On many campuses, mentoring is widely valued but loosely defined. It’s often left to individual departments or informal pairings, without much structure or accountability. While many institutions recognize the importance of faculty mentoring, building a coordinated, sustainable approach that works across all career stages remains a challenge.
At Emory University, efforts to strengthen mentoring began with a closer look at faculty experience. Through a partnership with Harvard’s Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE), Emory started collecting deeper insights into faculty satisfaction and support. The results were eye-opening. While junior faculty felt relatively well supported, associate professors were more likely to feel disconnected and unsure about their next steps.
“We were really good at onboarding junior faculty,” said Dr. Pearl Dowe, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs at Emory. “But we didn’t have anything for associate professors who were now in limbo. We had a big gap, and people didn’t know where to go.”
That realization sparked a shift—not just in programming, but in mindset. Mentoring wasn’t treated as an add-on. It became central to how Emory thinks about faculty success.
A Coordinated, Multi-Level Approach to Mentoring
Rather than asking departments to fix mentoring on their own, Emory adopted a more intentional, institution-wide approach. The Office of Faculty Affairs partnered with department chairs, deans, and external organizations like NCFDD to build a layered mentoring structure—one that recognizes faculty have different needs at different points in their careers.
Some of the most impactful changes included:
- Using faculty data to drive decision-making: COACHE surveys helped pinpoint where mentoring was working—and where it wasn’t. That clarity allowed Emory to prioritize investments where they would have the most impact.
- Creating opportunities beyond the department: Faculty had access to mentoring networks outside of their disciplinary home, including peer mentoring cohorts, leadership development opportunities, and participation in NCFDD’s Faculty Success Program.
- Framing mentoring as a shared responsibility: Rather than leaving it up to individual faculty to find support, Emory built mentoring into the fabric of its faculty development strategy, with cross-campus ownership.
“When mentoring isn’t consistent, it can leave people out,” Dr. Dowe explained. “We had to shift from thinking of it as something organic to something intentional—and supported.”
Why It Worked
Emory’s model worked because it acknowledged two core truths: that mentoring needs vary across faculty roles, and that support systems must be intentionally designed, not assumed.
Faculty reported feeling more supported, more connected, and more confident in their ability to navigate their careers. Among participants in NCFDD’s Faculty Success Program—which includes faculty mentoring through small-group coaching, network building, and structured support—Emory retained nearly 90%. This retention rate is a powerful example of how investing in mentoring infrastructure can strengthen both individual and institutional stability.
“It’s about creating a mentoring culture,” said Dr. Dowe. “One that doesn’t just help faculty survive—but one that helps them grow, lead, and stay.”
Lessons for Other Institutions
Emory’s success isn’t the result of a single tool or template. It’s the product of sustained attention, strategic partnerships, and a willingness to rethink outdated assumptions. For institutions looking to improve mentoring, the takeaways are clear:
- Don’t assume mentoring is working—ask.
- Use data to guide your next steps.
- Support mentoring at multiple levels, not just one.
- Recognize that faculty need different kinds of support at different stages.
- Treat mentoring as an institutional commitment, not a personal responsibility.
Want to explore more of Emory’s mentoring model and other strategies that work?
Download our latest white paper: Redefining Mentoring in Higher Education.