A Conceptual Framework of Mentoring on Career Success

Transcription

1 A Conceptual Framework of Mentoring on Career Success A. Seema Assistant Professor HR & OB Division, VIT Business School VIT University, Vellore Tamil Nadu, India Dr. S. Sujatha Associate Professor HR & OB Division, VIT Business School VIT University, Vellore Tamil Nadu, India ABSTRACT One of the most researched topics today is mentoring. The main purpose of the study is to examine the relationship between - roles of formal and informal mentoring on career success of an employee. To put it in simple terms, the ability of mentors either informally or formally to implement the mentoring program activities that lead to higher individuals psychosocial support and career development. Through centuries, traditional mentoring has been playing an important role in providing the support from senior person to a junior person for his or her objective and subjective career success. This is a conceptual paper that is proposed to cover the concepts of mentoring, types of mentoring, benefits of mentoring, career success concepts, types of career success and also helps in highlighting how mentoring have positive impact on predictors in the career success of objective and subjective. KEY WORDS: Formal and Informal Mentoring, Objective and Subjective Career success INTRODUCTION: A career is a series of jobs an individual holds during one s work life (Feldman, 1996). While success in one s career is a natural expectation of individuals, the nature of that success depends on what one expects from it. Indeed each and every individual have different definitions of career success based on their assessment of their career prospects (Ebadan & Winstanley, 1997). Since 1980 s, many researchers have been showing interest towards career success in the organizational management literature. According to Seibert & Kraimer (2001), career success as the accumulated positive and good work and psychological outcomes (such as achievement, high salary and so on) resulting from individual work experiences. It improves individuals quantity or quality of life, in fact, career success also is the perceived achievements, satisfaction and growth which came from the result of individual work experiences. Career success refers to objective and subjective elements of achievement and progress of an individual through the vocational lifespan (Judge et al., 1995; Nabi, 1999; Ng et al., 2005). Objective career success has been measured in terms of extrinsic measures, such as salary and occupational status (Kuijpers et al., 2006). Subjective career success has been measured in terms of an individual's perception of career actualization success (Aryee et al., 1994; Kuijpers et al., 2006). Career success is very much essential and meaningful to both individuals and their organizations. From the employees point of view, career success can be defined as not only source of power, happiness and satisfaction but also acquisition of materialistic advancement (Gattiker & Larwood, 1990, 1988; Judge et al., 1995; Poole et al., 1991). Thus, employees those who benefit out of IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 13

2 career success feel happier and more successful, using their own internal standards than those who do not benefited. Researchers have become more interested in the topic of mentoring throughout the past few decades. The importance of mentoring and its benefits to the protégé as well as the organization have been highlighted by the past researchers (Joiner, Bartram. & Garrefa, Sept, 2004; Dansky, 1996; Broadbridge, 1999; MacGregor, 2000). A mentoring relationship refers to a dyadic relationship between a more experienced member (senior) of the organization and with a less experienced individual (junior). A mentor provides support to a mentee and acts as a role model and is important for organizational development. Mentoring relationships are broadly classified into two categories of activities: career functions and psychosocial functions (Kram, 1983; Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee, 1978). Mentoring relates to workplace learning and leadership principles in career development and psychosocial support. As a result, it may lead to increased individuals advancement with respect to career development and psychosocial support (Ragins et al., 2000; Hegstad & Wentling, 2005; Turban et al., 2002). Consequently, it might improve the individuals advancement, especially in career development and psychosocial support (Allen & Eby, 2004; Hegstad & Wentling, 2005; Young et al., 2006). REVIEW OF LITERATURE: Mentoring has attracted a great deal of interest in academic as well as practitioner communities. The advantages of having a mentor have received greater attention (Fagenson, 1989; Godshalk and Sosik, 2003; Higgins, 2001; Hunt and Michael, 1983; Lankau and Scandura, 2002; Scandura and Williams, 2001). Studies show that employees with a mentor have more promotions, earn higher incomes, and develop work satisfaction than employees without a mentor (Baugh and Scandura, 1999; Dreher and Ash, 1990; Ragins et al., 2000; Scandura, 1992; Scandura and Schriesheim, 1994; Turban and Dougherty, 1994; Whitely and Coetsier, 1993). Understanding the term Mentoring: "A relationship between two people in which the