Mind mapping the topic of mentoring

Mind mapping the topic of mentoring

Joseph Kim-keung Ho

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Abstract: The topic of mentoring is a main one in Human Resource Management. This article makes use of the mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach to render an image on the knowledge structure of mentoring. The finding of the review exercise is that its knowledge structure comprises four main themes, i.e., (a) Descriptions of basic concepts and information (b) Major underlying theories and thinking, (c) Main research topics and issues, and (d) Major trends and issues related to practices. There is also a set of key concepts identified from the mentoring literature review. The article offers some academic and pedagogical values on the topics of mentoring, literature review and the mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach.

Key words: Mentoring, literature review, mind map, the mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach

Introduction

Mentoring is a main topic in Human Resource Management. It is of academic and pedagogical interest to the writer who has been a lecturer on Human Resource Management for some tertiary education centres in Hong Kong. In this article, the writer presents his literature review findings on mentoring using the mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach. This approach was proposed by this writer in 2016 and has been employed to review the literature on a number of topics, such as supply chain management, strategic management accounting and customer relationship management (Ho, 2016). The MMBLR approach itself is not particularly novel as mind mapping has been employed in literature review since its inception. The overall aims of this exercise are to:

1.      Render an image of the knowledge structure of mentoring via the application of the MMBLR approach;

2.      Illustrate how the MMBLR approach can be applied in literature review on an academic topic, such as mentoring.

The account of this literature review exercise offers academic and pedagogical values to those who are interested in the topics of mentoring, literature review and the MMBLR approach. Other than that, this exercise facilitates this writer’s intellectual learning on these three topics. The next section makes a brief introduction on the MMBLR approach. After that, an account of how it is applied to study mentoring is presented.

On the mind mapping-based literature review apprroach

The mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach was developed by this writer in 2016 (Ho, 2016). It makes use of mind mapping as a complementary literature review exercise (see the Literature on mind mapping Facebook page and the Literature on literature review Facebook page). The approach is made up of two steps. Step 1 is a thematic analysis on the literature of the topic chosen for study. Step 2 makes use of the findings from step 1 to produce a complementary mind map. The MMBLR approach is a relatively straightforward and brief exercise. The approach is not particularly original since the idea of using mind maps in literature review has been well recognized in the mind mapping literature. The MMBLR approach is also an interpretive exercise in the sense that different reviewers with different research interest and intellectual background inevitably will select different ideas, facts and findings in their thematic analysis (i.e., step 1 of the MMBLR approach). Also, to conduct the approach, the reviewer needs to perform a literature search beforehand. Apparently, what a reviewer gathers from a literature search depends on what library facility, including e-library, is available to the reviewer. The next section presents the findings from the MMBLR approach step 1; afterward, a companion mind map is provided based on the MMBLR approach step 1 findings.

Mind mapping-based literature review on mentoring: step 1 findings

Step 1 of the MMBLR approach is a thematic analysis on the literature of the topic under investigation (Ho, 2016). In our case, this is the mentoring topic. The writer gathers some academic articles from some universities’ e-libraries as well as via the Google Scholar. With the academic articles collected, To prepare for the review exercise, the writer conducted a literature review on them to assemble a set of ideas, viewpoints, concepts and findings (called points here). The points from the mentoring literature are then grouped into four themes here. The key words in the quotations are bolded in order to highlight the key concepts involved.

Theme 1: Descriptions of basic concepts and information

Point 1.1.              “As an educational concept, mentoring dates back thousands of years. Historical biographies of eminent persons frequently highlight the role of mentors in their development …. The literature is replete with many definitions of mentoring. The meaning of the term “mentoring” …. is a relatively chronologically stable dyadic relationship between an experienced mentor and a less experienced mentee, characterized by mutual trust and benevolence, with the purpose of promoting learning, development, and, ultimately, progress in the mentee” (Şahin, 2014);

Point 1.2.              “A protégé is the person who is guided and supported by a mentor, while a mentor is an influential person with valuable experience and knowledge who provides a protégé with support, guidance and developmental advice” (Kwan, Yim and Zhou, 2015);

