Critical issues in mentoring research

Introduction Research into the activity of mentoring has grown at a significant rate in the last twenty years (Allen, Eby, O’Brien & Lentz, 2008; Janssen, Vuuren & Jong, 2015) as has the range of inter-disciplinary subjects associated with mentoring, such as business, education, entrepreneurship, nursing and psychology (De Four, Pegg & Beck, 2015; Kochan, 2013; Laukhuf & Malone, 2015; Underhill, 2006). Allen et al.’s (2008) review of organizational mentoring literature – consisting of two hundred and seven individual research studies, published in sixty different journals acknowledged the growing interest and research on the topic of mentoring. The authors attributed this to the increasing recognition that formal and informal mentoring is associated with behavioral, attitudinal and career benefits for mentees and mentors (Allen et al., 2004; Eby et al., 2008; Ghosh & Reio, 2013). Additionally, over the last ten years there have been an increasing number of evaluations of mentoring research processes and practices (Allen et al., 2008; Bozeman & Feeney, 2007; Janssen, Vuuren & Jong, 2015; Kammeyer-Mueller & Judge, 2008; Underhill, 2006). A broad range of mentoring studies are explored in this chapter within the context of identifying the critical issues involved in assuring the quality of mentoring research. Purpose and Overview The aim of this chapter is to provide an in-depth analysis of the critical issues related to the quality of research processes and strategies used in contemporary inter-disciplinary scholarly literature in mentoring. Further, it seeks to expand researcher and practitioner perspectives about this issues that will ultimately enhance the research about and practice of mentoring. The chapter begins with an outline of the process used to identify critical issues in assuring quality in mentoring research. This is followed by a discussion of each of the eight critical issues identified through this process, referring to specific studies that illustrate the degree to which quality is achieved. The final section posits the way ahead for mentoring research

Green human resource management: a comparative qualitative case study of a United States multinational corporation

This article explores the ways in which a multinational company (MNC) approaches Green Human Resource Management (HRM) in its British, German and Swedish subsidiaries. The authors analyze the similarities and differences in Green HRM approaches in these three European subsidiaries of a US restaurant chain. This enables the comparison of Green HRM practises and behaviors, and considers the factors that influence the subsidiaries in this particular domain. Therefore, this research addresses the current lack of international comparative research in the field of Green HRM. The methodological approach is multi-case study with 50 participants, using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. The results show evidence of pro-active environmental management, reflected through a range of operational and people-centred initiatives across the three European countries. Although there is an overarching commitment to environmental sustainability, the positioning and alignment of the environment and HR function differ amongst the subsidiaries, as does the way in which the subsidiaries choose to engage the workforce in environmental sustainability. The study identified a number of factors which explain the differences in approach including, amongst others, strategic and performance drivers and cultural dimensions, such as relationships with key stakeholders

The mentoring cycle

The aim of this chapter is to explore the mentoring cycle and in particular, the concept of phases within the context of the mentoring relationship. The chapter begins by outlining a number of models that describe how mentoring relationships develop over time, such as Kram (1980, 1983), Missirian (1982), Clutterbuck (1985; 2004), and Westland (2015). The mentee and mentor perspective is explored by understanding the experiences of each, through insight, during various stages of the relationship. Next, the author identifies a number of empirical studies that have ‘tested’ the models to better understand their application to specific contexts (Westland, 2015). The models are compared and contrasted in order to identify the challenges associated with the concept of the mentoring cycle. The author also considers factors that influence the mentoring cycle and the effectiveness of the mentoring relationship. Finally, the author considers the implications of the mentoring cycle from a number of perspectives: mentoring relationships, program design, training for mentees and mentors, and future research agendas for both researchers and practitioners