Model of Organizational Readiness to Implement Mentoring

Malgorzata Baran

Collegium Civitas, Management Department, Pl. Defilad 1, PKIN, Warsaw, Poland

Keywords: Formal Mentoring in Organizations, Model to Implement Mentoring, Mentoring Programs, Mentoring

Implementation Process.

Abstract: The article presents the manners in which mentoring can be used by organizations. Prior to the implementation

of mentoring programs, the organization's preparation level for implementing such programs should be

evaluated. Evaluating the organization's readiness forms part of the pre-implementation analysis, which

allows the determination of the organization's initial level of commitment to employee development and talent

retention. The proposed model of preparing the organization for implementing mentoring programs enables

management to determine the scope of human resource management changes that will be introduced. The tool

used to carry out the research takes into consideration four areas of organization management: the

organization's values and strategies; the development of the organization and its employees; setting objectives,

conducting performance appraisals and motivating employees; cooperation and relationships within the

organization. The article outlines the procedure of using the tool to carry out research, including both data

gathering and analysis. The presented tool may prove useful during the pre-implementation analysis phase in

all kinds of organizations that wish to introduce mentoring into their operations.

1 INTRODUCTION

The process of creating, distributing and processing

knowledge within organizations is of crucial

importance in the modern knowledge-based economy

(Harris, 2001). Ensuring that the organization

remains competitive in conditions of uncertainty and

volatility requires devoting more attention to human

resources than ever before. Competencies — i.e. the

knowledge, skills, attitudes and motivations of

employees — are currently the most valuable

resource that organizations have at their disposal and

are indispensable for efficient operations and growth.

Human resource management is one of the key

processes of modern organization management.

Management aimed at acquiring, developing and

retaining talent translates into more creative and

innovative teams, improved employee motivation,

engagement and efficiency. It also reinforces the

organization's culture and is an inherent component

of sustainable growth (Baran, 2015).

The human-resource-oriented approach to

management is rooted in the conviction that a diverse

workforce is a resource that may bring about concrete

benefits leading to increased efficiency (Thomas, Ely,

1996; Higgins, 2000; Baran, 2015). Formal

mentoring programs have gained increased

popularity among organizations as a very important

resource for employees development (Kram, Ragins,

2007). Mentoring programs are a tool that enable

organizations to rationally allocate their human

resources.

2 THE IMPORTANCE OF

MENTORING PROGRAMS FOR

ORGANIZATIONS

The main goal of employers today is to retain a

sufficient level of knowledge and competence within

the organization.A particularly important issue is the

ability to manage employees from different age

groups in a way that would encourage them to

become teachers to each other, therefore providing

knowledge-based and organizational support in the

workplace and a natural flow of knowledge and

experience.

Mentoring is a process in which one individual

(the mentor) is responsible for overseeing the career

and development of another individual outside of the

usual superior–subordinate relationship.The process

208

Baran, M.

Model of Organizational Readiness to Implement Mentoring.

DOI: 10.5220/0006056902080214

In Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2016) - Volume 3: KMIS, pages 208-214

ISBN: 978-989-758-203-5

involves learning, experimenting and skill

development, while the acquired competence is a

measure of its success (Collin, 1979; Clutterbuck,

2002).A mentor is an experienced individual who

grants non-linear assistance to another individual

with the aim of transforming their knowledge, work

or thinking (Megginson, Clutterbuck, 1995).

Therefore, mentoring is successfully used by many

organizations to pass on informal, hidden knowledge

by teaching effective thought patterns, decision

making and approaching complicated issues in a

practical manner (Clutterbuck, 2002).

A mentor plays an important role in this process –

that is to say a person with the right skills and

competencies that ensure the achievement of the

objectives of mentoring programs (Baran, 2016).

Mentoring is a consciously implemented process

meant to support the employees of an organization,

which creates added value for the employees

themselves (e.g. development of qualifications and

skills), as well as the company (e.g. improved

atmosphere encourages employees to become more

engaged in their work; increasing motivation

levels).Goals of mentoring in the organization may be

the following (Parsloe, 2000; Klasen, Clutterbuck,

2002; Baran, 2014):

− transfer of knowledge and experience among

employees, including so-called tacit knowledge,

− practical training of new employees and

adaptation to a new job,

− keeping the most valuable employees with the

firm,

− building relations with new persons in the

enterprise,

− carrying out a complex project,

− personal development of participants of the

mentoring process,

− preparing individuals for performing new roles

or working in new job positions in the

organization,

− carrying out a change management process in

the organization,

− talent management.