Point 1.3.              “Healy and Welchert ….  consider mentoring to be “a dynamic, reciprocal relationship in a work environment between an advanced career incumbent (mentor) and a beginner (protégé) aimed at promoting the career development of both.”..” (Newby and Heide, 1992);

Point 1.4.              “In an organizational context, a mentoring relationship involves an experienced and knowledgeable individual (the mentor) investing time, knowledge, and effort to provide developmental career support in a caring and helpful manner to a less experienced individual (the protégé) in order to improve the protégé’s knowledge, skills, and growth” (Weinberg and  Lankau, 2011);

Point 1.5.              “Reverse mentoring is an innovative way to encourage learning and facilitate cross-generational relationships. It involves the pairing of a younger, junior employee acting as mentor to share expertise with an older, senior colleague as mentee. The purpose is knowledge sharing, with the mentee focused on learning from the mentor’s updated subject or technological expertise and generational perspective” (Murphy, 2012);

Point 1.6.              “The focus of mentoring is on the career of a protégé who is identified as a high performer and capable of advancement. This is in contrast to coaching that provides suggestions on improving performance and not career advancement” (Fracaro, 2002);

Point 1.7.              “The historical roots of mentoring lie in the Greek myth of Ulysses, who in preparation for his lengthy sea voyages entrusted his young son to the care of his old friend Mentor. Thereafter the name has been identified with a more experienced person who forms a relationship with a less experienced person in order to provide them with advice, support and encouragement” (Beech and Brockbank, 1999);

Theme 2: Major underlying theories and thinking

Point 2.1.              “Psychosocial developmental theory posits eight predictable psychological crises that individuals must resolve for healthy development to occur ….. The crises are related to psychological needs, such as a search for identity. The stages from infancy through school age are listed in order, by their crisis to be resolved: (I) trust vs mistrust, (II) autonomy vs shame, (III) initiative vs guilt, and (IV) industry vs inferiority. The stages from adolescence through late adulthood are: (V) identity vs identity confusion, (VI) intimacy vs isolation, (VII) generativity vs stagnation, and (VIII) integrity vs despair. Mentoring researchers … have drawn upon this theory to understand how mentoring may be influenced by these needs. Stages V and VII in particular may explain why individuals need mentors and serve as mentors” (Lunsford, 2014);

Point 2.2.              “…it is important to recognise that formal mentoring programmes will not suit all staff development needs or organisational cultures. Having a clear idea of the development needs of the employees in your organisation is an essential first step to identifying whether or not mentoring will be the right tool to use” (Ramalho, 2014);

Point 2.3.              “The maintenance of a successful formal mentoring program requires the ongoing participation of employees to serve as mentors. If these employees have a negative experience or perceive more costs than benefits in being formal mentors, then the program will quickly terminate, because few people will be motivated to support the program” (Weinberg and  Lankau, 2011);

Point 2.4.              “The organization …. benefits from mentor/protege relationships. Mentoring can help resolve some organizational problems such as premature departure, stagnation, boredom, and lack of qualified people in the organization …. Mentoring programs also aid development of managerial talent” (Newby and Heide, 1992);

Point 2.5.              “…mentors may show concern for prote´ge´s, provide them with strategies to reduce the uncertainty of a new environment, and facilitate their adaptive responses to the environment, so as to prevent or to reduce their strains. That said, mentoring could replenish prote´ge´s’ ‘‘resource reservoir’’ that could then be used to inhibit or reduce their maladaptive psychological responses at work” (Yang, Xu, Allen, Shi, Zhang and Lou, 2011);

Point 2.6.              “According to Kram …, mentors perform two different functions, namely, career-related functions, which support prote´ge´s’ career advancement, and psychosocial functions, which assist prote´ge´s’ personal growth, clarity of identity, and self-worth. These two functions include different forms of advice such as suggestions, recommendations, feedback, and other relevant information” (Son and Kim, 2012);

