Diet is a key modifiable risk factor for chronic diseases and mortality(Reference Yusuf, Joseph and Rangarajan1), yet globally there is a need for improved nutrition training and capacity of the health workforce(Reference Lepre, Trigueiro and Johnsen2). In Australia, careers in nutrition other than clinical dietetics are largely non-vocational and have a diverse scope of practice, with employment opportunities in public health, research, education, industry, private practice and animal nutrition. The term ‘nutritionist’ is not a legally protected professional title in Australia, which complicates issues around credible professional identity. The Nutrition Society of Australia (NSA) is a peak body for nutrition science in Australia, whose mission is to advance, promote and advocate for nutrition-related sciences for the benefit of diverse communities, industries and their environments(3). It is dedicated to setting and supporting high standards for professional nutrition education and practice in the nutrition field and strengthening the professional identity of its members via it’s voluntary Registration Scheme(4). In 2020, the NSA launched a mentoring program for its registered members, who as a minimum have completed a relevant tertiary qualification in nutrition, to provide opportunities for shared experience and knowledge, and contribute to ongoing professional development.
The purpose of professional mentoring may be defined as a ‘transformational process that seeks to help individuals develop and use knowledge to improve themselves on an ongoing basis’(Reference Bayley, Chambers and Donovan5). Modern practices of mentoring have been developed through the understanding of Management Theory(Reference Dale6) and through the application of adult learning theories proposed by Rogers(Reference Rogers7), Knowles(Reference Knowles8) and Kolb(Reference Kolb9). These theories are focused on learner-centred teaching experiences and thus are reflected in mentoring processes that encourage mentees to develop professionally via experiential learning(Reference Lipscomb and An10). Kram proposed that mentoring offers mentees skill development in career progression as well as psychosocial functions such as personal growth and professionalism traits(Reference Coppin and Fisher11). In healthcare-related professions, mentoring has been demonstrated to support individuals to strengthen their skills in decision-making, networking and career planning(Reference Lipscomb and An10–Reference Fowler, McConachie and Hattingh15). In healthcare settings, mentoring of healthcare providers has also been demonstrated to translate to improvements in patient outcomes(Reference Latham, Hogan and Ringl16,Reference Mudderman, Nelson-Brantley and Wilson-Sands17) .
Formal mentoring programs have been established in the dietetics field globally, but no such formalised program was previously available for nutritionists in Australia. There are few global frameworks for the development of mentoring programs in nutrition. Internationally, the Nutrition Society of New Zealand and the Canadian Nutrition Society offer mentoring to new graduates(18,19) , while the nutrition societies in the UK and Europe do not yet offer formal mentoring programs. Despite research on mentoring in dietetics(Reference Boocock and O’Rourke13,Reference Choi and Palermo20) and other vocational health fields(Reference Coppin and Fisher11,Reference Ramanan, Phillips and Davis14–Reference Latham, Hogan and Ringl16) , limited research exists on mentoring for health professionals in a non-vocational, diverse field such as nutrition science(Reference Palermo and McCall12).
Strengthening the professional practice of tertiary qualified nutritionists by the provision of mentoring is important for long-term public health outcomes, as nutrition scientists are trained to understand the role of diet in chronic or non-communicable disease and provide evidence-based strategies to help combat its effects on the population. Non-communicable disease is now the single largest cause of death in the global population(21), and diet is one of the largest contributing modifiable factors to the burden of non-communicable disease globally(Reference Yusuf, Joseph and Rangarajan1,22,23) . Therefore, strengthening and supporting professional practice in the field of nutrition science is of utmost importance(Reference Lawlis, Torres and Coates24). Fostering good quality mentoring practice may play a role to help facilitate this(Reference Palermo and McCall12,Reference Palermo, Hughes and McCall25) .
The NSA’s mentoring program is believed to be the first-of-its-kind in a non-vocational professional organisation in Australia, with the inaugural cohorts paired in January 2021, and no formal evaluation has been conducted to date. This qualitative study aimed to adopt a case study approach to explore the development of the NSA’s mentoring program for Registered Nutritionists and evaluate the experience of the nutrition professionals involved in developing and participating in the mentoring program.
