Mentoring in the workplace: Exploring the experiences of mentor–mentee relations

Abstract

Orientation: The way work is performed changes continuously and mentoring is becoming more prevalent in the workplace and this rapid modification of work profiles mentoring relationships as vital.

Research purpose: This study explored the mentor’s and mentee’s experiences in the same relationship at a construction firm offering a formal mentoring programme.

Motivation for the study: A more comprehensive understanding of the mentoring relationship was required to aid organisations with agile and robust talent and skills development interventions.

Research approach/design and method: A qualitative research design was employed and in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. Data were analysed in two phases: (1) direct content analysis and (2) thematic analyses. The study’s findings are singularly reported to comprehensively understand the mentoring relationship’s lived experiences.

Main findings: The experiences of the mentoring relationship in a workplace context are viewed as informal, mutualistic, and context-bound. Four key themes emerged from the mentoring relational interaction: (1) positive relationship, (2) growth and enablement, (3) psychological safety, and (4) purposeful.

Practical/managerial implications: The findings could assist organisations in realising the importance of mentoring relationships in mentoring programmes, as the interaction proves effective in solving pressing challenges, such as attracting and retaining talent and addressing skills gaps.

Contribution/value-add: This study conceptualises the mentoring relationship from an organisational context and contributes to the limited available literature on the topic. Possible recommendations are offered to improve workplace mentoring relationships.

Full text

hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
SA Journal of Industrial Psychology
ISSN: (Online) 2071-0763, (Print) 0258-5200
Page 1 of 11 Original Research
Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.
Authors:
Jennerdene L.
Rubbi Nunan1,2
Aysha B. Ebrahim1,2
Marius W. Stander1,2
Aliaons:
1School of Industrial
Psychology and Human
Resource Management,
Faculty of Economic and
Management Sciences,
North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark, South Africa
2Optena Research Unit,
Faculty of Humanies,
North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark, South Africa
Corresponding author:
Aysha Ebrahim,
aysha.ebrahim@nwu.ac.za
Dates:
Received: 27 Oct. 2022
Accepted: 10 June 2023
Published: 01 Aug. 2023
How to cite this arcle:
Rubbi Nunan, J.L., Ebrahim,
A.B., & Stander, M.W. (2023).
Mentoring in the workplace:
Exploring the experiences of
mentor–mentee relaons. SA
Journal of Industrial
Psychology/SA Tydskrif vir
Bedryfsielkunde, 49(0),
a2067. hps://doi.org/
10.4102/sajip.v49i0.2067
Copyright:
© 2023. The Authors.
Licensee: AOSIS. This work
is licensed under the
Creave Commons
Aribuon License.
Introducon
Globally, organisations face significant financial and operational challenges, with increased
talent shortages because of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (Alhamidi, 2022). Various
organisations offer mentoring programmes to transfer skills and knowledge and develop future
leaders (Eby & Robertson, 2020). Stapley et al. (2022) state that mentoring programmes are
practical and beneficial in ensuring organisational expansion and sustainability. However, the
mentoring relationship is central to the success of these mentorship programmes. Despite this,
research on the lived experiences of the mentoring relationship within organisational contexts is
disproportionately sparse and yet to be fully conceptualised in literature (Hu et al., 2016; Liu
et al., 2021; Mantzourani et al., 2022).
A vast body of literature (Mohana & Enoch, 2020; Poon et al., 2022; Zhou et al., 2019) focuses on
mentoring relationships, either the quality (Astrove & Kraimer, 2021) or the success of the
relationship (Gakonga & Mann, 2022). Conversely, limited perspectives concentrate solely on the
experiences of the relationship (Liu et al., 2021) and from the viewpoints of mentors and mentees
in the workplace. Zhou et al. (2019) add that both perspectives must be explored to comprehensively
understand the mentoring relationship, thus addressing a long-standing research gap. Hale
(2018) proclaims that a clear conceptualisation of the relationship is required, especially in
workplace settings. Furthermore, the relationship has also not been holistically understood
theoretically.
Orientation: The way work is performed changes continuously and mentoring is becoming
more prevalent in the workplace and this rapid modification of work profiles mentoring
relationships as vital.
Research purpose: This study explored the mentor’s and mentee’s experiences in the same
relationship at a construction firm offering a formal mentoring programme.
Motivation for the study: A more comprehensive understanding of the mentoring relationship
was required to aid organisations with agile and robust talent and skills development
interventions.
Research approach/design and method: A qualitative research design was employed and in-
depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. Data were analysed in two phases: (1)
direct content analysis and (2) thematic analyses. The study’s findings are singularly reported
to comprehensively understand the mentoring relationship’s lived experiences.
Main findings: The experiences of the mentoring relationship in a workplace context are
viewed as informal, mutualistic, and context-bound. Four key themes emerged from the
mentoring relational interaction: (1) positive relationship, (2) growth and enablement, (3)
psychological safety, and (4) purposeful.
Practical/managerial implications: The findings could assist organisations in realising the
importance of mentoring relationships in mentoring programmes, as the interaction proves
effective in solving pressing challenges, such as attracting and retaining talent and addressing
skills gaps.
Contribution/value-add: This study conceptualises the mentoring relationship from an
organisational context and contributes to the limited available literature on the topic. Possible
recommendations are offered to improve workplace mentoring relationships.
Keywords: experiences; mentoring relationship; mentor; mentee; organisation.
Mentoring in the workplace: Exploring the
experiences of mentor–mentee relaons
Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.