Point 2.7.              “According to Viator and Scandura …, mentors provide three functions to protégés: vocational mentoring, role modeling, and social support” (Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017);

Point 2.8.              “According to Cropley … children learn rapidly from the observation of models provided by prestigious adults. Thus, despite the kinds of thing that they tell their students to do, teacher/mentor find that students also learn by observing their mentor” (Şahin, 2014);

Point 2.9.              “An ideal mentoring program consists of five major phases. These include goal setting, initiation, cultivation, separation, and redefinition ….. The only stage not directly requiring the mentor’s participation is that of goal setting; however, many potential mentors participate in this process as subject-matter experts and as a prelude to their later involvement” (Newby and Heide, 1992);

Point 2.10.         “As the nature of mentoring changes, so too does the way in which these multiple relationships are initiated and carried out. In addition to meetings and “power lunches,” potential protégés can take advantage of different mechanisms such as phone, fax, and Internet/e-mail to either complement or substitute for face-to-face mentoring sessions” (Whiting and de Janasz, 2004);

Point 2.11.         “In organizations, mentoring by the supervisor (i.e., supervisory mentoring) is particularly beneficial with research suggesting that its influence on job outcomes (e.g., commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover intention) is stronger than that of other forms of mentoring …. As supervisors are the main representatives of the organization for employees …., supervisory mentoring likely results in direct and explicit signals about the organization's concern for employee development” (Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017);

Point 2.12.         “In the case of supervisory mentoring, the mentor's role is endorsed by the supervisor who has a significant influence on employees' tasks and job conditions …. Jobs with high scope should thus be perceived as being consistent with supervisory mentoring's goals and strengthen the obligation to reciprocate the benefits associated with mentoring” (Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017);

Point 2.13.         “Job scope, which reflects the level of enrichment of a job …, offers a context in which employees have opportunities to put into practice what they learn through mentoring. As supervisors, who are also mentors and act on behalf of the organization …, can shape employees' tasks and job conditions …, their ability to influence commitment through mentoring should be eased when employees concomitantly perceived their job to be enriched (i.e., high job scope)..” (Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017);

Point 2.14.         “Psychosocial functions …. rely on the quality of the interpersonal bond between mentor and mentee, and the degree of trust which exists within the relationship. Factors which influence the psychosocial bonding include mutual liking, respect, exclusivity, counselling skill and the desire for intimacy” (Beech and Brockbank, 1999);

Point 2.15.         “Some mentors may be involved in mentoring relationships mainly for extrinsic reasons, for example because their supervisor asked them to help junior newcomers. The motive then comes from outside the person: this is the most controlled motive for acting. When the motive begins to be internalized, but the regulation of the behavior still depends on the evaluation against external standards, the behavior is introjected regulated. This often appears as ego involvement …. People often engage in activities that are socially acceptable, in order to avoid feelings of guilt (e.g., paying back a favor to the protégé), or to gain others' respect (e.g., meeting the work environments' expectations to take a junior under their wings). Introjection is the second most controlled motive for acting” (Janssen, van Vuuren and de Jong, 2014);

Point 2.16.         “Strategies (likely to be unconscious) adopted by the mentoring couple include ‘projective identification’, ‘splitting’, ‘pairing’ and ‘attribution error’…” (Beech and Brockbank, 1999);

Point 2.17.         “Traditionally, workplace mentoring refers to relationships where advice, guidance and support are offered by more experienced colleagues to those with less experience or who are new to the organisation. In most organisations, this transfer of knowledge, skills and experience takes place organically, through informal networks and interactions” (Ramalho, 2014);

Point 2.18.         “When it comes to mentoring, chemistry and rapport between the mentor and mentee are crucial ingredients for success. Identifying individuals who share similar interests or whose experience and skill set complement the objectives of another, is a key part of this process” (Ramalho, 2014);

Point 2.19.         “Whereas traditional mentor-protégé relationships tended to be of the stable, long-term master-apprentice variety, the changing nature of technology, organizational structures, and marketplace dynamics have transformed mentoring into a process that extends beyond a single individual who represents a single function, organization, or country. Individuals need to consider relying not on one individual but rather on multiple, diverse individuals” (Whiting and de Janasz, 2004);

