توافق مشاور ـ شاگرد درباره ارائه حمایت روانی: مشاوره رابطه، شخصیت و حجم کار
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|8338||2004||14 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||5713 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 65, Issue 3, December 2004, Pages 519–532
Protégé–mentor agreement (PMA) about the provision of psychosocial support was examined in relation to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work self-esteem. One-hundred and sixty-six junior administrative and information technology (IT) staff at an Australian university and their matched mentors completed a questionnaire that assessed three antecedents to PMA: (1) structural and experience aspects of the mentorship (type and length of relationship, frequency of meetings, previous experience with mentoring, and gender-mix); (2) protégé and mentor personality (agreeableness, openness, extroversion, neuroticism, and conscientiousness); and (3) protégé and mentor workload. Structural Equation Modeling using Partial Least Squares revealed that PMA was predicted by structural and experience aspects of the mentorship (type of mentorship, frequency of meetings, and experience of the mentor), protégé personality (agreeableness, openness, extroversion, and conscientiousness), mentor personality (agreeableness, openness, and extroversion), and mentor workload. Protégé–mentor agreement was positively related to job satisfaction and organizational commitment for protégés and mentors.
Mentoring may be defined as “an intense work relationship between senior (mentor) and junior (protégé) organizational members.” (Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992, p. 622). This paper investigates three sets of factors that influence protégé–mentor agreement (PMA) in relation to psychosocial mentoring: (1) structural and experience aspects of the mentorship, (2) personality, and (3) workload. The predictive ability of PMA is then tested in relation to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work self-esteem. This paper makes a number of important contributions. Theoretically, the framework allows a detailed examination of the PMA in relation to psychosocial support. It is also the first in the mentoring literature to apply the Big Five framework (Costa & McCrae, 1992) as a way of systematically analyzing the role of personality in PMA. Methodologically, the use of dyadic data allows this paper to examine the processes of exchange that occur within a mentoring relationship (Chao, 1998) and to consider how the “micro-level behaviors enacted by one partner are evaluated by the other” (Young & Perrewe, 2000, p. 628). The use of dyadic data also means that this paper is able to investigate work outcomes for both protégés and mentors. This is an important contribution given that comparatively little research has examined the outcomes of mentoring for mentors themselves (Allen, Poteet, Russell, & Dobbins, 1997a; Allen, Poteet, & Burroughs, 1997b; Young & Perrewe, 2000). 1.1. Protégé–mentor agreement in relation to psychosocial support Protégé–mentor agreement is defined in this paper as the degree to which protégés and mentors hold a shared view of the mentorship. Protégés and mentors who hold a shared view of the relationship may be more likely to understand the needs of the other, be more open to receiving and understanding feedback from the other, and be more likely to make the attitudinal and behavioral adjustments required to ensure a continued relationship (Baird & Kram, 1983; Godshalk & Sosik, 2000; Yammarino & Atwaters, 1997). Certainly, Kram and Bragar (1992) stated that high-quality psychosocial support is only achieved when understanding between the protégé and the mentor is reached. Following this claim, the current study will examine PMA with respect to the provision of psychosocial support which comes through role modeling, counseling, friendship, and conveying positive regard/acceptance towards the protégé (Kram, 1985a; Noe, 1988). Most investigations of psychosocial support have used ratings given only by the protégé (e.g., Godshalk & Sosik, 2000; Koberg, Boss, & Goodman, 1998). Those researchers who have included protégé's and mentor's ratings run separate analyses on aggregated data for the two groups (e.g., Fagenson-Eland, Marks, & Amendola, 1997; Mullen, 1998; Mullen & Noe, 1999; Young & Perrewe, 2000). As such, these studies do not consider the dynamics that occur within each protégé–mentor pair and have been unable to assess whether protégé–mentor pairs agree about the provision of support that is given. In fact, it is likely that there is considerable room for lack of agreement between the two mentoring parties (Baird & Kram, 1983; Young & Perrewe, 2000). Hennefrund (1986) claimed that in some relationships, protégés and mentors experienced marked differences in judgments. Baird and Kram (1983) suggest that needs, expectations, and perceptions of each party may be quite different due to the different career stage of the protégé and the mentor. These differences may mean that agreement between the two parties is difficult to reach given that they are approaching the relationship from such different bases. The effect of these differences may be further compounded when considering Young and Perrewe's (2001) suggestion that the expectations and perceptions of each party are rarely defined or communicated in an explicit manner. Given the initial difference in expectations of the two parties agreement may be quite difficult to reach. The relatively intangible nature of psychosocial support (Noe, 1988) may mean that lack of agreement is particularly prevalent within this function of mentoring. This study examines three sets of factors that may influence the ability of protégés and mentors to reach agreement about the provision of psychosocial support. 