Mentoring Women in Corrections: Encouraging the Next Corrections Executive

Abstract

Mentoring can positively influence the mentee, the mentor, and the organization in which both are employed. Mentoring can help employees to overcome workplace challenges, including barriers to advancement, while increasing job satisfaction, enhancing career development, and producing a greater sense of value within the organization, often leading to increased productivity. While mentoring clearly has a multitude of benefits, women have traditionally had difficulty establishing mentorships in the workplace, which appear especially problematic in traditionally male-dominated careers, such as corrections. Based on surveys and interviews with members of the Association of Women Executives in Corrections (AWEC), this study investigates the role of mentorship in women’s advancement within corrections departments. Data show that support, particularly from one’s supervisor, is critical as women consider advancement, regardless of the supervisor’s gender. These results imply that when there are few women in the administrative ranks, limiting the opportunity for female mentorship, women can find equally effective mentorship from male superiors. Moreover, mentorships do not necessarily have to be formalized to be effective and can develop from outside one’s department when none exist within. Corrections agencies interested in diversifying their administrative ranks should plan to establish more opportunities to foster mentoring relationships, which would benefit all employees.

1. Introduction

The first jobs open to women in criminal justice were in the field of corrections, working as the custodial caretakers of women who were incarcerated, establishing themselves as capable and promising corrections professionals (Belknap 2007). Traditionally, there were far fewer women’s correctional institutions when compared to the number of male institutions (the same holds true today), and without the ability to work with men who were incarcerated, women in corrections were faced with limited opportunities for advancement (Collica-Cox 2023). With Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited discrimination in hiring and promotional practices, coupled with subsequent litigation to redress gender inequality and reinforce Title VII requirements, women entered male carceral institutions, supervising incarcerated men and working alongside male corrections officers (Maghan and McLeish-Blackwell 1991). As women sought advancement to the executive ranks in this traditionally male-dominated environment, they overcame challenges, including but not limited to sexual harassment, gender harassment, tokenism, and difficulty with work–life balance; yet, women were able to successfully overcome such challenges and found that each level of advancement presented fewer issues for them individually and their departments collectively (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2021). Women’s underrepresentation in the executive ranks of corrections departments means there are fewer women role models and fewer networking opportunities, when compared to male colleagues, that could serve a supportive function in not only remaining in the agency but also advancing to the executive ranks (Lavender and Todak 2022). Women corrections executives cite many reasons for their success (i.e., having a desire to effect change in their agencies, taking positions that were highly visible, accepting challenging positions, etc.), allowing them to prove their effectiveness as leaders, earning credibility with those they worked with, those they supervised, and those who supervised them (Collica-Cox 2023). An important component of this process was mentorship. Mentoring is one of the many factors that help women shatter the proverbial glass ceiling (Lantz-Deaton et al. 2018). This portion of a larger study examining the career trajectories of women corrections executives focuses on whether mentorship is beneficial for women in corrections as they overcome challenges to advancement, specifically whether gender plays a role in the mentor–mentee relationship, whether such mentor–mentee relationships need to be formalized to be effective, and whether a mentor–mentee relationship can be effective if it is forged with someone outside of the mentee’s agency. While women may have difficulty establishing mentoring relationships, especially in traditionally male-dominated fields, this study, based on surveys and interviews with women executives in corrections, demonstrates that mentoring relationships do not have to be formalized to be effective, and they can develop from outside one’s agency. When women mentors are limited, male mentors are equally effective in providing women with support while they navigate the promotional processes.

2. Literature Review

Mentoring relationships can produce beneficial outcomes for all involved: first, the mentee, by helping to navigate the work environment successfully, by enhancing career development, and by increasing job satisfaction; second, the mentor, by enhancing leadership skills and creating a greater sense of value within the department; and third, the organization, by increasing productivity and employees’ investment in longevity with the organization in which they are employed (Elliott et al. 2011; Washington 2010). When employees succeed, organizations will flourish (Washington 2010). Mentors provide practical and emotional support, as well as take pride in their mentee’s accomplishments; they feel more connected to their organization when they feel good about helping others (Elliott et al. 2011; Washington 2010). Mentoring can allow the organization to see the mentee in a more personalized way, and it can also help the organization reinforce its organizational policies through the mentor–mentee relationship (Washington 2010). Mentors who are familiar with the organization can provide constructive feedback to the mentee, which will aid in their advancement (Bhatta and Washington 2003). When these relationships are effective, a more loyal and productive employee is cultivated (Jayne 2001).

2.1. Formal vs. Informal Processes

There is a debate in the literature about whether informalized or formalized mentorships are preferable, but both can beget positive outcomes (Kram 1985). Due to the underrepresentation of women in the executive ranks of most agencies, it may be difficult for women to formalize a mentoring relationship with a more experienced superior. Yet, according to Jones (2016), formal mentoring can help to empower and support women as they overcome challenges in their work environment within the following four areas: first, cognitive, which can include one’s perceptions of workplace dynamics as well as receiving advice on obtaining promotions; second, skills-based, such as helping to enhance one’s interviewing skills or manage a work–life balance; third, affective-related learning, which is helping to increase one’s confidence and motivation for advancement; and last, social networks, to aid the mentee in making larger connections and forging better relationships within the workplace. Formal relationships may be more organized, but informal relationships develop with those the mentee is most comfortable with (Ehrich 2008). Regrettably, women are less likely to be included in informal organizational gatherings, which can impact their opportunities to foster informal networking relationships (Bapna and Funk 2020; Davies-Netzley 1998; Shen et al. 2022).

