(103)

JOURNAL OF NfANAGERlAL ISSUES

Vol. XVI Nlmwcr 1 Spring 2004: 103-126

The Role of Expectations in the Mentoring Exchange:

An Analysis of Mentor and Protege Expectations in Relation to Perceived Support

Angela M. Young

Professor of Management California State University. Los Angeles

Pamela L. Perrewe Professor of Business Management Florida State University

There are several tangible benefits sciously and effectively, and identify

that have been linked to mentoring what makes mentorships effective

(Ragins and Cotton, 1999; Scandura, and satisfying for both mentoring

1992; Silverhart, 1994; Turban and parmers. The question, however, be-

Dougherty, 1994; Whitely and Coer- comes what leads to positive percep-

sier, 1993; Whitely et al., 1991). and lions ofmentoring support? The pur-

organizations have become increas- pose of this study is to examine

ingly interested in mentoringas a mentoring relationships and identify

means to develop and train employ- aspects of the relationship that are

ees (Russell and Adams, 1997), AI- likely to yield po itive perceptual ou t-

though few srudies report on percep- comes. Specifically, we are examining

tual outcomes of mentors and protigis two relation hips. First, the relation-

(Kalbfleisch and Davies, 1993), per- ship between antecedent factors (i.e.,

ceptions of men toring participants dispositional characteristics and or-

are quite important. Attitudes about ganizaLi.onal environmental factors)

mentoring based on general beliefs and expectation of mentors and pro-

and past experiences are likely to in- leges will be examined. Further, the

fluence future participation in men- role of expectations in relation to

loring (Allen et al., 1997; Fagenson- perceptions of actual mentoring sup-

Eland et al., 1997; Ragins and Cotton, pon will be studied. Next, literature

1993). on mentoring relationships, expecta-

To secure the most po itive out- lions, and the importance of individ-

comes possible, we must learn to de- ual environment factors will be pre-

velop and manage mentorships con- sen ted in detail wilh hypotheses

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2004

and prolige, seek something from the mentoring relationship (Higgins and Kram, 2001; Hunt and Michael, 1983; Krarn, 1983. 1985; Nee, 1988a; Ragins and Cotton, 1999; Ragins et al .• 2000). From a more theoretical perspective, Homans (1958) suggested that relationships of any type are largely formed and maintained as an exchange where costs of maintaining the relationship are weighed against benefits received from the relationship. Within the mentoring relationship, there are certain exchanges that take place in which a mentor provides support and proliges respond with a reciprocal and related response behavior. For example, proteges may value career-related support such as that provided when a mentor offers technical advi e and social support such as when a mentor listens to a prolige's concerns and offers encouragement For each of these support behaviors enacted by the men tor. a protige acts or responds in a certain way. These response behaviors reciprocal to mentoring support are interpreted and perceived by 'the mentor. So just as proligis are likely La value support offered by mentors, mentors, in turn, are likely to value reciprocal support behaviors from a protege such as acting on sugge lions to enhance technical skills and being attentive, cordial, and friendly in response to a mentor's advice and encouragement. Based on Homans, the more valuable the support behaviors from the mentor and reciprocal behaviors from the protege, the more likely the relationship itself will be viewed as valuable.

104

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MA.."!A.GERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number l Spring 2004

related to expectations of a mentoring partner, perceptions ofa partner, and the importance of individual and environmental factors. Following the literature and hypotheses will be an explanation of the study, findings and a discussion of the Implications of the study.

The Mentoring Relationship

Mentoring is defined here as a mentor, a more experienced person, providing support and guidance to a le s experienced person referred to as a protege (Kram, 1985), both of whom are working together in a mutually agreed-upon relationship. The mentoring support behaviors identified by Krarn (1983) have been the mainstay of most mentoring research. Two main forms of mentoring suppOrt, psychosocial and career-related support, emerged from Kearn's work and have been examined exten ively in relation to many types of careerrelated outcomes (Russell and Adams, 1997). Career-related or career support, the more work-related construct, is comprised of sponsorship, visibility to infhrenrial others,exposure to advantageous projects. protection, and coaching. The more emotional form of support, psychosocial or social support, is eviden ed through listening, caring, acceptanc , confirmation, friendship and enc uragement. In a mentoring relationship, as in any relationship, we presume that both mentors and pro.tigis develop expectations for their mentoring partners and exchange behaviors throughout the relationship.

The Exchange of Mentoring Support

From previous research, it isevident that both parties, the mentor

Expectations of a Mentoring Partner Role and relationship theorists have identified several relevant factors in the role-making process (Ber-

from a mentor. Thus it is probable that there exists a cycle of exchange behaviors between a mentor and prrr tegi from beginning to end of the relationship. However, there is a likely set of some mentoring behaviors that are representative of both mentor and protege. roles and related to career and social support (Kearn, 1985; Ragins and McFadin, 1990; Scandura and Ragins, 1993).

Based on rol theory and previous research, it is dear that expectations have some relevance in relationship development and that the level of expectations for a partner is likely to have some impact on the relationship (Dansereau et at., 1975). Howexpectations formed by mentors and proMges impact the relationship has not been researched, but goal-setting theory (Locke, 1968; Locke and Latham, 1990), cognitive comparisons (Foa, 1957) and self-fulfilling prophecy (Merton, 1948; Sutton and Woodman. 1989) provide a logical basis for estimating the impact of expectations in mentoring.

Goal-setting theory centers on intention in relation to action and, typically, [he higher the intended performance the higher the resulting performance or actual outcome (Locke and Latham. 1990). Related to expectation • someone who expects more may try to attain more. Thus, a mentor or protege who has high expectations for .3.. relationship may very well enact higher levels of men wring support behaviors. To further explain the role of expectations, self-fulfilling prophecy, as defined by Merton (1948), was used by Sutton and Woodman (1989) to support the idea that what we expect from others will be enacted. Expectations are communicated through several direct and indirect mean and an individ-

THE ROLE OF EXPECTATIO S IN THE MENTORING EXCHANCE 105

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

scheid, 199 ; Dansereau et al., 1975). For example, within the context of a situation such as work or a relationship such as a mentorship, actor are likely to learn and enact behaviors according to the actor's belief about the relevant and appropriate role behavi01-S (Dansereau et at., 1975) .. Further, just as we each have beliefs about appropriate role behaviors for ourselves, we also form beliefs about the role behaviors of others (Dan ereau et al., 1975; Graen and Scandura, 1987). As roles and expectations are defined, redefined, and clarified over time, a per on is more likely to know what is expected of him or her (Greene. 1972).

