In this edition of Leadership Anywhere, I will share a big secret about how most coaching and mentor programs work and where we can change the current status quo.

Most mentors (or coaches) work similarly. You have a problem or a process that needs to be changed, and you need support or help with that. Your mentor comes as an aid, helps you with support and knowledge, and holds you accountable during the change, making the implementation easier.

The workflow is also the same. Almost all mentors work synchronously. It's called a mentorship call, workshop, or cohort for groups, etc.

The synchronous manner helps both parties: the mentees think there's a process that moves forward, and there are milestones (synched calls). The mentors can build up a framework, and here is the secret: the more synched a program is, the more you pay as a mentee.

You've heard it right. Most mentors price their mentorship programs based on the level of their involvement. You will pay X per month, and there will be Y calls per month. And oh, by the way, there's unlimited email/chat support.

I would love to say that this is a broken model, but as much as I would love to do that, I can't. It works for most people. As some people still prefer in-office work, which is fine, people will still choose synched mentor programs.

However, there's a new route: making mentor programs more async. It helps both parties: it costs less for mentees and allows mentors to help more people.

How would a mentor program like this work?

Simple. The mentee raises the problem. The mentor provides support and feedback with ideas and knowledge. The mentee then takes that feedback and can do two things with it. Integrate it without a question or jump into Q&A to help integrate more. In the latter part, the Q&A is synched.

With this method, you will end up with an async workflow in mentorship with only one monthly synched call.

It saves time for both parties and the individual mentee and saves money.

The mentor can still earn the same as in the old days of synched work since the mentor can take up not just 2-5 but 8-10 mentees.

But, there is a big but. And I have to be super honest here.

Some mentor programs are all in for support only. Meaning: they continue on and on and on and on. The mentor's goal is to keep people locked in, of course. But, having mentoring just for support might be less productive.

So, to do async mentoring, you need to change the baseline goal of the mentorship.

All async mentorship should serve one thing: getting the mentee from A to B.

They have to be results-driven problem-focused, and there has to be an end to the mentorship. Most mentors would tell you that, yes, they do the same. But that's simply not true. If it would be true, it would reflect the terms of engagement.

Here's how I work with my mentees.

All mentorship programs are individual, 1:1.

That's the baseline, as I don't believe in group programs. I understand why others do it and why coaches and mentors prefer it, but I believe it only helps those very early on their journey (whatever the journey is). Group programs are facilitated courses that help only those just starting out. Things get complicated once they go on a journey and need personalized help.

All mentorship programs have a result that we want to achieve.

It's personal, it's achievable, it's measurable, and it has an impact on the mentee's life (and business). I usually work with either founders or high-performing solopreneurs, so an example of an impact is something like these: a productized service that they launch with my help, a revamp of their current processes in operations, or reaching X in leads within a timeframe, etc.

All mentorship programs have a limit on time.

The financial quarter is the greatest invention of modern-day capitalism, so I tend to stick to that timeframe. A month is too short to get results; half a year might be an overstretch, so a quarter is the perfect time to get things done together. If we can't reach some results within a quarter, there might be problems getting those results in half a year.

Lastly, mentorship is a mix of synched and async processes.

It is individual, so some prefer a fully synched approach. Others are OK with a mostly async process. I prefer async, as I explained above.

Then, the pricing. There's no fixed pricing.

Mentees are not paying for my time; they are paying for the result. And since the results are based on individual preferences and only 1:1 mentorship, pricing differs for everybody. However, the more async the process is, the lower the price will be - since we are still considering my actual time in the process.

Async mentoring works the same way as we do work async in our remote workplaces. There are shared materials and a space where we collaborate and communicate async via written forms or recorded videos. It ignores time zones and our personal life preferences.

We work when we can and provide value when we can. Mentees work at their own pace, integrating the learnings. It works magically for CEOs, especially busy founders - finally, there's not another call they need to do during their busy weeks.

Of course, it only works for those who can manage their time, work async anyway, and get used to remote work. It's a great filter I love and prefer to have anyway. It does wonders for client relationships, to be honest. Since I'm doing it, I had a mentee that turned into a consulting client, leveling up in the terms of our engagements. We are alike because we work alike.

So what do you think? Would you prefer to get mentorship synched, or would you be comfortable working with a mentor in a more async manner?

Peter