When informal and formal mentors within one’s organization are unavailable, some workers may seek guidance from those outside their agency. External mentors can offer invaluable insights into industry standards, work ethics, and networking opportunities that might not exist within the mentee’s organization; since they are outside of the agency, they may be more objective when working with the mentee, providing information on best practices in the field (Haines and Popovich 2014). It appears that external mentors can help mentees comprehend expectations and best practices and develop their professional networks beyond the confines of their institution.

2.2. Mentoring and Women

Mentoring programs for women not only help them to overcome barriers while trying to advance but also provide additional support and encouragement, increasing one’s sense of self-confidence (Groves 2021). Mentoring programs can help female staff to feel more empowered within their organizations (Elliott et al. 2011) and help them to understand office politics, paths to promotion, and how to increase their visibility (Williams 2000). There is a lack of mentorship programming in law enforcement agencies, but women in law enforcement who receive mentorship have greater opportunities for advancement when compared to women in law enforcement who do not receive mentorship (Hampton and Whitlock 2022). Even though mentoring relationships can provide a plethora of benefits for all involved, women often have difficulty establishing mentorships, especially in traditionally male-dominated fields. The difficulties increase with the intersectionality of race and sexual orientation, as non-white women have even more difficulty securing mentorship when compared to their white counterparts (Helfgott et al. 2018), and lesbians and bisexuals receive less mentorship when compared to their heterosexual counterparts (Barratt et al. 2014).

2.3. Mentoring in Policing and Corrections

While little is written on mentoring and corrections, there is some corresponding literature regarding women in policing. The research finds that formal mentorships in policing organizations are uncommon, and informal relationships appear less available to women when compared to their male counterparts (Lavender and Todak 2022). When available, however, a mentor–mentee relationship can help to decrease barriers to advancement and increase diversity within the upper ranks (Hampton and Whitlock 2022). While it may be believed that women prefer to be mentored by other women, there is also a belief among some women officers that when other women hold executive positions, there is little interest in mentoring and supporting them and more interest in remaining competitive (Lavender and Todak 2022). Others find that women mentors may be more indirect and compromising when compared to their male counterparts, yet still effective (Holmes 2005). Female mentors may also provide more psychosocial support when compared to male mentors, which may help mentees to feel more supported in their positions (Kao et al. 2014). While a lack of women in the executive ranks can affect women’s ability to be mentored by other women, research has found that the gender of the mentor is immaterial; mentoring appears to be an important component in one’s advancement irrespective of gender (Mcilongo and Strydom 2021). There are no notable differences between female and male mentors (Hoigaard and Mathisen 2009). However, there is some research that points to some problems with cross-gender mentoring, such as spousal jealousy, boundary crossing, and the perpetuation of gender stereotypes, such as male workers being more knowledgeable than female workers (Ehrich 2008). The complexity of gender in law enforcement may be compounded by whether the officer is viewed as having more masculine or more feminine traits. For example, Barratt et al. (2014) found that women who presented with more masculine traits in police departments were more likely to be mentored when compared to officers with more feminine characteristics.

In corrections, mentoring can impact an employee’s commitment and retention, serving as a protective factor against resignation, especially in the beginning of one’s career, when turnover is at its highest (Farnese et al. 2016). Mentoring programs for corrections officers are known to help with non-employment matters, such as physical fitness and overall health (Namazi et al. 2021). It is advisable for women in corrections to seek mentors if they want to be more successful in advancing (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2020). Having a mentor’s support can increase job satisfaction and improve career planning (Hoigaard and Mathisen 2009; Lambert et al. 2017). Due to the valuable opportunity for learning and professional growth, it increases the prospects for promotion and, subsequently, one’s earning potential (Ehrich 2008). While it is not the only factor related to career success, it is more likely to be correlated with career advancement (Ehrich 2008). Overall, for mentoring to be most effective, it has to be individualized and account for one’s career goals (Holmes 2005). Yet, there is no consensus on its meaning or how programs should be constructed (Ehrich 2008).

A problem plaguing organizations with established mentoring programs is that such programs are not necessarily evidence-based and, therefore, do not always meet the needs of their employees (Chao et al. 1992). Program evaluations of mentorship in careers such as policing are not common, and when conducted, they do not attempt to examine women’s specific experiences in them (Lavender and Todak 2022). The same appears to be true of mentoring studies in corrections departments, which focus more on serving a supportive function for mental health, rather than specifically for advancement; few evaluations exist and do not necessarily examine women’s experiences independently (Namazi et al. 2021). Yet, mentorship, whether formal or informal, is known to increase job satisfaction, and those who are mentored fare better professionally when compared to those without mentorship (Lavender and Todak 2022). An effective mentorship program requires clear program objectives, well-defined roles for the mentor and mentee, and methods for assessing/evaluating the quality of the relationship (Fagenson 1989). It not only includes sponsorship but also exposure, coaching, protection, and encouragement for challenging assignments, as well as providing career guidance and psychosocial support (Chao 1997; Chao et al. 1992).

Mentorship may also aid in decreasing the negative impact of sex/gender discrimination (Dashper 2019). For example, women in federal law enforcement agencies are more likely to report sexual harassment when they have the benefit of a mentor (Yu and Lee 2021). When discrimination occurs, those who are mentored are less likely to feel isolated and more likely to feel confident and capable (Petersen et al. 2020). While women appear to have less access to mentoring programs when compared to men, a lack of mentoring can contribute to the proverbial glass or, in the case of law enforcement, brass ceiling (Ehrich 2008). In a study of 850 women working across multiple criminal justice agencies, Helfgott et al. (2018) found that women did not view discrimination as a barrier to future success, similar to what was found in Collica-Cox and Schulz’s study of women executives in corrections (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2019). However, strong mentorship helped to mitigate such challenges, in addition to family support and personal perseverance. They also found that while female mentorship was important, male mentorship was just as influential if women mentors were unavailable (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2020; Helfgott et al. 2018). With limited information on the role of mentoring for women in corrections, it is clear that more research is needed.