Expectations most relevant to mentors and proteges center on career-related and social support behaviors (Kram, 1983; Scandura and Ragins, 1993). These support behaviors, as viewed in this study, are performed by the men tor and received by the proligi and include numerous and spe me actions related to career and social support. Thus, our view is that a mentor 'enacts support behavior in the form of advice, guidance, protection, encouragement,etc. In return, a profigi responds to a mentor's support behavior with reciprocal action, labeled reciprocal support behavior. Therefore, we view expectations for career and social support from both mentor and pmtigi perspectives presuming that the mentor provides support and the protegi enacts reciprocal behavior related to support provided by the mentor. The support behaviors provided by menton and reciprocal SUppOl'l behaviors enacted by protiges are not mean t to be an exhaustive list of valued behaviors. For example. reciprocal pmtigi behaviors such as curiosity, interest, and willingness to exert effort may very well incite support

106

ceptions of a mcntoring partner. Applying the preceding theories to the menloring exchange, it is likely that expectations will influence percepLions of a partner's level of support behaviors. To test the possible link between expected and perceived support, the following hypothesis has been developed:

HI: The higher the career and social 0(.pectations in the rnentoring relationship, the higher the perceptions of career and social support, respectively.

YOUNG A D PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number] Spring 20(H

ual in turn, will respond to the spoken and unspoken messages and respend accordingly (Sutton and Woodman, 1989). Applying self-fulfilling prophecy in the mentoring exchange would lead to the idea that a mentor or pro~egewiU communicate expectations to a partner, including support needed or expected. The mentoring partner would then respond in kind and enact, or at least attempt to enact, support behaviors expected by a partner. Taking goalsetting and self-fulfilling prophecy in combination it is clear that we form expectations based on perceptions of self and what we perceive others expCC[ of us. In the mentoring exchange, as in any relationship. the link between expected and perceived support is cyclical and ongoing (Greene, 1972).

Additional insight into he link b - tween expectations and perceptions was explained by Foa (1957), who characterized the importance of expectations in relation to perceptions of outcomes in a description of cognitive comparisons made by an individual. Foa maintained that an individual's perceptions of outcomes has much to do with expectations, and someone who has high expectations and has perceived sufficient levels of support wiU continue to perceive satisfactory levels of support, even if actual support increases or diminishes. Therefore, there is a strong relationship between support expected from a mentoring partner and levels of support perceived. This cognitive Linkage i important because if expectation. and perceptions of support are strongly linked, mentors and protege. can do much, especially at the beginning of a relationship, (0 form a trong foundation for relationship succe s or inadvertently taint the per-

The Influence of Needs and Organizational Environment on Expectations

Dispositional characteristics of mentors and protiglts have been examined by several researchers (Fagenson. 1992; Noe, 1988b~ Olian et at .• 1988; Turban and Dougherty, 1994) who agree that certain traits are present in people who participate in mentoring relationships. Other researchers have focused on demographic characteristics such as gender (Dreher and Ash, 1990; Dreher and Cox, 1996; Fagenson, 1989; Ragins, 1989; Ragins and Colton, 1991, 1999~ Scandura and Ragins, 1993), age (Noe, 1988b; Ragins, 1989; Ragins and Cotton, 1993), race (KaIbfleish and Davies, 1991; Ibarra, 1995; Thomas, 1990) ethnicity (Atki nson et al., 1991 ) , and socioeconomic background (Whitely et aL, 19m). Although aspects of disposition, environmental factors, and personal factors have been examined in relation to willingness to mentor (AJlen et aL, 1997), participation in mentaring (Turban and D ugheny, 1994). or receipt ofmentoring (Whitely and Coestier, 1993), these antecedent factors have not been exam-

ment were significantly higher for protiges than for non-protegis. Need for power has been linked to proteges, but this factor is relevant to mentors as well. For example, Hunt and Michael (1983) describe mentors as self-confident, possessing some power in the organization, and include the mentor-protege relationship in the category of a power-dependent dyad. By the nature of the mentoring relationship and the component support functions described by Kram (1983), it is Hkelythat a high need for power is a relevant and prominent characteristic of mentors and proligis, and will influence expectations formed about a mentoring parmer.

Like powel', a hievemenr is likely to be attainable through participating in a mentoring relationship. Achievement and career success are typical of what a mentoring relationship can provide with expo ure, protection, guidance, and coaching. to name a few mentoring functions (Kram, 1983). The mentoring relationship has been proven effective in positively influencing a protege's career success and mentors have been described as confident, knowledgeable staff members who have achieved orne responsibility in the organization (Hum and Michael, ] 983). Becau e participan ts in mentoring have been found to be concerned with career attainment, it is posited that individual high in need for achievement are likely to have high expectations for their partner. The following hypothesis deals with the relationship between expectations and needs of mentor and proteges.

1I2: Expectations for a mentoring partner will be higher for individuals scoring high on need for achievement and need for power.

THE ROLE OF EXPECTATlONS IN THE MENTORING Ex 'HANGI! 107

ined in relation to expectations for a mentoring partner.

Individual Needs

Of the characteristicsexamlned in previous research, locus of control, self-esteem, affectivity, need for power, and need for achievement were found to be related to participation in or receipt of mentoring (Fagen on, 1992; Kalbfleisch and Davies. 1993; Noe, 1988b; Turban and Dougherty, 1994). Kalbfleisch and Davie (1993), for example, found a direct relationship between protege characteristics and the level of mentori.ng received. In the same study, Kalbfleisch and Davies discovered an indirect relationship between communication competence. self-esteem, and a mentor's participation in a mentoring relationship. Research on locus of control is mixed. Noc (1988b) found no SUppOl-t for his hypo the ized link between internal locus of control and successful attainment of mentoring. However, participants in the formal mentoring program studied by Noe tended to be internal locus of control. In a later study, Turban and Dougherty (1994) examined personality characteristics of protigis, finding that traits indicate how likely it is for a person to initiate a mentoring relationship. Proteges most likely to initiate mentoring had high internal locus of control, high self-monitoring, and highemoti.onal srabiHty.

More specific to needs, Fagenson (1992) examined protege characteri - tics including need for power, achievement. affiliation, and autonomy. Although need for affiliation and autonomy did not prove to be more prevalent in proteges than nonproteges, need for power and achieve-

JOURNAL OF MANAGERlAL ISSUES Vol. XVI umber 1 Spring 2004,

108

ing literature contends that each member in the dyad seeks a mentoring relationship (Kalbfleish and Davies. 1993; Turban and Dougherty. 1994). Whether or no there are OJ' portunitie for mentoring in an organization is critical, given that initiation of informal mentoring relationships depends on action by the mentor or protige (Kram, 1985). If individuals see opportunitie for mentoring or positive outcomes for other individuals in mentoring relationships, it may be that expectations for a mentoting relationship become more well-defined and salient.