Page 2 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
Given these arguments, this study aimed to explore the
mentor’s and mentee’s experiences within the same
mentoring relationship in a workplace context. The research
participants were well-positioned to reveal their veracious
and authentic experiences of the mentoring relationship. The
general objective was to explore the mentors’ and mentees’
experiences in the same relationship in a construction firm.
This study was timely as it calls for more studies to address
the limited insights and conceptualisations of mentoring
relationships within organisations.
Literature review
Mentoring
Mentoring is widely recognised as an agile workplace learning
mechanism because of the changing, complex, and challenging
nature of the world of work (Davey et al., 2020). Steinmann
(2017) defines mentoring as a continuous relationship
between the mentor (often the experienced individual) and
the mentee (usually the less experienced individual).
Mentoring involves the mentor sharing knowledge, skills,
and experiences to equip the mentee to reach their optimum
potential. Contemporary definitions of mentoring have
widened from skills development to personal growth
(Koopman et al., 2021). The interaction has shifted from
directed (where the mentor owns the control) to more self-
directed (with the mentee holding the control). The
relationship goals have also moved from ‘knowledge transfer
to critical reflection and application’ (Steinmann, 2017, p. 5).
During mentoring, mentees receive training, guidance, and
advice from mentors within an assigned amount of time
(Steinmann, 2017) and form a close-knit relationship.
Generally, mentors have extensive education, knowledge,
and experience (Eby & Robertson, 2020). In contrast, mentees
are focused on learning specific skills at the start of their
careers and view mentors as trusted role models with prior
experience or familiarity with the developmental goal (Ard
& Beasley, 2022). Mentors act as a resource to mentees, orient
them on workplace requirements, and continually support
them in building their self-esteem and confidence (Stapley et
al., 2022). However, Gee and Popper (2017) argue that there
is no sole framework to ensure effective mentoring; instead,
the framework is relative to the environment, the intention,
and the individuals.
The mentoring process
Heeneman and De Grave (2019) assert that there are
invaluable benefits to outlining a mentoring process, making
the relationship life-changing. Effective mentoring requires a
systematic approach that dictates direction, guidance, and
cadence (Steinmann, 2017). According to Kram (1983), the
mentoring process is linear and consists of four phases,
namely: (1) initiation, (2) cultivation, (3) separation, and (4)
redefinition. Each step is driven by the mentor’s and mentee’s
needs and the organisation’s workplace objectives. Eby and
Robertson (2020) state that setting realistic expectations and
achievable goals is essential, with accountability levels and
regular development feedback from both parties. Lastly,
tracking and measuring the success of the mentoring process
assists in shared learning between the mentor and the
mentee. Consequently, more emphasis is placed on the
relationship’s significance rather than the mentoring’s
success (Steinmann, 2017).
The structure and delivery of mentoring have evolved from
the traditional face-to-face interaction. As a result of
COVID-19 and remote working, electronic mentoring has
become increasingly favoured (Iqbal, 2020), allowing
mentoring to occur worldwide (i.e. a mentee and a mentor
can be based in two different locations and still share a
relationship). In hybrid work modes, mentoring is used as a
support system to enable employees to reach performance
objectives while adjusting to a new working method and
maintaining connections with leaders and colleagues (Laker,
2021). Furthermore, in a global survey conducted by Deloitte
among millennials, it was found that mentees want to be
mentored by individuals who are accessible via real-time
channels (Liu et al., 2021).
The mentoring relaonship
Relationships, for this purpose, are regarded as the
verbal and non-verbal behaviours between the interacting
individuals and are seen as continuous interactions that
occur over time (Baxter, 2011; Roos, 2016). The mentoring
relationship is a social partnership involving an
‘interpersonal exchange influenced by both the mentor and
mentee perceptions of each other’ (Pfund et al., 2016, p.
240), occurring formally or informally. Formal mentoring
relationships can last between 6 to 12 months and 5 or more
years if developed informally (Kram, 1983; Ragins & Kram,
2007). According to Kram (1983), the mentoring relationship
is intense and interpersonal, which is enacted through
career (e.g. exposure and guidance) and psychosocial
support behaviours (e.g. counselling and role-modelling).
In addition, the relationship is dyadic, professional, and
intentional (Henry & Mollstedt, 2021) and facilitates
learning and collaboration with the goal of professional and
personal development (Mantzourani et al., 2022).
Roos (2016) denotes that the self-interactional group theory
(SIGT), which was the underlying theory of this study, refers
to relationships as ‘reciprocal, continuous communicative
interactions between members of different generations’
(p. 141). Mentoring relationships are not isolated but
embedded in the broader work environment. The mentor–
mentee interaction occurs in a particular interpersonal
context within the workplace for a specific purpose. The
workplace provides the boundary for the nature of the
relational interactions in a mentor and mentee’s interpersonal
context. From an interpersonal perspective, mentoring
relationships help mentors and mentees to collaborate in
sharing knowledge and transferring workplace skills. On an
intrapersonal level, the mentor and the mentee simultaneously
grow and develop from the mentoring interaction (Roos,
2016; Zhang et al., 2016).

Page 3 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
In addition to self-interactional group theory (SIGT), this
study draws on the general systems theory, highlighting that
a system cannot be viewed as fixed independent parts but as
a combined whole (Indira, 2014). The mentoring relationship
is reciprocal between the mentor, the mentee, and the
organisation (Stapley et al., 2022). Therefore, a lack of
commitment by any of these parties could result in an
ineffective relationship. Mentoring concentrates on the
holistic development of mentees rather than single parts. The
general systems theory further describes breaking whole
pieces into parts to determine how the pieces work together
in a system (Marais & Meier, 2010). Similarly, the mentoring
relationship must be understood within its context (i.e. the
organisation) and by mentors and mentees. Moreover, if
applied correctly, mentoring can be a powerful and valuable
instrument to ensure organisational growth and longevity, at
all levels, within organisations (Mcilongo & Strydom, 2021).
Experiences of the mentoring relaonship in the
workplace
In the workplace, effective mentoring relationships expand
professional networks and lead to career opportunities,
improved employee engagement, job satisfaction, and higher
levels of resilience and well-being (Davey et al., 2020;
Grossman, 2013). Previous studies have found the mentoring
relationship to be positive, mutually beneficial, and yield
positive outcomes for mentors and mentees, resulting in a
virtuous circle (Sheehan et al., 2021; Zhou et al., 2019).
Empowered mentees subsequently display increased
motivation, stimulating their need to succeed (Mantzourani et
al., 2022). Comparatively, mentors attain intrinsic satisfaction
by knowing that they have contributed to the advancement
of their mentees, reaching a sense of belonging and self-
actualisation. Mentors also benefit from self-enhancement by
developing their leadership skills and reflecting on personal
learning (Steinmann, 2017).
Relational and individual factors also contribute to an
effective mentoring relationship, namely: (1) the congruency
between the perceptions and expectations of the mentor,
mentee, and organisation and (2) the constancy of
communication and accessibility of the mentor (Zhang et al.,
2016). For the relationship to flourish, establishing trust,
accountability, sharing viewpoints, asking questions freely,
mutual respect, and maintaining similar values are
imperative (Mantzourani et al., 2022). Equally, Green and
Jackson (2014) point out that unsuccessful relationships can
cause dissatisfaction between mentors and mentees. These
include the mismatch of a mentor to a mentee or vice
versa, personality clashes, a lack of commitment, inadequate
mentoring knowledge, experience, and skills, and the absence
of organisational support (Dehon et al., 2015).
Organisations are pivotal in facilitating mentoring relationships
and contributing to mentoring experiences by providing
structure, guidelines, and policies (Eby & Robertson, 2020).
Mantzourani et al. (2022) highlight that mentorship
programmes must consider well-articulated design structures
to ensure that those involved in the relationship can develop
adequate characteristics to enhance their mentoring experience.
Liu et al. (2021) recommend that organisations offer timeous
training to mentors to help establish their role, which could
eradicate perceived power imbalances and the overlap in
work and social boundaries.
Worldwide, organisations find it challenging to devise
innovative workplace initiatives (that are not monetary
related) to retain and recruit qualified individuals (Alhamidi,
2022). Therefore, the mentoring relationship is a critical
people intervention strategy for supporting, developing and
retaining high-potential employees (Menzin et al., 2020).
However, according to Hu et al. (2016), limited research
examines the role of the organisational climate within the
mentoring relationship, specifically, the mentors’ perceptions
of the mentoring support mentees receive. Moreover,
Spiekermann and Lawrence (2020) declare a lack of
knowledge on the relationship’s role in mentoring or how
mentoring relationships develop over time. The experiences
of the mentoring relational experiences embedded in an
organisational environment have not been extensively
understood. Thus, this study aimed to explore the mentors’
and mentees’ experiences within the same relationship in a
construction firm. Furthermore, the study sought to provide
an understanding of the return on the mentoring relationship,
make recommendations to improve the relationship and
offer a more comprehensive definition.
Research design
Research approach
The critical realism approach was used to understand the
realities, translations, and experiences of the mentoring
relationship in its natural setting.
Research strategy
A qualitative research design was followed to explore the
lived experiences of the relationship. The focus was on
understanding the meanings mentors and mentees ascribed
to their relational interactions (Creswell, 2013).
Research method
Research seng
This study was conducted at a global construction firm
in the Gauteng province, offering a formal mentoring
programme. The organisation predominantly specialises in
construction services (engineering design and project
management solutions). The formal mentoring programme
has been active for the last 2 years and the organisation
initiated and matched the relationships. As a result of the
scarce and critical skills required within the construction
industry, the mentoring programme helps to build and
retain technical and specialist skills. Furthermore, the
programme aimed at mentors equipping mentees with the
necessary knowledge and practical experience to achieve
professional certifications.