Point 2.20.         “Effective mentoring • is a relationship that focuses on the needs of the mentee • fosters caring and supportive relationships • encourages all mentees to develop to their fullest potential and • is a strategy to develop active community partnerships”…” (McMahon, Limerick and Gillies, 2004);

Point 2.21.         “…as commitment encourages prote´ge´s to spend more time with their mentors, highly committed prote´ge´s would have more opportunities to appreciate their mentors’ knowledge and expertise” (Son and Kim, 2012);

Point 2.22.         “Mentoring is a powerful process for enhancing the development of individuals and organizations …. Individuals who have a mentor report higher job satisfaction, compensation, promotion, and organizational commitment …. Organizations benefit through mentoring as well. Mentors facilitate the socialization process and help acculturate junior members of the organization” (Whiting and de Janasz, 2004);

Point 2.23.         “Workplace mentoring relationships involve building social capital … in order to fulfill instrumental goals such as getting promoted, and also carry expressive network resources (e.g., emotional support) that may impact employees’ affective bond with the organization and with co-workers” (Yang, Xu, Allen, Shi, Zhang and Lou, 2011);

Theme 3: Main research topics and issues

Point 3.1.              “Many researchers have examined the role of gender in mentoring relationships …, noting that mentoring is an effective way of helping women to obtain promotions ….. Over 80% of female executives perceive their mentors as either critical or fairly important in their career advancement” (Kwan, Yim and Zhou, 2015);

Point 3.2.              “Research has indicated that protégés tend to reciprocate to their colleagues with high levels of organisational commitment because mentoring provides numerous advantages to those receiving it” (Kwan, Yim and Zhou, 2015);

Point 3.3.              “… an understanding of the relation between mentoring and customer orientation is still lacking. Customer orientation is an attitudinal construct defined as ‘the importance that organisational members place on understanding and meeting customers’ needs and expectations regarding products and services and on achieving customer satisfaction and long-term loyalty for the organisation’…” (Kwan, Yim and Zhou, 2015);

Point 3.4.              “….formal mentoring program implementation entails complications that are distinct from those one would experience in informal mentoring relationships. One major distinction between formal and informal mentoring is that formal mentoring relationships are constrained by a very specific period of time …, and we do not yet know much about how mentors carry out their roles over the course of these abbreviated formal assignments” (Weinberg and  Lankau, 2011);

Point 3.5.              “A mentor’s perspective of the mentoring he or she provides is often quite different from that of the protégé, partially because the mentor may engage in mentoring behaviors that are “outside of the protégé’s awareness,” yet few studies have examined formal mentoring from the perspective of the mentor” (Weinberg and  Lankau, 2011);

Point 3.6.              “E-mentoring is still relatively new and under-researched … The limited published research available has tended to focus on supporting sociability, rather than on designing usability” (Headlam-Wells, Gosland and Craig, 2006);

Point 3.7.              “Empirical evidence and literature reviews support the claim that mentored employees obtain more promotions and have higher incomes, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment …. The favorable outcomes of mentoring relationships have inspired many companies to implement structured mentoring programs known as formal mentoring” (Son and Kim, 2012);

Point 3.8.              “Mentors' professional knowledge has been found to be highly practice-oriented and emanates to a great extent from mentors' own professional experiences and preferences … and instructional contexts have been found to have a strong influence on mentors' conceptions and practices of mentoring” (Aspfors and Fransson, 2015);

Point 3.9.              “Rhodes …  claims to date there has been little reliable, academic literature published in the field of mentoring …. However, one document stands out as perhaps the most influential to be published in the last decade: The National Evaluation of Big Brothers Big Sisters by researchers at Public/Private Ventures in Pennsylvania …… What the study concluded was that all teens had gradually increased problems as they progressed through their teen years. However, the teens with mentors “worsened” at a slower rate than those without a mentor” (DeJong, 2004);