Methods
Study design
This study employed a case study approach(Reference Yin26) to collect data in a setting bounded by time, program and cohort of participants, using multiple data sources to explore and evaluate the NSA mentoring program from development to delivery. This approach allowed an in-depth, multifaceted exploration of the intent and conceptualisation of the program, and the expectations and mentoring experience among those involved. An interpretivist lens was employed to understand the experience of participants involved(Reference Klein and Myers27), exploring the reality that is socially constructed.
All procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project ID: 28306). All participants provided informed written (survey) and/or verbal (focus groups and interviews) consent. All verbal consent was witnessed and formally recorded.
Participants
To explore the development of the NSA mentoring program, the three founding organising committee members participated in a focus group. During the focus group, documents related to the mentoring program were identified as additional data source for document analyses.
Three consecutive cohorts of mentors and mentees, who were paired between January 2021 and January 2022, were recruited 12 months after commencement in their program, utilising purposive, self-selective sampling(Reference Marshall28). An email was sent directly to participants via the NSA Secretariat with a link to the online Mentoring Program evaluation survey, where participants were then given the opportunity to opt in to an in-depth interview.
The research team
The research team comprised a female dietetic student researcher (MV), a female dietitian researcher with qualitative methodology expertise and experience in mentoring program evaluation (TC), and the three founding committee members (AD, KL and HP). ML was a nutritionist-in-training and has no prior involvement in the NSA mentoring program. She conducted all the interviews with participating mentors and mentees. TC, who had no prior connection to NSA, conducted the focus group with the founding members. HP participated as a founding member as well as an interview participant, at different time points of the study. MV facilitated an in-depth self-reflection with HP via different lens to draw on and build upon the different roles HP played and captured rich narratives to respective research questions. All authors contributed to study design, data analysis and interpretation to ensure inclusion of both etic and emic perspectives(Reference Mostowlansky and Rota29).
Data collection
To ensure construct validity and a holistic understanding of the mentoring program, multiple sources of evidence were collected and triangulated(Reference Yin26) (Figure 1). First, a focus group with the founding organising committee was conducted. Seven questions were asked to capture the intent and objectives of the mentoring program, the roles and background experience of each committee member brought into the mentoring program, the expectations they had and their perceived impact of the mentoring program.
Figure 1. Data triangulation employed in the study. Data were collected from document analysis methods, a focus group and participant surveys (open-ended questions) and in-depth interviews to develop a comprehensive understanding of the development of and participants’ experiences in the mentoring program.
Documents related to the mentoring program, including program committee meeting minutes, a Mentoring Program Booklet (Nutrition Society of Australia, Inc., version 1, January 2021), information presented on the NSA website outlining the mentoring program and mentor–mentee matching webpage, and the ‘Meet the Mentors’ professional biography document (Nutrition Society of Australia, Inc., version 1, December 2020), were identified for document analysis. An NSA Mentoring Program Progress Report (Nutrition Society of Australia, Inc., version 1, November 2021) authored by the organising committee was also included in the document analysis. This contained initial feedback and evaluation from the first two cohorts who participated in the mentoring program, collected 6 months after participant commencement.
An evaluation survey was sent to all mentors and mentees in the identified programs to collect information on their demographic characteristics and details about their experience in the program. The survey was constructed in a funnel format, with general demographic information, progressing to qualitative open-ended questions regarding the participants’ experience within the mentoring program, with thirty-four questions in total. Only the open-ended responses were used in the thematic analysis. Online surveys were designed and administrated via the Qualtrics program(30). Participants remained anonymous in the survey.
Survey participants were invited to opt in for a 60-min semi-structured interview, where contact details were stored separately to the survey responses to maintain anonymity for the participants. Interview questions were developed through consultation between two researchers and then piloted with an experienced mentor and a mentee who were independent of the program and the study, for appropriate elicitation of the mentoring experience and relevance to the individual’s nutrition work and career. Interview questions for mentors and mentees covered the experience of the mentoring program, expectations and outcomes, as well as suggestions for improvements to the program and perceived impact of the program on the nutrition profession. In-depth interviews were conducted one-on-one with participants by the first author via the Zoom platform as it was considered preferable to face-to-face interviews due to the ease of access for participants and its audio-visual recording features(Reference Archibald, Ambagtsheer and Casey31).