Page 4 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
Entrée and establishing researcher roles
Permission to take forward the study was sought from the
scientific and ethics committee of the Economic and
Management Sciences Faculty of the North-West University.
Approval was also obtained from the organisation’s Human
Resources Director (HRD) to conduct the study. The HRD
acted as the gatekeeper and was briefed on the study’s
undertakings and ethical protocols.
The researchers maintained various roles throughout the
study, which included conceptualising the research topic,
reviewing previous research, writing the literature review,
data collection, transcribing, coding, and analysis, and
writing the study. The researchers minimised personal bias
by employing various strategies to ensure data integrity and
trustworthiness.
Research parcipants and sampling methods
Research participants were selected through purposive
sampling, specifically criterion sampling. Neuman (2011)
states that criterion sampling is a non-probability sampling
method that selects participants through a pre-established
criterion. This criterion included: (1) the participants must be
a mentor or a mentee, (2) the participants must be involved in
the same mentor–mentee relationship, and (3) the partnership
must be 6 months or longer. Participants included mentors
and mentees employed at the organisation and were from the
engineering, finance, quantity surveying, and human capital
departments. The participants were recruited through the
HRD and part of the organisation’s formal mentoring
programme. The mentors were qualified senior leaders with
more than 5 years of working experience and acted as the
direct manager for some mentees. The mentees were
graduates and junior consultants with less than 3 years of
work experience.
The study’s sample size depended on the availability of
mentoring relationships at the organisation. Eight
relationships were closely studied – five mentors and eight
mentees, with two mentors mentoring more than one mentee.
Table 1 reflects the breakdown of the relationships and the
participants’ biographical information.
Data collecon methods
In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with
research participants, including mentors and mentees in the
same mentoring relationship, to explore the relational
interaction holistically. The interviews were conducted
virtually to ensure strict maintenance of the COVID-19
regulations. The duration of the in-depth semi-structured
interviews was 30 min – 45 min, depending on the interview’s
participatory nature. All voluntary participants signed
consent forms and returned them to the researchers before
the interview. Participants (mentors and mentees) were
interviewed separately via a secure online platform and
asked identical questions about their experiences of the same
relationship from a mentor’s or mentee’s perspectives. The
following interview questions were asked:
• Please describe your relationship with your mentor or
mentee in as much detail as possible.
• Describe an example where you experienced the
relationship as positive and optimal.
• Provide an example of a negative experience with the
mentor or the mentee. Please include everything you can
remember (i.e. from where it started, its progression, and
how it ended).
• What recommendations would you make to optimise
mentoring relationships in the workplace?
Probing questions were asked to obtain rich details about the
mentoring relationship (Neuman, 2011). All participant
interviews were conducted in English, and data saturation
was achieved even though eight relationships were studied.
In the collection and analysis phases, conceptual coherence
was applied to cluster homogeneous concepts and data.
Data recording
Participants provided permission for the interviews to be
audio and video recorded, which was also included in the
consent form. The researchers ensured the safety and
confidentiality of all participant information by storing it on
their password-protected laptops.
Data analysis
Data were analysed in two phases to ensure richer findings.
The first phase focused on deductively investigating and
separately analysing the two data sets to understand the
meanings participants attached to the relationship. Direct
content analysis was utilised to analyse the textual data
of mentors and mentees to understand their perceptions,
meanings, and experiences of the relationship. The second
data phase is as highlighted and involved combining and
analysing the data using thematic analysis. Therefore, the
study reports both phases of data analyses singularly to obtain
a complete view of the experiences of mentoring relationships.
Strategies employed to ensure quality data
Credibility was applied to ensure the authenticity and
accuracy of the results based on the research design. The
TABLE 1: Parcipants’ biographical informaon (N = 13).
Mentoring
relaonship
Mentoring role Parcipant (P) Age category Gender
MR – 1 Mentor Parcipant 1 31–40 Male
MR – 1 Mentee Parcipant 2 26–30 Female
MR – 2 Mentee Parcipant 3 26–30 Female
MR – 3 Mentee Parcipant 4 26–30 Female
MR – 4 Mentor Parcipant 5 26–30 Female
MR – 4 Mentee Parcipant 6 26–30 Female
MR – 5 Mentee Parcipant 7 26–30 Female
MR – 6 Mentor Parcipant 8 31–40 Female
MR – 6 Mentee Parcipant 9 31–40 Female
MR – 7 Mentor Parcipant 10 26–30 Female
MR – 7 Mentee Parcipant 11 26–30 Male
MR – 8 Mentor Parcipant 12 26–30 Male
MR – 8 Mentee Parcipant 13 26–30 Male
MR, mentoring relaonship.