person with greater rank, experience, and/or expertise teaches, counsels, guides and helps the other to develop both professionally and personally" (Alleman & Clarke, 2002, p. 4). TYPES OF MENTORING: The classification of mentoring has been into two types a) Formal or Career development/functions b) Informal Mentoring or Psychosocial functions. Formal mentoring programs are frequently encouraged by organization. The mentor mentee relation is decided by personnel chosen by the organization. The relationship exists from six months to one year. There is a contract signed by the dyads that usually decides the frequency of meet between them. This relationship is helpful in achieving short-term goals applicable to the mentee s present position (Geiger-DuMond & Boyle, 1995; Murray, 1991). Noe (1988), in his work mentions that organizations put into practice formal mentoring programs to benefit from developmental aspects of such relationships. The formal mentoring programs are mainly focused on training, employee socialization, personal and professional development, sponsorship or visibility/exposure than on, inner-oriented psychosocial developmental functions (Kram, 1985, Noe, 1988; Fagan & Ayers, 1985; Shelton. 1982; Wilbur, 1987; Leibowit/, Farren. & Kaye. 1986; London & Mone, 1987). Informal form of mentoring is the olden form where the mentor chooses a mentee whom he can relate with and the mentor is in turn the role model for the mentee. As the relationship depends on the mutual consent between both the parties, which is satisfactory to both and is characterized by closeness. The mentee receives guidance, support, sponsorship etc and the mentor develops a sense of satisfaction and recognition from the organization (Levinson et al., 1978). The mentor provides more psychosocial support and the relationship lasts for a longer duration of time (Kram, 1995) and is often unstructured. (Noe. R, 1997) referencing the works of Phillips-Jones (1983) states that the most of the mentoring relationships are informal as it is developed due to admiration, shared interests, or job demands that require the skills of two or more persons. Whitely, Dougherty & Dreter, (1992) terms it IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 14

3 as classical mentoring, in which the mentoring relationship is for a longer duration, mostly limited, and in which a mentee receives a variety of career-oriented and psychosocial help a one senior manager. Informal mentoring was often implemented by means of individual discussions (i.e., seeking advice, personal meetings and gatherings) after office hours inside and/or outside the workplace. Kram (1983), is one of the pioneers in the research of mentoring he has been credited with doing the most detailed work on the mentoring process. She identified various functions of mentoring process and categorized them as a) Developmental functions. Developmental/ Career functions includes career advancement of the mentee like sponsorship, coaching, protection and providing challenging assignments (Noe, 1997). b) Psychosocial functions. Psychosocial functions include the activities needed to balance work and social/family life. These functions include being a role model to the mentee, acceptance, counseling and friendship. (Noe, 1997). Scandura & Ragins (1993), in their work categorized the area of role modeling as a third function different from psychosocial support. This research mainly focuses to study only the first two aspects of mentoring, 1. Formal mentoring (as Career and Professional development) and 2. Informal mentoring (as Emotional and psychological support) with the career success (Objective and Subjective). BENEFITS OF MENTORING: One of the many benefits of mentoring is the increased job satisfaction for mentees (Allen et al., 2004; Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng, & Dubois, 2008; Scandura, 1992; Underhill, 2006). However, researchers have reported that mentoring affect career success of the mentee in a positive manner (Allen & Eby, 2007; Ragins & Kram, 2007). It has been found that individuals with mentors report more positive career outcomes than non mentored individuals (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lenz, & Lima, 2004; Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng, & Dubois, 2008; Kammeyer-Mueller & Judge, 2008; Underhill, 2006; Noe, Greenberger, & Wang, 2002; Ragins, 1999; Wanberg, Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003; Singh, Ragins, & Tharenou, 2009; Byrne, Dik & Chiaburu, 2008)). This makes it important to understand the role and importance of predictors that affect the success of mentoring. There are many research has explored the benefits of mentoring for mentee, found that mentoring is highly related to important career outcomes such as salary level, promotion rate, and job satisfaction, among other outcomes (e.g., Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Fagenson, 1989; Scandura, 1992; Whitely, Dougherty, & Dreher, 1991). Seeing the potential benefits of mentoring for mentee s, individuals are always advised to find a mentor, and many organizations support mentoring relationships between organizational members (Burke & McKeen, 1989; Douglas & McCauley, 1999; Kram, 1985). The benefits of having mentoring include important career outcomes