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 21st 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.