3. Materials and Methods

With very little research conducted on mentoring women in corrections, this study adds to the mentorship literature by examining the importance of the mentor–mentee relationship for women when advancing within corrections departments. Based on a targeted sample of members from the Association of Women Corrections Executives (AWEC)1 who completed surveys (n = 83) and participated in follow-up interviews (n = 58), the author examined the following questions:

• Can mentorship be effective if it is derived from outside of one’s agency?
• Does gender play a role in whether the mentor–mentee relationship is effective?
• Is mentorship viewed as beneficial to career advancement for women corrections executives?
• Does the mentor–mentee relationship need to be formalized to be effective?

3.1. Sampling Strategy

Women corrections executives, defined as those at the rank of warden or above, were located through the Association of Women Executives in Corrections (AWEC), a nonprofit agency, to serve as the study’s sample. Since its inception, AWEC has been “the active voice of women executives in corrections working toward reasoned change and the development of future leaders” (AWEC 2018). Through training, executive development, publications, and related activities, AWEC supports upward mobility for women to advance to corrections executive positions. This study was an exploratory analysis since the examination of women executives and mentoring in corrections is not well documented in the literature. Hence, the researcher used targeted sampling for its ability to yield rich detail and its suitability for studies that are qualitative, descriptive, or exploratory (Atkinson and Flint 2001). This entails a strategy to obtain systematic information when true random sampling is not feasible and when convenience sampling is not rigorous enough to meet the assumptions of the research design (Waters and Biernacki 1989, p. 420). This targeted plan involves locating agencies or organizations that would yield the largest sample of potential respondents. After nationally identified corrections agencies were contacted, AWEC was identified as the greatest source for suitable respondents; women who held the rank of warden or above were eligible for AWEC membership, and women at the rank of warden or above were considered to be an “executive” for inclusion purposes in this study. The principal investigator (PI) contacted the president of AWEC, and after several meetings, a multistage plan was developed to recruit voluntary study participants. First, the study was mentioned in AWEC’s newsletter. Second, the PI attended an AWEC conference to explain the research and to distribute and collect the first set of completed surveys. Third, many respondents were asked to refer other women to participate, known as chain referral or snowball sampling. Applying a combination of methods is often useful in gaining access to hard-to-reach populations (Waters and Biernacki 1989). Fourth, AWEC sent e-mail blasts one, three, and six months after the conference asking members, including those who did not attend the conference, to complete the survey. Upon completion of the survey, respondents were asked if they would be willing to participate in a follow-up interview. If interested, respondents provided their contact information. Of the 83 completed surveys, 58 women agreed to a follow-up interview, yielding a 70% response rate for the second part of the study.

3.2. Data Collection

The survey in this study was based on one used by Schulz (2003, 2009) in her studies of women executives in policing. Some questions were modified to account for differences between law enforcement and corrections. The survey was pretested by AWEC’s leadership team, all of whom had long careers in corrections, including institutional (jails and prisons) and noninstitutional (probation and parole) positions, to determine its applicability and ease of use. These same women completed the survey and then engaged in a focus group with one of the researchers. Based on their suggestions, questions were modified to better reflect careers within corrections.

The questionnaire included open- and closed-ended questions. It was divided into four parts: demographics, workplace information, career development, and workplace experiences. The subsequent interviews focused on the same areas, although, depending on the respondent’s career experiences, some topics were covered in greater depth than others. Demographic data included age; race/ethnicity; level of education; family status (single, married, divorced, widowed, or cohabiting); whether the respondent had children; and whether the respondent’s life partner was in corrections or another criminal justice profession. Work-related information included jobs held and the types of institutions in which the respondent had been employed; the length of time in executive positions; the length of time in the present (or last) position; the length of time in this or other agencies prior to reaching the executive rank; and the number and type of agencies in which the respondent had been employed. Career development questions were open-ended. They primarily covered motivations to enter corrections and motivations to enter the executive ranks, including the decision to apply for positions at different points in their career trajectories. The final set of questions pertained to the role that the respondent believed her sex may have played in workplace experiences. These included whether she received differential treatment; felt isolated; believed she had to work harder than males to prove herself; and experienced difficulties finding a balance between work and family. The respondents were also asked whether they would encourage other women to aspire to the executive rank and what advice they would give those interested in pursuing upward mobility. As part of this larger study, there were areas in the survey and during the interview where the construct of mentoring emerged as a theme. Examples of specific questions in the survey that focused on mentoring asked, “As you were moving up the ranks, were there any women in the Department that were able to provide you with mentoring and guidance?”, “As you were moving up the ranks, was there anyone outside of the department that was able to provide you with mentoring and guidance?”, “As a woman who reached the executive level, do you serve as a mentor to men and other women?”, “What makes an effective mentoring relationship?”, Did you find that mentoring relationships were often based on gender or race/ethnicity?”, “How has your membership with AWEC impacted your career development?”, and “What factors do you feel have contributed to your success?” During the follow-up interviews, women were asked to elaborate on these issues and to discuss whether they had mentors in the field who helped them achieve their career goals and, if so, whether these mentors were men, women, or both. Women were also asked on the survey if they were willing to participate in a more detailed follow-up interview, where the above-mentioned areas could be explored in greater depth. To increase reliability, interviews were conducted by the same researcher and averaged 52 min, ranging from 25 to 120 min.

Surveys and interviews were confidential; though participants had the option of completing the survey anonymously, only nine chose to do so. The researchers assured respondents that they would delete any identifying information when reporting qualitative results. Therefore, to maintain this confidentiality, women are referred to by title and region only. Surveys were collected in person or via e-mail, fax, or standard mail, while interviews were conducted via telephone.

