Current playbook index title and category plus an internally authored detailed-guide draft
Initiative-specific development wave
How this draft was developed
These sources support general principles for intergenerational exchange, two-way learning and matched mentoring; they do not constitute Rotary International endorsement of the named Reverse Mentoring Program initiative or this locally designed delivery model.
Primary references consulted
Make Connections(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary describes clubs as places where people can share skills across generations and offer new ideas.; The guidance emphasises ongoing relationships and putting people's interests and leadership skills into practical action.
Deliver Continued Value(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary identifies interaction between older and younger members as a source of personal growth and professional development.; The guidance encourages cross-generational relationships, mentoring, leadership development and skill-building.
Enhance Your Club's Culture(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary recommends matching mentors by interests, skills or professional background rather than relying only on position or tenure.; The guidance recognises that mentors also benefit through leadership practice and meaningful connection.
Candidate District material
No candidate local guide was used for this version. The current initiative identity and the attributed primary references remain separate.
Theme 2 source-assurance wave
What has been checked
3 current primary pages used by this guide were reopened on 9 August 2026.
6 attributed source claim(s) were mapped to their bounded use in this initiative.
Candidate District material remains separate and does not establish this result.
See each source's scope and limit
Engaging Younger Professionals: Make Connections Supports: The 32 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: That the initiative is endorsed by Rotary International or District 9510, that it is permitted by the club's governing documents, that members want it, that it suits the local club, or that it will achieve the intended outcome.
Deliver Continued Value Supports: The 49 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: That the initiative is endorsed by Rotary International or District 9510, that it is permitted by the club's governing documents, that members want it, that it suits the local club, or that it will achieve the intended outcome.
Enhance Your Club's Culture Supports: Member-centred culture review, barrier reduction, flexibility, mentoring and practical conversation about club renewal. Does not establish: That every suggested action suits the club, that the page diagnoses the club or that a proposed cultural change has member support or governing approval.
What still needs a person to confirm
Confirm the member, prospective-member, past-member and community needs, preferences and consent that the local design assumes.
Confirm which privacy, safeguarding, incorporated-association, charity, work health and safety, food, liquor, copyright, licensing, screening and other duties apply to the club and the activity.
Test accessibility, cultural safety, belonging, language and alternative participation routes with affected people and recognise First Nations cultural authority rather than inferring suitability from the guide.
Confirm every local fact, starting point, cost, role, current service contact, measure, stopping condition and platform capability before the club decides to proceed.
Confirm the authority and current scope of each primary source, resolve login-gated or moved-page references and keep any candidate District material attributed and unapproved until its source decision is made.
The source-verification release gate remains closed.
Checks still on hold
The board or delegated sponsor must approve the learning question, decision route, matching safeguards and independent concern contact before recruitment.
Participation and disclosure must be voluntary, with no adverse consequence for declining, disagreeing, pausing or ending the match.
No participant may be asked to represent a whole age group, culture, profession, identity or community, or to disclose lived experience beyond what they choose.
Recommendations must not be used to bypass normal board authority, complaints, safeguarding, employment, privacy or professional-advice processes.
Still an internal draft: source interpretation, local suitability, accessibility, governance and editorial approval remain open checks.
Why a club might use this
It helps knowledge, confidence and encouragement move between members instead of resting with a few people.
It may suit: Members seeking guidance or a new challenge, and the people offering practical support.
Use it when
Consider Reverse Mentoring Program when members want guidance or a next challenge but the available pathways are hard to see.
A club practice that needs insight from a generation, community, profession or lived experience not well represented in current decision-making.
Two members who are curious, willing to share power and able to work on one specific learning goal over a short period.
A six- to eight-week exchange with three structured conversations, one observation or practical test and a clear close-out.
Before the club starts
One approved learning question connected to a real club practice, with a sponsor who can consider the resulting recommendation but will not direct the private conversations.