Data analysis
The focus group and interview recordings were transcribed verbatim via the audio-video conversion program, Otter.ai (Otter.ai, 2016). Recordings were reviewed, and transcripts from otter.ai were edited for accuracy and clarity. All data from the multiple data streams described above were analysed and coded thematically using the Braun and Clarke’s approach(Reference Braun and Clarke32), employing an iterative process whereby emerging themes from the data were cross referenced and compared across all documents and interview transcripts. Key concepts from the documents were noted and summarised or coded in the case of the NSA Progress Report. Interview and focus group transcripts were coded, and then resulting codes were condensed into related concepts. These concepts were then further refined into themes informed by the research question, utilising thematic analysis. A subset of interviews and the focus group transcript were independently coded by the senior researcher with expertise in mentoring literature (TC), which facilitated the iterative process of thematic analysis whereby researchers discussed implied meanings derived from the coding to reach an agreed upon interpretation. The underpinning framework for thematic analysis of all qualitative data obtained was informed by social cognitive career theory alongside social capital theory. Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT) is a derivation from Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory(Reference Bandura33). SCCT posits that an individual’s behaviours and beliefs concerning their career are influenced by their social structures(Reference Lent, Brown and Hackett34). Alternatively, Social Capital Theory proposes that dominant social groups reinforce existing social structures, with regard to resources or knowledge that enable social mobility and ‘fit’(Reference Lin, Cook and Burt35). Throughout the research process, the first author (MV) undertook reflexive exercises by writing reflective observations after each interview in order to better understand the positioning of the researcher in the iterative data collection process(Reference Barry, Britten and Barber36) and facilitate theories-based interpretation. For example, during the interviews, aligning with the SCCT, the first author (MV) used prompts to draw out self-efficacy and outcome expectations of mentors and mentees, to examine the interplay of personal factors in career development. Research rigor was enhanced through use of both investigator and data triangulation(Reference Yin26). Two researchers independently analysed both the focus group data and the interview data. All research team members compared and discussed emerging themes prior to reaching a consensus regarding the final themes generated through the analysis of all data sources. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (i.e. COREQ) was used to guide reporting(Reference Tong, Sainsbury and Craig37).
Results
There were sixty-four program participants (thirty-eight mentees and twenty-six mentors) invited to participate. Eleven mentees completed the survey and were mostly entry-level Associate Nutritionists, with up to 12 years’ experience in nutrition. The majority (n 8) were from large metropolitan areas, with diverse employment, but mostly worked in public health (n 4) and food/industry (n 3). About 50 % (n 6) of participants had previously experienced primarily or entirely informal mentoring, whereas five respondents had participated in an equal combination of informal and formal mentoring. Ten mentors completed the survey and were either Registered Nutritionists or Public Health Nutritionists with up to 35 years’ experience in nutrition. Most mentors (n 8) were from large metropolitan areas; however, their areas of employment differed from the mentees, with an even spread working across public health, research/ academia and self-employment. Most reported interactions between mentor–mentee pairs were virtual (Skype, Zoom, FaceTime, telephone, email, etc), and only two mentees and one mentor indicated that they had met their mentor/mentee in person. Characteristics of the survey participants are presented in Table 1. Of the survey participants (n 21), seven mentees and five mentors agreed to participate in an interview.
Table 1. Participant characteristics
Data are presented either as number of participants or mean (range).
Analysis of data from surveys, interviews, focus group and documents associated with mentoring program planning yielded three major themes, each with a derivative sub-theme. Descriptors of themes and illustrative quotes are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Themes emerging from qualitative data with descriptors and illustrative quotes
Theme 1: Mentoring as a pathway to negotiate challenges associated with employment or career development in nutrition science
Both mentors and mentees held the perception that mentoring opened gateways to potential employment and career development within the nutrition field. This was facilitated through sharing of experiences and knowledge, clarification of career pathways and development of techniques to promote career progression such as goal setting and reflective practices. The NSA Mentoring Program Booklet, provided to program participants, states that mentoring is designed to ‘allow experience and skill sharing, facilitating personal and professional development’(38)p4. This was also reiterated by focus group participants and verified in survey responses, with participants citing mentoring as promoting self-reflection and:
‘Providing opportunities to connect and learn from each other’ – Survey participant
One mentor described the process as:
‘Building people’s capacity to actually be the best person that they could be.’ – Mentor 5
The process of developing a career in a non-vocational profession was at times challenging for mentees, with reports by participants in both survey responses and interviews that it was not always easy to obtain employment as a nutritionist.
