IÕve shown throughout this project occurs in workplaces like medical device manufacturing companies. Mentoring also happens in classroom spaces, and in other academic spaces like university hallways, offices, an d living -learning spaces (like dormitories and cafeterias) (see Lewis -Gaillet and Eble 2008). I have devoted much of this project to examining mentori ng at HealthTech Industries; however, another place informs this study, too. As I described in Chapter 1, since the fall of 2013, I have examined RCAH alumni and !!120 students Õ approaches and attitudes toward mentoring . During my time with alumni and students, I have interviewed them about their mentoring experiences inside and o utside of the residential college. My motivation for interviewing RCAH a lumni and students was this: non -academic, industry workers (i.e., HealthTech Industry employees) report that mentoring is situated, relational, and adheres to transparency, self -reflexivity (or self -awareness) , and reci procity . Do students also experience mentoring in these ways? I interviewed four alumni (three women and one man) from the residential college. Alumni -participants shared with me that they occupy various levels of employment and leadership in their acade mic classrooms and industry workplaces across the country. I chose to interview recent college graduates because I was interested to learn about any professional development p ractices that began in the residential collage that may have transferred to their new work environments. In this study, I interviewed recent college graduates from MSU as well as senior -level employees HealthTech to see if what I learned about mentoring in one place happens in another. What I have learned from all participants in this study is that the importance of mentoring in traditional classroom spaces, alternative -learning sp aces (e.g., writing centers and dorm rooms) , as well as in non -academic workplace settings is crucial for sustain ed, career -long learning. Long -term pedagogical implications will certainly require collecting more and varied experiences of mentoring from different kinds of people and in different workspaces and places . Still, RCAH alumni identified three !!121 necessities f or forming and sustaining positive mentoring relationships both in school and work settings . First, a lumni indicated that they want and need the option to invent mentoring that fits each unique situation they ar e in . Each alumna agreed that when they were students in the residential college, they did not want to be assigned a mentor if only for the sake of having one . Instead, alumni stated that the best kinds of mentoring they experienced in the college placed equal responsibility and accountability on bo th the mentor and mentee. To illustrate, Alex, an RCAH alum and licensed clinical therapist in New York City, noted that mentoring was most useful when it was Òinvent[ed] in whatever ways made sense to me and the other person involved.Ó AlexÕs mentoring experience reveals, similarly to Randall, that mentoring is situated, and happens because of self -identified needs and wants. Secondly, s imilarly to HealthT ech employees, RCAH alumni noted that m entoring happens in and because of a large system of professio nal development resources. This network of resources is made up of both human and technological actors in the residential college , the larger MSU campus and surrounding community, and other work and internship experiences both locally and globally . And, li ke HealthTech employees, RCAH alumni associated successful mentoring with transparency, self -reflexivity (or self -awareness) , and reciprocity . As Carr ie, another RCAH alumna put it: good mentoring doesnÕt necessarily mean happy or feel -good mentoring, but it does mean g rowth, learning, and awareness of self, of others, of privilege, and of your place in your community. !!122 From CarrieÕs experience, we learn that mentoring requires a balance of an individual as both separate and connected; she is an individual i n a community, acting in her environment and being part of it. Carrie and ClaireÕs mentoring experiences uphold the three criteria proposed in this study (and in the previous paragraph) to sustain positive and productive mentoring relationships. And thirdly, p articipants at both places have shown me tha t positive mentoring takes a lot of time , a lot of physical and emotional