A voluntary matching process that considers expertise, interest, power differences, conflicts, accessibility, communication preferences and either person's right to decline.
A two-way agreement covering learning goals, confidentiality, respectful challenge, matters out of scope, check-ins and a no-fault exit or rematch route.
A coordinator outside the pair who can handle concerns and confirm that personal stories or group identity will not be treated as representative evidence without permission.
Capacity guide
Likely cost
Low; usually limited to coffee, simple materials and coordination time.
Lead time
About three weeks to recruit mentors, map pathways and make the first matches.
People
One coordinator and four to eight mentors, scaled to the number of participating members.
A useful club conversation
Questions worth asking
What assumption about this club practice deserves to be tested, and whose experience has been missing from the conversation?
What would each of us like to understand better by the end of the exchange?
What is one change we can test without asking either person to carry the burden of changing the whole club?
Common traps
Trying Reverse Mentoring Program when Using a younger, newer or under-represented member as an unpaid consultant, spokesperson for a whole group or solution to a senior member's resistance to change.
Proceeding with Reverse Mentoring Program when A pairing where one person controls the other's role, complaint, nomination, employment, performance assessment or access to opportunities and the conflict cannot be removed.
The pair produces insight but the sponsor ignores it, reinforcing cynicism or tokenism. — Confirm the decision route before matching and require the sponsor to respond with reasons and a practical next step within 30 days.
A practical 90-day path
Three milestones for Reverse Mentoring Program
When
What the club does
Evidence to keep
Days 1–30: Agree the local design
Ask club leaders and members for practices that would benefit from a different perspective, then choose one question that is specific, changeable and safe to explore. Invite people to describe what they can offer and what they want to learn, without assigning mentor or learner status by age, tenure or office.
An approved learning question, scope and decision route A consented pool of interests, experience and participation needs
Days 31–60: Run and adjust the first version
Propose a match privately, disclose any power or role conflict, let both people decline and agree who will support the pair if the relationship becomes uncomfortable. Use the first session to agree the question, two-way learning goals, meeting rhythm, confidentiality, respectful challenge and one small observation or test between sessions.
A mutually accepted match or no-fault rematch A signed two-way learning agreement and session plan
Days 61–90: Review the evidence and decide
Hold two further conversations that compare assumptions with experience, test one practical change and record the learning without attributing private comments or speaking for a whole group. Close the pairing deliberately, check that both people felt respected, remove any temporary access and present only the agreed recommendation to the sponsor for a decision.
A tested insight and a jointly written recommendation A close-out record and an accept, test, adapt or decline decision
Fit it to the club you have
Small club
Use an interclub or district match when local roles create unavoidable power conflicts or the needed perspective is absent. Keep the learning question tied to a change the club can actually make.
Larger club
Run a small cohort with one coordinator, common agreements and separate pair check-ins. Do not publish pairings or learning topics unless both people choose that visibility.
Regional or rural club
Match across distance by phone or video and plan around work, caring and connectivity. Avoid assuming metropolitan digital practice is the only expertise the club needs.
Metropolitan, hybrid or online club
Use accessible shared materials, avoid automatic transcription and give the pair control over channels, cameras, recordings and whether any observation happens online or in person.
Learn, adapt and know when to stop
Evidence worth keeping
Matches accepted by both people after the question, power relationship, time commitment and boundaries are disclosed.
Pairs that complete three conversations and one practical observation or test without unresolved concern or unwanted disclosure.
Participants who report that learning and challenge moved in both directions and their experience was not tokenised.
Change course when
The less-established member is expected to educate the club about an entire generation, culture or identity. — Frame the person as one expert in their own relevant experience, pay attention to workload and never treat their view as representative of a whole group.
A formal role or status difference makes it unsafe to disagree, decline a task or end the pairing. — Avoid direct authority conflicts, disclose unavoidable power differences, provide an independent coordinator and allow confidential no-fault exit or rematch.