3.3. Data Analysis

Since women were located all over the United States, it was most efficient to conduct interviews by telephone, and to increase comfort levels, none were recorded. Responses were recorded in written format (i.e., pen/pencil, shorthand) and transcribed the same day (i.e., written shorthand was typed into longhand); quotes are verbatim transcriptions. Responses were read back to respondents for clarification. While recording would have been preferable, participants were not comfortable being recorded, and in such instances, written notes were the only practical or appropriate way for the interviewer to record information (Russell and Gregory 2003). Data from the surveys and interviews were analyzed using content and thematic analyses and coded utilizing the open-ended approach (Glaser and Strauss 1967). The authors examined common themes in the respondents’ answers, managing data by case and theme (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Miles and Huberman 1994). Data were reviewed by each researcher independently, coded for themes, and then reviewed and discussed in collaboration. Upon completion of the study, the researchers met with the focus group (i.e., peer debriefing) to discuss emerging themes and confirm whether such themes appeared consistent with their own knowledge and adequately represented the experiences of their membership. It was believed that saturation was achieved when no new themes emerged. Based on preliminary observations of the data, a codebook was developed, providing definitions for concepts, identifying themes that emerged, and categorizing succeeding concepts (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Coding was a continuous process. Initial themes were organized into categories and reorganized during several transcription readings. Representative quotes were selected to describe categories and/or themes within categories. Frequencies and percentages were used to quantify responses to the closed-ended questions.

3.4. Sample Demographics

The women in this study were working/worked in very high-ranking positions within their agencies, achieving the rank of assistant/associate warden or higher. The most frequent rank achieved by respondents was warden/superintendent (29%; n = 24), director (25%; n = 21), and assistant director/deputy director (13%; n = 11). Generally, the women in this study started in corrections as COs (28%, n = 23), counselors/counseling-related positions (18%, n = 15), or probation/parole officers (15%, n = 12). Other entry-level positions included typists/clerks, record specialists, teachers, psychologists, nurses, and other non-law enforcement/custodial positions. Those who worked for state/local government comprised the majority of women in the sample; six women (n = 7%) worked for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Most respondents worked in institutional corrections (82%, n = 68), 28% came up through the ranks as security/custodial staff (n = 23), 58% rose to their executive positions as civilian/non-custodial staff (treatment track) (n = 48), and 15% (n = 12) were employed within probation/parole. Corrections departments allow alternative paths for promotion to the executive level, dissimilar from the majority of police agencies, so women do not have to begin their careers as COs to advance through the ranks. Corrections allows a dual track for promotion—a custodial and a treatment side—allowing women to advance in their agency through a variety of positions (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2019).

The women’s careers were based in 31 states, including 18 states that had more than one woman in corrections management ranks. The highest number of women were from Colorado (n = 9), Tennessee (n = 9), Maryland (n = 5), and Pennsylvania (n = 5). Position types were not concentrated in one particular geographical area; for instance, the 24 wardens worked in 16 different states. The majority of the women were over the age of 40 at the time of the study. The average age at which they began their careers was 27 (median = 24; mode = 22), and their average age at the time of the interview was 52 years (median = 52), ranging from 30 to 73 years of age. Most started their careers between the ages of 20 and 29 (63%; n = 52); the oldest woman began her career at 48 and the youngest at 17. Almost half the women (46%; n = 38) had worked in corrections for 10 to 19 years at the time of the survey. Nineteen percent (n = 16) worked in the field for 1 to 10 years, 42% (n = 35) worked in the field for 11 to 20 years, 28% (n = 23) worked in the field for 21 to 30 years, and 7% (n = 8) worked in the field for 31 to 40 years. Four percent (n = 3) were in the field for more than 40 years, with the longest service documented at 46 years. The women in this study were diverse regarding many characteristics, with the exception of race. The majority of respondents were white (80%; n = 66), followed by black (13%, n = 11), Latina (4%, n = 3), and other (3%, n = 3). This group achieved high educational levels (94% held a college degree), including 42% who held master’s degrees (either a Master of Arts or Master of Science) and 11% with a juris doctorate/doctorate degree.

4. Results

Overall, mentoring was found to be a positive component aiding in one’s career advancement, irrespective of the mentor’s gender or whether the mentor was external to the mentee’s agency. While informalized relationships appeared to be preferable to formalized ones, mentoring, in general, was helpful in serving a supportive function as women advanced through the ranks. The difficult part seemed to be finding and establishing a relationship with a mentor.

4.1. External Mentoring

Since women may have difficulty finding mentorships in their own departments, external mentors appear to be a suitable alternative. Mentoring relationships do not have to be confined to connections formed within one’s agency. The majority of participants (n = 38; 66%) were able to receive mentoring and guidance from those outside their agency. In some cases, it was family members who offered that support and guidance. One female executive received support from her spouse:

I always bounced things off my husband, who was also in law enforcement. We are very connected to our church and there were people through our church that supported me.

(Regional Administrator, Northeast)

Support from a partner was noted as being important:

My husband. He had no ego problems and was very laid back. People would ask him, you let her do that? He said, she does what she wants. One time we were at a function, and someone came up to him to apologize because his last name was [his last name] and he had been calling him Mr. [her last name]. He said, no problem, what’s in a last name? As long as she brought home the paycheck, who cares? If I got called into work in the middle of the night, he would go outside and clean off my car. He was always supportive. He was my primary support, and I was very fortunate.

(Warden, Midwest)

Another received that support from her mother:

My foster mom was a staunch feminist, and she has always been in my corner. She was my voice of sanity. She would say, “… that’s not right” or “you know you can do that” or “find your voice”.