1.1.1. Structural and experience aspects of the mentorship There are several aspects of the mentorship itself that may facilitate PMA. These include type of mentorship, length of mentorship, frequency with which mentor and protégé meet, previous experience with mentoring, and the gender-mix of the dyad. The type of mentorship, be it formal or informal, might influence PMA. Protégés and mentors in informal relationships may be more likely to hold a mutual view than those in formal relationships. This would be due to the higher levels of identification, similarity, motivation, and communication that are characteristic of informal relationships and also due to the fact that these informal pairs typically have a longer lasting relationship (Chao et al., 1992; Kram, 1985a; Mullen, 1998; Murray, 1991; Young & Perrewe, 2000). Length of the relationship and frequency of meetings are also likely to play a role in developing PMA. Although the evidence is mixed, these factors are positively related to the provision of mentoring (Mullen, 1998). Increased length and frequency may enable pairs to clarify expectations, develop trust and understanding, and to adjust attitudes and behaviors over time in order to develop a mutually shared view.1 Previous experience with mentoring has been related to individuals' willingness to mentor and be mentored (Allen et al., 1997a; Fagenson-Eland et al., 1997). Previous experience may also influence PMA. People who have experience in a mentorship have first-hand experience of what it is like to be in such a relationship and may, therefore, have a better capacity to take the view of the other party and to negotiate a shared expectation and understanding. A final factor that may be of relevance is the gender-mix of the dyad. Pepper and Kulik (2002) argued that “[m]entors and protégés of the same gender are more likely to share experiences and social identities that make communication easier and personal comfort greater” (p. 11). Ragins and McFarlin (1990) suggest that two mechanisms operate in cross-gender relationships to influence role perceptions: sexual concerns and restriction of identification. Although the evidence is mixed, results do show that protégés in same-gender dyads reported higher levels of psychosocial support than cross-gender (Koberg et al., 1998; Ragins & McFarlin, 1990).2 It could also be that same-gender pairs achieve higher PMA. Hypothesis 1. Type of mentorship, length of mentorship, frequency of meetings, previous experience, and gender-mix will be positively related to PMA.3 1.1.2. Protégé and mentor personality The current study applies the Big Five personality classification system to the mentoring relationship (Costa & McCrae, 1992). This organizing framework suggests that most of one's personality can be summarized using five stable domains: neuroticism, extroversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. People high on agreeableness are fundamentally altruistic and strive for intimacy. They enjoy co-operative learning and are skilled at conflict resolution (Judge & Cable, 1997). Kram (1985a) suggested that protégés who were `enjoyable to be with' and who could `tolerate conflict' would be more attractive to potential mentors. The desire to create co-operative friendships, and the willingness to negotiate with others, mean that agreeable protégés and/or mentors are likely to achieve high levels of PMA. Extroverts are characterized as sociable, active, confident, expressive, energetic, and optimistic. Allen et al. (1997b) observed that mentors were attracted to protégés who were people-oriented (a characteristic of extroversion). It is possible that protégés and/or mentors high on extroversion and who, therefore, seek to understand their interpersonal relationships, may have high PMA. Neuroticism is characterized by a person's general tendency to view the world with negative or positive affect. Positive affectivity, organization-based self-esteem, and emotional stability (specific traits that form part of the higher order construct of neuroticism) are related to willingness to mentor and initiation of mentoring (Aryee, Wyatt, & Stone, 1996; Turban & Dougherty, 1994). Neuroticism may also be related to PMA in that if both, or either, party in the relationship is emotionally stable they may be better able to take the perspective of their partner than those who are neurotic and, therefore, only able to concentrate on their own anxiety and insecurity. People who are highly conscientious are said to be organized, systematic, reliable, efficient, persistent, and driven by a need for accomplishment. Allen et al. (1997a) found that locus of control and upward striving, traits rooted in the domain of conscientiousness, were positively related to willingness to mentor. Conscientious protégés and/or mentors may be more likely to put in the effort and persistence necessary to