Page 5 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
researchers rigorously studied the obtained data by
identifying pertinent characteristics significant to the research
topic (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). The researchers provided
thick, detailed descriptions of the experiences of the
relationship and research findings to ensure transference to
other contexts. An independent co-coder was appointed to
check transcriptions and ensure precise data translations and
interpretations of themes (Neuman, 2011). Furthermore, the
researchers provided the same information about the study
to all participants, and a standard interview protocol was
followed. All participants’ responses were captured as per
their narratives to mitigate the researchers’ personal biases
and dispositions.
Reporng style
The study utilised a narrative qualitative reporting style.
The direct responses of the participants were used to
support the study’s findings and represent the participant’s
experiences.
Ethical consideraons
The research committee approved this study in the relevant
research entity of North-West University. Ethical clearance
was obtained by the Economics and Management Sciences
Research Ethics Committee (NWU-00026-21-A4). The
researchers maintained all ethical obligations throughout the
study and ensured that no harm was caused to the
participants. Participants provided informed consent to the
researchers to participate in the research and were made
aware of withdrawal from the study at any point.
Results
Four key themes emerged from the study, with several
subthemes. Table 2 provides a summary of the key themes
and subthemes.
Theme 1: Posive relaonship
Mentor’s and mentee’s experiences within the same
mentoring relationship appeared to be positive and aligned
with each other’s perspectives. The relationship experiences
were constructive, less formal and more intimate between
the mentor and the mentee (Roos, 2016; Steinmann, 2017).
When research participants were asked to describe their
relationship experiences independently, the following quotes
transpired:
‘It’s an easy-going, good, and open dialogue relationship.’
(MR – 1, P1, Male)
‘It’s been a positive experience.’ (MR – 4, P5, Female)
‘We have a good relationship; we understand each other and get
each other. It’s more of a sisterly kind of relationship.’ (MR – 4,
P6, Female)
Participants were also asked to share a negative relationship
experience during the interview. Almost all participants
declared they had no negative experiences to share, except
one participant noted an overlap of personal and professional
boundaries:
‘It is involving my mentor too much in my personal life, as she
always brings it up. Sometimes, I don’t want to revisit these
things, and she will want to go back.’ (MR – 4, P6, Female)
According to Fornari et al. (2014), a challenge for many
mentors is striking a personal and professional balance.
Therefore, setting relationship boundaries, expectations,
and limits is vital. In comparison, Hu et al. (2016) assert
that the overlap across the different contexts could be
attributed to the mentor’s caring nature or other
characteristics whereby they take a deep interest in the
mentee’s journey.
Subtheme 1.1: Personal aributes
The personal attributes of both mentors and mentees largely
contributed to them experiencing the relationship as positive.
Participants stated that a positive attitude, responsibility,
and patience are essential:
‘A positive attitude, patience, and friendliness.’ (MR – 1, P1, Male)
‘He’s very nice, patient and motivating. He doesn’t get upset
easily; he’s willing and susceptible to change. He is willing
to adapt, even though he has so much more experience.’ (MR – 3,
P4, Female)
Mentors specifically noticed that the mentee’s willingness to
learn heavily impacted the mentoring relationship:
‘They are willing to try and learn, so I think it’s an attitude. They
are very interested in learning about themselves and others and
want to improve, which helps because sometimes you must
draw that out of people.’ (MR – 4, P5, Female)
Subtheme 1.2: Open communicaon
Research participants stated that open communication was a
significant experience in the relationship, with the occurrence
of more interpersonal communication. The following
quotations are supportive of this subtheme:
‘We have open dialogue and communication.’ (MR – 2; P1, Male,
31 – 40 years old)
TABLE 2: Summary of key themes and sub-themes.
Key theme Sub-theme
Posive relaonship Personal aributes
Open communicaon
Commitment
Growth and enablement Exchange of knowledge and skills
Gaining praccal experience
Mentor accessibility
Connuous feedback
Psychological safety Freedom
Collaboraon
Respect
Shared trust
Honesty
Purposeful Goal-orientaon
Professional networks
Empowerment

Page 6 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
‘We have good and transparent communication. She helps you
communicate with other people in the workplace at different
levels, and that’s positive for me.’ (MR – 5, P7, Female)
‘We both really have good communication between us, which I
think makes our relationship positive.’ (MR – 7, P11, Male)
Subtheme 1.3: Commitment
According to Allen and Eby (2008), the quality of mentoring
relationships increases if commitment is prevalent, especially
within formal programmes. Commitment also resulted in
positive mentoring experiences, with mentees acknowledging
effort and added resources as indications of commitment and
dedication from their mentors. Furthermore, participants
affirmed that commitment was necessary from both parties
for the relationship to flourish:
‘Mentors and mentees need to show commitment to the
relationship and process.’ (MR – 4, P5, Female)
‘I feel that my mentor is committed and enthusiastic. For example,
she gives me additional resources to help me.’ (MR – 5; P7,
Female)
‘You have to put in the effort, or the time, from both ends.’
(MR – 6, P8, Female)
Theme 2: Growth and enablement
Participants declared that the relationship led to growth and
enablement, thus making the mentoring experience mutually
beneficial and rewarding. Moreover, mentees learn and grow
within their specialised field of expertise, while mentors
develop their leadership skills and achieved satisfaction from
mentoring:
‘Through this, I am learning to lead others better, and it is just
that thing of knowing that I’ve passed on a skill to someone. I’ve
made a difference in someone’s career.’ (MR – 6, P8, Female)
‘I constantly upskill myself because I must be able to equip
her. The learning is mutual. I also learn from my mentees.’
(MR – 1; P1, Male, 31 – 40 years old)
‘If I just look at when she started to where she is now, there has just
been a massive growth in so many different ways.’ (MR – 5, P5,
Female)
Subtheme 2.1: Exchange of knowledge and skills
Participants’ experiences of the relationship indicated the
successful exchange of knowledge and skills, resulting in
professional and personal development. The following
quotes were shared by participants during the interviews:
‘He has a lot of knowledge and experience. He is very
forthcoming and very willing to share.’ (MR – 3, P4, Female)
‘It gives me someone to go to for guidance and learn new
knowledge, so I’m not alone.’ (MR – 5, P7, Female)
Subtheme 2.2: Gaining praccal experience
Obtaining practical experience for mentees has been
fundamental to their relationship experiences, as they are
recent graduates or junior consultants, and mentoring
allows them to transition into the workplace. Through the
firm’s mentoring programme, mentors equipped mentees to
bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical
experience, allowing mentees to apply their theoretical
knowledge practically. In turn, mentors also obtained
practical mentoring experience and saw the value of offering
hands-on exposure as they have personally previously
experienced the benefits of being mentored. Participants’
experiences entailed:
‘The work environment is very different to what you learn at
university or what you become accustomed to in your studies.
So, by having a mentor, I can get practice on things like how to
manage projects.’ (MR – 1, P2, Female)
‘It’s difficult to adjust to the workplace, and having a mentor
helps with that adjustment and translates what we learnt in
university to actual real work.’ (MR – 2, P3, Female)
‘I am also getting mentoring experience. I take this quite seriously
because I was part of quite a good mentorship program, so I see
the benefits.’ (MR – 8, P13, Male)
Subtheme 2.3: Mentor accessibility
Mentors ensured that they were accessible to their mentees
via various communication channels, thus being easily
reachable to mentees. The following quotes support this
relationship experience:
‘He’s like constantly available. If I need help with something or
need guidance.’ (MR – 3, P4, Female)
‘I make myself available for him. He can text me, call me and
email me. I ensure I give him time, even outside our mentoring
sessions.’ (MR – 8, P12, Male)
Subtheme 2.4: Connuous feedback
Participants declared that the relationship requires a systematic
feedback process by both individuals. Mentors provided
mentees with timeous feedback that assisted with personal
development and improved their quality of work. In
comparison, mentees provided mentors with feedback on their
progress, relationship experiences and suggestions for
improvement:
‘He gives very detailed feedback on all my documents, and I
incorporate it into my next revision, and my work becomes
better. His feedback is also quick.’ (MR – 1, P2, Female)
‘It’s a two-way thing. I make sure I give him feedback
immediately while we are working on the task. I also ask him
what he needs and what else I should do to improve his
mentoring experience.’ (MR – 8, P12, Male)
Theme 3: Psychological safety
Workplace psychological safety is the belief (underpinned by
trust and respect) that it is safe to undertake interpersonal
risks despite adverse consequences, which contributes to
increased work engagement, motivation, and performance
(Ahmad et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022). Participants
experienced the relationship as safe and non-judgemental,
with mentors acting as sounding boards for mentees.
The following quotes contribute to the connection being
experienced as psychologically safe:
‘I can say whatever to her, and she doesn’t judge.’ (MR – 4, P6,
Female)

