8.2.3.1. Formal versus informal mentoring

This dichotomy of the original concept of mentoring is the oldest and most addressed in the literature. Thus, for authors like Hegstad [HEG 99], mentoring can be formal or informal. As for informal mentoring, it can be said that it is a relationship that arises naturally, the result of a chemistry between two people, without any preparation or prior programming [CEN 03, ELR 15].

Chao [CHA 97] states that informal mentoring is not created, managed or formally recognized by the organization – these are relationships that exist intrinsically in any organization, arise spontaneously and are the result of mutual attraction processes. As for this process of mutual attraction, Kram [KRA 80] states that it happens because, unconsciously, mentees seek mentors who want to follow as a model, who they consider to be a source of access to information, networks, influence and even protection, and the mentors choose minds with characteristics that mirror their own. The key to this type of relationship is the feeling of sharing the same identity, both having a similar background. There are usually two situations contributing to the occurrence of informal mentoring. On the one hand, someone with more knowledge and/or experience is willing/happy to help another individual to evolve and feels useful thanks to this collaboration. On the other hand, someone who needs knowledge and/or experience approaches someone who has it [ERL 15].

As for formal mentoring, it is a process/program that is pre-planned and implemented by the organization itself, where there are well-defined objectives for the creation of alliances between less experienced employees, in order to meet certain organizational objectives [HEG 99, BRI 17]. Kram [KRA 80] also presents his own definition of formal mentoring, stating that these are programs structured and managed by organizations, and that are standardized by the pursuit of certain standards. Murray and Owen [MUR 91] corroborate Kram [KRA 80], and reiterate that formal mentoring consists of structural processes created to form effective relationships and orientations. Thus, formal mentoring translates the organizational effort to pair mentors and mentees – this process is traditionally called the match process [EBY 04]. As for participation in formal programs, it is up to the organization itself to grant the participation of all workers so that they can assume one of the roles (mentor or mentee) or designate criteria for that purpose, such as performance, appointment of third parties or type of job [EBY 04]. After the participants are chosen, organizations usually offer preparatory activities, such as guidance and training, so that mentors and mentees understand their role and obligations and feel comfortable with the entire mentoring process [EBY 04]. In short, formal mentoring is characterized by its intentionality. The relationship members (mentor and mentee) offer/ask for guidance, set goals and agree on the nature of the relationship to be established [CEN 03].

Regarding the differences between these two types of mentoring, Chao [CHA 97] affirms that the main difference lies in the way the relationship is born. Meanwhile, Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] argue that in addition to the way the mentoring relationship begins – spontaneous approach or a match by third parties – the concepts also differ in relation to the structure of the relationship, in terms of its duration and level of formality. For Hunt and Michael [HUN 83], the main differences between formal and informal mentoring are found in view of two distinct variables: the focus of the objective and the social intensity. Thus, in informal relationships the focus is on the individual and there is a strong social intensity, while in formal mentoring the focus is on organizational objectives and the social intensity is only moderate [HUN 83].

8.2.3.2. Reverse mentoring

After the concept of formal and informal mentoring, the most prominent type of mentoring in the literature and that is more recent as well, is so-called reverse mentoring.

According to Brito et al. [BRI 17], reverse mentoring happens when younger employees teach and transmit new learning to older employees. This type of mentoring stimulates older collaborators, to keep the younger ones committed to helping others to progress, thus allowing the development of intergenerational relationships [ANI 17]. Reverse mentoring is very common in organizations in the areas of new technologies [BRI 17].

8.2.3.3. Peer mentoring

According to Anitha and Chandrasekar [ANI 17], mentoring relationships can arise between junior and senior members, as well as between peers. The Talent Management Staff [TAL 14b] suggests that peer mentoring (internationally known as “peer mentoring” and even “buddy mentoring”) is mainly the bond and dialogue between peers that not only allows information to be exchanged, but also allows feedback and common problems, emotional and personal support and companionship to be shared. This bond is created with employees who do not show much difference in terms of level of experience. According to Tjan [TJA 11], this type of mentoring focuses more on learning than on mentoring itself. The author explains that, particularly in an organization’s onboarding processes, what really benefits the new employee is the “buddy”/“peer” system that aims to accelerate the individual’s learning curve. It mainly consists of help with certain more specific skills, explanations of certain organizational practices and demonstrations of how things are done in that organization. The buddy’s interaction with the new employee must be constant from day one [TJA 11].