(Warden, Southeast)

Mentorship did not necessarily have to come from someone employed in the field:

There were female professionals who I had ongoing relationships with. They have not always done what I’ve done but they could still offer me advice. They had strong management and strong supervisory skills, even though they might not have worked in criminal justice or corrections at all.

(Chief Operating Officer, Northeast)

In addition to individual mentoring, professional organizations have the ability to offer mentorships, which helps to address the paucity of mentorships available in specific agencies. Such guidance may be more helpful, as the mentors are outside of the mentee’s department and can offer a fresh and objective perspective:

I went to the NIC (National Institute of Corrections) executive leadership training, and it was a fantastic experience. I was with all superintendents and above from all over the country. It was a great opportunity to share with other women, especially our similarities.

(Superintendent, Northeast)

AWEC was one agency that women executives could rely upon for support and guidance. The idea of mentoring was fundamental to their mission. Many of the women were fortunate to join AWEC, and over half of the women (n = 32; 55%) said that AWEC offered them a supportive network. One woman said that AWEC helped her to be a better mentor:

I think the membership has motivated me to stay in the business. It is not an easy business to be in. Several years ago, I went to a women and corrections conference and several of the instructors were from AWEC. They were impressive and inspiring. I wanted to make a difference in this field, not sit behind a desk and collect a paycheck. I went to my first AWEC conference this past year and I am going again this year. I have found AWEC to be motivating and empowering especially when I am able to meet and talk with women who have been doing this 2 to 3 times longer than me. It is definitely impactful. It has not necessarily affected my career trajectory, but it has been a source of motivation and support.

(West, Coordinator)

One of AWEC’s founders who was interviewed noted the following:

NIC developed a pilot executive training program for women in 1994. It was a precursor to AWEC. There were 25 women hand selected by NIC. We learned about leadership styles and shared our experiences. I had never been with a group of female peers. I was able to meet this outstanding group of women and saw how much we all had in common. … It was a powerful changing agent. NIC continues to offer executive training, but we were the pilot class. The model was that we would come back the following year for the last two days of the new class for mentoring and group discussion. We needed to do something to keep this going. AWEC was started by us a year later. This class produced lifelong friendships. It was a huge step nationally to help women in leadership roles.

AWEC helped women in leadership positions to connect with other women from all over the country:

I didn’t know about AWEC Until I went to NIC, and I participated in the executive leadership training for women executives. I think they stopped the one just for women, which is unfortunate, but I do both. Women have different ways of learning. They do things differently. I made so many good friends and many of them are AWEC members. They (AWEC) are a very supportive network. I can always ask them for assistance. I was exposed to a great number of women who showed me there was no ceiling. Now I have friends all over the country, even in Hawaii and who would of thought I would ever be friends with someone in Hawaii?

(Warden, Northeast)

It helped women to find supportive networks in their own areas:

This is my first year [as a member] and last year’s conference was my first experience. I felt more at home than I ever have. I found people who know what I go through, and it helped me a lot. After AWEC, I took on more people in my mentoring. I am in a higher position now than the Warden who is my mentor, but she is still my mentor and she still governs me. I attended AWEC with 5 women from our agency that I never had conversations with before. We have a group now, the 5 of us. We check in once a week with a group call and one of us always talks to another at least every day. This all came out of AWEC. It helped some of us keep our jobs. If one of us is frustrated and wants to leave, the others support and help us. I am glad the agency afforded us the opportunity to go. We don’t ask for opportunities as much as men and we should.

(Assistant Director, Southeast)

Older members who have felt supported are now the ones supporting others:

Absolutely. They are my water in the hole. I was a founding member, the president and a board member. I was very fortunate and honored. It helps to balance perspectives and there is support and trust. You have that, ‘not in it all alone’, feeling. We have all been worried that if we get bigger, we will lose intimacy, but our mission and values are still there. We are nationally recognized. There were 27 of us who started it and we still see it as a comforting place. I still get fed but now I need to be a feeder. My role is to give back and help to provide strength to the origination, especially for the younger members.

(Assistant Deputy Commissioner, Southeast)

While AWEC has helped to provide more mentors for women, it is clear that more women in leadership roles have provided the opportunity for additional women to assume the role of the mentor:

We have more women as wardens and in leadership positions than ever before. I think there is better mentoring and lot of it has to do with your background and attitude. I see more women promoting. Women are in greater numbers in nursing and mental health positions but also in corrections overall. With a greater percentage of women, there is a larger pool to promote.

(Director, West)

Organizations like AWEC may also help women of color, who often suffer dual discrimination (race and gender) and are disproportionately represented in the upper ranks of corrections departments, to obtain a better sense of belonging. As a black female director in the Northeast explained,

Being at this level and in the minority, as both a woman and a black woman, going to AWEC has given me a sense of belonging. I am not the only one to experience the same issues and it was good to have others who experience the same things as a minority in a male dominated organization. It helped to learn of everyone’s adversities and their experiences. We shared experiences and shared solutions. After I come back from a session, I feel charged up and ready to go.

Not all women were fortunate to have a mentor; some had to navigate the process on their own:

I was on my own. At some point I even thought to myself that maybe I ought to dress more masculine or curse more. But I am a woman, and I was not covering that up. I was probably more of a tough guy than now.

(Warden, Southeast)

Of the 25 (43%) women who said AWEC had no effect on their career development in terms of mentorship, it is important to note that the majority of these women were either new to AWEC or opted not to take advantage of the mentoring that was offered, even though they thought it provided a good opportunity for women at the executive level:

No because I became associated at the end of my career. I have been to some of the conferences, but my husband is handicapped so my travel is limited. I think it is imperative for women to belong to this organization. It is good for mentoring and education. The agency has grown so much.