Page 7 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
‘I feel comfortable to ask her any question; even if I don’t
understand something, I don’t feel bad asking her to explain it
again.’ (MR – 6, P9, Female)
‘No parties must be scared to talk to each other.’ (MR – 7; P11,
Male, 26 – 30 years old)
Subtheme 3.1: Freedom
Participants experienced the relationship as flexible and non-
authoritative and felt free to ask questions. These relationship
experiences suggest that the context (i.e. the construction
firm) promotes proactive workplace behaviours, where
freedom, acceptance and respect are achieved:
‘He is not authoritative. He gives me much freedom.’ (MR – 1, P2,
Female)
‘She is just there to guide, or if I just need any advice on anything.
I can ask her anything.’ (MR – 4, P6, Female)
‘The relationship is just free, open and friendly.’ (MR – 7, P1,
Male)
Subtheme 3.2: Collaboraon
Psychological safety has been widely recognised as
salient in collaboration and is rooted in mentoring to
facilitate the exchange of knowledge and skills (Eby &
Robertson, 2020). Thus, emphasising joint efforts rather
than single efforts. The supportive participant quotes are
as follows:
‘He allows input and collaboration on projects and tasks. The
quality is also quite high, so that sort of becomes engraved in
you, so when we give documents out, it needs to be of a certain
standard.’ (MR – 1; P2, Female, 26 – 30 years old)
‘We have collaborative goals where we both do parts to ensure
we meet the goal or the deadline.’(MR – 5; P7, Female, 26 – 30
years old)
Subtheme 3.3: Respect
In the workplace, collaboration is facilitated by respect,
owing to everyone holding different ideas and opinions
and should be respected for them. Participants asserted the
proceeding:
‘There is mutual respect between us, and that’s important. She
also respects my knowledge, feedback, and suggestions.’
(MR – 1; P1, Male, 31 – 40 years old)
‘I respect him, and he shows me respect, although I have a lesser
experience. He values what I say.’ (MR – 2; P3, Female, 26 – 30
years old)
Subtheme 3.4: Shared trust
Mantzourani et al. (2022) highlight that mutual respect
results in shared trust. Mentees value being trusted when
given tasks by mentors, even though they are less experienced
than their mentors and trust their mentors with their
development. Participants declared the following during
their interviews:
‘I think there is much trust between us to complete tasks on my
own, which shows me that she values and trusts me.’ (MR – 7; P1,
Male, 26 – 30 years old)
‘He also trusts me to complete what we decided on.’ (MR – 8; P12,
Male, 26 – 30 years old)
‘I trust my mentor with my growth and development, and she
trusts me to get work done.’ (MR – 8; P13, Male, 26 – 30 years old)
Subtheme 3.5: Honesty
Research participants stated that transparency was vital
for the relationship to function and promoted respect,
trust, and openness. The succeeding quotes depict these
statements:
‘They should just be as involved and be honest as they can be…
it makes the relationship more trustworthy.’ (MR – 2, P3, Female)
‘There is honesty and transparency between us, and that makes
our relationship open and good.’ (MR – 6, P9, Female)
‘There are no secrets or holding back on anything. We are real
with each other.’ (MR – 8, P12, Male)
Theme 4: Purposeful
The mentoring relational interaction occurs for a specific
purpose within a particular context (Roos, 2016). Participants
reported that the mentoring relationship was purposeful and
undertaken for a specific reason (i.e. to build knowledge,
gain practical hours for professional registrations, and
develop specific job-related skills):
‘We do the mentoring programme for a reason, and my role is to
help her attain the knowledge and skills to prepare for her board
exams.’ (MR – 2, P1, Male)
‘I am in the mentoring programme because I need to register as
an engineer with the The Engineering Council of South Africa
(ECSA), and he is already a qualified engineer, so we focus on
the requirements for that in every session.’ (MR – 1; P2, Female,
26 – 30 years old)
Subtheme 4.1: Goal-orientaon
Participants denoted that targeted developmental goals must
be met to accomplish the purpose of the mentoring process.
The following quotes support this subtheme:
‘There are goals in place to help us, and I have helped her create
a development plan.’ (MR – 2; P1, Male, 31 – 40 years old)
‘We have goals that we have to meet according to different
timelines.’ (MR – 2; P3, Female, 26 – 30 years old)
Subtheme 4.2: Professional networking
Mentees reported that the relationship helped to develop their
professional networks with other experienced professionals
outside their organisation, which they leveraged to achieve
mentoring goals and attain guidance. The following quotes are
representative of this subtheme:
‘She was able to connect me with two people, and they
proved to be valuable in the advice they gave me and their
guidance, so she put me in touch with people from her
network.’ (MR – 6; P9, Female, 31 – 40 years old)
‘He referred me to another well-experienced engineer who works
in a completely different environment, much bigger than our
company, so I can connect with him to understand more about the
field as I am still new.’ (MR – 8; 12, Male, 26 – 30 years old)

