مشاوره و رهبری تحولی: نقش مشاوره شغلی نظارتی

Leaders may need to serve as mentors to activate transformational leadership and promote positive work attitudes and career expectations of followers. To test this premise, incremental effects of transformational leadership and mentoring over each other were examined using N=275 employed MBAs. Respondents with supervisory mentors reported receiving higher levels of career mentoring than respondents with non-supervisory mentors. Supervisory career mentoring (SCM) and transformational leadership had incremental effects over each other for job satisfaction. SCM had mediating effects over transformational leadership for organizational commitment and career expectations. Career mentoring by non-supervisory mentors was not associated with career expectations but there were incremental effects with idealized influence and inspirational motivation for job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Implications for the changing role of mentorship in organizations are discussed.

Transformational leadership is performance-oriented (Bass, 1985) while mentoring is development-oriented (Burke, McKenna, & McKeen, 1991). When a supervisor provides mentoring, the relationship affects the protégé's skill development and intentions to remain with the employer (Fagenson-Eland, Marks, & Amendola, 1997). While supervisory mentors are often in the best position to have frequent interactions with protégés (Ragins & McFarlin, 1990), very little research on mentoring has examined supervisor's leadership style in relation to mentoring (McManus & Russell, 1997). The benefits that protégés report when they receive mentoring and transformational leadership may vary between supervisory and non-supervisory mentors. Research is needed that more closely examines how mentoring might complement leadership and the resulting effects on work attitudes. Transformational leadership pursues organizational goals by focusing on follower motivation (Burns, 1978). Transformational leaders reinforce the competencies and skills that keep the organization competitive. Through transformational leadership, supervisors communicate a vision that motivates employees to exert extra effort (Bass, 1990). Such leaders also show personalized attention that links individual and collective interests resulting in commitment to the vision (Hambrick, 1989). When the supervisor is seen as a mentor a transformational process may be present. Scandura and Schriesheim (1994, p. 1589) conceptualized supervisory career mentoring (SCM) as “…a transformational activity involving a mutual commitment by mentor and protégé to the latter's long-term development, as a personal, extraorganizational investment in the protégé by the mentor, and as the changing of the protégé by the mentor, accomplished by the sharing of values, knowledge, experience, and so forth.” Thus, in the same way that organizational context influences the emergence of transformational leadership (Pawar & Eastman, 1997), the presence of transformational leadership might create a relational context in which a mentoring relationship can flourish. Bass (1985) suggests that “…some situations bring out the mentoring in superiors and their attention to the development of their protégés” (p .94) and acknowledges that mentoring may be present in some superior–subordinate relationships. The purpose of this paper is to extend previous research that examines how aspects of leadership and mentoring provide complementary approaches to the study of supervisor–subordinate relationships. Scandura and Schriesheim (1994) discussed the literature on transformational and transactional leadership as the basis for integrating the Leader–member exchange (LMX) approach with mentoring and found that LMX and mentoring accounted for meaningful variance over the other for career outcomes. McManus and Russell (1997) suggest that in-group status (attained in high quality LMX relationships) might be a prerequisite for subordinates to receive mentoring. They suggest that the discrimination between LMX and mentoring might depend on the perspective (subordinate or supervisor), whether the mentor is also the supervisor, and the dimensions of mentoring examined. We therefore examine (1) the incremental effects that SCM (the immediate supervisor is the mentor) and transformational leadership have over each other in predicting work attitudes and career expectations and (2) the incremental effects that non-supervisory career mentoring (the mentor is not the immediate supervisor) and transformational leadership might have over each other in predicting work attitudes and career expectations. This research addresses a gap in the mentoring literature by examining the role of transformational leadership from the perspective of the protégé when the supervisor is also the mentor. The effects of non-supervisory mentoring and transformational leadership are also examined. 1.1. Transformational leaders as mentors Supervisory career mentoring (SCM) has been conceptualized as a transformational process in which the commitment of the mentor to the protégé's development results in extraorganizational investment (Scandura & Schriesheim, 1994). Employee socialization and career development may be enhanced when supervisors fulfill the mentor role. Transformational leadership and SCM are conceptually distinct but interrelate in ways that might advance our understanding of mentoring. Thibodeaux and Lowe (1996) reported convergence of in-group LMX relationships and mentoring. In his discussion of transformational leadership, Bass (1985) recognized the importance of mentoring. As a trusted counselor, the mentor uses his/her advanced knowledge and experience to develop the protégé as a competent professional. Bass (1990) noted that mentors play a critical role in the development of junior organizational members and suggested that supervisors could serve as mentors for subordinates. Supervisor–subordinate relationships might be viewed as opportunities for employee development with an emphasis on what can be learned on the job (Lankau & Scandura, 2002). Sosik and Godshalk (2000) reported that supervisor transformational leadership behavior was more positively related to mentoring than transactional leadership behavior. Godshalk and Sosik (2000) suggest that the emotional attachment of followers to transformational leaders might facilitate the development of mentoring relationships (Godshalk & Sosik, 2000). Despite these suggested linkages, no research to date has examined the incremental effects of mentoring and transformational leadership over each other by supervisory or non-supervisory mentors. The transformational leadership and mentoring approaches contain similar concepts and affect outcomes such as career mobility, performance, commitment, and satisfaction (Bass, 1990; Dreher & Ash, 1990). Therefore, incorporating mentoring research into studies of leadership might provide a more complete explanation of the relationships between transformational leaders and subordinates. Research in both areas reveals that certain aspects of the relationships that supervisors develop with direct reports develop the junior person's confidence, build trust, and create a climate for increased performance and positive work attitudes (Bass, 1990; Kram, 1996). Leadership and mentoring both essentially involve relationships between senior and junior persons in organizations (McManus & Russell, 1997; Scandura & Schriesheim, 1994). When the supervisor assumes the mentor role, a special form of work relationship may evolve. Career mentoring involves vocational support on the part of the mentor in the form of sponsorship, protection, challenging assignments, exposure, and visibility. As noted by Graen and Scandura (1987), high quality relationships between supervisors and subordinates may evolve into mentoring relationships. In the relationships between transformational leaders and subordinates, the processes described in Bass' (1985) transformational leadership theory may activate SCM. Bass views transformational leader–member relationships as those that go beyond the transactional formal employment contract. These relationships intellectually challenge the member and result in extra effort beyond expectations. More personal attention should be present when the leader is also considered to be a mentor. Thus, transformational leadership and SCM may emerge concomitantly.