The possibility to implement the mentoring

program exists in every organization, however; what

is crucial here are rules of conduct which use

employees’ potential to the benefit of both parties –

the employers and the employees (Clutterbuck, 2004;

Ragins, 2011).The main objectives of mentoring

programs include assisting newly-employed

individuals in becoming independent and efficient

employees and adapting to the corporate

environment. Mentoring, due to the vast difference in

knowledge between the mentor and the employee,

resembles a master-student relationship. The main

aim of mentoring programs is to support the

development of employees through both career and

psychosocial functions. The programs usually include

in-work training of employees preparing them to

perform tasks in an important position, coaching, and

teaching them to handle challenges with the goal of

improving the mentees' skills and position in the

company. Individual psychosocial functions, on the

other hand, relate to the way the mentees feel about

the best patterns of behaviour, their value in the

workplace, personal dilemmas and feeling accepted

by the group. Mentoring programs may be used in a

variety of scenarios, including: when a co-worker is

promoted or their scope of responsibilities is

expanded; when an employee achieves success; when

a co-worker desires more than achievements and

promotions; and when an employee encounters

obstacles that prevent them from fulfilling their

dreams or following a desired path of development.

In other words, the aim of mentoring programs

implemented by organizations is to support selected

employees in making significant changes in the

organization (Megginson et all, 2008).

Regardless of the kind of mentoring used (formal

or informal programs) and regardless of the size and

specialization of the organization, the basic

mentoring principles remain unchanged (Kram, 1988;

Parsloe, 1992; Klasen, Clutterbuck, 2002; Holiday,

2006):

− The needs of the employees who are undergoing

mentoring are thoroughly evaluated in

cooperation with all interested parties in the

organization,

−

The employees who are undergoing mentoring

receive support when planning and executing

development plans,

− The mentor communicates well with the

mentees,

− Advice and assistance are offered to mentees

throughout the duration of the program in

accordance with their needs,

− The results and progress achieved by the

mentees are monitored by the mentor on a

regular basis,

− Feedback, both constructive and encouraging

the mentees' to take responsibility for their own

development is ensured throughout the duration

of the program,

− The mentor–mentee relationship concludes at an

appropriate time and in an appropriate manner.

Model of Organizational Readiness to Implement Mentoring

209

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

It is proven in the literature that effective mentoring

is an effective intervention in organization for

leadership succession and employees’ development

(Higgins, Kram, 2001). However, the literature of

formal mentoring has at least one identified gap.

According to the author the most attention has been

paid to mentee outcomes (Allen, 2007; Lentz, Allen,

2009; Regins, Kram, 2007; Allen, Eby, O’Brien,

Lenz, 2008), mentors’ and mutual benefits (Fletcher,

Ragins, 2007; Ramaswami, Dreher, 2007). Less

research has focused on the legitimacy for formal

mentoring programs in organizations (Baugh,

Fagenson-Eland, 2007). There is in the literature the

lack of tools that help organizations with

implementation of formal mentoring programs. That

is the reason why in 2013-2014 the author carried out

research concerning the familiarity with mentoring

and the type and scope of mentoring programmes

used on a sample of 250 polish organizations (80% of

the sample consisted of small, medium and large

companies from different regions and sectors, and

20% consisted of non-government, government,

public and private organizations). A traditional PAPI

survey was used. The research was meant to identify

the mentoring processes in companies, non-

governmental organizations and public institutions,

i.e. determining whether mentoring is used, which

organizations use it, in which areas of their operations

it is used and what are the key factors to run

mentoring programs in organizations.

The results allowed the author to draw initial

conclusions about the principles of mentoring within

organizations (because 10% of all studied

organizations had fully implemented mentoring

processes or formalized mentoring programmes). The

author then prepared a list of conditions that an

organization should meet to make mentoring possible

based on an analysis of the gathered data and

literature research. The list was then verified during 2

focus group interviews (FGIs) with 10 experts in each

group. The following experts were invited: mentors,

coordinators of mentoring programs, HR directors

and CEOs. This allowed the author to prepare a

prototype tool for verifying whether an organization

is ready to implement mentoring. The questionnaire

was divided into four areas of operations that had

been identified as crucial for introducing mentoring

processes (these are outlined in the following

chapter). Each area had 10 detailed questions

assigned to it and should be evaluated using the

answers that describe the current situation within the

organization on a Likert scale. The answers will make

it possible to calculate a score for each area, i.e.

evaluate the conditions for carrying out mentoring

processes, which will then translate into a general

score of the organization's readiness to implement

mentoring programs. The scores in the presented

model are calculated using the arithmetic mean of the

scores of the lower level. Of course there are strengths

as well as limitations of using a five point Likert scale

for evaluating the condition of the organization.