such as higher salary levels, increased promotion rates, and higher job satisfaction (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004; Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Pellegrini & Scandura, 2005). CAREER SUCCESS Career success is important from both employees and employers view point. So, this topic has become a interest to each one of us who would like to be successful in their work (Erikson, 1980; Greenhaus, 1971; Super, 1990). By knowing the factors, it will be easy for employees and management in deriving better career success plans. Career success is defined as an individual s long term satisfaction with his/her career (Judge et al., 1995). Career success is also the satisfaction individuals derive from intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of their careers, including pay, advancement, status and career developmental opportunities (Judge et al., 1995). TYPES OF CAREER SUCCESS: Career success has also been defined as objective and subjective components of individual happenings and advancement through their occupational lifespan. Career success has two kinds of components: extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic career success is relatively objective and tangible, and normally consists of highly visible outcomes such as salary, status (Jaskolka, Beyer, & Trice, 1985) promotions, and/or position (Ng et al., 2005). In contrast, intrinsic success is viewed as an individual s IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 15

4 observation of his or her own career, and is most commonly considered as career satisfaction (Gattiker & Larwood, 1988; Judge et al., 1995). Employer need to concentrate more to objective career success (e.g. an individual s achievements in terms of salary, position, promotions, and job performance), whereas individuals care for subjective career success (e.g. positive career-related perception). According to Dries, Pepermans, and Carlier (2008) objective career success is more concerned with observable, measurable and verifiable accomplishments such as pay, promotion and occupational status (p. 254). The most widely found measurements of objective success are: monthly salary, hierarchical status (e.g., Abele and Spurk, 2009b), and salary progression (Wayne et al., 1999). Objective measures of career success relates to those that can be viewed and verified by others (Judge et al., 1995). Various researchers have studied career success using objective measures such as total compensation (Pfeffer & Davis-Blake, 1987; Seibert, Kraimer & Liden, 2001; Whitely, Dougherty & Dreher, 1991; Whitely & Coetsier, 1993; Kirchmeyer, 1998), number of promotions (Wayne et al., 1999; Whitely, Dougherty & Dreher, 1991; Whitely & Coetsier, 1993), current pay grade (Daley, 1996), and size of most recent merit increase (Lobel & St. Clair, 1992). Objective career success also relates to the work experience outcomes, such as status, promotions and salary that are objectively observable (Seibert and Kraimer, 2001). Objective measures of success are important; because they help to measures what an individual wants to achieve. Individuals define career success as their assessment of career prospects (Ebadan & Winstanley, 1997), so individuals expect a lot more from their careers other than compensation, promotion, and other objective measures. Subjective measures of career success (Judge et al., 1995) relates to the individuals own judgment of their career attainment. Subjective career success measures career satisfaction (Martins, Eddleston & Veiga, 2002; Seibert, Kraimer & Liden, 2001; Poole, Langan-Fox & Omodei, 1993), job satisfaction (Judge et al., 1995; Burke, 2001), advancement satisfaction (Martins, Eddleston & Veiga, 2002), and perceived career success (Turban & Dougherty, 1994). Career prospects and employment security are positively related to subjective career success Aryee et al. (1994). Career prospects and employment security are important career-related issues to employees (Holbeche, 1997; 2000), which helps in judging their own career success. Career prospects is critical to subjective career success because they give the individual with a favourable evaluation of their careers with respect to their future outlook and past achievements (see Aryee et al., 1994; Dutton, 1993; Judge et al., 1995). Subjective career success is defined as a conceptually distinct construct which refers to an individual's judgment of their own success evaluated against personal standards, age, aspirations and views of significant others (Betz and Fitzgerald, 1987; Gattiker and Larwood, 1986). LINK BETWEEN MENTORING AND CAREER SUCCESS OR MENTORING RELATES WITH CAREER SUCCESS: Many researchers predicts mentoring is positively associated employee outcomes (Kram, 1985; Ragins et al., 2000). Mentoring is considered to be beneficial by providing career development aid which helps the mentee to advance in the organization and psychosocial functions which results in mentee s personal growth and professional development (Ragins and Cotton, 1999). For instance, mentee s are more satisfied with their jobs (Whitely and Coetsier, 1993) and are more committed with their work (Baugh and Scandura, 1999). Mentee not only report of having perceived career success (Turban and Dougherty, 1994), but certainly