8.2.3.4. Other mentoring types

Santos [SAN 07] considers that there are different types of mentoring depending on the organizational objective that is intended to be achieved. Thus, Santos proposes four types of mentoring:

• – Integration mentoring: when the organization aims to promote and integrate minority groups or integrate people in very specific careers [SAN 07].
• – Succession mentoring: when the organization aims to develop workers in order to reduce the turnover of human capital. It is about preparing workers for career growth and attracting new workers with these development policies [SAN 07].
• – Entrepreneurship mentoring: when an organization intends to sponsor and guide new entrepreneurs who are starting their business in order to develop attitudes and the culture of a successful entrepreneur [SAN 07].
• – Career mentoring: when the organization wants to develop a worker in order to obtain the skills necessary for their growth and adaptation to the function, such as leadership, communication, conflict resolution, among others [SAN 07]. Tjan [TJA 11] adds that this type of mentoring arises after an employee’s integration period, where another more senior professional in the organization assumes the role of their career counsellor. The senior professional should show the mentee how the mentee contributes to the organizational purpose, what their impact is and how far they can go. This will make the mentee feel motivated, satisfied and fulfilled [TJA 11]. Tjan [TJA 11] also points out that in this situation the mentee’s superior should not be the mentor.

8.2.5.1. Mentor

For Fouché and Lunt [FOU 10], a mentor is a kind of trusted advisor or guide. Kumar et al. [KUM 16] adds that the mentor is an experienced guide and transmitter of knowledge and know-how. Daniel et al. [DAN 06] considers that the mentor is an experienced person, capable of helping their mentee to develop professionally. In addition, the mentor also has psychosocial functions, as they serve as a role model and support for the mentee, while assuming the role of their defender [DAN 06, TAL 13]. Finally, according to Kram [KRA 80], the main function of the mentor is to discover all the potentialities of their mentee.

Since mentoring programs are often designed with emphasis on the mentor’s knowledge [CLU 12], it is important that, in order for the mentor to help the mentee to develop specific skills and leadership skills, the mentor has these same characteristics [CEN 03]. If they don’t have them, mentors must acquire these skills, techniques or tools in order to transmit knowledge better [ROD 18].

In addition to technical knowledge and skills, mentors must be highly committed and involved in understanding their role in the mentoring process/relationship and the role of their respective mentee [TAL 13]. For this there are formations/trainings called pre-mentoring that can be an option for those who have lesser social skills, in order to establish basic skills so that they can become effective mentors [CLU 12].

Regarding the relationship that the mentor should maintain with their mentee, Rodrigues [ROD 18] says that mentors must be found and chosen to assume this role according to the needs of the mentees. According to Clutterbuck [CLU 12], given that the mentor sees in their mentee a version of himself/herself in the past, the relationship should focus on the mentee, on their needs and rhythms. The mentor should question what their mentee thinks about certain projects/challenges and should encourage them to think as their superiors would think in order to prepare the mentee for possible future management and/or leadership positions [TAL 13].

As for who can be a mentor, as previously mentioned, this decision is up to the organization itself. It may be someone with more or less experience in the organization; they may be direct superiors, peers from the same organization or outside, subordinates among many other options [BAU 05]. For Baugh and Sullivan [BAU 05] the options are endless to the point of stating that mentoring relationships do not necessarily need to be in pairs. However, the Talent Management Staff [TAL 14a] points out that a mentor who is “peer” to the mentee, that is, who has a level of experience just above the latter, understands better and creates greater empathy with the mentee’s problems. If the mentor was or is in a similar situation, this allows for better communication, greater mutual and collaborative support than if they were a traditional mentor, that is, much more experienced. Going beyond the question of experience, the Association of Legal Administrators [ASS n/d], through its “ALA Guide to Cross-Functional Mentoring”², believes that there are certain ideal characteristics that a mentor should present – the “3 C’s”. First, competence, through professional experience, knowledge, respect and interpersonal skills. Second, confidence, observed through the sharing of resources and the sharing of the network, the fact of allowing the mentee to establish their own rules, by showing initiative, giving credit and taking risks. Third, commitment, by investing time, effort and energy in the mentoring relationship and by sharing professional experiences.