Point 3.10.         “Studying mentoring as a form of SHRM [strategic human resource management] is an interesting addition to the HRD [human resource development] literature because many of the characteristics of a firm’s traditional approaches to individual human resources can’t be easily changed. For example, turnover and selection processes may be able to slowly change the employee landscape, but they can’t change a crucial element of human resources—the individual employees’ characteristics” (Thurston Jr., D’Abate and Eddy, 2012):

Point 3.11.         “The concept of the mentor as all-wise sage and the protégé as a passive recipient of the mentor’s wisdom is changing to the new paradigm of the protégé as initiator of the relationship and the one responsible for setting the learning goals for the mentoring partnership” (Emeraldinsight, 2015);

Point 3.12.         “The lack of attention given to examining why mentoring works represents a significant gap in the literature since in the absence of this information it is difficult, if not impossible, to build comprehensive causal models of the mentoring process” (Baranik, Roling and Eby, 2010);

Point 3.13.         “The mentoring literature has largely ignored the function of information and knowledge sharing, which can play a significant role in the mentoring relationship. This facet of the mentoring relationship has been implicitly argued but not fully explored” (Bryant, 2005);

Point 3.14.         “There is ample literature on mentoring in organizational and business settings. However, less attention has been given to a study of mentoring in educational settings, particularly as it might relate to the career development of scientists. Yet scientists’ contributions to innovation and economic productivity are considerable, even though they make up a small percentage of the workforce” (Lunsford, 2014);

Point 3.15.         “Various scholars have emphasized that the mentor is a neglected actor in mentoring research … and as a result, we have a one-sided and incomplete understanding of mentoring relationships. Much more research is needed to examine mentors' attitudes, needs, motivations, and behaviors. Most often, mentoring is not mandated or rewarded in organizations” (Janssen, van Vuuren and de Jong, 2014);

Point 3.16.         “When asked how they perceived the teens they were mentoring, over half the mentors indicated that they thought of their Little Brothers or Sisters as younger friends. Some mentors defined their relationship as a friendship to specifically differentiate from any association of family. For example, one mentor said, “He is mostly like a young friend because he is not like family,” while another indicated “If I were like a parent, she wouldn’t have a good time and would likely reject the relationship.”…” (DeJong, 2004);

Point 3.17.         “A variety of authors have suggested that HRD [human resource development] focuses on improving individual and organizational effectiveness through an integrated application of human resource activities including training and development, organizational development, and career development” (Thurston Jr., D’Abate and Eddy, 2012):

Point 3.18.         “Following social exchange theory …, employees should therefore reciprocate to the organization the benefits associated with supervisory mentoring (e.g., via increased commitment). But what would happen if, beyond supervisory mentoring itself, the organizational context does not support employee development? Would supervisory mentoring suffice to bring about desired outcomes?” (Lapointe and Vandenberghe, 2017);

Theme 4: Major trends and issues related to practices

Point 4.1.              “…as Terry Morehead Dworkin et al. say, mentoring programs designed exclusively for women in the US to the exclusion of men are not acceptable. However, a voluntary adopted private employer plan, if focused and need-justified, might avoid successful challenge” (Emeraldinsight, 2013);

Point 4.2.              “…the recent organizational trends of downsizing and delayering have reduced the number of senior managers in organizations available to be mentors …. In this situation, newer employees may need to turn to experienced employees on their team who are at the same level in the firm for mentoring. In addition, peers may be more effective at creating and sharing certain kinds of knowledge—especially technical and job related information” (Bryant, 2005);

Point 4.3.              “As globalization progresses, mentoring programs will likely become an increasingly important part of managerial practices in multinational corporations where employees from both Western and non-Western cultures work together. Notably in China, mentoring programs have become adopted by more and more companies including multinational and local firms, for purposes like aiding early-career employees’ succession planning and coping with organizational structural changes” (Yang, Xu, Allen, Shi, Zhang and Lou, 2011);