Sub-theme 1: Mentors as facilitators of growth through ‘real-world’ skill sets and opportunities
The knowledge and lived experience possessed by mentors were perceived by many of the mentees as a skill set outside of the knowledge that was derived from university learning, real-world experience from an expert in the diverse field of nutrition science. There was a perception by some mentees that their university degree content had less focus on preparing graduates to work for themselves. Those participants who were paired with mentors who were self-employed reported high levels of satisfaction on being able to access help in developing these skills:
‘There’s not much focus on training you to have your own practice, to be able to have your own gig by yourself. And I was yearning for that… So, this mentoring program was like one chance to fulfill that gap that the university didn’t give me.’ – Mentee 1
In contrast, mentors perceived that the barriers to growth mentees encountered were often intrinsic, related to mentees perceived confidence in themselves to perform tasks associated with the workplace. This was corroborated by survey responses that indicated mentees may require more help with goal setting and organisational skills such as scheduling meetings with mentors. Outcomes for mentees stated in mentoring program documents mention reflective skills and recognition of strengths as potential mentee benefits from program participation(38). Many mentees recognised that the improvements in their professional skills could be applied beyond the scope of their immediate situation and into their future practice.
The mentoring program was designed to provide opportunities for growth for mentors as well as mentees. Potential benefits to mentors stated in program documents focus on consolidating existing strengths and developing new skills, giving something back to the nutrition field and deriving satisfaction from witnessing self-development in their mentees(38). This was supported by survey responses which emphasised the satisfaction of helping other professionals grow and develop. Many of the mentors reflected on the personal benefits of mentoring others:
‘It’s nice to be able to provide that platform to help someone grow. And at the same time, you get so much back from everyone, you know, no one knows everything. So, it’s really nice just to have conversations and little tips about life or understanding people’s perspectives. It’s really nice to learn from my mentees as well.’ – Mentor 4
Theme 2: Outcomes of mentoring relationships are dependent on participants’ perceptions of successful professional alignment
Whether a mentoring partnership was ultimately seen as successful was dependent on the mentees perception that the mentor was a good match professionally. Initial surveys of mentees indicated a desire for mentors with industry, private enterprise and public health experience rather than academics. This was noted by program organisers in early evaluations, and therefore subsequent cohorts’ recruitment of mentors occurred from more diverse fields, such as animal nutrition. An increase also occurred in the number of mentors available who were self-employed and therefore were able to impart business experience. The focus group interview indicates that providing diversity in the mentor’s expertise was considered as part of the evolution of the program:
‘That was part of our feedback to make sure we have a broad range of mentors that meet the needs of our registered nutritionists. And so, we did put extra effort into making sure we had that diversity of mentors’ – Founding Committee Member 1
While most participants surveyed or interviewed thought that their pairings were successful, there was a small contingent who felt that their mentor did not have the expertise in the specific field of nutrition that they were seeking. This resulted in disappointment with the pairing, and a reduction in meetings sought with the mentor.