However, the Likert scale is one of the most widely

used in the measurement of this socio-economic

phenomena (Edmondson, 2005). This multi-position

scale is also focused on the measurement of hidden

phenomena in the organization (Likert, 1932).

4 PROPOSAL OF PROTOTYPE

RESEARCH TOOL USED FOR

VERIFYING THE READINESS

OF AN ORGANIZATION TO

IMPLEMENT MENTORING

The implementation of mentoring programmes in an

organization should begin with verifying the

organizational readiness to introduce mentoring. The

aim of the research is to outline the organization's

preparation for the introduction of mentoring in a

detailed manner. The tool for determining the

readiness of organizations to implement mentoring

programmes outlines the boundary conditions that

must be met for an organization to be considered

ready to operate based on a mentoring system. The

scope of the conditions that need to be met before an

organization is ready to implement mentoring was

determined based on the opinions of experts and

insights into institutions that successfully use

mentoring programs.

The results of the analysis should form the basis

upon which organizations decide whether or not to

implement mentoring, or if they should undertake

further preparations allowing them to introduce

mentoring in the future.

The proposed tool features a questionnaire

making it possible to grade four areas of

organizations that are crucial to human resource and

talent management, that affect the growth of

developmental relationships, such as: values and

strategies; development of the organization and its

employees; setting objectives, conducting

performance appraisals and motivating employees;

and cooperation and relationships within the

organization (Table 1).

KMIS 2016 - 8th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing

210

Table 1: Areas of an organization's operations that are key

for carrying out mentoring processes.

Values and

strategies

The organization's values and strategy;

professional identity and sense of

organizational competence; the

organizational structure; the principles

of employee appraisal and selection

from the perspective of the

organization's general objectives; the

principles of selecting prospective

employees (Ragins, Cotton, 1991;

Kram, 1988; Eby, 1997)

Development

of the

organization

and its

employees

The principles of developing employee

competence levels; planning

development and promotion paths; the

available types of employee training;

carrier progress; professional

development programs - carrier

development (Zey, 1984; Kram, 1983;

Fagenson, 1989).

Setting

objectives,

conducting

performance

appraisals and

motivating

employees

Management by objectives; managing

the results of the employees' work;

functioning of the bonuses and awards

system for the best employees;

managing talent within the organization

(Whitely, Dougherty, Dreher, 1991;

Fagenson, 1989; Roche, 1979).

Cooperation

and

relationships

within the

organization

The mechanisms describing inter-

employee relationships; the

organization's culture of fostering

cooperation; transfer of knowledge and

experience in the organization;

effective system of communications;

growth of developmental relationships,

developmental networks (Aryee, Chay,

Chew, 1996; Ragins, Cotton, 1991;

Thomas, 1993; Higgins, Kram, 2001).

Each of the four areas was divided into detailed

indicators, which are measured using the answers

given to the questions (see Table 2 below). The

researcher may assign one of five available answers,

based on a Likert scale (1 to 5), to each question. The

following answer labels are used in the research

process:1 – Strongly disagree; 2 – Disagree; 3 –

Neither agree nor disagree; 4 – Agree; 5 – Strongly

agree. If a situation outlined in the questions does not

apply to the organization that is being analyzed, the

respondents should mark answer 1, i.e. strongly

disagree. If the situation fully applies to the

organization, they should mark answer 5, i.e. strongly

agree.

Table 2: Questionnaire used to verify the readiness of an

organization to implement mentoring.