Point 4.4.              “The internet has opened the gateway to mass global communication; but E-mentoring has previously been largely limited to e-mail-only systems …. EMPATHY-EDGE aimed to extend the range of communication methods and an online site was created which used both synchronous and asynchronous methods of communication” (Headlam-Wells, Gosland and Craig, 2006);

Point 4.5.              “The optimism for mentoring in the popular press assumes that individuals will be able to link up and develop great interactions rather easily. In reality, mentoring can be restrictive regarding who participates and when. Barriers as such organizational structures, interpersonal skills, cross-gender relationships, differences in ethnicity, and flexible working arrangements challenge the myth that finding mentors and fostering mentoring connections is effortless” (Hamilton and Scandura, 2002);

Each of the four themes has a set of associated points (i.e., idea, viewpoints, concepts and findings). Together they provide an organized way to comprehend the knowledge structure of the mentoring topic. The bolded key words in the quotation reveal, based on the writer’s intellectual judgement, the key concepts examined in the mentoring literature. The referencing indicated on the points identified informs the readers where to find the academic articles to learn more about the details on these points. Readers are also referred to the Literature on consulting and coaching Facebook page for additional information on this topic. The process of conducting the thematic analysis is an exploratory as well as synthetic learning endeavour on the topic’s literature. Once the structure of the themes, sub-themes[1] and their associated points are finalized, the reviewer is in a position to move forward to step 2 of the MMBLR approach. The MMBLR approach step 2 finding, i.e., a companion mind map on mentoring, is presented in the next section.

Mind mapping-based literature review on mentoring: step 2 (mind mapping) output

By adopting the findings from the MMBLR approach step 1 on mentoring, the writer constructs a companion mind map shown as Figure 1.

Referring to the mind map on mentoring, the topic label is shown right at the centre of the map as a large blob. Four main branches are attached to it, corresponding to the four themes identified in the thematic analysis. The links and ending nodes with key phrases represent the points from the thematic analysis. The key phrases have also been bolded in the quotations provided in the thematic analysis. As a whole, the mind map renders an image of the knowledge structure on mentoring based on the thematic analysis findings. Constructing the mind map is part of the learning process on literature review. The mind mapping process is speedy and entertaining. The resultant mind map also serves as a useful presentation and teaching material. This mind mapping exercise confirms the writer’s previous experience using on the MMBLR approach (Ho, 2016). Readers are also referred to the Literature on literature review Facebook page and the Literature on mind mapping Facebook page for additional information on these two topics.

Concluding remarks

The MMBLR approach to study mentoring provided here is mainly for its practice illustration as its procedures have been refined via a number of its employment on an array of topics (Ho, 2016). No major additional MMBLR steps nor notions have been introduced in this article. In this respect, the exercise reported here primarily offers some pedagogical value as well as some systematic and stimulated learning on mentoring in the field of Human Resource Management. Nevertheless, the thematic findings and the image of the knowledge structure on mentoring in the form of a mind map should also be of academic value to those who research on mentoring.

Bibliography

1.      Aspfors, J. and G. Fransson. 2015. “Research on mentor education for mentors of newly qualified teachers: A qualitative meta-synthesis” Teaching and Teacher Education 48, Elsevier: 75-86.

2.      Baranik, L.E., E.A. Roling and L.T. Eby. 2010. “Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived organizational support” Journal of Vocational Behavior 76, Elsevier: 366-373.

3.      Beech, N. and A. Brockbank. 1999. “Power/knowledge and Psychosocial Dynamics in Mentoring” Management Learning 30(1), Sage: 7-25.

4.      Bryant, S.E. 2005. “The impact of Peer Mentoring on Organizational Knowledge Creation and Sharing: An Empirical Study in a Software Firm” Group & Organization Management 30(3) June, Sage: 319-338.

5.      DeJong, M. 2004. “Metaphor and the Mentoring Process” Child & Youth Care Forum 33(1) February: 3-17.

6.      Emeraldinsight. 2013. “Making it through mentoring” Development and learning in organizations 27(3), Emerald: 29-31.