Page 8 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
Subtheme 4.3: Empowerment
The focus of mentoring is to help individuals develop in their
careers and be autonomous (Steinmann, 2017). Mentees
declared that the mentoring relationship had led them to
become confident and independent, implying that mentoring
is an empowering experience. Mentors openly shared their
knowledge and expertise and ensured they holistically
understood mentees to unlock potential and meet mentoring
goals. The following participant quotes encompassed these
views:
‘It’s helped with my confidence.’ (MR – 5; P7, Female, 26 – 30
years old)
‘It has helped my ability to self-start and be confident in the
quality of my work, and that has helped.’ (MR – 7; P11, Male, 26
– 30 years old)
‘He tries to understand you as the person you are, and then he
uses that to mentor you to make you better and emphasise your
qualities that need some work.’ (MR – 8; P12, Male, 26 – 30 years
old)
Discussion
Outline of results
This study aimed to explore the mentor’s and mentee’s
experiences within the same relationship in a construction
firm. The results indicate that the relationship experiences
are beneficial. The exchange further depicts having a
significant return (the positive aspects identified) on the
mentoring relationship for mentors and mentees.
Experiences of the mentor - mentee relaonship
The study’s findings infer that the relationship experiences
are positive and progressive. Participants described the
relationship as casual, informal, and intimate, with mentors
and mentees sharing a deep connection and likening their
experience to a sibling relationship (with the mentor taking
the role of an elder brother or sister). Kumar (2021) concurs
with this finding and states that mentoring relationships are
tightly knit, and mentees often associate mentors with elder
siblings. Open communication, the personal attributes of
mentors and mentees, and commitment also played a vital
role in mentors and mentees experiencing a positive relational
interaction. A recent study by Tetzlaff et al. (2022) found that
communication during mentoring must be adaptable,
effective, and transparent. This outcome is consistent with
the participants’ experiences in this study.
Mentoring involves exchanging knowledge and skills (Eby &
Robertson, 2020). This study confirms and credits the
mentoring relationship as two-fold and mutualistic. Both
parties equally benefited from the relational interaction (for
different reasons), predominately from growth and
development. The relationship allowed mentees to thrive in
the workplace and get closer to achieving their career
aspirations to become registered professionals. Mentees
greatly valued their mentor’s widespread expertise,
knowledge, skills, and experience. Simultaneously, mentors
needed to continuously upskill themselves to ensure
mentees were given a replete mentoring experience. The
mentoring relationship allowed mentees vocational learning
opportunities, thus promoting workplace learning. The
association provided a platform for mentees to convert their
theoretical knowledge into practice and obtain hands-on work
experience within their area of specialisation. These research
findings concur with a study by Hamilton et al. (2019), where
mentees (recent graduates) experienced positive outcomes
from participating in a mentoring programme, which assisted
them in transitioning from university to the workplace.
Li et al. (2019) proclaim that mentors play a distinct and
direct role in supporting and encouraging mentees. This
study found that the accessibility and availability of mentors
were not only limited to the mentoring sessions. Furthermore,
mentors ensured that they allocated sufficient time to
mentees and encouraged communication. This corroborates
the mentor–mentee relationship’s closeness and the mentors’
supportive disposition to facilitate the growth of mentees. In
addition, mentees valued the frequent feedback received
from mentors, as it helped to improve their quality of work.
Al Khajeh (2018) adds that quality work enhances business
satisfaction, improves resources and time, reduces errors,
and builds trust among employees and managers, ultimately
resulting in organisational performance.
The mentoring relationship was further experienced as
psychologically safe and developed by trust (Ahmad et al.,
2022). Edmondson (1999) declares that psychological safety
is the shared belief that the workplace promotes a safe and
conducive climate for employees to embark on interpersonal
risks. Several studies (Baer & Frese, 2002; Huang et al., 2022;
Kulik, 2021) have attributed psychological safety to
higher employee engagement, job performance, employee
commitment, loyalty, and organisational achievement.
Successful interpersonal relationships in the workplace
positively influence the psychological safety of employees,
which is indicated in the mentoring relationship (Eby &
Robertson, 2020). Mentees reported that the mentoring
relationship allowed them the freedom to brainstorm new
ideas, collaborate on work projects, and ask their mentors
questions. Therefore, mentees felt comfortable and free from
harm in participating actively and committing to the
relationship.
Pollard and Kumar (2021) maintain that effective mentoring
relationships depend on trust, which was a significant
finding in this study. The participants’ experiences indicated
that the relationship was largely formed on shared trust and
respect. Mentors trusted mentees to complete specific tasks
irrespective of their limited experience, thus enhancing
mentees’ confidence levels. This further indicates that
mentors and mentees respected and valued each other’s
opinions and advice regardless of their heterogeneity,
experience, and knowledge. This study emphasises the
importance of building trust, respect, and honesty to ensure
a favourable mentoring relationship. Moreover, Mantzourani
et al. (2022) state that if the mentoring relationship depicts

Page 9 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
shared respect, trust, and honesty, it will help to create a
supportive, stable, and safe mentoring environment.
The study’s findings confirm that the mentoring relational
interaction occurred for a specific purpose in the organisation.
On an inter-individual level, mentors aimed to equip
mentees to gain practical hours to register as certified
professionals. Whereas other mentoring relationships focused
on developing skills relevant to the mentee’s role. Within the
group level of the SIGT, the relationship proved to be
interdependent, and both individuals relied on each other to
achieve the mentoring expectations and goals. Krishna et al.
(2020) emphasise that the mentoring relationship begins with
the mentor’s and mentee’s microenvironment but gradually
moves towards the macro environment (making mentees
more competitive through their enhanced skills as the
relationship progresses). The relationship also led to the
expansion of professional networks.
Although mentors were responsible for mentoring more than
one mentee in parallel, the mentors displayed the same level
of commitment and enthusiasm towards the mentees. A
study by Christensen et al. (2020) shows that mentors and
mentees who shared the same attributes, gender, and age
resulted in the mentoring relationship being more robust and
fruitful. These findings contradict the results of this study, as
the mentoring relationships were diverse, and mentors and
mentees simultaneously experienced positive relational
outcomes. This study confirms the relevance and usefulness
of the mentoring relationship in organisations, especially
within the multi-cultural South African context. As a caution,
Davey et al. (2020) recommend that precise boundaries are
established to prevent blurred lines between professional
and personal goals, which could hinder the intention of the
mentoring relationship.
The evolution of the mentoring relationship is heavily
influenced and informed by the overarching structure and
constituents of mentoring. Sawiuk et al. (2022) state that the
organisation often initiates the relationship and decides on
the mentoring process. However, the organisation can
concomitantly lead to the success or failure of the relationship
in terms of offering adequate support and resources
(MacCallum, 2007). This coincides with the general systems
theory as it maintains that a system cannot be understood
independently but as an entity (Marais & Meier, 2010). The
mentoring relationship depends on all those involved, and if
any party digresses, the relationship can be affected (Kram,
1983; Stapley et al., 2022). Therefore, this research study
concludes that the mentoring relationship exists between the
mentor, the mentee, and the organisation. The study’s findings
describe the mentoring relationship as an intense, growth-
enabling, context-bound relationship that led to benefits such
as respect, trust, empowerment, and goal achievement.
Praccal implicaons
Significant practical implications are highlighted in this study.
While mentoring is widely covered in literature, little is known
about the experiences of mentors and mentees in the same
mentoring relationship. The study sought to provide an in-
depth understanding and illuminate the mentor’s and
mentee’s experiences from an organisational perspective. The
findings can be utilised to emphasise the effectiveness and
applicability of mentoring in the workplace, specifically the
importance of the mentoring relationship as a talent and
leadership intervention. Organisations should recognise and
invest in formal mentoring programmes, which could assist in
managing complexities that disrupt overall organisational
functioning. Mentoring might further harness employee
strengths and potential to fully engage and optimise their
work environment as it nurtures a learning culture.
Limitaons and recommendaons
This research study is not without limitations. Firstly, a single
data collection method was utilised. Although this was
beneficial in obtaining rich data about the experiences of the
mentoring relationship in the workplace, future studies could
focus on exploring the relationship from the perspectives of
the mentor, mentee, and the organisation. Furthermore, other
qualitative data methods, such as storytelling or focus groups,
could broaden the knowledge base of the mentoring
relationship. Secondly, this study was conducted during the
COVID-19 pandemic, and the study’s findings must be
considered in this context. Lastly, the sample size might be
too small to provide a holistic view of the mentoring
relationship because of the availability of participants.
Therefore, future research could study a larger sample size
across different organisational sectors. The findings of this
study cannot be generalised to other contexts or informal
mentoring relationships. Still, extending data collection
methods to a broader group of participants might be
worthwhile.
This study also puts forward the need to conceptualise the
mentoring relationship within a theoretical perspective,
structured framework, or model, which could offer a visual
formulation of the relationship and more expansive views of
the interaction. Additionally, the study recommends
that organisational mentoring programmes be carefully
structured and that organisations be actively involved in
providing the necessary support and training. Although
formal mentoring relationships were studied, mentees
should have the opportunity to self-select mentors or have
more than one mentor in other business areas and not be
limited to mentors in their area of specialisation.
Conclusion
The study’s findings are distinctive as the experiences of the
mentoring relationship were studied from both the mentors’
and mentees’ perspectives to provide a view of the relationship
in its entity. This research aids organisations in understanding
the importance of implementing mentoring programmes in
the workplace and recognising the impact of the mentoring
relationship. The study further contributes to the limited
understanding of the mentoring relationship within a

