# Mentorship program feedback survey

Learn whether mentoring conversations support useful progress.

If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.

## 1. How clear are the goals for your mentoring relationship?

Answer: ____________________

## 2. Which conversation helped you take a next step?

Answer: ____________________

## 3. What would improve meeting frequency or structure?

Answer: ____________________

## 4. How easy is it to arrange the next mentoring conversation?

Answer: ____________________

## 5. What practical next step came from your last discussion?

Answer: ____________________

## Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable

1. Check whether both participants can describe an agreed purpose for mentoring. Clarify conflicting expectations before changing the meeting schedule or interpreting participation as progress.
2. Locate the discussion that informed a concrete next step, preserving its useful questioning or support. A helpful conversation does not demonstrate a lasting career outcome.
3. Separate cadence problems from problems with meeting agendas or follow-through. Agree a feasible adjustment with both participants rather than assume more frequent meetings are preferable.
4. Identify practical scheduling friction, including the route used to arrange the next conversation. Address coordination barriers separately from the participant's willingness to continue mentoring.
5. Check whether the last discussion produced an identifiable action that the participant owns. Revisit its feasibility without requesting private disclosures from the mentoring conversation.

Interpretation caution: Do not require details from private mentoring conversations.


## Illustrative finding and follow-up

Observation: Example participants value their mentor but struggle to agree on a meeting rhythm.

Action to test: Agree on a realistic cadence and end each meeting with an optional next step.

Follow-up: After testing the action, revisit this original observation: Example participants value their mentor but struggle to agree on a meeting rhythm. Repeat the relevant experience prompts with people who encountered the change. Compare specific explanations and sample differences; do not claim causation from the before-and-after responses.