Behind Mentorship Matchmaking

Author : Rike Enss

What is your background?
I’ve been in HR since 2008 and worked in various industries, like construction, transportation, oil & gas, and utilities. My roles mostly contributed to recruitment, but I have been in an HR Business Partner role for the last 2 years. 
 
How did you come to be a matchmaker?
In August 2022, I joined the Mentorship Committee, and as time came closer to the applications for the mentorship intake, I was approached by our facilitator, Lynda, and I said yes! So, this last turnaround was my 3rd time matching.
 
What do you enjoy about matching?
I love the success stories! What I really like to hear is things like “We extended our relationship by 6 months.”, or “This was so beneficial, I am applying again.” We often also see that in the intake, and it’s nice to see that people come back for the 2nd, 3rd, or even 10th time, either on the mentor or mentee side. And it’s super cool to see that someone who was mentored before is now ready to take on the mentorship role. It’s so nice to see people growing in their professional lives. 
Matching is fun! The little time we have can be quite challenging when it comes to matching as the intake closes, and then we have 1 week to match. But we all have full-time jobs, families, and a life. However, it is a really great feeling when you sort through the profiles and you have that perfect match for someone. With every time we match, we also grow a little and know what to look out for a bit better than last time. 
On a personal level, I have been a mentor a few times and I am still in touch with all my proteges. You can build long-lasting relationships, for sure on the professional level, but also on a personal level if it comes to that. 
 
What is challenging? 
There are a few things. We constantly try to improve our intake questions to better match everyone’s preferences. But that’s also the problem. We don’t always have that “perfect” match. 
I had a case in the last intake where a mentee desperately wanted someone from the construction industry, and I found the (in my mind) perfect match! But the mentor wanted someone from the same chapter and the mentee was from a different chapter. However, I matched them regardless as I felt this could be such a beneficial relationship. I know it's not ideal, and sometimes people probably wonder why their preferences weren’t matched, but I want to assure everyone that we try everything to take all preferences into consideration. It’s just not always doable, and the more we match, the fewer applications we have available. On the plus side, and because I had a few other examples, we are now adding “industry” to the intake form. We previously asked for the company, but we cannot know 250+ companies and what exactly they do. There is lots of Googling going on. Knowing their industry will be very helpful.
What we also really need is more people with unionized experience on the mentor side. A lot of mentees are asking for that, and we don’t have enough, but this environment is very different than open shop. 
We aim to make this a memorable and valuable experience and relationship for all matches. What we often miss is feedback. Even if it’s blunt, we need it. But then it’s also important to realize the expectations and the limitations of the program. 
 
What have been other changes since you started matching?
We added the question if you want to be matched with someone from your chapter. Coming out of COVID, that was a big thing for people. They wanted to meet in person. But it’s also nice to see that COVID opened some unexplored doors, and many of our matches now meet over Teams or Zoom or long distances but can still connect. 
Another change we have made on our part is using Google tables for matchmaking. Previously, the matchmakers would meet in person and try to get everyone done. Sometimes it’s nice to sit on a profile and think it through before making a call instantly.
We also added peer-to-peer, and this last intake, I had my own first peer-to-peer session, and I love it! It’s a completely different level to come up with solutions and sometimes just share ideas.
 
What advice do you have?
Many! If you haven’t mentored or proteged before, I strongly encourage you to consider it. Use the CPHR tools on the website; don’t overthink it, and make it a relationship. If your match doesn’t work out, don’t be discouraged. It’s hard to know personalities from a spreadsheet (what we get as matchmakers), so sometimes it may not work. Reach back out to CPHR and ask for a new match. Just be professional about it. Consider your own expectations, and be a little flexible and a bit forgiving if not everything works out to your standard.
Also – keep in mind that your mentor will mostly share their own personal experience. 2 mentors may give you some completely different advice on the same question. Take what works for you and your situation. It’s a give-and-take relationship. 
Another point to make if you want to be part of the HR community – it doesn’t have to be mentoring. Networking and building community are fun! Attend functions and events. Check out other committees. I’m part of another committee (Edmonton Chapter Committee), and I have built great relationships with that committee and feel like I’m part of a community. 
 
What do you do in your personal life?
I’ve been married for over 18 years and have 2 girls (9 and 13). The extracurricular keeps us busy enough, but we had to add 6 pets to our household, 4 cats and 2 dogs; they are all rescues. I feel like there’s always room for more but not everyone agrees. I started my MBA last year in September, so also attend school every few weekends. And I’m working out 6 times a week, mostly running. That is so important for my mental health and to decompress. 

Our July to December Mentorship Program is open for applications until June 17, 2024. Learn more about the program here


The views and opinions expressed in this blog post belong solely to the original author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CPHR Alberta.

 


The views and opinions expressed in this blog post belong solely to the original author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CPHR Alberta.