8.2.5.2. Mentee

The mentee, also known as the “mentored”, the “protégé” or the “apprentice”, among other terminologies is the one who receives mentor guidance [MIN 14, ROD 18]. Rodrigues [ROD 18] states that mentees are the ones who need and want to learn and develop in a certain area, so they are relatively easy to find. Thus, it can be concluded that it is usually someone who is starting a career in a new organization and who is in a more fragile position, as they do not yet feel completely integrated, so he/she will be the one who typically, in comparison with the mentor, will be most interested in the mentoring relationship [ROD 18]. However, Clutterbuck [CLU 12] recalls that, in the case of formal mentoring programs, there may be two main reasons for mentees to participate in this relationship: either they are genuinely interested in developing a relationship with another more experienced employee, in order to gain knowledge, or they participate only because their organization appoints them.

It should also be noted that the benefits of a mentoring relationship are much more evident to the mentee than to other players and that this type of relationship is often born and/or is built based on the mentee’s needs. Although the following section presents the benefits of mentoring for mentees in detail, a small preview of some of them is presented. Minnick et al. [MIN 14] argue that through the support of a mentor, the mentee feels greater security and help, for example, in preventing errors, due to the past experience of their mentor. Minnick et al. also add that, compared to those workers who did not receive any mentoring, those who had help from the mentor have a higher rate of promotion, salary and career success [MIN 14]. However, one cannot think that the mentee is simply present passively in the relationship to receive advice and teachings from the mentor. The mentee must be an active player, shaping and leading the relationship itself [ZER 09]. Thus, ideally the mentee should seek in a mentoring relationship to make a self-assessment, to be receptive, to take initiative, to show responsibility and honesty towards the mentor [ZER 09]. According to the proposal by Zerzan et al. [ZER 09], the most productive position that a mentee can adopt in order to optimize the mentoring relationship is “managing up”. Zerzan et al. argue that this is a management concept that characterizes the form of relationship between an employee and a supervisor, in this case applied to mentoring relationships, in which the mentee conducts and appropriates the relationship, allowing the mentor to know what he/she needs and in what way he/she prefers to learn. The mentee can do this by planning and setting the meeting agenda, by asking questions, by actively listening and carrying out tasks and requesting feedback [ZER 09]. Regardless of how it arises or how it is conducted, mentoring, according to Zachary [ZAC 05], is always a relevant tool for the mentee, both at a personal and a professional level, as their personal and professional skills are developed simultaneously. Clutterbuck [CLU 12] corroborates this position and states that, contrary to what happens with the mentor during mentoring relationships, whose skills remain relatively constant, those of the mentee, on the contrary, evolve continuously throughout the different phases of the relationship [ROD 18].

Another variable to be aware of in the case of mentees is the fact that most of them are from the millennial generation [TAL 13]. This generation has relatively peculiar characteristics in relation to other generations, as they want to be part of a mentoring relationship but not a traditional mentoring [TAL 12a, TAL 12b, TAL 13]. Millennials like to learn through different collaborations and see mentoring as a learning process that takes place through different relationships – through managers, colleagues, customers, among others – instead of the traditional one-to-one format. In addition, they expect to be told from their first day on the job what they are supposed to do, although they prefer to work with collaborative mentors who are close, who listen to them and who are not authoritarian [TAL 13].

8.2.5.3. Organization

The organization consists of the environment in which mentoring relationships are inserted and developed. The organization must provide the necessary conditions (such as resources, time, etc.) so that both mentors and mentees can benefit from the mentoring relationship [MAS 15]. As mentors and mentees both benefit from this type of relationship, it creates a general atmosphere of satisfaction in the organization and makes it more agile, more conducive to change. The implementation of this organizational practice will allow the organization to take more risks in hiring new workers, reducing costs and training time that these same employees would need to adapt to the organization and start producing value [POW 10].