These factors, perceived reward structure and mentoring opporrunitie ,relate to the perceptions individuals hold about mentoring in organizations. Therefore, it is likely that these factors will shape, to some extent,the expectations individuals hold about a mentoring partner and the extent to which mentoring support will be provided. The fol1owing hypothesis relates to the relationship between organizational factors and expectations:

H3: The higher the perceptions of menloring opportunities ann the more clearly participation in mentoring is perceived as a rewarded behavior in the organization, the higher the expeciauons for a mentoring partner.

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

Organizational Environment

Some environmental factors may influence the menroring relationship regardless of the dispositional characteristics of the partners. For example. Koberg el al. (1994) found that organizational variables, such as position in the organization. influenced the likelihood of participating in a mentoring experience more than individual characteristics. Recently. other mentoring researchers have examined organizational variables relevant to mentoring relationships, including such constructs as opportunities and constraints (Higgins and Kram, 2001), rank (Allen et al., 1997) and reward systems (Aryee et al., 1996; Kram, 1985).

Perceived &ward Structure. Kearn (1985) made it clear that participation in and expectations for mentoring can be influenced by the reward structure in organizations. Simply stated. if mentoring is obviously valued by an organization, then there is likely to be some reward structure in place or, more importantly, perceived by potential participants in mentoring (Kram, 1985). Thus. reward structure or perceived value of mentoring in the organization can be made dear through aU types of communication mechanisms including formal. policy, compensation systems, or more informal type of reward such as recognition for participation in mentoring, In addition, there are many subtle ways that the organizationalculture can make it dear to members the behaviors that are most valuable regardless of formal policy (Aryee et al., 1996).

.11,tlentoring Opportunities. Vel}' little re earch has been done on the influence of the opportunity to mentor or be mentored; however, most mentor-

In addition to focusing on the specific variables relevant to our hypothe es, we will control for two variables that have been shown in past research to playa role in initiation, receipt or participation in mentoring, Specifically, gender and age (Noe, 1988b; Ragins, 1989; Ragins and Cotton, 1993) have been found to relate to participation in and outcomes of mentoring. Additionally, age or gender has typically been included in studies as control variables (cf. Olian

THE ROLE OF EXPECTATIONS IN THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 109

JOURNAL OF MANAGERlAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2004

el al., 1988; Ragins and Scandura, 1994~ Scandura, 1992}.

Method

nata Collection and Sample

Data were collected from two separate groups of individuals in the later stages of a formal relationship with two separate surveys. Doctoral students and Assistant Professors in Management who were likely to be in the dissertation process were targeted for the "mtige survey, and Associate and Full Professors in Management who may have recently chaired a doctoral dissertation were targeted as mentors. It is difficult to find mentoring-type relationships that are similarly formed and managed across different industries and organizations. The use of respondents in a chairdoctoral candidate relationship provides a view of mentoring from several individuals who are not just reporting that they are being mentared, but are actually participating in a mentoring-type relationship.

A total of 1,222 surveys were sent to individuals in each of the two target samples. Doctoral students and Assistant Profes ors were targeted for the protigis survey and Associate and Full Professors were targeted as men tors. MaiJing information for each gr up was taken [rom an electronic database used to compile a Direci(Jry of Managlmumt Faculty (Hasselback, 1996). Respondents targeted for each sample were asked whether or not they are completing or have recently completed a dissertation (i.e., protege

ample) or if they have recently chaired a dissertation (i.e., mentor sample). Individuals in the mentor sampl completed and returned 108 of 1,222 surveys, re ulting in a re-

sponse rate of 9%. Proteges completed and returned 215 f 1,222 surveys for a response rate of 18%. The respondents were selected at random from several academic institutions and the possibility that members of the target sample may not have worked with doctoral students may have artificially inflated the non-response rate for mentors.

Among the respondents in the mentor sample who reported gender, 77% were male and 20% female. Ninety-six percent of the mentor-respondents were Caucasian, 1% Hispanic, and 3% reponed ethnicity as "Other." The ave.rage age of the mentor-respondents was 50 years old with average position tenure of 12 years. Among the respondents in the protigi sample who reported gender, 39% were female and 58% were male. Eighty-four percent of the pmtige.l·espondents were Caucasian, 5% African-American, 2% Hispanic. 4% Asian, and 2% reported ethnicity as "Other" and 3% did not report ethnicity. The average age of the protege. respondents was 39 years old and, on average, respondents had been in their current positions as faculty members or doctoral candidates for three years. Comparing percentages of males and f males in the target population to the percentages reported by respondents in this study, it is reasonable to believe that the respondents in this study are representative of the target population, at least in terms of gender.

MeasUl'cs

Perceptions and demographic information were collected with two surveys: one for mentors and one for proteges, The mentor and protige surveys measured the same constructs

110

ing, friendship and role-modeling. Both measures were based on a response scale ranging from Frequently (7) to Never (1).

Mrmwring SUppO'rl Received-Protige's Pcn/I(!ctivc, Support behavior from the protege's perspective is the extent to which a protege feels that the mentor engaged in career or social support behaviors. A sample item measuring career-related support from the ~ tige scale is "To what exten t does your mentor suggest projects whi.ch enhance your technical knowledge?" A sample social Stlpport item from the protigi measure of perceived social support role behavior is "To what extent does your mentor show a personal interest in you and your values, goals, and aspirations?" The Cronbach Alpha reliabili ty estimate was. 90 for the protegi career-related scale and .89 for the social support scale ..

Reciprocal Support Behavior-Mentor's Perspective. Support behavior [rom the mentor's perspective is the extent to which a mentor perceived that the pmtigi engaged in career-related and social behaviors typical ora protige. An item from the perceived career-related role behaviors from the mentor scale is "To what extent does Y0tH" Irrotigi put forth effort in attending functions as requested?" A sample item. from the mentor social support scale is "To what extent does your protegiiinteract with you on a personal level?' The Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate was .84 for the mentor career-related scale and .75 for the social support scale.

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MANAGERlAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

but the wording of questions for some of the variables was unique to each sample and emphasized the role of provider of support on the mentor survey and the role of recipient on the protigesurvey. In addition, the pr()lege survey instructed respondents to answer questions based on their relationship with their dissertation chair. The mentor survey instructed respondents to base responses on 'the most current relationship or on the relationship with whom. they have worked the most. Examples of questions directed at each group are provided below.