energy, and mutual respect from both the mentor and mentee . The stories of HealthTech employees and RCAH alumni reveal that the physical, emotional, and intellectual labor of informal and formal mentoring are highly influential in the way mentoring relationships form, are sustained, and even mobilized from one work or class situation to another. With this knowledge, I argue for increased attention to and action in developing peer mentors alongside peer reviewers in the writing classroom. An Investment Approach to Mentoring as a Pedagogical Tool for Inventing Relationships and Writing I articulated in Chapter 1 that t eaching and m entoring are complementary modes of learning. To reiterate, what I mean by this is that when students become active and positive peer mentors for one another, their opportunities for learning in the classroom increase . Positive peer -to-peer mentoring enabl es students to develop more productive rhetorical skills, writing strategies, and relationships with one another. Again, this pedagogical shift in classroom writing and learning practices reflects contemporary !!123 scholarship surrounding academic and workplace writing practices and strategies. Developing peer -to-peer mentoring relationships in the writing classroom is one approach to expanding the ways undergraduate and graduate students learn to write and communicate effectively . Ultimately, peer -to-peer mento ring, alongside writing and peer reviewing, provide s rhetoric and writing teachers with a new way to teach students how to write and think critically about know ledge as a rhetorical production. Furthermore, I suggest that rhetoric and writing researchers and teachers, especially those in technical communication , consider the rhetorical and relational habits we create and use as writing pedagogies. As our courses expand from technical report writing and website design, to courses in usability re search, user -centered design, and experience architecture, implementing peer mentoring in our classrooms can help students understand that writing well comes from investing in positive and productive relationships. Therefore, the more students can practice modeling and building positive peer mentoring relationships with one another, the better chance they have of employing transparent, reciprocal, and self -reflexive (or self -aware) writing strategies when working with and for local and global citizens . Conclusion: Using an Investment Approach to Mentoring as a Framework for Seeing and Inventing Rhetorical Work In this final chapter of the dissertation, I have articulated the complex weaving of mentoring, learning, and professional development, and the impl ications for the way we understand professional identity development and learning in our scholarship , teaching, !!124 and service. What I ha ve shown in this chapter, and throughout this dissertation project, is that in order to continue to build value in our dis cipline, we must re -evaluate our commitments to positive, sustainable relationship building practices. Further, the investment approach to mentoring articulated in this study is connected to cultural and soci al change. Change happens in and across traditio nal, alternative, and non -academic learning spaces and workplaces. This study is a place to start, a way to visibly call attention to how we value mentoring and learning in our Rhetoric and Composition , and how writing programs can contribute to workplac e learning beyond the classroom . In turn, future research must take up the shortcomings of this study with the goal of creating more and nuanced understandings of the role mentoring plays in learning and writing. For instance, it is my plan to revisit and analyze participantsÕ comments about and views of mentoring from a more critical stance, perhaps a stance informed by a more direct cultural rhetorical analysis of participantsÕ experiences of mentoring. We have more work to do in uncover ing the stories of colleagues (both in academia and industry), of our students, and others who have taken alternative routes for their careers. Thus, the more and varied accounts of mentoring we record and collect, the more we can be accountable to and participate in expanding the dominant definitions of what counts as professional success in Rhetoric and Composition. !!125 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WORKS CITED !!126 WORKS CITED Anzaldœa, Gloria. Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza . San Francisco : Aunt Lute Books, 1987. Print. Anzaldœa, Gloria and AnaLouise Keating. this bridge we call home: radical visions for transformation. New York: Routledge, 2002. Print. Bhabha, Homi. ÒOf Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse.Ó October Discipleship: A Special Iss ue on Psychoanalysis (Spring 1984): 125 -33. Print. Alcoff, Linda Marti !n. Visible Identities Race, Gender, and the Self , selections. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print. Anderson, Kathryn., Susan Armitage, Dana Jack, and Judith Wittner. ÒBegin ning Where We Were: Feminist Methodology in Oral History.Ó Oral History Review 15 (1987): 103 -27. Print. Baake, Ken., and Stephen A. Bernhardt, Eve R. Brumberger, Katherine Durack, Bruce Farmer, Julie Dyke Ford, Thomas Hager, Robert Kramer, Lorelei Ortiz, and Carolyn Vickery. ÒMentorship, Collegiality, and Friendship: Making Our Mark as Professionals.Ó Storie s of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 52 -66. Print. Berkenkotter, Carol., Thomas N. Huckin, and John Ackerman. ÒSocial Context and Socially Constructed Texts: The Initiation of a Gra duate Student into a Writing Research Community.Ó Research in the Teaching of English (1989): 191 -215. Print. ---. ÒConventions, Conversations, and the Writer: Case Study of a Student in a Rhetoric Ph.D. Program.Ó Research in the Teaching of English 22. 1 (1988): 9 -44. Print. Berlin, James, and Robert Inkster. ÒCurrent -Traditional Rhetoric: Paradigm and Practice." Freshman English News 8.3 (1980): 1 -14. Print. Bloom, Lynn. ÒMentoring as Mosaic: Life as Guerilla Theater.Ó Composition Studies 35.2 (2007): 87 - 99. Print. Blyler, Nancy. ÒTaking a Political Turn: The Critical Perspective and Research in Professional Communication.Ó Technical Communication Quarterly 7 (1998): 33 Ð52. Print. !!127 Brooks, Lisa. The Common Pot: the Recovery of Native S pace in the Northeast . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008. Print. Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity . New York/London: Routledge, 2006. Print. Cain, Mary Ann. ÒMentoring as Identity Exchange: Conflicts and Connections.Ó Feminist Teacher . 8.3 (1994): 12 -118. Print. Chandler, Christy. ÒMentoring Women in Academia: Reevaluating the Traditional Model.Ó NWSA Journal 8.3 (1996): 79 -100. Print. Christian, Barbara. ÒA Race for Theory.Ó Cultural Critique: The Nature and Context of Minority Discourse . 6 (1987): 51 -63. Print. Clary -Lemon, Jennifer., and Duane Roen. ÒWebs of Mentoring in Graduate School.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 178-192. Print. Clarke, Adele E. Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory After the Postmodern Turn . New York: Sage, 2005. Print. Clegg, Sue. ÒFeminist Methodology: Fact or Fiction.Ó Quality and Quantity 19 (1985): 83 -97. Print. Clutterbuck, David. Everyone Needs a Mentor: Fostering Talent in Your Organization. Wimbledon: CIPD, 1985. Print. Coggins Mosher, Cinda., and Mary Trachsel. ÒPanopticism? Or Just Paying Attention?Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 276 -288. Print. Cole, Barbara., and Arabella Lyon. ÒMentor or Magician: Reciprocities, Existing Ideologies, and Reflections of a Discipline.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaill et and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 193 -206. Print. Craig, Collin Lamont., and Staci Maree Perryman -Clark. ÒTroubling the Boundaries: (De)Constructing WPA Boundaries at the Intersections of Race and Gender.Ó WPA 34.2 (Spring 2011 ): 37 -58. Print. Cruikshank, Julie. ÒOral History, Narrative Strategies, and Native American Historiography.Ó Clearing a Path: Theorizing the Past in Native American Studies Ed. Nancy Shoemaker. New York: Routledge, 2001. Print. !!128 De Certeau, Michel. Prac tice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Print. Derrida, Jacques. ÒSignature, Event, ContextÓ Limited , Inc. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1977. 1 -23. Print. Dias, Patrick, Aviva Freedman, Peter Medway, and Antho ny Par”. Worlds Apart: Acting and Writing in Academic and Workplace Contexts. New York: Routledge, 1999. Print. Emig, Janet. ÒWriting as a Mode of Learning.Ó College Composition and Communication 28.2 (May 1977): 122 -128. Print. Ebest, Sally Barr. ÒMentoring: Past, Present, and Future.Ó Preparing College Teachers of Writing: Histories, Theories, Programs, and Practices. Ed. Betty Pytlik and Sarah Liggett. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 211 -221. Print. Eble, Michelle F . ÒReflections on Mentoring.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 306 -312. Print. Faber, Brenton. ÒProfessional Identities: What Is Professional about Professional Communicati on?Ó Journal of Business and Technical Communication 16.3 (July 2002): 306-337. Print. Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge . E !ditions Gallimard: Paris, France. 1969. Print. ---. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison . New York: Vintag e, 1979. Print. Goodburn, Amy., and Donna LeCourt, and Carrie Leverenz. ÒIntroduction.Ó Rewriting Success in Rhetoric and Composition Careers . Eds. Amy Goodburn, Donna LeCourt, and Carrie Leverenz. Anderson: Parlor Press, 2013: vii -xxiii. Print. Gurak, Laura and Nancy Bayer. ÒMaking Gender Visible: Feminist Critiques of Technology to Technical CommunicationÓ Technical Communication Quarterly . 3.3. (1994): Print. Grabill, Jeffrey T., James E. Porter, Patricia Sullivan, Libby Miles, and Stuart Bly the. ÒInstitutional Critique: A Rhetorical Methodology for Change.Ó College Composition and Communication 51.4 (2000): 610 -642. Print. Grabill, Jeffrey T., Libby Miles, Stuart Blythe, and Jim Porter. ÒInstitutional Critique Revisited.Ó Works and Days 21 (2003): 219 -237. Print. !!129 Haas, Angela. ÒWampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice.Ó Studies in American Indian Literatures 19.4 (2007): 77-100. Print. ---. ÒRace, Rhetoric, and Technology: A Case Stud y of Decolonial Technical Communication Theory, Methodology and Pedagogy.Ó Journal of Business and Technical Communication 26.3 (2012): 277 -310. Print. Hall, Stuart. ÒCultural Identity and Diaspora.Ó Colonial Discourse & Postcolonial Theory: A Reader . Eds . Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman. Harvester: Wheatsheaf, 1993. Print. ---. ÒEncoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse.Ó Birmingham: Centre for Cultural Studies , 1973: 507-17. Print. Haraway, Donna. ÒA Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist -Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.Ó Feminist Theory: A Reader. Eds. Wendy K. Kolmar and Frances Bartkowski, Boston : McGraw Hill, 2010. 336-346. Print. Hart -Davidson, Bill. ÒLearning Many -to-Many: The Best Case for Writing in Digital Env ironments.Ó Invasion of the MOOCs: The Promises and Perils of Massive Open Online Courses. Eds. Steven Krause and Charles Lowe, Anderson: Parlor Press, 2014. 212 -222. Print. Herndl, Carl. ÒTeaching Discourse and Reproducing Culture: A Critique of Researc h and Pedagogy in Professional and Non -academic Writing.Ó College Composition and Communication 44 (1993): 349 Ð363. Print. Henry, James. ÒDocumenting Contributory Expertise: The Value Added by Technical Communicators in Collaborative Writing Situations. Technical Communication 45.2 (1998): 207 -220. Print. Henry, Jim., Holly Huff Bruland, and Ryan Omizo. ÒMentoring First -Year Students in Composition: Tapping Role Construction to Teach.Ó Currents in Teaching and Learning 1.1 (2008 Fall): 17 - 28. Print. ---. ÒEducating Reflexive Practitioners: Casting Graduate Teaching Assistants as Mentors in First -Year Classrooms.Ó International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 22.3 (2010): 308 -319. Print. ---. ÒCourse Embedded Mentoring for First -Year Students: Melding Academic Subject Support with Role Modeling, Psycho -Social Support, and Goal Setting.Ó International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 5.2 (July 2011): 1 -22. Print. !!130 Jablo nski, Jeffrey. "Seeing Technical Communication from a Career Perspective: The Implications of Career Theory for Technical Communication theory, Practice, and Curriculum Design" Journal of Business and Technical Communication 19 (2005): 5 -41 Print. Jehn, Karen A., and Karsten Jonsen. "A Multimethod Approach to the Study of Sensitive Organizational Issues." Journal of Mixed Methods Research 4.4 (2010): 313 -341. Print. Johnson -Eilola, Johndan. ÒRelocating the Value of Work: Technical Communication in a Post -industrial Age.Ó Technical Communication Quarterly 5.3 (1996): 245 -270. Print. Katz, Steven. ÒThe Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust.Ó College English 54 (1992): 225 Ð275. Print. King, Thomas. The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003. Print. Kram, Kathy., and Lynn Isabella. ÒMentoring Alternatives: The role of Peer Relationships in Career Development.