receive more promotions (Dreher and Ash, 1990), and make more money (Scandura, 1992). Bozionelos (2004) and Allen et al. (2006) found that mentoring is positively related to career success of mentors. The result of their research indicate that having provided mentoring during one s tenure within a single organization was truly related to both objective and subjective career success. Bozionelos (2004) also found that those who had received mentoring (i.e. those who had been prote ge s) were more likely to provide mentoring (i.e. to become mentors). Bozionelos and Allen et al., Eby et al. (2006) employed mentors in their study, and found that the benefits these mentors supposed they had received from providing mentoring. There are empirical evidence that establish IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 16

5 relationship of mentoring with objective and subjective career success (Bozionelos, 2004; Allen et al., 2006). Many, empirical research establishes a strong support for the relationship between mentoring and positive career outcomes such as more promotions, more mobility, higher income and career satisfaction (Kram, 1985; Fagenson, 1989; Scandura, 1992). Studies have shown that mentoring significantly influences career success (Cox and Nkomo, 1991; Fagenson, 1989; Whitely et al., 1991; Turban and Dougherty, 1994). This article aims to investigate the relationship between role of mentoring and career success of employees in an organization. The conceptual model for this research consists of one main independent variable, i.e. mentoring (includes, formal and informal or career development/career help and psychosocial support), and one main dependent variable, i.e. career success (objective career success includes, promotion, salary, and occupational status) and (subjective career success includes, career prospects, career satisfaction and career commitment), as depicted in Figure 1. FIGURE 1 CONCEPTUAL MODEL INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE CAREER SUCCESS MENTORING Formal (Career development / help) and Informal (Psychosocial support) (Objective) Promotion, Salary, (Subjective) Career Prospect Career Satisfaction Occupation Status Career Commitment Based on the framework, it seems reasonable to assume that properly implemented informal and formal mentoring activities will influence career development and psychosocial support among the employees of the selected organization. The advantage of having a mentor in career development has received more attention (e.g. Higgins and Kram, 2001; Scandura and Williams, 2001; Lankau and Scandura, 2002; Godshalk and Sosik, 2003; Simmonds and Zammit Lupi, 2010). For instance, employees with a mentor were found to have more promotions, higher incomes and more work satisfaction than employees without a mentor (Baugh and Scandura, 1999; Ragins et al., 2000; Bozionelos, 2006; Arokiasamy and Ismail, 2008). The relationship between formal and informal mentoring relationships and career outcomes such as promotion and compensation, and to provide even more support for the work of Chao et al. Allen et al. (2004) also found that objective career success was more related to career mentoring than to psychosocial mentoring. In addition, it was found that career and psychosocial mentoring had similar relationships with job and career satisfaction. The study of Chao et al. (1992), Merriam (1983), Ragins and Cottons (1999), and Scandura (1992) concluded that mentoring relationships improved the career outcomes of mentored individuals. There are various studies to support that an individual who receives mentoring will have several benefits, such as organizational commitment, intent to stay, job satisfaction, tenure with the organization, number of promotions, self-esteem, perceived alternative employment options, income, work stress, work-family conflicts, and promotion or career opportunities. The objective factors found to be positively related with career satisfaction include rate of advancement/promotion, rank and salary (Judge et al., 1995; Auster and Ekstein, 2001; Seibert and Kraimer, 2001). IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 17

6 Extrinsic or objective factors of career success such as salary, promotions and status are tangible or observable outcomes. The outcomes of career success which are less visible indicators such as job or career satisfaction, perceptions of career accomplishments, career commitment and career mentoring are, relatively more internally assessed by individuals own subjective judgements of career success (Poon, 2004; Burke, 2001; Aryee et al., 1994). FINDINGS: After the various reviews in this topic, these are the findings of the study: Formal mentoring positively and significantly correlated with individuals career development. Secondly, informal mentoring positively and significantly correlated with individuals psychosocial support. The results have empirically confirmed that properly implemented mentoring programs can lead to increased individuals advancement in the studied organization (Azman Ismail et al., 2009) Psychosocial mentoring related to compensation and promotions. There are various research indicating greater psychosocial mentoring was associated with greater career satisfaction, greater job satisfaction, and stronger