FORMAL AND INFORMAL MENTORSHIPS: A COMPARISON ON MENTORING FUNCTIONS AND CONTRAST WITH NONMENTORED COUNTERPARTS

TLDR

Research on mentorships has been fragmented, with unclear distinctions among relationship types, mentor functions, and outcomes. The study examines how formal and informal mentorships differ in functions and outcomes compared to nonmentored peers. A field study compared 212 protégés in informal mentorships, 53 in formal programs, and 284 nonmentored individuals, assessing psychosocial and career functions and outcomes such as socialization, job satisfaction, and salary. Informal mentorships yielded higher career support and salaries, and better outcomes across all measures than formal mentorships or nonmentored peers, whereas formal mentorships showed no significant differences.

Abstract

Research on mentorships has suffered from fragmentation of key issues; specifically, type of mentoring relationship, functions served by the mentor, and outcomes of the mentoring relationship. A field study was conducted comparing 212 protégés who were involved in informally developed mentorships, 53 protégés involved in formal mentor‐ship programs, and 284 individuals who did not have mentors. Individuals in informal and formal mentorships were compared along two mentoring dimensions: psychosocial and career‐related functions. All groups were compared on three outcome measures: organizational socialization, job satisfaction, and salary. Results indicated protégés in informal mentorships reported more career‐related support from their mentors and higher salaries than protégés in formal mentorships. For all outcome variables, protégés in informal mentorships also reported more favorable outcomes than nonmentored individuals. However, outcomes from protégés in formal mentorships were generally not significant from the other two groups. Implications for mentorship practices and research are discussed.