Despite these limitations, we did find that career mentoring might add to our explanation of work attitudes over transformational leadership. The mentoring roles of supervisors should continue to be incorporated into studies of leadership. Supervisory career mentoring (SCM) was related to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and career expectations beyond transformational leadership. Other important issues include the role that moderator variables might play in the relationships between transformational leadership, mentoring, and outcomes. For example, negative climate within the organization may result in poor morale. This might limit the degree to which mentoring has an incremental effect on transformational leadership in affecting work outcomes. Human resource departments in organizations are interested in developing both leadership and mentoring skills in managers. Future research should focus on the possibility of training supervisors in both transformational leadership and mentoring to improve work attitudes and performance outcomes. The benefits derived from mentoring have sparked increasing interest in the use of formal mentoring programs to facilitate employee development (Noe, 1988; Ragins, Cotton, & Miller, 2000). Many organizations believe that training leaders to engage in coaching and mentoring will improve attitudes and productivity of workers; future research might examine the extent to which leaders who received mentoring are seen as more transformational by their followers. In the leadership arena, Bass and his colleagues have developed programs that train leaders to be more transformational to increase organizational and individual outcomes (Bass, 1997). Hence, both mentoring and transformational leadership appear to be of interest to practitioners. Integrating the two concepts may provide more effective leadership training. Organizations may thus need to sponsor training that facilitates the development of leaders who are both transformational leaders and capable mentors.