In this third element of the mentoring relationship, the literature points out two fundamental elements for mentoring relationships with regard to the organization: the head/management/supervision of the mentor and the mentee [TAL 13] and the team responsible for management mentoring programs [MAN 12].

As for the manager/leadership of the mentor–mentee pair, it must provide a structured plan with the mentoring activities for both parties; it must schedule check-ins to ensure that the mentees are learning properly and feel comfortable with the mentoring relationship, and understand how mentors are developing the relationship and how they are developing themselves [TAL 13]. The manager must adopt an open and welcoming attitude from the beginning, thus communicating that they want to develop mentoring work with the team and, at the same time, develop a relationship with both the mentor and the mentee. The manager should also question the mentor and the mentee about ideas and feedback, so that they understand that their contributions are taken into account [TAL 13].

As for the mentoring program management team, as Penim and Catalão [PEN 18] claim, organizational mentoring programs are often linked to other development strategies such as competency management, which shows that the mentoring management is usually the responsibility of the Human Resource Management Department or the Development Department. Penim and Catalão also recognize and emphasize the indispensability of the management team for the success of mentoring programs, even stating that their constitution is a prerequisite for this type of organizational initiative. This team is responsible for designing/creating the program and is also responsible for its implementation and management [PEN 18]. Mentoring program managers also benefit from their involvement through: strengthening their management and leadership skills; creating opportunities to put certain skills into practice, such as conflict management, for example; and for learning to work with different personalities and at different stages of their careers [MAN 12].

8.2.6.1. Advantages for the mentee

Thus, starting with the mentee, who is usually at the center of the research’s attention on this subject, according to Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] the benefits that mentoring can provide can be divided into four areas: learning, coaching, career planning, and psychosocial support.

According to Penim and Catalão [PEN 18], mentoring contributes to the mentee’s learning process and accelerates their adaptation to the organization. The mentee, by having someone to learn with, will be more available to assimilate information and knowledge and transfer them to reality and professional context. As for the greater adaptation to the organization, it may come from the fact that the mentor had previously considered what the mentee would need to know and how to do to adapt. Mentoring helps the mentee learn about the organization’s culture as well as its intrinsic norms [DOU 97, MAN 12]. According to Clutterbuck [CLU 12], with the mentoring relationship, three different types of learning are transmitted to the mentee. First, the mentee learns directly from the mentor through their experience and wisdom. Second, the mentee learns from the dialogue they maintain with the mentor, by challenging their beliefs, which in turn makes them more self-confident, and they obtain an opinion on their behavior and the behavior of others, while also learning how to acquire knowledge. Thirdly, the mentee learns from their own reflection on the mentoring sessions.

Concerning coaching, having a mentor from day one in an organization increases the productivity of the mentee, as the mentor will help identify the necessary resources and some cultural norms that they would have difficulty identifying without the mentor’s help [TAL 13]. With mentoring, the mentee is taught to know how to speak and be heard, as well as how to accept feedback [MAN 12]. In addition, both support and feedback are personalized [DOU 97]. With a mentor, mentees feel safer with their work and, consequently, perform better [ENV 17].

Another area is career planning. Employees who participated in mentoring programs as mentees show greater satisfaction with their work [PEN 18], and in turn, according to some studies, satisfied employees stay longer in the organization and work more and better [GRA 17]. Douglas [DOU 97] states that mentees have greater opportunities for career advancement. These opportunities result from the mentees receiving concrete support from the mentor along the road to progress and in the respective decision-making made by them [PEN 18].

Finally, the fourth area is psychosocial support. According to the Talent Management Staff [TAL 12a], the period in which an employee joins a new company is always a moment of great vulnerability for them, especially if they recently left university to enter the job market. Uncertainty and fear take a back seat when the employee knows they will be able to rely on someone – their mentor. According to Erlich [ERL 15] and Douglas [DOU 97], mentoring provides greater security and self-confidence to the mentee, as they know they will not be alone [PEN 18]. The mentee benefits from the reduction of stress levels, as they will be helped both in recognizing the challenges that they will have to go through, as well as the skills that the mentee possess to face the challenges [DOU 97, PEN 18]. With mentoring, the mentee expands the network of relationships [MAN 12] by benefiting from the mentor’s own networking [PEN 18]. Mentoring helps the mentee to develop and/or improve their interpersonal skills [MAN 12].