intentions to stay with the company. This was proved in the empirical research where the variable psychosocial mentoring was highly related to satisfaction with the mentor (Allen, et al., 2004). Regarding objective career outcomes, compensation and number of promotions were higher among mentored than non-mentored individuals, mentored individuals were more satisfied with their career, more likely to believe that they would advance in their career, and more likely to be committed to their career than were their non-mentored counterparts. This was proved by the study of (Allen, et al., 2004). In addition, mentored individuals were more satisfied with their jobs than were non-mentored individuals. Mentored individuals had greater intentions to stay with their current organization than did non-mentored individuals (Allen, et al., 2004). Mentoring reported that they had provided was positively associated with their objective and their subjective career success and with the amount of mentoring they reported they had received. This was proved by Nikos Bozionelos (2004) through his research mentoring mediated the relationship between mentoring received and subjective career success. Objective career success, results indicated greater career mentoring related to greater compensation, greater salary growth, and more promotions. The subjective outcomes- career mentoring was positively related to career satisfaction, job satisfaction, and satisfaction with the mentor (Allen, et al., 2004). Several empirical systematic research has demonstrated that mentoring relates to objective career success of protégés, including number of promotions achieved (e.g., Aryee, Wyatt, & Stone, 1996; Dreher & Ash, 1990; Scandura, 1992), salary progression (Dreher & Ash, 1990), salary levels (e.g., Turban & Dougherty, 1994;Wallace, 2001), and organizational grade (Koberg, Wayne Boss, Chappell, & Ringer, 1994); and to subjective career success of protégés (e.g., Fagenson, 1989; Koberg et al., 1994; Murphy & Ensher, 2001; Wallace, 2001). CONCLUSION With the work force changing rapidly, career success depends a lot on working smartly. Organizations are now focusing on mentoring. It is fast becoming one of the critical factors in career success. Consequently, it is important to attract, retain, and use the talents of people to provide with proper mentoring support from an organizational point of view. Mentoring is very essential to each and every individual employee in the organization. It was found that, those who were mentored had positive career outcomes over those who were not mentored. And it also traced that, those who receive mentoring with career success are likely to stay or retain with the organization for a longer period, rather higher employee turnover. This has decreased employee turnover compared to the last year. In IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 18

7 this conceptual paper the researcher has attempted to collate the various research studies relating to study on mentoring with career success of employees. People who manage their careers effectively through proper mentoring are able to produce Objective career success such as promotion, increased salary, and increased occupation or position status, and also able to produce subjective career success such as career satisfaction, career prospect and career commitment. REFERENCES 1. Abele, A. E., & Spurk, D. (2009). The longitudinal impact of self-efficacy and career goals on objective and subjective career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, Alleman, E., & Clarke, D. L. (2002). Manual for the Alleman Mentoring Questionnaire 3. Allen, T. D., Lentz, E., Day, R. (2006). Career success outcomes associated with mentoring others: A comparison of mentors and nonmentors. Journal of Career Development, 32, Allen, T.D., Eby, L.T., Poteet, M.L., Lentz, E. and Lima, L. (2004), Career benefits associated with mentoring for prote ge s: a meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 89, pp Arokiasamy, L. and Ismail, M. (2008), Exploring mentoring as a tool for career advancement of academics in private higher education institutions in Malaysia, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W., & Tom, H. H. (1994). An examination of the antecedents of subjective career success among a managerial sample in Singapore. Human Relations, 47(5), Aryee, S., Wyatt, T., and Stone, R. (1996), Early Career Outcomes of Graduate Employees: The Effect of Mentoring and Ingratiation, Journal of Management Studies, 33, Auster, E. R., and K. L. Ekstein. (2001), Professional Women s Midcareer Satisfaction: Toward an Explanatory Framework. Sex Roles, 44 (11-12), Baugh, S.G. and Scandura, T.A. (1999), The effects of multiple mentors on protege attitudes toward the work setting, Journal of Social Behavior&Personality, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp Betz, N. and Fitzgerald, L. (1987), Career Psychology for Women, Academic, San Diego, CA. 11. Bozionelos, N. (2004), Mentoring provided: relation to mentor s career success, personality, and mentoring received, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 64 No.1, pp Burke, R. J., & McKeen, C. A. (1989, winter). Developing formal mentoring programs in organizations. Business Quarterly, 53, Burke, R.J. (2001), Managerial women s career