Summary.    In the best sponsorship relationships, sponsees adopt a proactive stance, making clear who they are and what they need. But many can’t do that, especially if they come from underrepresented groups, because of barriers, some personal and some structural, that...

Behind the most productive sponsorships often stand savvy sponsees — industrious junior talent who spot opportunities for sponsors to unleash tactical support and advocacy.

As Herminia Ibarra and I have noted previously, the best sponsees make themselves stewards of the sponsorship relationship. One sponsee might take the initiative to put meetings on her sponsor’s calendar; a second might draw attention to gaps in his development; a third might ask for introductions to senior leaders in the sponsor’s network. But these moves require sponsees to adopt a proactive and confident stance in relation to their sponsor, and many simply don’t feel able to do that. Why? Because of barriers — some personal and internal, others structural and external — that confront them in the workplace.

In my work as a consultant to organizations that invest in sponsorship, I’ve watched junior talent face significant challenges to success with assigned sponsors, and I’ve developed three strategies they can use to overcome them.

Develop an impact statement.

Sponsees signal readiness to sponsors by demonstrating their unique value and impact. But formal sponsorship programs often target members of groups that are frequently penalized for explicit self-promotion: for example, women who were raised with gender norms that prioritize humility, or people who hail from cultures that place a strong emphasis on modesty.

Although there’s nothing wrong with humility and modesty, sponsees who possess these traits can project a lack of drive and initiative. That, in turn, can make it harder for sponsors to know how to help — and to do it with confidence. To get around this challenge, companies can encourage sponsees to prepare a concise “impact statement”: a short document or deck in which sponsees outline their role, highlight their superpowers, quantify their accomplishments, note distinctive character traits, and describe their purpose and proudest moments. Because self-promotion does not come naturally to many people, managers can coach sponsees in preparing their impact statements. Where managers are not available, sponsees can use a set of written prompts, then work in peer groups with fellow sponsees to iterate together on their final statements.

In one such group, Silvio, a Latinx director for a tech company, listed several high-level creative endeavors in his impact statement but did not quantify his impact. When asked why by his peers, he joked, “My people are not self-promoters.” The group encouraged him to be more concrete about his unique contributions. It turned out there were many, including the design of a suite of products that generated a burst of revenue for the company.

These kinds of “pull strategies” create the psychological safety many sponsees need to present the fullest profile of their talent and potential, a necessary foundation for effective sponsorship. They also help capture the valuable information sponsors and sponsees will refer to as they begin exploring sponsorship opportunities.

Boost risk tolerance.

Effective sponsors nudge junior talent out of their comfort zones. They model ironclad confidence, even when their proteges cannot access it themselves. But risk-taking is loaded for groups whose mistakes have been subject to unfair scrutiny, or whose potential is more likely to be questioned.

Skillful sponsors consider a wide range of reasons for risk aversion when working with sponsees from underrepresented groups, including bias and cultural expectations. They do not misread a sponsee’s caution toward a new opportunity as a lack of appetite for change. Instead, sponsors lean into coaching, often by sharing stories of their own past tussles with risk.

They also help sponsees learn moves for healthy risk-taking, such as breaking down big goals into smaller steps and using decision-making frameworks. They may encourage sponsees to evaluate the macro climate, reassuring them that discomfort is a feature, not a bug, of the risk-taking process.

Divya, a director at a large technology company, was a top performer who avoided networking and relied on steady promotions for advancement. After several sessions with her assigned sponsor, she shared an idea for new role at the company. The sponsor ran with it, meeting with the leader who had the oversight to green-light the new position. Divya’s sponsor worked with her on the business case and gave her feedback during dry-runs of her pitch deck. “I knew there was someone who would listen to me,” Divya said, “and tell me if I was totally off on a tangent or within limits, given what was going on in the company.” The conversations and thought exercises she worked on with her sponsor, she said, changed her perspective on herself and pushed her to get out of her comfort zone and ask questions.

Divya’s sponsor communicated, with words and actions, that she was present and invested. And she did what great sponsors do: She set aside additional time to check in with her sponsee, advocated for her with colleagues, and offer her time and moral support throughout the risk-taking process.

Create a personal-development plan.

Sponsors can’t help sponsees if they don’t know how. Junior talent need to point to specific ways sponsors can support them. This is especially true in programs where sponsors and sponsees are not well-acquainted.

The challenge is that many sponsees won’t freely voice their needs. Self-advocacy is a muscle that grows stronger with practice and encouragement from others, and many sponsees lack both. Some, especially from underrepresented groups, have learned that speaking up can be like walking through a minefield of bias. Others may have been socialized to avoid self-advocacy.

Before beginning to work with their assigned sponsors, sponsees should create a personal-development plan to serve as a tactical road map for the relationship. Some will find it easier to put in writing what might feel hard to say, so it can be helpful to give sponsees written prompts they can work on independently or in small groups with peers.

Questions sponsees answer in Rachel’s program include: Where do you want to upskill? Do you have ideas for new projects, scope, or roles? What does a day at work look like for you a year from now? Who would you like to be more aware of your contributions? Which leaders would you like to meet?

Sponsees then generate a list of suggested tactics to begin answering their own questions. They bring the plan to their sponsors, who approach it as a living document to guide the relationship and evolve as it deepens.

That approach worked well for Sara, a dynamic tech-company sales executive. When she was assigned a VP sponsor, Sara was vague about her career-development goals. It took coaching and explicit encouragement from the sponsor for Sara to lay her cards on the table. In her personal-development plan, Sara advocated for more scope — and eventually got it. She credits her sponsor with emboldening her. “I never felt a sense of entitlement to ask a VP for what I wanted,” she says. “This was a huge step for me, and it took time to build that muscle.”

The junior talent most in need of sponsorship may also face the strongest headwinds to activating it. That’s why merely assigning a sponsor to an underrepresented sponsee is rarely enough. Effective sponsors have to offer not just their influence and advocacy but also a culturally responsive connection. They need to learn about the self-censorship common among underrepresented groups, and about the difference between diffidence and apathy. But this road runs both ways. The most successful sponsees also need to take the initiative, by embracing a project of personal development that will allow them to align with the expectations of sponsorship. They — and the culture in which they work — both need to grow and change.