By Jessica Jaithoo December 2, 2025
At CPHR Alberta, we believe that the future of work is being shaped by the decisions we make today. That’s why we’re proud to share our 2026-2028 Strategic Plan—a bold, member-informed roadmap that will guide our organization over the next three years. This plan is the result of a deeply collaborative process, led by our Board of Directors and developed in partnership with our operations team. It reflects the voices of our members, gathered through surveys and conversations, and is grounded in market research and aligned with the national priorities of CPHR Canada. Together, we’ve crafted a strategy that is responsive, forward-looking, and rooted in data. At its core, the plan is about strengthening the Human Resources profession and supporting the people who drive it. It reaffirms our commitment to building a resilient, inclusive HR community—one that is equipped to lead in a rapidly evolving workplace landscape. Our redefined vision and mission statements speak to this ambition, and our newly articulated values provide a foundation for how we work, connect, and grow. The strategic priorities outlined in the plan reflect the areas where we believe CPHR Alberta can make the greatest impact. They focus on elevating the visibility and influence of the HR profession, fostering innovation and leadership across our community, and deepening engagement with our members and partners. These priorities are designed to meet the diverse needs of our jurisdiction, from urban centers to rural communities, and to ensure that every CPHR has the tools and support to thrive. As we look ahead, we’re energized by the possibilities this plan unlocks. It’s a call to action—for our team, our Board, and our members—to work together in shaping the future of HR. Whether it’s through new learning opportunities, stronger regional connections, or amplifying the voice of HR in public discourse, we’re committed to leading with purpose and impact. We invite you to explore the full 2026-2028 Strategic Plan and see how our shared vision will come to life. Together, we’re building a future-ready HR community—one that’s connected, influential, and prepared to meet the challenges of tomorrow.
By Bailey Beauchamp December 1, 2025
Seeking CPHRs, Retired CPHRs and Public Board Members
By Jessica Jaithoo November 19, 2025
Author: Ada Tai, MBA, CPHR, SHRM-SCP After publishing “ A Strategic Guide to Organization Restructuring, Part 1 ,” I heard a consistent follow-up question from leaders: “How do you actually re-design an organizational structure so it aligns with strategy, future needs, and the realities of the day-to-day operations?” In this post, I will take you behind the scenes of a recent restructuring project our firm completed and walk you through the steps for designing a structure that works not just today, but also for the next 3 - 5 years. Step One: Understand the Organization Restructuring is not a mechanical exercise. Before anyone touches boxes on an org. chart, leaders must understand the full context of the organization: its challenges, aspirations, constraints, and people. Recently, our team worked with a large public-sector entity that hadn’t reviewed its structure in more than a decade. Over time, several issues had emerged: Long-standing role ambiguity and workflow friction Significant retention and succession challenges A rapidly growing industry and expanding service demands A CEO overwhelmed with too many direct reports Insufficient leadership depth in the layer immediately below the CEO The mandate was clear: Design a structure that could carry the organization for the next 3–5 years. Before jumping in, we partnered with the executive team to answer a set of foundational questions: Why is a new structure needed now? What pressures, risks, or opportunities are driving the change? What is the organization trying to achieve long-term? We reviewed vision, mission, values, strategic priorities, and expected growth. How is the organization currently designed? We examined complexity, formality, decision flows, span of control, talent mix, communication channels, policies, and people challenges. What work must happen to deliver services successfully? We mapped critical processes and clarified who is responsible for what work today and tomorrow. What resources and budget constraints shape the options? We did a reality check. Answering these questions transforms guesswork into a strategic foundation. Step Two: Plan for the Structure Review Once aligned on objectives and constraints, we co-created a plan for the whole structure review. 1. A small project team was assembled within the organization. This was a group of leaders/champions who would serve as our partners, sounding board, and communication anchors throughout the process. 2. To design a structure that reflects reality rather than assumptions, we needed both qualitative and quantitative insights. Together with the project team, we developed a data-collection plan that included: On-site tours to understand operations and workflow in context In-person interviews with employees across departments, tenure levels, roles, and demographic groups Review of organizational documents , including strategy, service data, operational metrics, etc. 3. We also conducted external research to understand the demand for the organization’s services, the competitive landscape, and industry benchmarks. The goal was to build a complete, nuanced picture of how work actually gets done. Step Three: Design the Structure Over the next several weeks, we conducted interviews with 80% of the head office staff and 60% of the frontline workforce. One important message we emphasized to every group is: “This review is not a performance assessment, nor an attempt to eliminate jobs. It is about building a structure that sets everyone up for success.” Gradually, as we gained insights, a clear picture emerged of what the future structure could and should be. We facilitated a series of structural design sessions with the project team. These sessions were collaborative, candid, and grounded in both data and lived experience. Together, we co-created: A transition structure for the upcoming year — providing stability while preparing for change. A future-state, growth-oriented structure designed for the next 3 – 5 years — with more substantial leadership depth, transparent accountability, and defined pathways for talent development and succession. The result was not just an org. chart. It was a blueprint for how the organization would operate, make decisions, support employees, and deliver services at a higher level. Step Four: Support the People Side of Change Even the best-designed structure can fall apart without thoughtful implementation. Once the project team felt confident in the proposed structures, the next steps were: Securing Board approval Preparing a comprehensive communication plan Engaging employees with clarity, empathy, and transparency We had the privilege of presenting the new design and its rationale to the Board. After approval, we supported the organization as it rolled out the change to staff, ensuring leaders were prepared to answer questions, set expectations, and guide their teams through the transition. Structure isn’t just architecture; it impacts morale, trust, and people’s sense of security. The human side must be handled with the same care as the technical side. Final Thoughts Restructuring is a strategic redesign of how an organization works, leads, and delivers value. A thoughtful structure review requires three things: Deep understanding of the organization’s reality Collaborative design grounded in data Careful implementation that supports people When these pieces come together, restructuring becomes more than a response to pressure. It is an opportunity to strengthen leadership capacity, improve clarity and accountability, and position the organization for sustainable growth. Check out my previous blog: “ A Strategic Guide to Organization Restructuring, Part 1 ” 
MORE NEWS