experiences, satisfaction and wellbeing: a five-country study, Cross-Cultural Management, Vol. 8 Nos 3/4, pp Byrne,Z., Dik,Bryan. & Chiaburu, D.S. (2008). Alternatives to traditional mentoring in fostering career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior 72 (2008) Science Direct 15. Chao, G. T., Walz, P. M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with non-mentored counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, Cox, T.H. and Nkomo, S.M. (1991), A race and gender-group analysis of the early career experience of MBAs, Work and Occupations, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp Daley, D. (1996). Paths of glory and the glass ceiling: Differing patterns of career advancement among women and minority federal employees. PAQ, Summer, Dansky, K. H. (1996). The effect of group mentoring on career outcomes. Group and organizational management, 21, Douglas, C. A., & McCauley, C. D. (1999). Formal developmental relationships: A survey of organizational practices. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10, Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 19

8 21. Dries, N., Pepermans, R., & Carlier, O. (2008). Career success: Constructing a multidimensional model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, Dutton, J.E. (1993), ``The making of organizational opportunities: an interpretive pathway to organizational change'', in Cummings, L. and Staw, B. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15, pp Ebadan, G. & D. Winstanley (1997). Downsizing, delayering and careers: The survivor s perspective. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(1), Eby, L. T., Allen, T. D., Evans, S. C, Ng, T., & Dubois, D. L. (2008). Does mentoring matter? A multidisciplinary meta-analysis comparing mentored and nonmentored individuals. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, Eby, L. T., Durley, J. R., Evans, S. C., & Ragins, B. R. (2006). The relationship between shortterm mentoring benefits and long-term mentor outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, Erikson, E. H. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York: Norton. 27. Fagenson, E. A. (1989). The mentor advantage: Perceived career/job experiences of prot_eg_es versus non prot eges. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, Feldman, D. (1996). Managing careers in downsizing firms. Human Resource Management, 35 (2), Gattiker, U. and Larwood, L. (1986), ``Subjective career success: a study of managers and support personnel'', Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 1, pp Gattiker, U. E., & Larwood, L. (1990). Predictors for career achievement in the corporate hierarchy. Human Relations, 43, Gattiker, U.E. and Larwood, L. (1988), Predictors for managers career mobility, success and satisfaction, Human Relations, 41 (8): Geiger-DuMond, A. H., & Boyle, S. K. (1995), Mentoring: A practitioners guide. Training and Development, 49: Godshalk, V.M. and Sosik, J.J. (2003), Aiming for career success: The role of learning goal orientation in mentoring relationship, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 63, pp Greenhaus, J. H. (1971). An investigation of the role of career salience in vocational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1, Hegstad, C. D., & Wentling, R. M. (2005). Organizational antecedents and moderators that impact on the effectiveness of exemplary formal mentoring programs in fortune 500 companies in the United States. Human Resource Development International, 8(4), Higgins, M. and Kram, K. (2001), Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: a developmental network perspective, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp Hunt, D.M., & Michael, C. (1983). Mentoring a career training and developing tool. Academy of Management Review, 8, Jaskolka G., Beyer, J. M., & Ti-ice H. M. (1985). Measuring and predicting managerial success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Boudreau, J. W., & Bretz, R. D. (1995). An empirical investigation of the predictors of executive career success. Personnel Psychology, 48(3), Kirchmeyer, C. (1998). Determinants of managerial career success: Evidence and explanation of male/female differences. Journal of Management, 24, Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Chappell, D., & Ringer, R. C. (1994). Correlates and consequences of protégé mentoring in a large hospital. Group and Organization Management,19, Kram, K.E. (1983), Phases of the mentor relationship, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 26, pp IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 20