‘I think that the pairing may not have been as good as it could have been potentially…. I was looking for more of a …counterpart I guess, who had food [industry] experience, not more of like a lecturer or someone with dietetics experience….There are so many places that people can work in food and nutrition. So, it’d be good to capture more areas of the field.’ – Mentee 2
In contrast, some mentees found value in their partnerships despite having employment in a field that contrasted with their mentor’s field of expertise, by utilising their mentor’s broader life experience to inform career progression choices, including advice on the benefits of further investment in training:
‘I thought it was an odd mix [the mentoring match], because [my mentor] was so academic, and I wasn’t, but they were brilliant. It was… amazingly positive.’ – Mentee 7
Sub-theme 2: Flexibility is a key facilitator of successful mentoring partnerships that allows time for relationship development
The structure of the NSA’s mentoring program was designed to be flexible, with no assigned frequency or duration of meetings, to allow the participants to adapt to the unique needs of their professional situations, as outlined in Mentoring Program Booklet(38) p12. Focus group committee members reiterated this:
‘We wanted to keep the program as flexible as possible, so that it could be tailored to suit the individual pair’s needs, whatever they might be. I think that was really the core of what we designed this program to be.’ – Founding Committee Member 1
Due to program flexibility, several successful mentoring partnerships chose to continue beyond the recommended 1-year time frame. Both mentees and mentors in successful parings reported that quality relationships took time and effort to foster, and that the relationships deepened over time, producing a more productive, trusting relationship. Mentors mentioned that they needed to understand the personalities of their mentees first, including their communication styles, personality, strengths and frailties before they could effectively assist their mentees.
‘The effectiveness of the way we work together was strengthened over time. As we get to know each other you get to trust what the person is telling you (or not) and I think it’s a matter of you have to work on it, you can’t just go in unprepared’ – Mentor 1
Mentees generally were very appreciative of the effort that their mentors had invested in the relationship and most clearly understood that the onus was on them to drive the relationship forward. As a result of the relationship development throughout the program, some mentees reported that their interactions developed into a mutual respect, transforming into more of a relationship of equals.
Theme 3: The NSA’s mentoring program was perceived by participants as adding value to membership, thus strengthening the society and professional practice
Regardless of whether their personal expectations of mentoring through the NSA’s program had been fulfilled, participants interviewed felt that the program itself was worthy of developing and preserving as it added significant value to the membership of the NSA itself and promoted the growth and professionalism of the profession. The NSA’s mentoring program documents promote mentoring as a vehicle for strengthening the profession and giving something back to the industry, on both a personal level and an organisational level to promote innovation and continuous development, increase engagement and improve communication. Many interviewees and survey respondents expressed views that were in alignment with the mentoring program’s design. A desire to give something back to the nutrition profession to strengthen the nutrition community and support the work of the NSA was stated by many mentors as a reason for participation in the program:
‘We’re all working in different parts of the nutrition spectrum. But we’re all kind of on the same team, you know, we’re all trying to improve health in whatever way we do that, through this food system. And so, you know, if we can improve, employability and improve the impact that those graduates have in their workplace, then that’s going to be a great thing for nutrition’ – Mentor 2
Sub-theme 3: Mentoring was seen as a conduit to facilitate connectivity within the nutrition community as well as the broader public health field
One aspect of mentoring that was evident throughout all elements of the NSA’s mentoring program was the concept that mentoring promoted greater connectivity between members of the society, which also potentially strengthened interactions between the nutrition field and the broader public health community. Program documents highlight sharing and developing networks as a key benefit of mentoring(38)p6,14. Survey results confirmed that providing networking options for members of the society was valued by participants as it provided connections to the broader nutrition industry that may not have been available otherwise. Personal gains were often linked to strengthened networks across Australia, or as a method of reconnecting to parts of the nutrition field lost due to employment in other areas of nutrition. Focus group members reiterated that the ability to connect people leading to successful collaborations was a motivating factor for contributing to the program. Mentors also discussed the importance of creating connectivity between members as a benefit of mentoring that strengthens the profession as a whole:
‘One is creating relationships between members, like stronger relationships, that otherwise may not have been formed, creating opportunities for the mentees and mentors. In lots of different ways, because, when you have that connection, magic happens. You don’t know what you don’t know. Until you know, right?’ – Mentor 4
Further increasing networking opportunities was suggested as an improvement to the mentoring program by program participants, collaborated by focus group members:
‘One of the things that came out of one of the training webinars was that…it would be great to have a forum where people could chat to each other, like an alumni hub, or a resource where all the mentors and mentees could connect to each other.’ – Founding Committee Member 2
Fostering connections between nutrition professionals was seen as a method of bolstering collegiality and counteracting the siloing of knowledge and resources which was seen as counterproductive to the development of the public health field.
