Mentoring is hard, or maybe it's not.

It seems two styles exist; 
1) where the mentor tries to make a remould of himself in the mentee
2) where the mentor just guides and corrects the mentee but allows him to give expression to innate creativity.

The most reasonable argument for style one is that, for you to be able to give expression to "yourself" you must at least be good at something. Thus, you must kind of attain something before you "earn" the right to express yourself.

Most advocates of style one feel style two proponents are too liberal and might not really raise strong mentees.

Of course, the above are examples are what I have seen from my immediate environment. I wish I could get links to studies on mentorship styles or approaches.

While I'm not concluded yet, I feel the domain of training should determine the style of mentorship. But ultimately it seems it's the personality of the mentor that determines which style is used.
Funny that to me #1 doesn't appear to be mentorship at all!
2020-12-29 03:10:14
Agreed with Sir Abe - #1 doesn't feel like mentorship. 
The topic is interesting Seun. I am also looking to understand this more. This year, I have experienced repeated disappointments from people I considered my mentors. Maybe I should write about that experience as a post. 
2020-12-29 21:02:36
Wow so fascinating that you've went through so many mentors and been disappointed, Keni. Curious as to your top reasons for disappointments were.
2020-12-30 19:10:11
Sure - I will share it in a post... Still understanding the whys myself. 
2020-12-30 23:08:19