Ó Academy of Management Journal 28 (1985): 110Ð32. Print. Krause, Steven., and Charles Lowe. Invasion of the MOOCs: The Promises and Perils of Massive Open Online Courses . Anderson: Parlor Press, 2014. Print. Latour, Bruno. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor -Network Theory . Oxford: Oxford University Press , 2006. Print. ---. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. Lauer, Janice M., and Asher, J. William. Composition Research: Empirical Designs. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Print. Lauer, Janice., et al. ÒTheir Stories of Mentoring: Multiple Perspective on Mentoring.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Lewis Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 33 -51. Print. Lave, Jean, and Etienne Wenger. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Print. Lay, Mary. ÒFeminist Theory and the Redefinition of Technical Communication.Ó Central Works in Technical Communication .Ó Eds. Johndan Johnson -Eilola and Stuart A. Selber. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. 146 -59. Print. !!131 Leon, Kendall., and Stacey Pigg. ÒGraduate Students Professionalizing in Digital Time/Space: A View From ÒÕDown Below.ÕÓ Computers and Compositio n 28 (2011): 3 -13. Print. Leon, Kendall. ÒExpanding the Boundaries of WPA Research: A Response to Craig and Perryman ClarkÕs ÔTroubling the BoundariesÕ.Ó Council of Writing Program Administrators (November 2012): n.p. Print. Lewis Gaillet, Lynee. ÒIntroduction.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 3 -13. Print. Lyotard, Jean -Francois. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: Un iversity Of Minnesota Press, 1979: 29 -84. Print. Maracle, Lee. Oratory: Coming to Theory . North Vancouver: Gallerie Publications, 1990. Print. Mead, Jay. ÒMeasuring the Value Added by Technical Documentation: A Review of Research and Practice.Ó Technica l Communication 45.3 (1998): 353 -379. Print. McGuire, Gail, and Jo Reger. ÒFeminist Co -Mentoring: A Model for Academic Professional Development.Ó NWSA Journal 15.1 (2003): 54 -72. Print. Meeks, Lynn, and Christine Hult. "A Co -Mentoring Model of Administr ation." WPA -LOGAN 21 (1998): 9 -22. Print. Mignolo, Walter. The Darker Side of the Renaissance: Literacy, Territoriality, & Colonization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003. Print. ---. The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Deco lonial Options. Durham: Duke University Press Books, 2011. Print. Miles, Katherine S., and Rebecca E. Burnett. ÒThe Minutia of Mentorships: Reflections about Professional Development.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 113 -128. Print. Miller, Scott L., Brenda Jo Brueggemann, Bennis Blue and Deneen M. Shepherd. ÒPresent Perfect.Ó College Composition and Communication 48.3 (1997): 392 -409. Print. Mol, Annemarie. The Body Mu ltiple: Ontology in Medical Practice Durham: Duke University Press, 2002. Print. !!132 Monberg, Terese Guinsatao. ÒReclaiming Hybridity: How One Filipino American Counterpublic Hybridizes Academic Discourse.Ó Rhetorical Agendas: Political, Ethical, Spiritual . Ed. Patricia Bizzell. New York: Routledge, 2008. Print. ---. ÒWriting Home or Writing As Community: Toward a Theory of Recursive Spatial Movement for Students of Color in Service -Learning Courses.Ó Reflections: A Journal of Public Rhetoric, Civic Writing, and Service Learning 8.3 (2009): 21 -51. Print. Moraga, Cherrie and Gloria Anzaldua. This Bri dge Called my Back: Writings By Radical Women of Color. New York: Kitchen Table/Women of Color Press, 1984. Print. Moore, Cindy. ÒA Letter to Graduate Student Women on Mentoring.Ó Profession (2000): 149-156. Print. ---. ÒMentoring for Change.Ó Rewriting Success in Rhetoric and Composition Careers Eds. Amy Goodburn, Donna LeCourt, Carrie Leverenz. West Lafayette: Parl or Press, 2013: 158-174. Print. Morville, Peter. Ambient Findability . Sebastopol: OÕReilly, 2005. Print. Okawa, Gail Y. ÒDiving for Pearls: Mentoring as Cultural and Activist Practice among Academics of Color.Ó College Composition and Communication 53.3 (February 2002): 507-532. Print. Potts, Liza. ÒUsing Actor Network Theory to Trace and Improve Multimodal Communication Design.Ó Technical Communication Quarterly 18.3 (2009): 281 -301. Print. Powell, Malea. ÒListening to Ghosts: an Alternative (non)Ar gument.