>> I would be interested, but I think it would depend on the adoptee not
>> just the adopter. I would not want to end up being the fount of
>> knowledge and turn into a crutch for the adopted person.
>> >
>> >
>> > Aur Saraf
As far as the adoptee taking undue advantage of the adopter's time and 
willingness to help, I've been on teams where we use Social Contracts to 
outline expectations and responsibilities from the start. This provides 
a good framework for resolving clashes. For instance, if the adopter can 
devote 2 hours per week yet the adoptee is asking eight detailed 
questions per day, the Social Contract can be used to remind both sides 
of the match to what they have agreed to.

Doing a quick search on Google for mentoring agreements, I found a 
simple one at:  
https://www-personnel.salford.ac.uk/docs/Code%20of%20Practice%20on%20Mentoring.doc 
where Appendix I was a simple example agreement, Appendix II was 
'Periodic Mentoring Partnership Review' and Appendix III was 'Monitoring 
and Evaluating the mentoring relationship'. Perhaps this is overkill and 
people would prefer much more informal arrangements (if any) but I still 
think it is a good idea to synchronize the adopter and adoptee's 
expectations early on. I would hate to see the fallout of a bad match 
overshadow the success of the remaining ones.

Regards,
Jim