(Warden, Midwest)

4.2. Gender and Its Impact on the Mentor–Mentee Relationship

Whether mentoring was internal or external to one’s agency, the gender of the mentor did not appear to be an important component of the success of the mentor–mentee relationship. Interestingly, women received their supervisor’s support (i.e., encouragement to apply for promotion) regardless of whether their supervisor was male or female. Seventy-four percent (n = 43) of the women did not note differences in mentorship by supervisors based on gender, nor were differences noted in the feedback they received. In fact, most of the women reported to male supervisors who appeared to support their desire to promote and offered them positive feedback:

I had all male supervisors. They were very supportive and encouraging. If I was a writer, writing a tomb stone, I would spin the accolades of these men. Some are archaic in thinking—hunters, fisherman, rednecks—but they never saw me as a woman, only as a coworker and they helped me. Not every woman has been hurt by males in the workplace.

(Superintendent, Southwest)

While it was believed that women supervisors might be more supportive of women subordinates when compared to their male counterparts, a few of the women felt that female supervisors provided less positive feedback when compared to male supervisors:

I felt that women were not as supportive. I didn’t have many female mentors. I had many male mentors. This is a dangerous generalization, but I only had two or three women close to me that helped me. I had quadruple the number of men.

(Superintendent, Southwest)

This was particularly true of women who began their careers in the 1970s and 1980s and had no option but to rely upon male mentorship:

Mostly all of my supervisors, especially my supervisors while I was moving up through the ranks, were male. There were no females. My very first supervisor, when I started as a drug and alcohol counselor 19 years ago, was a woman. She is a Superintendent now. She was my mentor and still is my mentor.

(Superintendent, Northeast)

In some cases, women expressed concern that women in the executive ranks were more interested in competing with one another, rather than helping one another. One senior director from the West expressed these concerns and claimed that women at the executive level needed to support other women who wanted to advance:

There were people along the way that lead me to AWEC, and those women are very supportive. Women don’t support other women as well as we need to. We often see one another as competition. It is tough enough and we don’t do each other any favors in helping or supporting. In some agencies, there are only so many positions available, and you are trying not to help the other one because you are often going for the same job.

(Senior Director, West)

Despite these concerns, most women were able to find at least one female mentor. Almost all of the women interviewed (90%; n = 52) said there were other women within their agency who mentored them during their careers. This was reassuring and demonstrates that there are more women who achieved the executive ranks who are willing to offer mentorship to female subordinates:

I have been very fortunate. From my 1st female supervisor until now, they have all been supportive. I have had women in leadership roles who took an interest in my career and took the time to guide and mentor me in the right direction.

(Corrections Coordinator, West)

Mentoring relationships offered support and encouragement for advancement. It appeared necessary to ensure the continued sustainability of the agency:

My first supervisor was a woman, and she was very supportive and very interested in seeing me grow. She said she wanted to support me because she would not be here forever, and she needed good people to come up behind her.

(Program Manager, West)

In addition to guidance, mentorship helped to provide women with confidence in their abilities, highlighting their strengths and reinforcing their proficiencies:

I had one, the Chief of Prisons. She was a great mentor. She was the first woman Warden [in our department]. She was very well known and said what was on her mind. She knew about corrections; she understood people and she saw abilities in me that I couldn’t see. When I became Warden, even though she was not my direct supervisor, she made time for me on a weekly basis. She made time to connect with me and give me guidance. By the end of our conversations, she always made me feel like a rock star. She’s retired but we still stay in touch.

(Warden, West)

Although women seemed just as likely to be mentored by men as they were by women, gender and race can play a role in mentoring relationships, but its role seemed very small, with only 19% (n = 11) believing that it played a part. The majority of women (n = 38; 66%) did not believe that gender or race played a role, whereas 16% (n = 9) believed that it sometimes played a role:

Within the facility it was based on race or gender. You don’t find this as much when you get to the executive level. There are so few of us, but we are opening to mentoring all people. We have to develop those relationships. If I look at the dichotomy of who I look to; there is a Puerto Rican woman, a black woman, someone from California and someone from Vermont. At the lower levels we tend to go towards those we have similarities with. It ceases being about us going to someone we can relate to on a personal level. You may not even be sure why you are initiating the relationship at that point. As you move up, it goes toward a more professional mentoring.

(Administrator, Northeast)

4.3. Mentorship as Beneficial to Career Advancement

Women noted that mentorship, in general, was an important component of career advancement and that the experience of being mentored was beneficial for promotion. Women found support for advancement from their supervisors, and while the relationship was not part of a formalized mentoring program, most supervisors seemed comfortable mentoring subordinates. Women stated that they felt comfortable in speaking with their supervisors about their desire to advance (n = 50; 86%). Mentors provided encouragement, support, and guidance, all of which were important to advance:

They let me know the "unwritten rules" of the agency, sponsored me when appropriate, made recommendations of various career path options, kept me grounded when I reached certain challenges or challengers, let me know when I was not making wise choices, and encouraged me at pivotal points in my career.

(Southeast, Assistant Director)

One superintendent from the Southeast recommended the following advice for future corrections executives:

It is lonely at the top—no matter what your gender—so find mentors and friends you can trust.

Career support through mentoring provides invaluable learning:

You need support from the organization. Learn all you can from the folks who have the experience and knowledge…those who have been successful and who are willing to mentor you into becoming all you can….

(Director, Southeast)

Women viewed mentorship as highly valuable to their career advancement, and as a result, they took it upon themselves to become mentors to others once they entered the executive ranks. Almost all of the female corrections executives interviewed served as mentors to both male and female staff (n = 57; 98%):

I feel like I do. I mentored two ladies, and one is a Deputy Warden today and the other is in my same position on the juvenile side. I also hired a male supervisor who told me that he learned more from me and by observing me than from anything else.