Questionnaire of organizational readiness to

implement mentoring

Answer

Areas of an organization's operations

Labels:

1 - 5

VALUES AND STRATEGIES

The organization has a set of clearly defined

values

The organization has a defined strategy of

human resources management / personnel policy

The organization implements its strategy of

human resources management / personnel policy

The organization is open to change, actively

seeks ways of improving its operations and

implements them

Employees are encouraged to suggest and

implement improvements within the scope of

their position

Each employee has their individual

professional development plan/ career path

There is a unit/individual responsible for

executing the following tasks within the

organization: selection and recruitment of

candidates, analysis of training needs and

supervising employee development, employee

motivation, periodic appraisal, etc. (the so-called

“soft HRM”)

8 The organization has motivational schemes

The organization actively manages knowledge

(e.g. by undertaking actions meant to facilitate

development, to share knowledge and to retain

knowledge within the organization)

The organization identifies and prepares

individuals who will fill key positions in the

future (succession planning)

ORGANIZATIONAL AND EMPLOYEES’

DEVELOPMENT

The organization recognizes the importance of

training and professional development of its

employees. The organization believes that

training and development are necessary, as the

employees' qualifications are the key to

achieving its strategic objectives

The organization had adopted an approach to

explore training needs and to satisfy them

The organization has a system of evaluating

the efficiency of measures related to the

professional development of employees

The organization manages the competences of

its employees, e.g. it has implemented a

competency-based model

Model of Organizational Readiness to Implement Mentoring

211

Table 2: Questionnaire used to verify the readiness of an

organization to implement mentoring (cont.).

Questionnaire of organizational readiness to

implement mentoring

Answer

Areas of an organization's operations

Labels:

1 - 5

ORGANIZATIONAL AND EMPLOYEES’

DEVELOPMENT

The necessary key skills are well known and

sought after by the organization

All employees are encouraged to develop their

skills as much as possible

Employee performance management makes it

easier to identify employees' strengths and areas

for potential development

Professional development activities encom-

ass a variety of training techniques, including

learning methods, internal and external

development methods, on-the-job training

The organisation provides training based on

the experience of employees with excellent

performance

The organization tries to learn from its

mistakes – even when an employee makes a

mistake, he or she is not criticized for it. The

focus is on learning from one's mistakes and

avoiding them in the future.

SETTING OBJECTIVES, MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES

The organization applies a system of setting

goals and assessing their achievement (e.g. a

system of periodic performance appraisal)

Employee performance management is part of

the organization's operation.

Employees are involved in achieving their own

professional goals

Recognizing achievements translates into

acquiring, developing and retaining talent

Employees are able to associate their tasks

with the organization’s objectives

Employees see their duties as crucial for the

organization’s success

The results achieved by employees are

assessed in the context of the agreed standards

and objectives

Employees receive from their superiors

constructive and timely feedback on their own

performance and effectiveness

The organization has a system that enables to

reward and appreciate its best employees

The reward system in the organization motiva-

tes employees to adopt desired behaviours

Table 2: Questionnaire used to verify the readiness of an

organization to implement mentoring (cont.).

Questionnaire of organizational readiness to

implement mentoring

Answer

Areas of an organization's operations

Labels:

1 - 5

COOPERATION AND RELATIONSHIPS

Teamwork is important within the

organization

An atmosphere of mutual support is present

within the organization - employees are ready to

help each other

Executives supports the sharing of knowledge

between employees in the organization

As a rule, employees are treated fairly

Relations between management and

employees of the organization are positive

Members of senior management are available

to employees

The organization puts emphasis on each

problem solving

The employee is encouraged to take more and

more responsible actions within the organization

Communication in the organization is open

and sincere

Communication in the organization is

effective. Employees and teams actively

exchange information

Below you will find the interpretation of all the

possible results of research into an organization's

readiness to implement mentoring on a general level:

1 - The organization is definitely unprepared to

implement mentoring

2 - The organization has a low level of

preparation for implementing mentoring

3 - The organization is moderately prepared to

implement mentoring

4 - The organization is highly prepared to

implement mentoring

5 - The organization is ready to implement

mentoring

Therefore, for an organization to be considered

ready for implementing mentoring, it should have, on

the one hand, a general score of 4 or 5 and scores of

4 or 5 in each of the analyzed areas. Low scores (1 or

2) are a definite indication of the organization's

unpreparedness for implementing mentoring. On the

other hand, organizations with a general score of 3 are

only partially prepared (i.e. moderately prepared) for

KMIS 2016 - 8th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing

212

implementing mentoring. Such organizations will

require a longer implementation phase and a wider

array of preparatory measures before mentoring

programs are set up.