The themes and subthemes that emerged from this study were used to generate a ‘road map’ (Figure 2) to support the development of mentoring programs for nutrition or other non-vocational professions.
Figure 2. Evaluation of Nutrition Society of Australia’s mentoring program for Registered Nutritionists enabled the development of a road map for the design of mentoring programs for nutrition professionals.
Discussion
This study explored the experience of nutrition professionals involved in developing and participating in a professional mentoring program for nutritionists. The findings indicate that access to mentoring is a highly valued component of the membership of the NSA, with mentees perceiving their relationships with mentors as gateways to career development and networking opportunities within the profession. Mentors were often facilitators of substantial growth in mentees, who appreciated access to professional skill sets that were perceived as not being taught at university. Analysis of successful mentoring partnerships within the program suggested that flexibility around mentoring time frames allowed participants to invest time to build trust and quality communication. The challenges experienced by some mentees within the program related to the non-vocational nature of the nutrition profession, where the diversity of mentoring required sometimes exceeded the specific fields of mentor expertise on offer. Participants supported the continuation of the program as it was perceived to strengthen the professional practice of the nutrition field.
Due to the non-vocational nature of the nutrition profession, issues may arise pertaining to professional identity formation. Maintaining and strengthening the identity and visibility of nutrition professionals in public health is supported by access to professional organisations that provide opportunities to network and strengthen competencies(Reference Lewis, Jamieson and Smith39,Reference Snell, Fyfe and Fyfe40) . A key finding of this study related to participant’s perceptions that mentoring added value to membership of the Society, promoting the relevance of membership and strengthening cohesion between members. This was in part due to mentees’ appreciation of increased professional skills and confidence that were acquired through contact with mentors. As the general title ‘nutritionist’ lacks legal protection, registration with a peak body affords practitioners with greater credibility, recognising their university training and qualifications. A recent report indicated the need for increased nutrition training and health workforce capacity(Reference Lepre, Trigueiro and Johnsen2). Mentoring can be seen to be a mechanism to increase capacity, as it provides support for emerging nutrition professionals to consolidate professional skills. Earlier research into nutrition and dietetics students’ experience while on placement reported that anxiety and issues with confidence were common among students even though educators perceived no actual lack of skills(Reference Gibson, Dart and Bone41). The study also reported that some clinical educators believed that the skills taught at university did not become professional proficiencies until they were applied in context(Reference Gibson, Dart and Bone41), a view which was shared by some mentors. For participants in this study, mentoring provided a valuable adjunct to tertiary study by providing access to career resources and development opportunities, thus strengthening professional identity.
The development of professional identity and confidence has also been explored in the context of employment outcomes. Recent research into nutrition and dietetics graduate outcomes has reported that among the factors or attributes that contributed to securing employment in the nutrition field, psychological factors such as self-confidence, resilience and persistence ranked in the top three(Reference Blair, Mitchell and Gibson42). This aligns with the experiences of the participants within the NSA’s mentoring program, who reported that mentoring promoted the self-confidence that helped to overcome challenges associated with gaining employment in a non-vocational profession. This may be understood through examination of Social Cognitive Career Theory’s(Reference Lent, Brown and Hackett34) description of the link between self-efficacy, persistence and positive career outcomes.