achieve PMA. Openness to experience is reflected in intellectual curiosity, creativity, imagination, attentiveness to emotions, and receptiveness to new ideas. Mentors in Allen et al.'s (1997b) study stated that they were attracted to protégés who had an `openness to learn' and an `openness to accept constructive feedback.' It seems reasonable to suggest that higher levels of PMA will be achieved when protégés and/or mentors are high on openness. Hypothesis 2. Extroversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness will be positively related to PMA, while neuroticism will be negatively related to PMA. Personality may also be associated with the structural and experience aspects of the mentorship. Chao et al.'s (1992) finding that protégés who became informally mentored were selected because they seemed `open' to the advice and ideas from mentors, indicates that the trait of openness may influence the type of mentorship formed. It is also possible that domains such as extroversion and agreeableness may make people more willing to be involved in a mentorship, hence leading to them having past experience. Finally, it might be suggested that people high on conscientiousness would reliably meet on a frequent basis and would also persist in a long-term relationship, therefore, relating to the length and frequency aspects of the mentorship. Hypothesis 3. Extroversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness will be positively related to the structural and experience aspect of the mentorship, while neuroticism will be negatively related. 1.1.3. Protégé and mentor workload High workloads and high time demands on the mentor, as well as a mentor's job induced stress, have been highlighted as inhibiting factors in a person's willingness to become a mentor (Allen et al., 1997a and Allen et al., 1997b). Mentors and/or protégés who are working under conditions of overload may find that the mentorship is competing with the demands placed upon them by their own job duties. When these demands are high, the time and energy needed to establish PMA may be reduced. Hypothesis 4. Workload of mentors and protégés will be negatively related to PMA. Workload may also influence the structural and experience aspects of the mentorship itself. For example, when a protégé or a mentor has a high workload they may not have the time to meet on a frequent basis or to continue the relationship over a long period of time. Protégés and mentors with high workloads may also not volunteer to be involved in formal programs. Hypothesis 5. Workload of the mentors and protégés will be negatively related to structural and experience aspects of the mentorship. 1.2. Potential outcomes of PMA in relation to the provision of psychosocial support Psychosocial support is reported to facilitate the protégé's career by enhancing confidence in professional role as well as improving job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Corzine, Buntzman, & Busch, 1994; Kram & Isabella, 1985; Noe, 1988). Research into the outcomes of mentoring for the mentors themselves is still in its relative infancy (Mullen & Noe, 1999; Young & Perrewe, 2000). However, Allen et al.'s (1997b) qualitative research indicates that job satisfaction, organizational commitment and work self-esteem are outcomes that are worthy of investigation in relation to mentors. Amongst other things, mentors interviewed in their study stated that mentoring was beneficial because it promoted esteem and satisfaction through helping other people succeed. Hypothesis 6. Protégé–mentor agreement will be positively related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work self-esteem for protégés and mentors. These hypothesized relationships are presented in Fig. 1.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This cross-sectional study captured PMA at one point of time, yet it is likely that PMA is a dynamic phenomenon. Whilst there may be some relatively unchangeable predictors of PMA such as personality and previous experience, there are also likely to be some antecedents that change over time. Situational factors such as workload, work-life issues, changes to company policies, and practices (e.g., mentoring training programs), and changes to organizational climate (e.g., downsizing) may alter PMA. Length of the mentorship did not come out to be a significant variable. In future it may be more useful to consider the stages of mentoring, rather than assuming that length is linearly related to PMA. It may be that these findings are only applicable to mentoring within universities. However, as the employees in this study were involved in the operational and business functions of the university there may be some generality to the findings. Moreover, given that the antecedents in this study were either dispositional (e.g., personality) or not unique to a university sample (e.g., workload) the results may relate to other contexts. The extent to which protégés and mentors agree about the level of psychosocial support being provided in their relationship is an important factor for work outcomes. However, this study has shown that PMA is not readily achieved. While the results point to a number of situational and dispositional factors that can be used to improve PMA, further work is needed to foster a greater understanding of the antecedents and outcomes of PMA.