Mentoring Support Behaviors

The measure of suppon behaviors captures the extent to which an individual feels that his or her partner has actually engaged in behaviors typical of a mentor or protege. More research has been conducted related to a protegi's perspective of rnentoring received, but this study captures the protigi view and the mentor view; therefore, two scales relevant to the target samples in this study were developed based on career and social support behaviors discussed in re~ search (Krarn, 1'983; Raginsmd McFarlin, 1990; Scandura and Ragins. 1993). Career-related support behavior was measured with seven items and social support behavior was measured with six hems. Items I:epresent each of the unique aspects of support presented in literature (cf., Krarn, 1985; Ragins and McFarlin, 1990) such as career-related support that includes such activities as sponsorship, e.."posure to advantageous projects, visibility, coaching. protection and challenging assignments. Social support includes items related to acocptance, confirmation, counsel-

Expected Mentoring Support

Expected Menwring Suppml-.Protegi's Perspective; Role behavior from the protege's perspective is the extent to which a ftrotige expects that, generally

peered car or-related role behaviors from the mentor scale is "To what exlent do you expect your protige put forth effort in attending functions as requested?" A sample item from the mentor social support scale is "To what exren t do you expect your pmtege to interact with you on a personal level?" The Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate was .80 for the Career-related scale and. 78 for the social support scale.

THE ROLE OF EXPEGrATIONS I THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 111

JOURNAL OF Jl,V\.NAGER11\L ISS ES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2004

speaking, a mentor should engage in specific career and social upport behaviors. These questions arc focused on mentoring in general, and respondents were instructed to answer these questions based on their opinions and feelings about mcntoring in general. and not about any particular relationship or experience. Seven items were used to measure expectations of career-related support and six items were used to assess expectations of social UppOfl. Both mea - ures were based on a response scale ranging from Frequently (7) to Never (1). A ample item measuring careerrelated support from the protege scale is "To what extent do you exp ctyour mentor to suggest projects which enhance your technical knowledge?" A sample social support item from the p'rotege measure of expected ocial support role behavior is "To what exlent do you expect your mentor to show a personal interest in you and your valu s, goals, and aspirations?" The Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate was ,86 for the protege career-related scale and .. 78 for the social support scale.

Expected Recifrrocal Behavior-Mentor's Perspective. Expected role behavior from the mentor's perspective is the extent to which a mentor expe ts that a protege should engage in reciprocal career-related and social b haviors typical of a protege. S ven item were u ed to measure expectations of career-related support and six items were used to measure social support. Both measures were based on a response scale ranging from Frequently (7) to Nevel' (1) and items were quite similar to those used for the protege sample, except for wording differences that presumed an advisory role for the mentor and a recipient role for proteges. An item from the ex-

Disposition

Individual Needs. eed for achievement and power were both measured using Steers and Braunstein's (1976) Manifest Needs Questionnaire in Cook et al. (1981). Both of the needs were measured with five items and responses range from Always (7) to Never (1). For the mentor sample, the Cronbach Alpha reliability estimale was .58 for "achievement" and .80 for "power." For the protegi sample, the reliability estimate was .50 for "achievement" and .78 [or "power."

Organizational Environmem

Perceived Reuiard. Structure. The perceptions of the rewards an individual receives for participating in mentoring and the delectable organizational events that indicate that mentoring is important were measured by four items. The wording of the items depended upon the target sample and questions g'eared toward the mentor sample focused on giving mentoring while questions for proteges denoted the receiptofmentoring. Two sample items from this scale are: "There are tangible reward [or people in this organization who mentor/are mentor d," and" It is clearly understood in this organization that it is impor-

112

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL .ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

taut to be a mentor/be mentored .. " The Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate was .83 for the mentor sample and .90 for the protege sample.

Mentonng Opportunities. The opportunity an individual has to give or receive mentoring was measured by two items. On the protigi survey, wording is such that the items capture the extent to which a jrrotige perceives the availability of guidance and the possibility that he or she could be mentared. On the mentor's survey. the wording is geared toward providing guidance and being a mentor rather than receiving guidance and mentoring. A sample item from the opportunity for mentoring scale is: "In this organization, there is a lot of opportunity to mentor/be mentored." The Cronbach Alpha reliability estimate was .63 for the mentor sample and .87 for the protege sample.

Analysis and Results

The two samples collected for this study were analyzed separately. The results of the analysis follow. First, descriptive statistics. reliabiHty estimates, and correlations were calculated for both samples. The results for the protege sample are presented in Table 1 and results for the mentor sample are shown in Table 2. The hypotheses were tested using ordinary least squa:res regression.

The Influence of Expectations .oR Perceptions of Support

Pmfigis. Hypothesis I stated that the level of expec rations formed for a mentoring partner will influence the perceptions of support received. To test the hypothesis. two regression equations were run for 'each of the samples. For the protege sample, one

regression equation 'tested the influence of protigti expectations of careerrelated support on perceptions of career-related supportreceived from a meneor; The second regressionequation tested the influence of protige expectations on perceptions of social: support received. In all equations age and gender were included as control variables. The results of the analyses are shown in Table 3 ..

The equation testing career-related expectations and perceptions of Career-related support was signifi.cant (F(4,188) = 4.46; P = .002)., as was the equation regressing perceptions of social support on expectations for social: support (F(4,188) = 6.42; P < .001). In bo!.hequa.tions, expectations for social support were associated with a significant t-statistic. How" ever, protege expectations for social support emerged as positively related to both perceptions of career-related and social support received. Expectations for career-related support had no relationship with either career support or social support, Thus, Hypothesis 1 was only partially supported.

Menturs. Two regression equations were run to test mentors' expectations for reciprocal career-related and social support behaviors from protiges. The result's of the tests are shown in Table 3. The first equation testing the influence of mentors' expectations for reciprccal careerrelated behavior on perceptions of reciprocal career-related behaviors received was not significant. For mentors, expectations had no discernible influence on perceptions of reciprocal: career-related support behavior received from a protege. The second equation, however, was Significant (F(4,87) = 3.63; p < .01) and expectations emerged as a statistically sig-

THE ROLE OF EXPECfATIONS IN THE MENTORIG'XCI-IANGE 113

- ,

.'

0.'

o~

c;;;- 00 1'00

.._' ,

00 00

' .. "00 ..

N

_....._: 0...G\I,Q .....;,

<'I...."

~ ~ '"": q

ul

00 ,"00 "';0..:

M

G\ I,Q 00 NN

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVl Number 1 Spring 2004

114

You G AND PERREwE

r--'\D 0...,

.r- 00 v N -00

('\ 00 OQ.o, -00 .......

l

<-v 00

I I

N"" o

I

- .,.,

0_

-e- 0

-0

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XV1 Number 1 Spring 2004

OD

N ___

'n r-....:.

..-..:: '<1'...OI:!<I"i

'-'

THE ROLE OF EXPECfATIO s r THE MENTOR1NG EXCHANGE 115

oe ......

~

o o

VI Co

0:

VI Cl.