Page 10 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
workplace context. The study concludes that mentoring
relationships must be defined within their context and
purpose. Furthermore, the mentoring relationship is two-
fold, encompassed by mutual respect and trust, psychological
safety, and collaboration and formed for a specific purpose. It
is recommended that future studies take a multi-perspective
stance by including the organisational viewpoints to offer a
more detailed description of the mentoring relationship and
not only limit it to the views of mentors and mentees.
Acknowledgements
Compeng interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal
relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them
in writing this article.
Authors’ contribuons
J.L.R.N. was the main researcher, a MA Industrial Psychology
student, co-conceptualiser, responsible for the literature
review, data collection, interpreting the results, and writing
the mini-dissertation. A.B.E. acted as the supervisor,
conceptualiser, co-coder, and critical reviewer of the overall
research study. M.W.S. was the co-supervisor, conceptualiser,
co-coder, and critical reviewer of the overall research study.
Funding informaon
This research received no specific grant from any funding
agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Data availability
All information pertaining to the organisation and the
participants are reported using unique identifiers. The data
that support the findings of this study are available on
request from the corresponding author, A.B.E. The data are
not publicly available because of restrictions (e.g. adhering to
ethical requirements of privacy).
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or
position of any affiliated agency of the authors.
References
Ahmad, N., Ullah, Z., AlDhaen, E., Han, H., & Scholz, M. (2022). A CSR perspecve to
foster employee creavity in the banking sector: The role of work engagement
and psychological safety. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 67, 102968.
hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102968
Al Khajeh, E. (2018). Impact of leadership styles on organizaonal performance.
Journal of Human Resources Management Research, 2018, 1–10. hps://doi.
org/10.5171/2018.687849
Alhamidi, S.A. (2022). Mentoring role eecveness and sasfacon during internship
training: A psychometric evaluaon of Saudi nursing interns. Australian College of
Nursing, 29(2), 252–262. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2022.01.009
Allen, T.D., & Eby, L.T. (2008). Mentor commitment in formal mentoring relaonships.
Journal of Vocaonal Behavior, 72(3), 309–316. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvb.2007.10.016
Ard, N., & Beasley, S. (2022). Mentoring: A key element in succession planning.
Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 17(2), 159–162. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.
teln.2022.01.003
Astrove, S.L., & Kraimer, M.L. (2021). What and how do mentors learn? The role of
relaonship quality and mentoring self-ecacy in mentor learning. Personnel
Psychology, 75(2), 485–513. hps://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12471
Baer, M., & Frese, M. (2002). Innovaon is not enough: Climates for iniave and
psychological safety, process innovaons, and rm performance. Journal of
Organizaonal Behavior, 24(1), 45–68. hps://doi.org/10.1002/job.179
Baxter, L.A. (Ed.). (2011). Voicing relaonships: A dialogic perspecve. Sage.
Christensen, K.M., Hagler, M.A., Stams, G.J., Raposa, E.B., Burton, S., & Rhodes, J.E.
(2020). Non-specic versus targeted approaches to youth mentoring: A follow-up
meta-analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49, 959–972. hps://doi.
org/10.1007/s10964-020-01233-x
Creswell, J.W. (2013). Qualitave inquiry & research design: Choosing among ve
approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
Davey, Z., Jackson, D., & Henshall, C. (2020). The value of nurse mentoring
relaonships: Lessons learnt from a work-based resilience enhancement
programme for nurses working in the forensic seng. Internaonal Journal of
Mental Health Nursing, 29(5), 992–1001. hps://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12739
Dehon, E., Cruse, M., Dawson, B., & Jackson-Williams, L. (2015). Mentoring during
medical school and match outcome among emergency medicine residents.
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 16(6), 927–930. hps://doi.org/10.5811/
westjem.2015.9.27010
Eby, L.T., & Robertson, M. (2020). The psychology of workplace mentoring relaonships.
Annual Review of Organizaonal Psychology and Organizaonal Behavior, 7(1),
75–100. hps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012119-044924
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work
teams. Administrave Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. hps://doi.org/
10.2307/2666999
Fornari, A., Murray, T., Menzin, A., Woo, V., Clion, M., Lombardi, M., & Shelov, S.
(2014). Mentoring program design and implementaon in new medical schools.
Medical Educaon Online, 19(1), 24570. hps://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v19.24570
Gakonga, J., & Mann, S. (2022). The mentor acted like an enzyme: A case study of a
successful mentoring relaonship. European Journal of Applied Linguiscs and
TEFL, 11(1), 59–75. Retrieved from hps://www.proquest.com/openview/19835f
379b8528f6c345ed18447a31/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=4565088
Gee, K.L., & Popper, A.N. (2017). Improving academic mentoring relaonships and
environments. Retrieved from hps://acouscstoday.org/wp-content/uploads/
2017/08/Gee.pdf
Green, J., & Jackson, J. (2014). Mentoring: Some cauonary notes for the nursing
profession. Contemporary Nurse, 47(1–2), 79–87. hps://doi.org/10.1080/10376
178.2014.11081909
Grossman, S. (2013). Mentoring in Nursing (2nd ed.). Springer.
Hale, R. (2018). Conceptualizing the mentoring relaonship: An appraisal of evidence.
Nursing Forum, 53(3), 333–338. hps://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12259
Hamilton, L., Boman, J., Rubin, H., & Sahota, B. (2019). Examining the impact of a
university mentorship program on student outcomes. Internaonal Journal of
Mentoring and Coaching in Educaon, 8(1), 19–36. hps://doi.org/10.1108/
ijmce-02-2018-0013
Heeneman, S., & De Grave, W. (2019). Development and inial validaon of a dual-
purpose quesonnaire capturing mentors’ and mentees’ percepons and
expectaons of the mentoring process. BMC Medical Educaon, 19(1), 133.
hps://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1574-2
Henry, A., & Mollstedt, M. (2021). The other in the self: Mentoring relaonships and
adapve dynamics in preservice teacher identy construcon. Learning, Culture
and Social Interacon, 31, 100568. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100568
Hu, C., Wang, S., Wang, Y., Chen, C., & Jiang, D. (2016). Understanding aracon in
formal mentoring relaonships from an aecve perspecve. Journal of
Vocaonal Behavior, 94, 104–113. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.02.007
Huang, W., Shen, J., & Yuan, C. (2022). How decent work aects aecve commitment
among Chinese employees: The roles of psychological safety and labor relaons
climate. Journal of Career Assessment, 30(1), 157–180. hps://doi.org/
10.1177/10690727211029673
Indira, S. (2014). General systems theory. Retrieved from hps://www.bibliomed.org/
mnsfulltext/157/157-1455952116.pdf?1653379970
Iqbal, H. (2020). E-mentoring: An eecve plaorm for distance learning. e-mentor,
2(84), 54–61. hps://doi.org/10.15219/em84.1463
Koopman, R., Englis, D.P., Ehrenhard, M., & Groen, A. (2021). The chronological
development of coaching and mentoring: Side by side disciplines. Internaonal
Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 19(1), 137–151. hps://doi.
org/10.24384/3w69-k922
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Praccal guidance to qualitave research. Part
4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Pracce, 24(1),
120–124. hps://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
Kram, K. (1983). Phases of the mentor relaonship. The Academy of Management
Journal, 24(4), 608–625. hps://doi.org/10.5465/255910
Krishna, L.K.R., Tan, L.H.E., Ong, Y.T., Tay, K.T., Hee, J.M., Chiam, M., Chia, E.W.Y., Sheri, K.,
Tan, X.H., Teo, Y.H., Know, C.S., Mason, S., & Toh, Y.P. (2020). Enhancing mentoring in
palliave care: An evidence based mentoring framework. Journal of Medical Educaon
and Curriculum Development, 7, 1–13. hps://doi.org/ 10.1177/2382120520957649
Kulik, C.T. (2021). We need a hero: HR and the ‘next normal’ workplace. Human Resource
Management Journal, 32(1), 216–231. hps://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12387
Kumar, A. (2021). Mentoring by near peers from HEI: A promising connecon to build
human capital. Retrieved from hps://www.evidencebasedmentoring.org/wp-
content/uploads/2021/08/Mentoring-by-HEI-A-Promising-Connecon-to-Build-
Human-Capital_AnuradhaTK.pdf

