Where learning research meets practitioner instinct — writing on peer mentoring, instructional design, and what it takes to build programs that actually last.
Most mentoring conversations focus on the mentee: what they need to learn, who they should be paired with, how they’ll grow. The mentor’s development is usually an afterthought. This series argues for a different model — one where mentoring is designed as an equal exchange.
Most mentoring conversations focus on the mentee: what they need to learn, who they should be paired with, how they’ll grow. The mentor’s development is usually an afterthought. This series argues for a different model — one where mentoring is designed as an equal exchange.
There’s a type of connection that matters at work — not just to your team or your manager, but to the organization itself. This kind of connection is harder to build than most organizations realize. And it’s more fragile than they’d like to admit.
Autonomy doesn’t mean absence of structure. It means the right kind of structure. Self-managed teams make their own decisions — but within strategic boundaries. Teams can own how they learn and grow, if organizations give them frameworks, time, and support to actually do it.
You can’t learn everything on your own. Nobody can. The most valuable thing in your organization isn’t in the documentation — it’s knowing who to ask when you need help. And feeling like you can actually reach out and ask.
There’s what the documentation says. And then there’s how experienced people actually do it. That gap is where tacit knowledge lives. And it’s one of the most valuable, most overlooked resources in any organization.
Here’s the difference between a New Year’s resolution and a sustainable practice: one is about acquiring something. The other is about building a system that keeps working. That distinction matters more every year in fields where the tools, methods, and expectations shift faster than any formal training program can track.
The pressure to diversify skills isn’t new. It’s been building for years as career ladders flatten, advancement opportunities shrink, and people experience multiple career pivots within the same organization. AI is just the most visible example right now.
When organizations restructure or downsize, employees who remain face disrupted workflows, unclear roles, and increased workloads. Traditional support systems often break down during these periods—and yet, this is precisely when people need support most.
You want to launch a mentoring program, but you’re in the middle of restructuring. Downsizing. Delayering. Suddenly, you have fewer senior managers available to mentor — but the need for development hasn’t disappeared. This is where peer mentoring becomes essential.
Before launching a peer mentoring program, you need to pass two tests. Most organizations only run one of them.
Going into the literature review for my Northwestern capstone, I thought I’d find maybe 3 or 4 situations where peer mentoring works well. I found eight. And the benefits — and challenges — go deeper than I anticipated.
While managing education programs by day, I’ve been pursuing my Master’s in Information Design and Strategy at Northwestern by night. Here’s what I’m researching: peer-based skills mentoring programs that create value for both sides of the equation.