5 IMPLEMENTATION

RECOMMENDATIONS

The next phase of the implementation process, in the

case of organizations that prove ready (through

research) to implement the mentoring process (and

then formalize it as mentoring programs), will

involve holding conversations with senior

management and providing recommendation of

further action. The mentoring process and mentoring

programs are usually initiated by the management,

HR departments, and the tasks associated with

mentoring are usually assigned to the most

experienced employees who are willing to take on the

additional duties. The mentoring relationship focuses

mainly on achieving the personal and professional

development goals of the mentee, convergent with the

objectives of the organization, which should be

evaluated by the organization.

Below are the recommendations for further steps

on the path to implementing mentoring:

1. Determining the benefits that implementing

mentoring will bring, including: estimating the

expected benefits for the organization, the

mentors and the mentees; determining the

timeframe in which the benefits should become

apparent; predicting the obstacles that may

hamper the implementation and usage of

mentoring.

2. Determining the tasks of senior and middle

management and the HR department in the

mentoring process (engagement and support;

coordination and supervision; monitoring of the

process and the procedures used; evaluation;

informational and promotional activities).

3. Planning the mentoring process implementation

schedule (i.e. selecting mentors; selecting

mentees; pairing mentors and mentees; the

mentoring process plan – duration, number of

sessions, training, advice, evaluation).

4. Evaluating the mentoring process in the

organization. Determining how the organization

will measure the effectiveness of mentoring.

Planning specific indicators.

5. Estimating the costs that implementing

mentoring will bring (including the expenses

and time needed to train mentors; the time used

for mentoring meetings; the time of the

individual responsible for overseeing the

process, including managing the program;

analyzing results; taking corrective steps if

necessary; engaging members of management).

6 CONCLUSIONS

The presented model for evaluating the readiness of

an organization to implement mentoring is a a useful

tool in all kinds of organizations. This tool allows the

organization to verify the basic areas of human

resource management, including talent management.

It is also the first step on the path to implementation

of formal mentoring programs into the organization's

structure. The mentoring literature has indicated that

formal mentoring programs continue to be of need

and interest to organizations (Matarazzo, Finkelstein,

2015). Nowadays, more and more organizations

implement mentoring processes, especially formal

mentoring programs as an attempt to obtain

organizational development. Some research is

focused on the benefits of well-run mentoring

programs. But there has been very little empirical

research recently to guide the development of

mentoring programs in organization (Allen,

Finkelstein, Poteet, 2011). There is a need for more

research on best practices for formal mentoring

programs in different types of organization, how to

implement such a program, what makes it work, what

are the success factors, etc. This topic will be

explored based on the current author’s research into

the usage of mentoring programs by organizations.

The result of this research will be published by the

author next year.

REFERENCES

Allen, T. D., 2007. Mentoring Relationships From the

Perspective of the Mentor. In B. R. Ragins, K. E. Kram

(Eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory,

Research, and Practice , Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.

123-147.

Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., O’Brien, K. E., Lentz, E., 2008.

The state of mentoring research: a qualitative review of

current research methods and future research

implications. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 73, pp.

343-357.

Allen, T. D., Finkelstein, L. M., Poteet, M. L., 2011.

Designing workplace mentoring programs: An

evidence-based approach, John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1-

10.

Model of Organizational Readiness to Implement Mentoring

213

Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W., Chew, J., 1996. The motivation to

mentor among managerial employees: An interactionist

approach, Group & Organization Management, Vol.

21, pp. 216-277.

Baugh, S. G., Fagenson-Eland, E. A., 2007. Formal

mentoring programs: a poor cousin to informal

relationships? In B. R. Ragins, K. E. Kram (Eds.), The

Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research,

and Practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 249-271.

Baran, M., 2015. Mentoring jako element zarządzania

różnorodnością w przedsiębiorstwie, Management

Forum, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 3-8.

Baran, M., 2014. Mutual mentoring as a tool for managing

employees of different generations in the enterprise,

Journal of Positive Management, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 20-

29.

Baran, M., 2016. Profil kompetencyjny profesjonalnego

mentora, Nauki o Zarządzaniu. Management Studies,

2(27), pp. 22-32.

Clutterbuck, D., 2002. Każdy potrzebuje mentora. Jak

kierować talentami, Wydawnictwo PETIT, Warszawa,

p. 13.

Collin A., 1979. Notes on some typologies of management

development and the role of the mentor in the process

of adaptation of the individual to the organization,

Personnel Review, Vol. 8, No.1.