9 43. Kram, K.E. and Isabella, L. (1985), Mentoring alternatives: the role of peer relationships in career development, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp Kuijpers, M. A. C. T., Schyns, B., & Scheerens, J. (2006). Career competencies for career success. The Career Development Quarterly, 55(2), Lankau, M.J. and Scandura, T.A. (2002), An investigation of personal learning in mentoring relationships: content, antecedents, and consequences, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 45, pp Lobel, S. & L. St. Clair (1992). Effects of family responsibilities, gender, and career identity salience on performance outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5), Martins, L.L., K.A. Eddleston & J.F. Veiga (2002). Moderators of the relationship between workfamily conflict and career satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), Murray, M. (1991) Beyond the Myths and Magic of Mentoring. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 49. Nabi, G. R. (1999). An investigation into the differential profile of predictors of objective and subjective career success. Career Development International, 4(4), Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), Nikos Bozionelos (2004). Mentoring provided: Relation to mentors career success, personality, and mentoring received. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, Noe, R. (1988). An Investigation of the Determinants of Successful Assigned Mentoring Relationships. Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota. Personnel Psychology, Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2005). Construct equivalence across groups: An unexplored issue in mentoring research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65(2), Pfeffer, J. & A. Davis-Blake (1987). The effect of the proportion of women on salaries: The case of college administrators. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(1), Phillips-Jones, L. L. (1982). Mentors and proteges. New York: Arbor House. 56. Poole, M., J. Langan-Fox & M. Omodei (1993). Contrasting subjective and objective criteria as determinants of perceived career success: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, Poole, M., Langanfox, J., & Omodei, M. (1991). Sex-difference in perceived career success. Genetic Social And General Psychology Monographs, 117 (2), Poon, J. (2004), Career commitment and career success: moderating role of emotion perception, Career Development International, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of men and women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, Ragins, B.R., Cotton, J.L. and Miller, J.S. (2000), Marginal mentoring: the effects of type of mentor, quality of relationship, and program design on work and career attitudes, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 43, pp revised. Sharon Center, OH: Silverwood Associates. 61. Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, Scandura, T. A., & Ragins, B. R. (1993). The effects of sex and gender role orientation on mentorship in male-dominated occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43, Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (2001). An investigation of the moderating effects of gender on the relationships between mentorship initiation and prote ge perceptions of mentoring functions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, Scandura, T., A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1994). Leader-member exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complementary constructs in leadership research. Academy of Management Journal, 37, IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 21

10 65. Seibert, S. E., and M. L. Kraimer The Five-factor Model of Personality and Career Success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58 (1), Seibert, S.E., M.L. Kraimer & R.C. Liden (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (2), Simmonds, D. and Zammit Lupi, A.M. (2010), The matching process in e-mentoring: a case study in luxury hotels, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp Singh,R., Ragins,B.R., & Tharenou,P. (2009). What matters most? The relative role of mentoring and career capital in career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior 75, Super, D. E. (1990). A life space, life span approach to career development. In D. Brown et al. (Eds.), Career choice and development: Applying contemporary theories to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 70. Turban, D. B., Dougherty, T. W., & Lee, F. K. (2002). Gender, race and perceived similarity effects in developmental relationships: The moderating role of relationship duration. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, Turban, D.B. & T.W. Dougherty (1994). Role of protégée personality in receipt of mentoring and career success. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), Underhill, C. M. (2006). The effectiveness of mentoring programs in corporate settings: A meta-analytical review of the literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, Wallace, J.E. (2001), The Benefits of Mentoring for Female Lawyers, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., Kraimer, M. L., & Graf, I. K. (1999). The role of human capital, motivation and supervisor sponsorship in predicting career success. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 20, Whitely, W. T., & Coetsier, P. (1993). The relationship of career mentoring to early career outcomes. Organization Studies, 14, 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, 34, Whitely,W., Dougherty, T.W. & Dreter,G.F. (1992) Correlates of career-oriented mentoring for early career managers and professionals. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 13, Young, A. M., Cady, S., & Foxon, M. J. (2006). Demystifying gender type in mentoring: Theoretical perspectives and challenges for future research on gender and mentoring. Human Resource Development Review, 5(2), IRJBM ( ) July 2014 Volume No VII Page 22