Ó ALT DIS: Alternative Discourses and the Academy . Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2002. Print. ---. ÒBlood and Scholarship: One Mixed -BloodÕs Story.Ó Race, Rhetoric and Composition . Ed. Keith Gilyard. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook -Heineman, 1999. 1 -16. Print. ---. ÒDreaming Charles Eastman: Cultural Memory, Autobiography, and Geography in Indigenous Histories.Ó Eds. Gesa Kirsch and Liz Rohan. Beyond the Archives: Research as a Lived Process . Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2008. 116 -27. Print. Powell et al., ÒOur Story Begins Here: Constellating Cultural Rhetorics.Ó Enculturation: A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Cultures . (2014): 1 -25. Web. Redish, Janice. ÒAdding Value as a Technical Communicator.Ó Technical Communication 42.1 (1995): 26 -39. Print !!133 Rickly, Rebecca. ÒMentoring, (Wo)Mentoring, and Helping Students Take Responsibility for Their Own Education.Ó Kairos 5.2 (2000): n.p. Print. Rickly, Rebecca., and Susanmarie Harrington. ÒFeminist Approaches to Mentoring Teaching Assistants: Conflict, Power, and Collaboration.Ó Preparing College Teachers of Writing: Histories, Theories, Programs, and Practices. Ed. Betty Pytlik and Sarah Liggett. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 108 -120. Print. Royster, Jacqueline Jones and Gesa Kirs ch. ÒPart Two: Re -visioning History, Theory, and Practice.Ó Feminist Rhetorical Practices: New Horizons for Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2012. Sano -Franchini, Jennifer, Donnie Johnson Sackey , and Stacey Pigg. ÒMethodological Dwellings: A Search for Feminisms in Rhetoric & Composition.Ó Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society . 1.2 (2011): 1 -9. Print Scott J. Blake, and Bernadette Longo. ÒGuest EditorsÕ Introduction: Making the Cultural Turn.Ó Technical Communication Quarterly 15 (2006): 3 -7. Print. Schell, Eileen K., and KJ Rawson. Rhetorica in Motion: Feminist Methods and Methodologies . Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh Press, 2010. Print. Sharer, Wendy., and Jessica Enoch and Cheryl Glenn. ÒPerforming Professionalism: On Mentoring and Being Mentored.Ó Stories of Mentoring: Theory & Praxis Eds. Lynee Gaillet and Michelle F. Eble. West Lafayette: Parlor Press, 2008: 129-144. Print. Showunmi, Victoria. ÒA Black Perspective on Mentoring.Ó Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning . 3.3 (1996): 12 -18. Print. Slack, Jennifer, and David Miller, and Jeffrey Doak. ÒThe Technical Communicator as Author: Meaning, Power, Authority.Ó Journal of Business and Technical Communication 7 (1993): 12 -36. Print. Spilka, Rachel. Writing in the Workplace. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1998. Spilka, Rachel., and Barb Morrow. Reshaping Technical Communication: New Directions and Challenges for the 21st Century . New York: Routledge, 2002. Print. Stowers, Robert, and Robert Barker. ÒThe Coaching and Mentoring P rocess: The Obvious Knowledge and Skill Set for Organizational Communication Professors.Ó Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 40 (2010): 363 Ð371. Print. !!134 Sullivan, Patricia., and James E. Porter. Opening Spaces: Writing Technologies and Critica l Research Practices. Greenwich: Ablex and Computers and Composition, 1997. Print. Swarts, Jason. Together With Technology . Amityville: Baywood, 2008. Print. Tuhiwai -Smith, Linda. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples . London: Zed Books, 1999. Print. Villanueva, Victor. Bootstraps: From an American Academic of Color . Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, 1993. Print. Vygotsky, Lev. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard U niversity Press, 1978. Print. Warner, Michael. The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics, and Ethics of Queer Life . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. Print. Wilson, Shawn. Research Is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Black Point: Fernwood Pu blishing, 2009. Print. Winsor, Dorothy. Writing Power: Communication in an Engineering Center Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003. Print. Yates, JoAnne. Control Through Communication: The Rise of System in American Management . Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press , 1993. Print. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!