Eby, L. T., 1997. Alternative forms of mentoring in

changing organizational environments: A conceptual

extension of the mentoring literature, Journal of

Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 51, pp. 125-144.

Edmondson, D. R., 2005. Likert scales – history, Charm

Magazine, 45, pp. 127-133.

Fagenson, E. A., 1989. The mentor advantage: perceived

career/job experiences of proteges versus non-

proteges, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, VO. 10,

pp. 309-320.

Fletcher, J. K., Ragins, B. R., 2007. Stone centre relational

cultural theory: A window on relational mentoring. In

B. R. Ragins, K. E. Kram (Eds.), The Handbook of

Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice,

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 373-399.

Higgins, M. C., Kram, K. E., 2001. Reconceptualizing

Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network

Perspective, Academy of Management Review, Vol.

26, No. 2, pp. 264-288.

Harris, R. G., 2001. The knowledge based economy:

intellectual origins and new economic perspectives.

International journal of management reviews, 3(1), 21-

40.

Higgins, M. C., 2000. The more, the merrier? Multiple

developmental relationships and work satisfaction,

Journal of Management Development, Vol. 19 Issue: 4,

pp. 277 - 296.

Holiday, M., 2006. Coaching, mentoring i zarządzanie. Jak

rozwiązywać problemy i budować zespół,

Wydawnictwo HELION, Gliwice, p. 122.

Klasen, N., Clutterbuck, D., 2002. Implementing Mentoring

Schemes. A practical guide to successful programs,

Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, London & New

York, pp. 49-54.

Kram, K. E., 1983. Phases on the mentor relationship,

Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26, pp. 608-

625.

Kram, K. E., 1988. Mentoring at work. Developmental

Relationships in Organizational Life, University Press

of America, New York.

Kram, K. E., Ragins, B. R., 2007. The landscape of

mentoring in the 21

century. In B. R. Ragins, K. E.

Kram (Eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work:

Theory, Research, and Practice, Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage, pp. 427-446.

Lenz, E., Allen, T. D., 2009.The Role of Mentoring Others

in the Career Plateauing Phenomenon , Group &

Organization Management, 34, pp. 358-384.

Likert, R., 1932, A technique for the measurement of

attitudes, Archives of Psychology, vol. 140, pp. 5-55.

Matarazzo, K. L., Finkelstein, L. M., 2015. Formal

mentorships: examining objective-setting, event

participation and experience, Journal of Managerial

Psychology, No. 30, pp. 675-691.

Megginson, D., Clutterbuck, D., 1995. Mentoring in Action,

Wyd. I, Kogan Page, London, p. 13.

Megginson, D., Clutterbuck, D., Garvey, B., Stokes, P.,

Garrett-Harriss, R., 2008. Mentoring w działaniu.

Przewodnik praktyczny, Dom Wydawniczy REBIS,

Poznań, pp. 17-18.

Parsloe E., 1992, Coaching. Mentoring and Assessing: A

Practical Guide to Developing Competence, Kogan

Page, London, pp. 3-5.

Parsloe, E., 2000. Coaching i mentoring, Petit, Warszawa,

pp. 45-47.

Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L., 1991. Easier said than done:

Gender differences in perceived barriers to gaining a

mentor, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, pp.

939-951.

Ragins, B. R., Kram, K. E., 2007. The roots and meaning

of mentoring. In B. R. Ragins, K. E. Kram (Eds.), The

Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research,

and Practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 3-15.

Ramaswami, A., Dreher, G. F., 2007. The benefits

associated with workplace mentoring relationships. In

T. D. Allen, L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook

of Mentoring: A Multiple Perspectives Approach,

Malden, MA Blackwell Publishing, pp. 211-230.

Roche, G. R., 1979. Much ado about mentors, Harvard

Business Review, 57(1), pp. 17-28.

Thomas, D. A., 1993. Racial dynamics in cross-race

developmental relationships, Administrative Science

Quarterly, 38, pp. 169-194.

Thomas, D. A., Ely, R. J., 1996. Making differences matter:

a new perspective for managing diversity, Harvard

Business Review, Sept.-Oct., pp. 79-91.

Whitely, W., Dougherty, T. W., Dreher, G. F., 1991.

Relationship of career mentoring and socioeconomic

origin to managers’ and professionals’ early career

progress, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34,

pp. 331-351.

Zey, M., 1984. The mentor connection, Homewood, II,

Dow Jones-Irwin.

KMIS 2016 - 8th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing

214