JOURNAL OF l\iIANAGERlAL rs (]E Vol. XVI umber I Spring 2004

00 -.0 0000

. ·00

e 2

~

'c

~

o

.~

~~--~~--------------------------------~

rf

III

'01_ '" M °1 ..... 0

til ,

"",0 ooe

c-4"':

, ,

116

social and career-r lated support. Specifically, women expect more from their mentors in regard to career and oeial support. Based on the result, the higher the need for achievement (Hypothesis 2) and the greater the perceived opportunities to be mentored (Hypothesis 3), the higher a protige's expectations of social support behaviors. However, keeping in mind that need for achievement had a relatively low reliability estimate, findings for Hypothesis 2 should be taken with some caution.

Mentors. Hypotheses 2 and 3, dealing with antecedent factors such as disposition, organlzauonal environment, and g'ender in relation to expectations for reciprocal career-related and social support were also tested for mentors (see Table 4). Specifically, a mentor's expectations that a protegi will engage in reciprocal behaviors related to career development and social SUpp01t were tested in separate regression equations. Each of the dependent variables (r.e., expected reciprocal career-related and social support) \IIaS regressed on the independent variables-mentor disposition (i.e., need for achievement and power) and organizational environment (i.e., ment ring opportunities and perceptions of mentoring as a valuable behavior in the organization), with gender and age as control variables. Neither of the equations was significant. Based on the regression tests performed for this study with data from the mentor sample. the antecedent factors examined here have no identifiable influence on a mentor's expectations for a protigi's behavior. Although need for achievement had a significant t-statistic in relation to a mentor's expectation for career behav-

YOUNG AND PERRE"vE

nlficant variable in the equation. From the result, it appears that there is support for the idea that mentors' expectations f01" reciprocal social support behaviors from protigis influence mentors' perceptions of reciprocal social support behaviors received. Thus, Hypothesis 1 for the mentor sample is partially supported.

Pl'Otigis. Hypothesis 2 Slated that expectations formed b a mentoring partner will be influenced by dispositional qualities and Hypothesis 3 dealt with the influence of the organizational environment on expectations. To test these hypotheses, two separate regression equations were run on data from the protege sample, one equation tested the influence of the independent variables on 'expected career-related suppOrt and another equation tested expected social support. First to test Hypothesis 2 for the protegi sample, expectations for career-related support was regressed on variables associated with protege disposition, perceptions oflhe organizational environment, with gender and age as control variables. The results of the test are shown in Table 4. The equation was significant (F(6,185) = 9.94; P < .001). with gender and need for achievement resulting in significant t-statistics.

A similar regression equation was used to te t protigiexpectations for social support from the mentor and the result is shown in Table 4. Again, the equation was significant (F{6,184) == 10.42; P < .001) with gender, need for achievement, and mentOring o(r portunities resulting in significant tstatistics. Thus, partial upport (or Hypotheses 2 and 3 for the protigi sample was evident Although gender was included as a control variable, it was a significant variable related to level of protege expectations for both

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISS ES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

THE ROLE Of EXPECTATI NS IN THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 117

CON -0

- ..

_ V'l - 0 "

CO,..., o ,_;

- .

...... V', NO

'" ....

S ~ ~

"-' o

'" c:

.g

Ur----r-t------------------------------------1

OJ

~

Lll

..., -

o Cl VI C.

Cl VI c.

...., o

VI c.

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL IS ES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2004

Perhaps mentors, with far more years of experience and expertise about career-related activities required of proteges, take on a role of diagnostician and focus on the development of proteges more than evaluating specific reciprocal behaviors. Reciprocal social support, a more affective and emotional reflection on the relationship, may invoke a different attitude from the mentor. Perhaps how protiges react to the mentor. in terms of level of interest and listening, is more important and salient to mentors than actual career-related reciprocal behaviors. In addition, expectations regarding support may be more dearly defined due to the nature of the student-chair relationship where a formal program is structured and outcomes are explicit. Further, mentors routinely work with several! student s and may have more ofa routine set of demands and activities that comprise the mentoring role.

118

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF M'\NAGERML ISSUES Vol. XVI .umber 1 Spring 2004

iors of a protige. the overall equation was not significant and therefore adds no substantive information. Again, however, it is necessary to interpret findings related to need for achievement and menLoring opportunities with some caution due to the I.ow reliability estimates associated with the e scales for the mentor sample.

Discussion

Expectations and Perceptions of Support

Expectations is presumed to be an important construct in relationships (Berscheid, 1994). yet in mentoring research there is little evidence of the role of expectations in the mentoring exchange. There was upport fOT the idea that the level of expectations for social support is positively related to and a likely predictor of perceptions of social support received for both mentors and frroltgis. Unexpectedly, pmtigis'expectations for career-related support was significant. and appeared to be predictive of perceptions of social support received from mentors. Given recent evidence that proteges expect and value more social

upport from mentors than career-related support (Young and Perrewe, 2000}, perhaps these expectations are as ociated with perceived support in general. Thus, protiges' expectations for social support might be perceived as a mechanism for both. career-related support as well a social support.

It is imere ling that expectations for reciprocal social support would emerge as a significant variable in the equation te ting data from the mentor sample. while expecta ions for reciprocal career-related suppon is not.

Antecedents to Mentoring Expectations

In explaining the influence of dispositional and organizational factors on the formation of expectations. findings based on the protige sample yielded quite interesting findings with need for achievement emerging as a possible predictor of protigis expectations for social and career-related SUPPOI-t. Theoretically, this would not be a surprising finding given that protiges with high need for achievement are likely to actively desire and pursue career-enhancing activities as a means of satisfYing the need. Proteges with a high need for achievement may realize the potential value of a mentor and therefore form higher expectations for that mentor than omeone who do s not

Another interesting finding was the association between gender and p1'l1- tige expectations of a mentor. Although gender was included as a control variable, it is worth noting that in this sample, female proteges had higherexpectations of their parm.ers than males. Specifically, female protegi.s had higher social supportexpeclations as well as higher career-related support expectations for mentors than did male protiges for their mentors, Perhaps, as more women enter traditionally male occupations (e.g., Ph.D. programs, professorships, etc.), their expectations for themselves as wen as their mentoring partners increase. This could be due, in pan, to barriers women perceive in career progression. Barriers in developing mentorshlps (Noe, 1988a; Ragins, 1989,.1999) and career advancement in organizations (Heilman, 1995; Ragins et ai., 1998) is evident in extant literature. These barriers are likely to be known to most women and thus, perhaps" women with higher levels of need [or achievement have higher expectations of their mentors because they feel it necessary to be prepared to overcome certain barriers to advancement .. It is also possible that females simply expect more or have higher expectations, in general, than males in relation to receiving support from others. Whether or not higher levels of expectations are more inherent in females than males is not dearly evident in existing research; however, this is a possible explanation.