(Regional Correctional Administrator, Northeast)

Those women who occupy positions within the executive ranks want others to see them as role models:

I hope I do (i.e., serve as a mentor to others). I feel like I do. I have had people tell me that I was a mentor to them, and I helped them. I have always been acutely aware and watched a little more closely as a woman in certain positions. You have to recognize that you are a role model, and I was aware of that as I was in different positions, especially when I see someone who has potential. The most important elements are respect and trust.

(Deputy Secretary, Southeast)

Female executives saw mentoring as integral to their position:

Mentoring and coaching is a big part of what I do. I take a staff member from each of the facilities I supervise, and I mentor and groom them. I do it for men and women. I think open lines of communication are the most important. It is literally being able to be what you are telling them to be. You want them to strive.

(Assistant Director, Southeast)

Respondents discussed the factors they felt were important for an effective mentoring relationship, with the top three cited answers being honesty (n = 14; 24%), communication (n = 13; 22%), and trust (n = 11; 19%):

Honesty—people always come to me and say I know you will tell me the truth. Every other supervisor may just tell them that they are great and it’s just not their time. They may have been turned down for a number of positions and want to know what they can do to get promoted. I tell them things they may not want to hear but they need to hear them. If they want to promote, they will have to seek out positions that give you the opportunity to demonstrate your skills. Sometimes it may require a lateral transfer.

(Warden, Midwest)

A good mentor was someone who showed their staff that they cared about them:

Being real and care about people. If you genuinely care and can communicate that, people will follow you. There is a supervisor whose staff would do anything for her because she is a good person, doing the right thing, who really cares.

(Assistant Director, West)

4.4. Informal or Formalized Mentoring

While mentoring was found to be beneficial to women’s careers, it seemed to be most effective if the relationship occurred naturally. Most women noted that mentorship was not a formalized practice, and there were few agencies that developed formalized mentoring programs. When formalized mentoring programs existed, informal relationships were preferred. The issue of accessibility appeared to be more important than the formality of processes:

Absolutely. It’s (mentoring) not formal. I think accessibility and being available is the most important. I have an open-door policy. People know that they can walk into my office, and they do it. I heard stories that they couldn’t do that in the past. They couldn’t walk past certain offices. We have changed the environment. Being visible and talking to people is important. Find out what interests them, what do they want to do, answer their questions and encourage them.

(Deputy Commissioner, Northeast)

Such relationships appear to work better when they form organically:

These relationships have to be informal. You can’t formalize it. There has to be trust. You have to be honest.

(Superintendent, West)

One woman said her agency tried to implement a formalized mentoring program, but it was not successful. Informality seemed to be more useful:

It was informal. We took a few stabs at a mentoring policy, but it didn’t work well. I had a female warden when I was an associate warden, and she gave me a lot of mentorship. Most of it was from male wardens. There was one who was getting ready to retire and had me do all of his work. But it gave me a lot of experience that others didn’t have. The other one was so encouraging and told me to just go for it.

(Superintendent, West)

Another woman echoed similar concerns about formal mentorship:

There were few formalized mentorship opportunities and even though we tried to develop mentor programs, they were never successful….

(West, Regional Administrator)

5. Discussion

Mentoring can positively impact the mentee, the mentor, and their larger agency (Elliott et al. 2011; Washington 2010). Employers have the opportunity to learn more about their employees, which in turn will allow them to address their employee’s needs more efficiently. Employees who feel that their needs are held in high regard by their supervisor, even if they cannot always be met, feel more valued by their agency and become more loyal, productive employees (Jayne 2001). As such, support and mentoring were an important component of the promotional process for many women in this study, and as these women advanced in the field, they became mentors to their own staff.

When the women in this study considered career advancement, support from their supervisor was not necessary for them to advance but certainly aided in the process. While the data show that mentorship is beneficial to career advancement, mentoring relationships do not have to be part of a formalized mentoring program in order to be effective, similar to previous research regarding mentoring in other disciplines. In fact, the opposite appears to be true. Informal mentoring relationships are more valuable and appear to be more successful than formalized networks established by one’s agency (Holt et al. 2016). As discussed by Ragins and Cotton (1999), formal mentoring relationships provide fewer mentoring functions and are typically less effective than informal relationships. This could be because formal relationships are typically short-term, and there is less connectivity between the mentor and mentee at the onset of the relationship (Ragins and Cotton 1999). When relationships are forced rather than occurring organically, both parties may be less invested in the relationship as a whole. Relationships that form naturally are more likely to be genuine and based upon common, shared interests. When people are matched with a mentor, it may not be a good fit for either party. If either party is uncomfortable, the relationship is less likely to be successful. As such, it is not unusual for those paired with formal mentors to simultaneously seek out and rely upon informal mentors (Holt et al. 2016). Research has found that those paired with formal mentors view the relationship as less effective than when paired with informal mentors, and those with informal mentoring relationships experience better career outcomes and earn higher salaries (Ragins and Cotton 1999). Other research found that women, along with other marginalized groups, are more likely to receive formal mentoring, while male and white employees are more likely to receive informal mentoring. Since informal mentoring is more effective than formal mentoring, this can place women at a greater disadvantage when trying to advance their careers (Todoran 2023).