7.      Emeraldinsight. 2015. “Setting your mind on mentoring” Development and learning in organizations 29(1), 24-26.

8.      Fracaro, K. 2002. “Mentoring: too for career guidance” American Salesman August: 10-12.

9.      Hamilton, B.A. and T.A. Scandura. 2002. “E-mentoring: Implications for Organizational Learning and Development in a Wired World” Organizational Dynamics 31(4), Elsevier: 388-402.

10. Headlam-Wells, J., J. Gosland and J. Craig. 2006. “Beyond the organisation: The design and management of E-mentoring systems” International Journal of Information Management 26, Elsevier: 372-385.

11. Ho, J.K.K. 2016. Mind mapping for literature review – a ebook, Joseph KK Ho publication folder October 7 (url address: http://josephkkho.blogspot.hk/2016/10/mind-mapping-for-literature-review-ebook.html).

12. Janssen, S., M. van Vuuren and M.D.T. de Jong. 2014. “Motives to mentor: Self-focused, protégé-focused, and unfocused motives” Journal of Vocational  Behavior 85, Elsevier: 266-275.

13. Kwan, H.K., F.H.K. Yim and X. Zhou. 2015. “Effects of mentoring on customer orientation: the moderating role of gender” Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 53: 124-140.

14. Lapointe, É. and C. Vandenberghe. 2017. “Supervisory mentoring and employee affective commitment and turnover: The critical role of context factors” Journal of Vocational Behavior 98, Elsevier: 98-107.

15. Literature on consulting and coaching Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-consulting-and-coaching-565602056953022/).

16. Literature on literature review Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.literaturereview/).

17. Literature on mind mapping Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.mind.mapping/).

18. Lunsford, L.G. 2014. “Mentors, tormentors, and no mentors: mentoring scientists” International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching Education 3(1), Emerald: 4-17.

19. McMahon, M., B. Limerick and J. Gillies. 2004. “Mentoring as a career guidance activity: fostering non-traditional career exploration for girls” Semantic Scholar (url address: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Mentoring-as-a-Career-Guidance-Activity-Fostering-Mcmahon-Limerick/5ca80961892a2e65464cd1ca90e340f7f9bc9775) [visited at March 6, 2017].

20. Murphy, W.M. 2012. “Reverse mentoring at work: fostering cross-generational learning and developing millennial leaders” Human Resource Management 51(4) July-August, Wiley: 549-574.

21. Newby, T.J. and A. Heide. 1992. “The Value of Mentoring” Performance Improvement Quarterly 5(4): 2-15.

22. Ramalho, J. 2014. “Mentoring in the workplace” Industrial and commercial training 46(4), Emerald: 177-181.

23. Şahin, F. 2014. “The effectiveness of mentoring strategy for developing the creative potential of the gifted and non-gifted students” Thinking Skills and Creativity 14, Elsevier: 47-55.

24. Son, S.J. and D.Y. Kim. 2012. “What Makes Protégés Take Mentors’ Advice in Formal Mentoring Relationships?” Journal of Career Development 40(4), Sage: 311-328.

25. Thurston Jr., P.W., C.P. D’Abate and E.R. Eddy. 2012. “Mentoring as an HRD Approach: Effects on Employees Attitudes and Contributions Independent of Core Self-Evaluation” Human Resource Development Quarterly 23(2) Summer, Wiley: 139-165.

26. Weinberg, F.J. and M.J. Lankau. 2011. “Formal Mentoring Programs: A Mentor-Centric and Longitudinal Analysis” Journal of Management 37(6) November: 1527-1557.

27. Whiting, V.R. and S.C. de Janasz. 2004. “Mentoring in the 21^st Century: Using the Internet to Build Skills and Networks” Journal of Management Education 28(3) June: 275-293.

28. Yang, L.Q., X. Xu, T.D. Allen, K. Shi, X.C. Zhang and Z.Y. Lou. 2011. “Mentoring in China: Enhanced Understanding and Association with Occupational Stress” J Bus Psychol 26, Springer: 485-499.

---

[1] There is no sub-theme generated in this analysis on mentoring.