چه تمایلاتی بر آینده مشاور تاثیر می گذارد؟بررسی سبک های دلبستگی و تجربه های مشاوره
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|8427||2009||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||7310 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 74, Issue 3, June 2009, Pages 245–256
This study examined the influence of attachment styles and mentoring experiences on willingness to mentor in the future in a formal mentoring program in China. For both mentors and protégés, avoidance and anxiety dimensions of attachment styles and their interaction had a significant influence on willingness to mentor in the future. Mentoring experiences explained unique variance in willingness to mentor beyond attachment styles. Crossover analysis of matched mentor–protégé pairs showed that mentoring functions fully mediated the mentor avoidance – protégé willingness to mentor relationship. The interaction between protégé avoidance and anxiety was directly related to mentor willingness to mentor in the future. Directions for research and implications for managerial practice are provided.
Mentoring has been widely recognized as providing protégés with benefits including increased compensation, promotional opportunities, and career satisfaction (e.g., Noe et al., 2002 and Underhill, 2006). For mentoring relationships to be successful, mentors must be willing to invest time and energy sharing their experiences and providing career and psychosocial support to protégés (Kram, 1985). However, many individuals feel uncomfortable assuming the role of the mentor (Allen, 2003). Understanding the factors that influence formal mentoring program participants’ willingness to mentor in the future is critical for ensuring program viability (Allen, Poteet, Russell et al., 1997 and Ragins et al., 2000). This study makes two contributions to the literature. First, it examines how attachment styles, individual differences based on attachment theory, and mentoring experiences, particularly those that occur within the context of a formal mentoring program, influence individuals’ willingness to mentor in the future. Attachment theory can help us gain insight into how the significant interpersonal relationships mentors and protégés have experienced in their lives help shape their reactions to and how they approach mentoring relationships in an organizational context (see Bravo and Yuan, 2006 and Wang et al., 2003). Second, this study helps us understand the generalizability of Western mentoring theory and research to Chinese mentoring relationships. Although China is the largest transitional economy in the world and mentoring relationships in the Chinese workplace are more prevalent than in the Anglo-Saxon setting (Bozionelos & Wang, 2006), this is one of only a few mentoring studies using a Chinese sample (Aryee et al., 1999 and Bozionelos and Wang, 2006). Cultural factors such as collectivism and power distance likely have a different influence on mentoring relationships in China compared to Western cultures. We would expect that compared to more individualistic Western cultures such as the US, the influence of individual difference variables such as attachment styles are constrained in China’s highly collectivistic culture (Hofstede, 1993 and Mischel, 1977). Also, individuals’ motivation and willingness to mentor may be even more important in China’s high power-distance culture compared to Western cultures because protégés are expected to be loyal and obedient (Louie, 1980).
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The relationship between mentor and protégé attachment styles and willingness to mentor in the future were generally consistent with attachment theory. As expected, regardless of whether they were in the mentor or protégé role, highly avoidant and highly anxious individuals were less willing to mentor in the future. This suggests that individuals who have negative views of either self or others are less likely to feel comfortable mentoring others. Consistently, mentors and protégés with a secure attachment style (low avoidance–low anxiety) expressed greater willingness to mentor in the future compared to mentors and protégés with a fearful attachment style (high anxiety–high avoidance). High anxiety–high avoidance, high anxiety–low avoidance, and low anxiety–high avoidance mentors were less willing to assume a future mentoring role compared to secure mentors. Contrary to our hypothesis, low avoidance–low anxiety protégés were not significantly more willing to mentor in the future than low avoidance–high anxiety or high avoidance–low anxiety protégés. Because of the inherent inconsistency in the nature of the anxiety dimension, it was not surprising to see the different results for mentors and protégés because they assumed different roles in mentoring relationships. It is also possible that both views of self and others related to anxiety and avoidance may be more important to experienced mentors than protégés as they evaluate whether they would like to mentor others. An examination of the data showed that the majority of the protégés in our sample (86.2%) had never served as a mentor. Moreover, the attribute of the liking of closeness in the anxiety dimension, rather than concern for rejection, may be more salient to protégés. This might be the case especially in the Chinese culture which emphasizes respect for individuals with higher social status. The crossover analysis showed that avoidant mentors are less likely to provide mentoring functions to their protégés which in turn is positively related to protégé willingness to serve as a mentor in the future. However, protégé attachment styles did not affect mentor relationship satisfaction and the interaction of protégé avoidance and anxiety was directly related to mentor willingness to mentor in the future. Supporting previous research we found that characteristics of mentoring experiences (mentors’ relationship satisfaction and protégés’ perception of the extent of mentoring functions received) explained incremental variance in willingness to mentor in the future beyond that explained by attachment styles. Furthermore, time spent in the mentoring relationship was positively related to protégés’ willingness to mentor in the future. However, the more time mentors spent in the relationship the less willing they were to serve as a mentor in the future. Mentors who feel they have already spent considerable amount of time in a mentoring relationship may be less willing to mentor again because they believe the benefits they receive are not commensurate with the time spent in the relationship, or they feel they have fulfilled their mentoring responsibility (cf. Allen, Poteet, & Burroughs, 1997). Mentor supervisory status was unrelated to the mentoring functions received by the protégé, consistent with Lankau and Scandura’s (2002) results. This may be because in a high power-distance culture found in China the appointment of senior employees as mentors formalized the higher- versus lower-status relationship between the mentor and the protégé regardless of whether the mentor was the protégé’s supervisor. Also, the mentor supervisory status is unrelated to protégé willingness to mentor in the future directly or indirectly via mentoring functions received. 5.1. Practical implications Although individuals’ willingness to mentor is related to their attachment styles their orientation toward relationships that occur in specific contexts, e.g., formal mentoring relationships that occur at work, might deviate from the predictions of the general attachment model if certain contextual factors are present (Collins & Read, 1994). To foster a more positive view of self and reduce anxiety levels related to serving in a mentoring role, organizations need to help enhance mentors’ status by recognizing outstanding mentors and the contributions mentoring makes to the organization. It may also be helpful to train potential mentors to spend sufficient time with protégés as well as how to provide mentoring functions (such as serving as a valuable resource for developmental assignments). Mentor training may be especially useful for encouraging avoidant mentors to be more conscientious in fulfilling the mentor’s role despite their predisposition to distance themselves from others. Finally, the significant relationship between time spent in mentoring and willing to mentor in the future suggests that both mentor and protégé perspectives and expectations of time demands need to be considered when choosing mandatory program activities and setting goals or requirements for contact time to ensure that mentors do not feel overburdened. 5.2. Limitations and future research There are several limitations of this study. The independent and dependent variables for both the mentor and protégé samples were collected on a questionnaire at one point in time, increasing the chances that common method variance may explain the significant results and limiting the causal inferences about the relationships tested. Several steps were taken in the survey design and administration to lessen the potential threat of common method bias such as conducting pilot tests to refine the survey questions and reduce item ambiguity that could cause common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Statistical analysis also found that common method variance had little or no effect on the study results. Nevertheless, future research should consider using a combination of different methods (interviews, surveys), collecting data at different points of time, and measuring actual future mentoring behavior rather than intentions or willingness to mentor. Most of the study hypotheses were supported, suggesting that Western-culture-based mentoring research results and attachment theory are generalizable to the Chinese culture. However, more research of formal mentoring relationships in China and other non-Western countries is needed, especially in countries considered to be emerging economies where mentoring will play an important role in socializing new employees and developing managerial talent.