Antecedent factors related to the organizational environment also proved to be influential to some degree. Perceived opportunities to be mentored were found to be related to expected social support. Perhaps, social support expectations are more

TI-IE ROLE OF EXPECfATIONS IN TIlE MENTORING EXCHANGE 119

JOURNAL OF Ml\NACERIAL ISSUES VoL XVI Number! Spring 2004

have the same need for achievement. From the basis of this study, one must consider the low reliability estimate for need for achievement and use caution in relying upon this finding for empirical support for this argument Need for achievement was not supported in relation to expectations fonned by a mentor, It was thought that mentors with a high need for achievement, concerned witch career progress themselves, would clearly define goals and behaviors expected of proteges in order to make time spen t with a protegias productive and meaningful as possible. Again, a note of caution is needed in interpreting findings related to need for achievemeritgiven its tow reliability estimate.

Need for power had no statistical support in relation to expectations a protigi fanned for a mentor. Given thata mentoring relationship can help a protege become more visible to influential others and is a useful tool for proteges to build a network with powerful individuals. it is surprising that need for power did not emerge as a significantly influential antecedent factor. For mentors, the lack of support for need for power is even more surprising than the lack of suppan found in the p'rotigi sample. It is mentors who are perceived as powerful and talented individuals in the organization (Hunt and Michael, 1983) and pmtigis who have higher need for power than non"protegis (Fagenson, 1992), yet need for power had little to do with forming expectations about a partner's behavior .. So then, one possible conclusion is that participation in mentoring is not necessarily a way to satisfy a need for power. Mentoring, however, may be one means to obtain more powerful positions through career attainment, thus satisfying <Ii need for power.

120

applying cognitive comparison (Foa, 1957),. we could state that when expectations for support are very high and support received meets or 'exceeds thoseexpe,ctations, perceptions of support a re likely to remain high even in times when support received is rather low. Similarly, when expectations are high and support received is quite low, it win be difficult to create positive perceptions later in the relationship.

Findings suggest that managing expectations is important to mentors and protigis, especially at the beginning of relationships when ,expectations are likely to be very salient. Mentoring program administrators can use this information in several ways. First, findings from this study make it evident that expectations playa role in forming perceptions about the relationship. Therefore, program administrators must manage expectations early in relationship formation, Further, support that occurs during the relationship will be evaluated based upon expectations, Setting dear goals and guidelines for a mentoring program and helping participants to understand. the program's purpose and what can be expected could have a profound impact on relationship and program success. Finally, findings from 'this study may appear counter-intuitive in that we often think of individuals with high expectations as being difficult to satisfy. Yet findings support theoretical perspectives on expectations (cf., Foa, 1957) and suggest that expectations playa formative role in perceptions. giving program administrators more control over program outcomes than perhaps thought.

The findings from this study make it evident that certain frrotifi-s, those with higher levels of need for achieve-

YOUNG AND PERREwE

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAl. ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 20M

strongly influenced by the environment than career-related ,expectations because an errvirornnent in which it is dearly known that mentorship exists and anyone can be meniored if they so desire encourages an atmosphere of acceptance and Cll11UZ,.. rade1'ie. An organizational culture that fosters perceptions that mensoring is accessible perhaps creates a. feeling about possible openness, acceptance, and understanding more closely associated with social support. Wlli1e this thought is quite speculative, the notion that there is a connection between expectations of social support and perceived opportunities to be mentored is interesting and potentially useful.

Implications

Findings from this study indicated a positive relationship between expectations and perceptions of support, thereby suggesting that managing expectations in mentoring relationships is important and that there m.ay be very specific behaviors we can enact to create and sustain positive perceptions within our mentaring relationships. A somewhat more intuitive approach might lead one to jump to the conclusion that a protigi or mentor with high ,expectations will be demanding and difficult, to please. Therefore, a mentoring partner with high expectations will naturally have lower perceptions of support received from a partner. However, applying goal-setting (Locke and Latham, 1990) and ideas from. other cognitive theories on selffulfilling prophecy (Merton, 1948) and cognitive comparisons (Foa, 1957), there is far more detail and precision with which we can approach expectations. For instance,

tation Chair, the possibility that professors randomly selected for this study were currently chairing or recently chaired a dissertation 'WaS far less likely. So while an important aspect of the study was that it included random selection of individuals within a particular target group, the chance that individuals from the group selected as mentors were actually chairing dissertations was quite low.

The nature of the academic sample rna)' cast some doubt on findings from this study; however, mentors and proteges targeted in this study were participating in a formal relationship where the focus was on the career success of the Foligi. WhUe sirnilari ties exist between formal meneorships in this study and those found in business seltings,ther,e is no doubt. a replication or continued study of expectationsand mentoring across varied industries and organizations would strengthen our understanding of men toting.

Yet another limitatioa of this study was that individuals targeted in this study were in the later stages of a relationship. Thus, certain variables. such as expectations, may not have been as salient as they might be in different or earlier stages of the relationship, It would be interesting to examine expectations and dispositional qualities among individuals in the earliest stages of a relationship and throughout the relationship. There may be identifiable points in ill relationship where expectations are more influential and thus should be used to manage, counsel, and train mentors and proteges. As me relationship progn:!sses, perhaps expectations lose importance and other factors such as mentoring support itself should be the main focus on program manage-

THE ROLE OF EXPECfATrONS IN THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 121

JOURNAL OF lIIlANACERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2004

roent and female Il1"otP.gfo, are likely to fonn higher expectations for mentoring partners than proteges with lower levels of need for achievement and male pmtigis. This finding alone gives much information to mentoring program administrators who must reoogni.zeearJy in program development, partlcipaat expectations. In addition, perceptions about the opportunities for mentorship emerged as influential in proteges' resulting expectations for social support from a mentor, Whil.e dispositional qualities such as needs are not under me control of mentoring program administrators, certain aspects of the organizational environments, such as cues suggesting that mentorshlp is available, are not only relevant but are controllable within tlleorganization. Therefore, program administrators who recognize the importance of expectations and relevant antecedent factors will know the importance of making opportunities known to potential participants.

Limitations and Suggestions fo:r Fuuu-,e Research

One aspect of the study that may have limited the findings to some respect was the relatively small size of the mentor sample in comparison to that of dlep,-otigi sample .. While the sample size was large enough to find at leas t the largest of effects, a larger sample would no doubt allow for an analysis including even the smallest yet relevant effects. The sample size, especially for mentors. was likely to be hampered by the random nature of data collectlon. For example, while it is very likely that every Ph.D. student or recent graduate has recently comple ted or is currently working on a dissertation with a designated disser-

122

lations and ultimate participation in a mentorship. AJlen et at. (1997) identified several relevant factors related to willingness [0 participate in mentorship such as organizational rank. Perhaps, these factors are linked to expectations as well and could prove,. upon further investigation, to be influential to expectations formed by mentors an dfJrotig6.