Private discussion is attributed to a participant or used in a decision beyond the agreed question. — Share only a jointly approved recommendation, keep personal examples out of the report and obtain separate permission for any quotation or wider use.
How to put it into practice
Detailed implementation steps for Reverse Mentoring Program
Step
Action
Suggested owner
Timing
Evidence or output
1
Ask club leaders and members for practices that would benefit from a different perspective, then choose one question that is specific, changeable and safe to explore.
Program sponsor and coordinator
Four weeks before matching
An approved learning question, scope and decision route
2
Invite people to describe what they can offer and what they want to learn, without assigning mentor or learner status by age, tenure or office.
Program coordinator
Three weeks before matching
A consented pool of interests, experience and participation needs
3
Propose a match privately, disclose any power or role conflict, let both people decline and agree who will support the pair if the relationship becomes uncomfortable.
Program coordinator
Two weeks before the exchange
A mutually accepted match or no-fault rematch
4
Use the first session to agree the question, two-way learning goals, meeting rhythm, confidentiality, respectful challenge and one small observation or test between sessions.
Mentoring pair
Week 1
A signed two-way learning agreement and session plan
5
Hold two further conversations that compare assumptions with experience, test one practical change and record the learning without attributing private comments or speaking for a whole group.
Mentoring pair
Weeks 3 and 6
A tested insight and a jointly written recommendation
6
Close the pairing deliberately, check that both people felt respected, remove any temporary access and present only the agreed recommendation to the sponsor for a decision.
Pair, coordinator and sponsor
By week 8
A close-out record and an accept, test, adapt or decline decision
Controls and safeguards
Check the selected approach against the club's actual needs, capacity and responsibilities before putting it into use.
Protect member choice and privacy, make participation accessible, and do not infer belonging or satisfaction from attendance alone.
The less-established member is expected to educate the club about an entire generation, culture or identity. — Frame the person as one expert in their own relevant experience, pay attention to workload and never treat their view as representative of a whole group.
A formal role or status difference makes it unsafe to disagree, decline a task or end the pairing. — Avoid direct authority conflicts, disclose unavoidable power differences, provide an independent coordinator and allow confidential no-fault exit or rematch.
Private discussion is attributed to a participant or used in a decision beyond the agreed question. — Share only a jointly approved recommendation, keep personal examples out of the report and obtain separate permission for any quotation or wider use.
The pair produces insight but the sponsor ignores it, reinforcing cynicism or tokenism. — Confirm the decision route before matching and require the sponsor to respond with reasons and a practical next step within 30 days.
The board or delegated sponsor must approve the learning question, decision route, matching safeguards and independent concern contact before recruitment.
Participation and disclosure must be voluntary, with no adverse consequence for declining, disagreeing, pausing or ending the match.
No participant may be asked to represent a whole age group, culture, profession, identity or community, or to disclose lived experience beyond what they choose.
Recommendations must not be used to bypass normal board authority, complaints, safeguarding, employment, privacy or professional-advice processes.
What to measure
After 90 days, review Reverse Mentoring Program. Look for suitable matches, regular check-ins and progress against goals chosen by the participating member.
Matches accepted by both people after the question, power relationship, time commitment and boundaries are disclosed.
Pairs that complete three conversations and one practical observation or test without unresolved concern or unwanted disclosure.
Participants who report that learning and challenge moved in both directions and their experience was not tokenised.
Recommendations that receive a recorded accept, test, adapt or decline decision from the sponsor within 30 days.
Follow-up: At the 90-day review, compare the recorded measures with the starting point, resolve the listed governance holds and tell participants whether Reverse Mentoring Program will change, continue or stop.
Made for this initiative
Tailored supporting documents
These working documents use the decisions, safeguards and evidence needs of this initiative. Complete them with the people affected and keep the agreed version with the club's project record.
01
Reverse Mentoring Match and Conflict Check
Create a voluntary match around a real learning question while identifying power and role conflicts before the pair begins.