Page 11 of 11 Original Research
hp://www.sajip.co.za Open Access
Laker, B. (2021). Leadership mentorship in a hybrid world: Here’s how to make it
work. Retrieved from hps://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminlaker/2021/11/
08Zership-mentorship-in-a-hybrid-world-heres-how-to-make-it-work/?sh=4745f
71532f4
Li, M., Gong, Z., & Liao, G. (2022). How relaonship-building behavior induces new
employees’ career success: Eects of mentor e strength and network density.
Social Behavior and Personality. An Internaonal Journal, 50(1), 1–16. hps://doi.
org/10.2224/sbp.10791
Liu, Y., Ye, L., & Guo, M. (2021). Does formal mentoring impact safety performance? A
study on Chinese high-speed rail operators. Journal of Safety Research, 77, 46–55.
hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2021.02.001
MacCallum, J. (2007). Mentoring and teachers: The implicaons of reconceptualising
mentoring. The Internaonal Journal of Learning, 14(5), 133–140. hps://doi.
org/10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v14i05/45338
Mantzourani, E., Chang, H., Desselle, S., Canedo, J., & Fleming, G. (2021). Reecons
of mentors and mentees on a naonal mentoring programme for pharmacists: An
examinaon into relaonships, personal and professional development. Research
in Social and Administrave Pharmacy, 18(3), 2495–2504. hps://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.04.019
Marais, P., & Meier, C. (2010). Disrupve behaviour in the foundaon phase
of schooling. South African Journal of Educaon, 30(1), 41–57. hps://doi.
org/10.4314/saje.v30i1.52601
Mcilongo, M., & Strydom, K. (2021). The signicance of mentorship in supporng the
career advancement of women in the public sector. Heliyon, 7(6), e07321. hps://
doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07321
Menzin, A.W., Kline, M., George, C., Schindler, J., Yacht, A., & Fornari, A. (2020).
Toward the quadruple aim: Impact of a humanisc mentoring program to reduce
burnout and foster resilience. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovaons, Quality &
Outcomes, 4(5), 499–505. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2020.05.001
Mohana, P., & Enoch, A. (2020). A study on mentoring funcons and their inuence on
protégé’s career development in informaon technology(it) sector, Chennai.
European Journal of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, 7(9), 1974–1995. hps://
ejmcm.com/arcle_5896.html
Neuman, W.L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitave and quantave
approaches (7th ed.). Pearson Educaon, Inc.
Pfund, C., Byars-Winston, J., Branchaw, J., Hurtado, S., & Eagan, K. (2016). Dening
aributes and metrics of eecve research mentoring relaonships. AIDS and
Behaviour, 20, 238–248. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-016-1384-z
Pollard, R., & Kumar, S. (2021). Mentoring graduate students online: Strategies and
challenges. The Internaonal Review of Research in Open and Distributed
Learning, 22(2), 267–284. hps://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v22i2.5093
Poon, C., Herrera, C., Jarjoura, R., McQuillin, S., Keller, T., & Rhodes, J. (2022).
Deconstrucng “Risk” in youth mentoring programs: How environmental
stressors and presenng challenges shape mentoring relaonship outcomes.
The Journal of Early Adolescence, 42(6), 793–821. hps://doi.org/10.1177/
02724316221078833
Ragins, B.R., & Kram, K.E. (2007). The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory,
research, and pracce. Sage.
Roos, V. (Ed.). (2016). Understanding relaonal and group experiences through the
Mmogo-method. Springer.
Sawiuk, R., Leeder, T., Lewis, C., & Groom, R. (2022). Planning, delivering, and
evaluang formalised sport coach mentoring: Exploring the role of the Programme
Director. Sports Coaching Review, 11(1), 1–20. hps://doi.org/10.1080/21640629.
2022.2045139
Sheehan, A., Elmir, R., Hammond, A., Schmied, V., Coulton, S., Sorensen, K., Arundell,
F., Keedle, H., Dahlen, H., & Burns, E. (2021). The midwife-student mentor
relaonship: Creang the virtuous circle. Women and Birth, 35(5), e512–e520.
hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2021.10.007
Spiekermann, L., & Lawrence, M.L.E. (2020). The ups and downs of mentoring
relaonship formaon: What to expect. Children and Youth Services Review, 118,
105413. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105413
Stapley, E., Town, R., Yoon, Y., Lereya, S., Farr, J., Turner, J., Barnes, N., & Deighton, J.
(2022). A mixed methods evaluation of a peer mentoring intervention
in a UK school setting: Perspectives from mentees and mentors. Children
and Youth Services Review, 132, 106327. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.
2021.106327
Steinmann, N. (2017). Guiding and leading crucial mentoring conversaons.
Knowledge Resources Publishing.
Tetzla, J., Lomberk, G., Smith, H.M., Agrawal, H., Siegel, D.H., & Apps, J.N. (2022).
Adapng mentoring in mes of crisis: What we learned from COVID-19. Academic
Psychiatry, 46, 774–779. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-022-01589-1
Wang, W., Kang, S., & Choi, S. (2022). Servant leadership and creavity: A study of the
sequenal mediang roles of psychological safety and employee well-being.
Froners in Psychology, 12, 1–13. hps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.807070
Zhang, Y., Qian, Y., Wu, J., Wen, F., & Zhang, Y. (2016). The effectiveness and
implementation of mentoring program for newly graduated nurses: A
systemac review. Nurse Educaon Today, 37, 136–144. hps://doi.org/10.1016/j.
nedt.2015.11.027
Zhou, A.J., Lapointe, É., & Zhou, S.S. (2019). Understanding mentoring relaonships in
China: Towards a Confucian model. Asia Pacic Journal of Management, 36,
415–444. hps://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9589-5