At the National Meeting, there was a great deal of discussion about mentoring after graduation. Currently, there is a high turnover of new veterinarians in the first year they are hired. According to Stith Keiser, 70% of new graduates leave their first job within 1 year. Based on Banfield’s success with their model of "coaching" new graduates, some think that a lack of good guidance contributes to clinics not being able to retain new employees. This has led to conversation about developing a set of mentorship guidelines for employers and job seekers. Some things that have been considered in these guidelines are negotiating a lower starting salary that will increase in increments in exchange for individualized attention, including advise on communicating with clients, obtaining payments, and developing clinical skills.

I think this idea has both pros and cons. As new veterinarians I believe that we will feel overwhelmed at times without proper guidance. Having a mentor that we trust may allow us to increase our productivity sooner and assimilate into the clinics we’re working at more quickly. I also think that if the AVMA and AAHA approve of these guidelines and educate current DVMs on the advantages of providing good mentorship to new graduates, then there will be more accountability and consistency so that the mentorship provided is beneficial to all involved. However, I am skeptical of new graduates agreeing to work for less money. I worry that instead of everyone understanding that the salary decrease is to compensate for the profit lost to employers due to the time spent mentoring, it might be misconstrued to potential employers as new graduates being worth less.

I want to hear your thoughts? What are the strengths and weaknesses of trying to introduce a set of mentorship guidelines to practitioners? Do you think this would benefit both the employer and the employee?