In addition to expanding variables of interest in relation to expectation, examining perceptions of individuals in varied stages of relationship development across several industries and organizations is likely to prove beneficial. In may be that expectations, and even dispositional qualities for that matter, are more influential in the beginning of a relationship. As time progresses and the mentor and fJ'fotigi become familiar with one another and the potential of the relationship, perhaps expectations and more basic dispositional qualities become less relevant and actual outcomes and perceptions of excbange behaviors become more influential. In addition, separating the collection of responses for expectations and perceived support would strengthen the investigation. Expectations. a construct that i likely lO be more salient at the b ginning of a relationship, and perceived support, a construct with more salience at later stages of'a relation hip, would be best studied at different points in time and with different methods or scales. Again, after individuals have accumulated experience as men tors or proteges. experience-related factors become more relevant and influential in future relationships. Tracking the influen e of disposition and expectations across relation hip stages and across levels of men tori ng experience

You G /-\ND PERREwE

ment, Further studying samples of both mentors and proteges is one contribution of this study, but future research should examine mentor-protigi dyads. Jdentifying matched pairs of mentors and proteges and expanding research methods to include qualitative and quantitative methods would greatly increase our understanding of expectations in mentoring.

Improving aspects of future research can be attained, in part. through addressing some of the weaknesses of this study. In particular, future research should expand on possible antecedent factors related to individual characteristics, organizational environment and other related factors. It may be that exploring other antecedent factors such as locus of control, emotional stability,and positive affectivity would increase our understanding of expectation formation in mentoring relationships. Findings related to need for achievement, in particular, should be taken with caution due to the low reliability estimates for both mentor and pmtigi samples. The construct itself isimponanl and has been supported in mentoring research related to proteges (Fagenson, 1989), but a low reliability e tirnate has plagued thi scale aero s several studies (cf., Cook et al., 1981). Although the measure of need for achievement is problematic the remainder of the measures had acceptable reliability estimates, adding credence to the findings.

Variables related to the organizational environment should be expanded to include more than reward structure and perceptions of opportunities to be mentored. Workload issues, career factors. and job-related factors may prove to be relevant and influential in the formation of expec-

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

support are also related to perceptions of career-related support received. In addition, it is dear that some factors are influential in expectation [onnation-gender and need for achievement for por£ges and need for achievement for mentors. Mentors, proteges and mentoring program administrators can use this inforrnation to recognize and understand We importance of expectations in relation to perceptions about mentoring support. Moreover, it is dear that expectations vary across some groups such as females and those scoring high in need or achievement, but expectations can be understood and managed. In addition. other factors related to expectation formation are under control of program administrators, to some extent, such as making opportunities for mentoring known to potential participants and identifying clear program outcomes that may strengthen relationship and program success.

THE ROLE OF EXPECfATlONS IN THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 123

References

Allen, T. D .. M. L. Poteet and S. M. Burroughs. 1997. "A Field Study of Factors Related to Supervisors' Willingness to Mentor Others." jOi,mai oj Vocational Behavior 50: 1-22.

Aryee, S .• y_ W. Chay and J- Chew. 1996. "The Motivation to Ment r among Managerial Employees." Group & o,ganization Managernent21: 261-272.

Atkinson. D. R. H. Neville and A. Casas. 1991. "The Men orship of Ethnic Minorities in Professional Psychology." ProJessionalPsycholo[!;J. R.esem·ch and Practice 22 (4): 336-338.

Berscheid, E. 1994. "Interpersonal Relationships." Itnnual Review oj Ps),clwio{!;J 45: 79-129.

Cook,1- D., S. J. Hepworth, T. D. Wall and P. B. WaIT. 1981. The Experience oj Work: It Compendium and Review oj 249 Measu.res and Their Use. New York, NY:

Academic Press.

Dansereau. G., G. Graen and W. Haga. 1975. "A Role Making Model of Leadership in Formal Organizations: A Developmental Approach." In Leadership

would be an important addition to future research.

Conclusion

This study adds to our exrstmg knowledge about expectations, factors leading to the fonnation of expectations, and perceptions about mentoring support from both mentor and protege perspective . Certainly, this study does not answer all the questions that exist in regard to the mentoring exchange and more needs to be done to understand this valuable personal and organizational relationship. However. this study brings together previously unexplored bases of literature related to cognitive comparisons. expectations and men tOTing, Findings provide evidence that supports exi ring theory on expectations and shows that social support expectations are. posi rive! y related to perceptions of social support received for both mentors and protegis. For proligis, expectations of social

JOURNAL OF :MANAGERJAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

124

YOUNG AND PERREwE

Frontiers. Eds.]. Hunt and L. Larson. Kent, OH: Comparative Administration Re earch Institute. Kent tate University.

Dreher, G. and RAsh. 1990. "A Comparative Study of Mentoring Among Men and Women in Managerial, Professional, and Technlcal Positions." Journal of Applied Psychology 75: 539-546.

___ and T. Cox. 1996. "Race, Gender and Opportunity: A Study of Compensation Attainment and the Establishment of Mentoring Relationships." joumal of Applied Psychology 81: 297-308.

Fagenson- land. E. A., M. A. Marks and K L. Amendola. 1997. "Perceptions of Men toring Relationships." Journal of VocatiO'luU Behauior 51: 29-42.

Fagenson, E. A. 1992. "Mentoring-Who Needs It? A Comparison of ProtigCs' and Non Protigffi' Need For Power, Achievement, Affiliation and Autonomy." Joumal of Vocational Behavior 41: 48-60.

___ .1989. "The Mentor Advantage: Perceived Career and Job Experiences of Protigis v. Non-Protigis." Journal of Vocational BeltaviodO: 309-320.

Foa, V. E. 1957. "Relations ofWorker's Expectation to Satisfaction with the Supervisor." Personnel Psychology 10: 161-168.

Graen, C. B. and T. A Scandura. 1987. 'Toward a Psychology of Dyadic Organizing .. " In .fWearch in Organizational Behavi()r. Eds. L. L. Cummings and B. M. Slaw. Greenwich. Cf: JAl Press. pp. 175-.208.

Greene, C. N. 1972. "Relationships among Role Accuracy, Compliance, Performance Evaluation, and Sari faction within Managerial Dyads." Academy of ManagementJournall5: 205-215.

