Perspectives Series Introduction
The Perspectives: Learning through Differences series will explore seven common differences that are present in mentoring relationships: geography, function, experience, power, culture, style, and generation. Each of these differences provides a touchstone against which to evaluate and enhance the effectiveness of your mentoring relationship. We will explore each topic in its own newsletter. This second installment in our series is focused on the differences between organizational functions. 

The Effects of Function on Mentoring
Organizational functions are typically broken down by departments, such as sales, customer service, human resources, manufacturing, and finance. Within each of these functions are various disciplines or areas of expertise. For instance, within a sales function you may have administrative support personnel, prospectors, and closers. Each of these disciplines has a different set of work expectations, which shape the type of activities people engage in and the type of skills they need to be successful.

When it comes to work, these distinctions help people accomplish tasks and ensure that work is completed. But when it comes to mentoring, these distinctions in function can lead to distance between the partners because they approach the relationship in different ways. Understanding functional differences with your partner can be critical to ensuring the success of your relationship. Sometimes this means understanding how your partner’s brain works or how he/she approaches an issue. Clues can be found in how they approach their work.

Nobel Prize winner Roger W. Sperry (1981) showed that there are two modes of thinking represented rather separately in the left and right hemispheres of the brain. The left hemisphere uses logic and facts, is detailed oriented, and excels at analysis. The right hemisphere relies on intuition, is big picture oriented, and interprets emotions. The chart below offers a side-by-side comparison of these two distinct modes of human operation and reasoning. 

If we apply this concept to jobs, we can more easily see similarities and differences between them. For example, a structural engineer by discipline may spend more time processing facts and data than an architect, who relies more on imagination and spatial thinking. These differences influence how knowledge is processed, communication occurs, problems get solved, decisions are made, and learning takes place.

Using the example of the engineer and the architect, it is easy to imagine the difficulties that their functional differences could bring to their mentoring relationship. The architect may want to have a free associated discussion regarding learning possibilities, while the engineer wants to know what manual or procedure they are going to follow. In reality, either approach could work as long as they are aware of their differences.

Becoming More Whole Brain
There are advantages that can be leveraged from your mentoring relationship regardless of whether you have similar or different dependencies on left brain or right brain activity. Those with similar styles have a sense of familiarity and a common understanding about how to approach a situation and process information. Those with different styles gain empathy and insight into a different way of doing things.

What might be even more important today than just understanding left versus right is being more whole brain and able to apply both left and right brain traits toward work accomplishment. For example, engineers need to be able to consider how their efforts are impacting other systems, and architects need to be able to bring their imaginative projects in on time and within budget. Applying a technique from another discipline can create a breakthrough in thought and action.

This has been demonstrated many times, such as in software development. The practice of developing new software applications is very unpredictable and therefore difficult to estimate accurately. The left brain approach to fixing this problem is to control the scope of the project by not allowing change requests until after the planned application has been fully developed (sequential phased development). The right brain approach is to use approximations based on previous experience and develop the application in short iterations that accommodate rapidly changing requirements (frequently adapted development). Using a right brain approach in a typically left brain field can reduce friction between developers and customers, allow for quicker development, and yield higher quality applications.