Mentoring can help employees to overcome workplace challenges; yet, women often have difficulty acquiring mentorships (Washington 2010). While there may be fewer females occupying high-ranking positions and thus fewer opportunities for female mentoring, women can find effective mentorship from male supervisors. Research has found that mentorship is effective irrespective of the mentor’s gender, with similar results found with the participants in the current study, and is correlated with higher rates of job satisfaction, enhanced career development, and improved career planning for the mentee (Hoigaard and Mathisen 2009; Mcilongo and Strydom 2021). With more men occupying the executive ranks when compared to women, it is fortunate that the respondents believed that gender did not impact the mentor–mentee relationship. The majority of the women (74%; n = 43) were comfortable speaking to their supervisors about their desire to advance, and they received positive feedback (i.e., encouragement and support) from their supervisor, regardless of whether their supervisor was male or female. Women noted that they received similar support from male and female supervisors with whom they discussed career options and their desire to advance within their agencies. In fact, many respondents believed that male supervisors were often more supportive than the women with whom they spoke; this was most true for women who started their careers in the 1970s and 1980s. There was concern expressed that some women in supervisory roles tend to be more competitive than collaborative. If this is true, women will find it even more difficult to receive proper mentoring from a female superior. Women may compete because they hold fewer positions than their male counterparts, are more visible, and are trying to assimilate more with the dominant male group. This can lead to further isolation, and since they will find it difficult to receive full acceptance by the dominant group, they risk being rejected by the dominants, as well as the other women (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2020; Kanter 1977). Respondents in the study who felt that women in the executive ranks were more competitive than supportive were in the minority. Most women felt supported by other women. Since corrections allows for dual tracks of employment (law enforcement or non-law enforcement) and promotion can be more difficult from the treatment side, mentoring could help women trying to advance through the treatment track (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2019). Once the respondents reached the executive ranks, they saw mentorship as integral to their job responsibilities and became mentors to female and male subordinates. They expressed that honesty, communication, and trust were vital elements to the success of the mentoring relationship, and they reinforced that successful relationships are established when supervisors demonstrate care for their mentees.

When formal or informal mentorship within one’s agency was not feasible, women also sought and received mentorship from outside of their agency. In some cases, women received mentoring from spouses or other family members, which was particularly helpful if they were also involved in similar types of careers. In other cases, women could join professional organizations, such as AWEC, and receive both formal and informal mentoring, which appears to be extremely helpful. Many women noted that relationships that developed from AWEC have continued to serve as a source of support for them. This is consistent with previous research that finds that external mentors can provide unique perspectives that might be limited within the mentee’s organization, and since they are outside of the agency, they can offer a more objective viewpoint, providing valuable insights into best practices in the field (Haines and Popovich 2014). External mentors may be able to assist mentees in gaining a clearer understanding of industry expectations, learning about best practices, and developing their professional connections beyond their current organization.

5.1. Limitations

Several limitations are apparent in the study’s methodology. Sampling was not randomized. Rather, targeted sampling was used to recruit subjects through their AWEC memberships. Targeted sampling is “a strategy to obtain systematic information when true random sampling is not feasible and when convenience sampling is not rigorous enough to meet the assumptions of the research design” (Waters and Biernacki 1989, p. 420). Only those who were members of AWEC participated in the study, posing issues for selection bias and generalizability. Moreover, a control/comparison group was not available for this study. When compared, AWEC members might differ from non-AWEC members. Moreover, the decision to increase participant comfort through the use of hand-written recording is not as accurate as audio recording.

5.2. Implications and Future Research

While corrections agencies need to recruit more women, their efforts should also focus on recruiting more women of color into the upper ranks (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2016). Since the intersection of gender and race can impact a woman’s level of acceptance within the corrections field, and this influence may vary depending on the specific type of department and the geographic location of that department, it stands to reason that such factors may also impact one’s ability to find a mentor (Collica-Cox and Schulz 2020). Departments can offer training to supervisors so that they feel more comfortable in a mentoring role, as well as opportunities where such relationships between a mentor and mentee can be established, especially where formal programs do not exist. Agencies like AWEC and the NIC already provide such training. Different types of mentoring relationships can be encouraged since women spoke about the importance of having support and mentorship from within the agency, outside the agency, and even from professional organizations like AWEC or the NIC. Departments can encourage staff to become members of such organizations and, if possible, pay their membership fees. Support can be crucial to one’s success, as it not only helps to increase satisfaction in an incredibly stressful field but also can help to decrease job-related stress, which often contributes to one’s level of overall job satisfaction (Paoline et al. 2015; Shelley et al. 2011). Mentoring should be viewed as an evolving process where different mentors may be needed at different stages of one’s career trajectory (Lavender and Todak 2022). Kram (1985) identified four stages of mentoring: initiation (connecting a mentor to a mentee), cultivation (developing a relationship between the mentor and mentee), separation (ending the official mentor–mentee relationship when the mentee has reached their professional goal), and redefinition (redefining the relationship between the mentor and mentee once formalized mentoring is no longer needed). If organizations do not want to establish internal mentoring programs, external ones, especially through organizations such as AWEC, can serve as alternatives (Groves 2021). Organizations may also want to provide support for relationships that develop more organically rather than those that attempt to partner mentors with mentees in a more formalized way (Lavender and Todak 2022). Mentoring helps to increase one’s sense of confidence (Groves 2021), and as mentioned in this study by many women executives, women subordinates often lack the confidence held by their male colleagues when applying for promotion. When women are not supported, they may feel discouraged from pursuing promotional opportunities despite their capabilities (Archbold and Schulz 2008).

Future research may want to examine how effective mentoring relationships develop organically. Agencies can use this information to provide opportunities for such relationships to develop, especially since formal mentoring programs do not appear as effective as informal mentoring relationships. It would also be interesting to learn whether mentorship for men is impacted by the gender of the supervisor. Are men just as likely to receive positive feedback and support irrespective of their supervisor’s gender? Will mentoring relationships between a female supervisor and a male subordinate be as effective when compared to mentoring relationships between a male supervisor and a male subordinate? Examining the similarities and differences between men’s and women’s experiences in the workplace with mentoring, especially in corrections, where there is a dearth of available information, will prove beneficial to the overall field.