Frequently Asked Questions:

Why use a web-based mentoring management system, like Colaboro?

Typically, prospective clients come to us with challenges such as: increasing knowledge sharing, competency development, succession planning and employee retention. When the numbers involved in a program grow beyond 75 or 100 participants, the amount of time involved in matching (never mind monitoring and evaluation) is beyond the organization’s capacity. In fact, one client confirmed what we already knew from interviews we conducted with Program Coordinators in more than a dozen countries around the globe – it routinely takes three to five hours per pair to match. And the matches may not be objective or based on any science. In other words, these matches may be based on little more than a guess.

Let's consider the mathematics of these numbers: 75 pairs X 3 hours each = 225 hours spent by at least one person (using the lower number). It's easy to surmise that more than one person is normally involved in the matching process. Add in some hourly figure to calculate the dollars spent if done manually for this Phase of the program and you can well appreciate why an organization will look at the time it takes Colaboro algorithms to match 200 pairs (approximately 15 minutes), and the answer to the original question is clear.

Of course, there are other reasons to consider our electronic system – it's objective, it offers more than one type of matching, it links a series of proven tools into an entire System, it creates a database… and so forth. If you decide Colaboro might offer a cost saving plus other advantages, give us a call.

For what reasons do clients typically use pencil and paper mentoring materials?

It will depend -- based on decisions made during our Planning and Design Session (Phase 1) onsite with the client as to what is most appropriate. In point of fact, some clients use both Colaboro and paper and pencil mentoring materials.

Others with small programs or very specific needs use a suite of our printed materials: typically our 16-page Mentoring For Results Mentor-Protégé Workbook, PocketCard, and the most appropriate version of the Mentoring Style Indicator (11 versions in two languages available).

To ensure proper use, we conduct webinar training sessions for partners who have our printed materials in front of them or come on site to conduct and model inhouse mentor-protégé training sessions. These are attended by client trainers or Coordinators. We also conduct Train-the-Trainer sessions.

What are the pitfalls of developing mentoring materials in-house?

Thoughtful organizations "stick to the knitting" – what they're good at. They come to us because they've learned (usually by having a program "fizzle") that establishing and maintaining a solid mentoring program requires specialization like ours.

What have they done to get to this point? Unfortunately, some have treated it like a course and mistakenly believed that a few hours of lecture, fun icebreakers and a high profile (but totally unrelated) psychometric test will do the job. The client has used what's at hand, or what "might work" to put together "an event". Sometimes there are no materials provided. Later, partners spend many hours trying to figure out what to work on and how to make the relationship last.

What must be kept in mind is that mentoring is both a relationship and a broad concept. It's not the same as coaching. Some organizations want to treat mentoring as if it were coaching. That won't work either especially with regard to materials that are used as a springboard for activities that build and maintain the relationship.

Why have we been successful in this arena?

Beginning with our first program in 1978, we spent time each week with participants observing, asking questions, analyzing the relationship requirements, developing materials and activities that would speed up the partnership building element, getting feedback, make the process seem natural and useful and have a high success rate. As close to 100% as possible. We also spent time acting as Coordinators. We didn't take a hands-off approach in order to learn. Over time, we created materials and activities for coaching as well as for mentoring.

What’s your Quality Assurance and Security process? Are you 508-Compliant? Are you on the GSA?

Here’s a brief overview for each of these questions:

Quality Assurance & Security

CMSI employs an internal / external process of testing to ensure the quality of our products. Internally, we test for core functionality requirements and gross program operation. Externally, CMSI employs a team of testers to review and provide feedback on gross functionality, technical functionality, and usability aspects in the final production. Colaboro 4 is implemented on a Java Sun Server platform.

GSA Registration

The software related products and services that we provide have been registered in the U.S. Government's GSA Schedule, under the following Special Item Numbers:

SIN 132-32 Term License for our Internet/Intranet-based software system [Colaboro® Mentoring Management System®]
SIN 132-33 Non-term License for our Internet/Intranet-based software system [Colaboro®]
SIN 132-50 Onsite Consulting and Training

508 Compliance with the U.S.A.'s Disabilities Act

Section 508 of the American Disabilities Act establishes requirements for electronic and information technology developed, maintained, procured, or used by the U.S. Federal government so technology is accessible to people with disabilities. An accessible information technology system is one that can be operated in a variety of ways and does not rely on a single sense or ability of the user. For example, a system that provides output only in visual format may not be accessible to people with visual impairments and a system that provides output only in audio format may not be accessible to people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Some individuals with disabilities may need accessibility-related software or peripheral devices in order to use systems that comply with Section 508.

One of our corporate priorities has been to work with the following groups to ensure our web-based software complies:

Canadian National Institute for the Blind – for initial feedback and recommendations
American Association for Persons with Disabilities – for additional feedback and recommendations
National Federation for the Blind – for a rigorous "sight reading" test of our system to ensure it met Certification Standards