Another finding of significance from this study is the observation that mentoring may strengthen public health nutrition practice by acting as a conduit to facilitate connectivity and visibility within the nutrition community but also with other health professions. Many mentors within this study demonstrated an ability to think more holistically about mechanisms that would counteract the siloing of knowledge, seen to dilute the impact of the nutrition profession. Increasing the impact of nutrition professionals in the public health arena may require greater awareness and education around the effects of nutrition on health in other health professions. Recent research(Reference Lepre, Mansfield and Beck43) has called not only for more involvement of nutrition professionals in public health but also more nutrition education for other health professionals such as doctors and nursing staff. This recommendation builds on earlier qualitative research which reports that medical staff may also refer more frequently to nutrition professionals with greater personal nutrition capacity and competency, leading to greater prioritisation of nutrition concerns(Reference Kris-Etherton, Akabas and Bales44). These observations align with Social Capital Theory, which proposes that dominant social groups can provide access to resources or knowledge that facilitate the progression and assimilation of less resourced or less experienced professionals into their field(Reference Lin, Cook and Burt35). This is applicable both on an individual level between mentors and mentees but can also be observed through a broader collective health promotion lens. Through fostering greater nutrition knowledge within the broader health community, the role of nutrition in public health may be promoted, potentially increasing the impact of nutrition professionals(Reference Lepre, Trigueiro and Johnsen2,Reference Lepre, Mansfield and Beck43) . As part of supporting a skilled and confident nutrition workforce, the Australian Academy of Science’s National Nutrition Committee has produced a decadal plan for the science of nutrition(45,Reference Truby, Allman-Farinelli and Beck46) in order to realise progress towards the nutrition-focused Sustainable Development Goals(47), which proposes a ‘unified voice’ in nutrition as an important part of progressing the plan. Mentoring programs such as those delivered by the NSA may have a role to play in supporting cohesive action from nutrition professions across diverse fields to support this overarching vision.
While this study presents the perspectives of a relatively small group of nutrition professionals, it should be noted that the entire population specific to this study was small, and therefore the sample size (32 % of the total cohort) may reflect similar characteristics of the program participants than what may be implied by looking at numbers alone. Despite the small sample we demonstrated inclusion of a diverse voice, as participants shared stories that were both positive and that did not meet expectations, indicating that a range of experiences were captured. However, we acknowledge potential participation bias, as participants were self-selected into the study, and therefore some experiences may not have been explored. The Australian setting of this study may not be directly transferrable to other countries, but there may be aspects of the experience of the mentoring program that are reflective of the diversity that exists throughout the nutrition field. As a largely non-vocational profession globally, this study may deliver insights into the experience of mentoring and mentoring program development, regardless of the country. Research rigor in this study has been strengthened by multiple researcher perspectives applied to the analysis of data. This included a graduate nutritionist’s perspective, which aligned strongly with the mentees’ experiences of emergence into the nutrition profession. In contrast, the perspectives of the more experienced qualitative and quantitative researchers allowed for a diverse and richer analysis. In addition, the multifaceted sources of data for this study allowed data triangulation, providing the researchers with an in-depth exploration of experience, from both the development process via the committee focus group interviews and documents and the experience of the program through survey results and interviews from multiple cohorts of the program.
Continuing evaluation of future mentoring programs for nutrition professionals would be recommended, to confirm the findings of this study, which may benefit not only nutrition societies and their membership but also may provide insight for professional organisations who have yet to provide their members with mentoring programs. In addition, providing access to high-quality mentoring helps to bolster the reputation and effectiveness of nutrition professionals and the nutrition profession in general. As poor nutrition is highly implicated in chronic disease pathogenesis, producing highly effective nutrition professionals to help combat and prevent the consequences of chronic disease is of great importance in the field of public health.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the participants in this study and thank them for their time and input into this work.
Authorship
M.V.: Investigation, Formal analysis, Writing – Original draft, Writing – Review and editing; A.L.D.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Writing – Review and editing, Supervision; K.M.L.: Conceptualisation, Writing – Review and editing; H.P.: Conceptualisation, Writing – Review and editing; T.C.: Conceptualisation, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Writing – Review and editing, Supervision.
Financial support
This work did not receive any funding. M.V. received a student scholarship from the Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University to support the data collection and analysis. K.M.L. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Emerging Leadership Fellowship (APP1173803).
Competing interests
A.L.D., K.M.L. and H.P. hold/have held voluntary roles within the Nutrition Society of Australia (NSA) and comprised the committee for the NSA Mentoring program from 2020 to 2022. As such, they were also participants within the study. NSA did not provide any funding for this evaluation and had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation of the manuscript; nor the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. However, the NSA did support the recruitment of participants and were provided with reports on the progress and outcomes of the evaluation for the purpose of improving the mentoring program. Views presented in this manuscript are that of the authors and do not represent the views of all Nutrition Society of Australia members.
Ethics of human subject participation
This study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki, and all procedures involving research study participants were approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (28306). Written or Verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants. All verbal consent was witnessed and formally recorded.
Open access
