NUR 674 Topic 9 DQ 1: Mentor and Leadership Style
Naming the leadership style is the graded move, and it means naming a theory. The last question is about what the mentor gets, which most posts treat as an afterthought.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 16, 2026
Four questions, and the last one is about both parties
Two of these four questions are personal and two are analytical, and the analytical ones carry the marks. What style of leadership did they use asks for a named style from the literature — transformational, servant, situational, authentic, transactional — and then for evidence that the label fits. Do not simply assert transformational because it sounds complimentary. Transformational leadership has components: idealised influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration. If your mentor mostly gave you attention tailored to your development, that is individualised consideration and you should say so; if they mostly redefined how you saw the problem, that is intellectual stimulation. Servant leadership makes a different claim, that the leader's priority is the growth of the people they lead, and it fits many mentors better than transformational does. Choose the style that fits the behaviour rather than the one that flatters, and say briefly which alternative you rejected and why.
The traits question should distinguish traits from behaviours, because what actually drew you was almost certainly something they did. Availability at the moment you needed it, willingness to say they did not know, giving you work slightly beyond your current level, and protecting you when it went wrong are behaviours, and they are more informative than adjectives. The fourth question asks about importance for both leader and mentee, and the mentee half is easy. For the leader, mentoring surfaces what they actually believe by forcing them to articulate it, keeps them connected to frontline reality as they move away from it, extends their influence past their own tenure, and is increasingly a competency they are assessed on. Say which of those your mentor got, since the mutual claim is the one the prompt is testing. Say whether the relationship was formal or informal too, because the mutual benefit works differently when the mentoring is assigned rather than chosen.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Match an observed leadership style to a named theory with evidence.
- 02Distinguish traits from behaviours in describing a mentor.
- 03Articulate the benefit of mentoring to the mentor.
- 04Use leadership theory as an analytical tool rather than a label.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01A described mentor and relationship context.
- 02A named leadership style with component-level evidence.
- 03Behaviours rather than adjectives in the characteristics section.
- 04Benefits to the mentee, specified.
- 05Benefits to the mentor, argued rather than assumed.
The mentor, the style, the traits, the mutual benefit
The mentor and the relationship
Establish the context and what the relationship consisted of.
The leadership style, named
Match observed behaviour to a theory and evidence the fit.
What drew you, behaviourally
Convert characteristics into observable actions.
What the mentee gains
Specify the development the relationship produced.
What the mentor gains
Argue the reciprocal benefit.
Mentorship evaluated, not celebrated
Recommended databases
- CINAHL
- PubMed Central
- American Organization for Nursing Leadership
- Business Source Complete
Search sequence
- 1.Read the components of the style you intend to name before naming it.
- 2.Search mentorship outcome studies rather than mentoring advice.
- 3.Look for evidence on what mentors gain, which is less written about.
- 4.Check whether your mentor's behaviour fits a second style better than the first.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Implementing evidence-based practice: effectiveness of a structured multifaceted mentorship programme
Journal of Advanced Nursing · 2010
Mentorship evaluated against an outcome rather than described — evidence that the relationship does measurable work.
- 02
Impact of Nurse Manager Leadership Styles on Work Engagement: A Systematic Literature Review
Journal of Nursing Management · 2023
Leadership styles related to work engagement, for evidencing the style you name.
- 03
What is Servant Leadership?
Robert K. Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership · 2024
Servant leadership in its own terms, which fits many mentors better than transformational does.
- 04
AONL Nurse Leader Core Competencies
American Organization for Nursing Leadership · 2024
Mentoring as an assessed leadership competency, which is part of the mentor's own benefit.
- 05
A systematic review of the relationships between nurse leaders' leadership styles and nurses' work-related well-being
International Journal of Nursing Practice · 2022
Leadership style and staff wellbeing, connecting the relationship to a measurable outcome.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Naming transformational leadership because it sounds like praise.
- Listing admirable qualities with no behaviour behind them.
- Treating the leader's benefit as a courtesy sentence at the end.
- Describing the relationship without ever using leadership theory.
Submission checklist
- Is the style named from the literature and evidenced at component level?
- Are your characteristics behaviours a third party could have observed?
- Have you argued the benefit to the mentor?
- Would the analysis hold if the mentor read it?
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.
Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.
Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.