Hasselback,]. R 1995-1996. Directory of Management Faculty. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Heilman, M. E. 1995. "Sex Stereotypes and Their Effect in the Workplace: What We Know and What We Don't Know." Tn Genderin the Workplace. Ed. N. Struthers. Jo1L11Lal of Social Bebaoior and Personality 10 Special issue): 3-26.

Higgins, M .. C. and K. E. Kram. 2001. "ReconceptualizingMentodng at Work:

A Developmental Network Perspective." Academy of Manatpnenl Revil!w26: 264-288.

Homans, G. C. 1958. "Social Behavior as Exchange. "A11Ierit:.anJo1Lrnal of Sociology 63: 597-606.

Hunt, D. M. and C. Michael. 1983. "Mentorshlp: A Career Training and Development Tool." Academy of Managem.ent Review 8: 475485.

Ibarra, H. 1995. "Race, Opportunity. and Diversity of Social Circles in Managerial Networks: A Conceptual Framework." Academy of ManagementJoumal38: 673-703.

Kalbfleisch, P.]. and A. B. Davies. 1991. "Minorities and Mentoring: Managing the Multicultural Institution.' Communication Educatitm 40: 266-271.

___ and 1993.' 'An In terpersonal Model for Participauon in Men-

toring Relationships. ,. Western Journal ofVacatio-nal Behavior 57:399-415.

Koberg, C. S., R W. Boss, D. Chappell and R. C. Ringer. 1994. "Correlates and Consequences of Protigi Mentoring in a Large Hospital." Group and Organi· zation Management 19:219-239.

Krarn, K.. E. 1983. "Phases of the Mentor Relationship." Administrative Science Qtunterly 26: 608-625.

___ 1985. Mentaringal Work. Glenview, lL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

JOURNAL OF MANAGERlAL ISSUE Vol. XVI Number 1 Spring 2004

THE': ROLE OF' EXPEcrATIONS IN THE MENTORING EXCHANGE 125

Locke. E. A. 1968. "Toward a Theory of Task Motivation and Incentives." Organizational Behavior and Human Performanoe 3: 157-189.

___ and G. P. Latham. 1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Merton, R K. 1948. "The Se1f-Fullilling Prophecy." Antioch Review 8: 193--210. Noe, R A. 1988a. "Women and Mentoring: A Review and Research Agenda."

Academy o/Management Reoieu: 13 (l): 65-78.

___ 1988b. "An Investigation of the Determinants of Successful Assigned Mentoring Relationships." Personnel Psychology 41: 457-479.

Olian, J. D.,. S. J. Carroll, C. M. Ciannantonio and D. B. Feren. 1988. "What Do ProtigesLook For in a Mentor? Results of Three Experimental Studies." journal of Vocational Behaoior 33: 15-37.

Ragins, B. R 1999. "Gender and Mentoring Relationships: A Review and Research Agenda for the Next Decade." In Handbook of Gender and Work. Ed. Gary N. Powell. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. pp. 347-370. ___ .. ] 989. "Barriers to Mentoring: The Female Manager's Dilemma." Human Relations 42: 1-22.

___ and D. B. McFarlin. 1990. "Perceptions of Mentor Role in Cross-Gender Mentoring Relationships." [ournal of Vocational Behavior 37: 321-339. ___ and]. Cotton. 1999. "Mentor Functions and Outcomes: A Comparison of Men and Women in Formal and Formal Mentoring Relationships." iou,mal of Applied Psychology 84: 529-550.

___ and . 1993. "Gender and Willingness to Mentor." [ournal of

Managenumt 19: 97-11l.

___ and 1991. "Easier Said Than Done: Gender Differences in

Perceived Barriers to Gaining a Mentor." Academy of Management journal 34 (4): 939-951.

___ " and J. S. Miller. 2000. "Marginal Mentoring; The Effects of

Type of Mentor, Quality of Relationship, and Program Design on Work and Career Attitudes." Academy of ManagemenljUli.rnaI43: ll 77-1210.

___ and T. Scandura. 1994. "Gender Difference in Expected Outcomes of Mentoring Relationships." Academy of ManagementJourna137: 957-971.

__ -. B. Townsend and M. Mattis. 1998. "Gender Gap in The Executive Suite:

GEOs and Female Executives Report on Breaking the Glass Ceiling." Academy of Managenllmt Executiue 12: 28-42.

Russell, J E. A. and D. M. Adams. 1997. "The Changing Nature of Mentoring in Organizations: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Mentoring in Organizations." Journal of Vocational Behavior 51: 1-14.

___ . 1992. "Mentorship and Career Mobility: An Empirical Investigation. • journal of Organiz.a,tional Behavior 13: 169-174.

___ and B. R Ragins. 1993. "The Effects of Sex and Gender Role Orientation on Mentorship in Male-Dominated Occupations." Journal of Vocational Behavior 43: 251-265.

Schneider, B. 1983. "Interactional Psychology and Organizational Behavior." In Research in Organizational Behavior. Eds, Staw and Cummings. Greenwich, CT:

Press, Inc.

Silverhart, T. A. 1994. "It Works: Mentoring Drives Productivity Higher." Ma.nagers Magazine October. 14-15.

JOURNAL OF MANAGERIAL ISSUES Vol. XVI Number I Spring 2001

126

YOUNG AND PERREwE

Steers, R. M. and D. N. Braunstein. 1976. "A Behaviorally-Based Measure of Manifest Needs in Work Settings." Journal of Vocational Behaviol'9: 251-266.

Sutton, C. D. and R. W, Woodman. 1989. "Pygmalion Goes to Work: The Effects of Supervisor Expectations in a Retail Setting. " Journal of Applied Psycholof!J 74: 943-950.

Thomas, D. A. 1990. "The Impact of Race on Managers' Experiences of Developmental Relationships (Mentoring and Sponsorship): An. Intra-Organizational Study." JournClJ oJOrganizational Behavior 11: 479492.

Turban. D. B. and T. W. Dougherty. 1994. "Role of Protigft Personality in Receipt of Mentoring and Career Success." Academy of Management Jou'rnal37: 688-702.

Whitely, W., T. W. Dougherty and G. F, Dreher. 1991. "Relation hip of Career Mentoring and Socioeconomic Origin to Managers' and Profe sionals' Early Career Progress." AcaMmy of ManagementJoumal34: 331-351.

___ and P. Coetsier. 1993. "The Relationship of Career Mentoring to Early Career Outcomes." Organization Studies 14: 419-441.

Young, A. M. and P. L. Perrewe, 2000. "What Did You Expect? An Examination of Career-Related Support and So ial Support among Mentors and Protigis." Journal of Managernenl26: 611-632.

JOURNAl. OF MANAGERL·\LISSUES Vol. XV1 Number 1 Spring 200<1

Copyright of Journal of Managerial I ssues is the property of Journal of Managerial Issues I PSU and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.