8.2.6.2. Advantages for the mentor

The benefits of mentoring are for both parties and not exclusively or mainly for the mentee [BAU 05]. For Clutterbuck [CLU 12], the most common benefit for mentors is that they can be challenged. However, a mentoring relationship can present many other benefits for the mentor, such as those listed and grouped into categories by Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04]: learning, development of a personal relationship, personal qualification, and improvement of management skills.

Concerning learning, mentoring programs often contribute to the acquisition of knowledge, serve as a source of inspiration for the mentor and help to evolve their own way of thinking, more or less consciously for the mentor themselves [CEN 03]. The generational difference that often occurs between the mentor and the mentee provides a great exchange of knowledge between both parties [PEN 18]. The mentor learns through the mentoring relationship and gets used to using active listening instead of passive listening.

Another benefit results from the development of a personal relationship. The mentor, through a mentoring relationship, has the opportunity to share wisdom and experiences [CEN 03]. In addition, there is also personal qualification. Participation in mentoring programs gives the mentor an energetic boost to their career and a revitalization at work that leads to greater satisfaction and personal fulfilment as well as their own career [DOU 97, MAN 12]. Through the contacts established to increase the network of their mentee, the mentor, in turn, increases and/or reactivates their own network [CEN 03, ERL 15, PEN 18]. The feeling of contribution, of leaving a legacy and greater visibility, prestige and recognition are also considered benefits that contribute to the motivation and self-esteem of the employee who is or was a mentor [DOU 97, MAN 12, PEN 18]. This situation is even more critical and essential when working in an organization that focuses heavily on youth and young employees, since in this type of organizational environment, older employees can easily feel useless and undervalued, leading to demotivation [PEN 18]. For this reason, the mentor is able to increase their self-confidence [DOU 97]. According to Penim and Catalão [PEN 18], mentoring provides mentors with the development of some skills that they acquire either through preparation to assume their role or during the mentoring process itself. These skills may already be previously intrinsic to the mentor; however mentoring is an excellent opportunity to put them into practice. According to Clutterbuck [CLU 12], personal development is common to the vast majority of mentors, especially with regard to interpretation skills.

Another benefit results from improvement of management skills. One of the most recognized management skills of employees in leadership positions is empathy and interpersonal communication. Thus, the mentor, when developing their interpersonal communication skills for assuming the role of mentor, is also developing their management skills [MAN 12]. The mentor, having to show and contact the different areas of their organization because of their mentee, will acquire more organizational knowledge about the different areas and thus have a global perspective that they would hardly have if they simply focused on their own tasks and did not have the opportunity to participate in a mentoring relationship [MAN 12]. Knowing the organization well makes the job of any manager more efficient because it allows them to gain knowledge on how it works and where to go for help on a given subject.

In addition to these main benefits pointed out by Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04], others can also be highlighted, such as:

• – employees who have taken on or take on the role of mentors receive more promotions than other employees and perform better, due to the reinvigoration with the mentoring experience [GRA 17];
• – participation as a mentor in mentoring programs provides an opportunity to thank and return the support of the organization and the mentoring itself that may have been received in the past [MAN 12].

8.2.6.3. Advantages for the organization

As previously mentioned, the organization itself also benefits from the implementation of mentoring programs, if not for the benefits felt by its employees (both mentors and mentees), since co-learning is the most common benefit in relationships between mentoring pairs. As mentioned earlier, benefits appear at a more subjective level – such as through job and career satisfaction – or at an objective level – potential salary increases, promotions, etc. [EBY 04]. According to Hegstad [HEG 99], when organizations are able to create formal mentoring programs, they are also able to create strategies for the development of employees. Thus, some of the organizational benefits of mentoring include, among others: human resources input/output management, career management, learning/knowledge, image.

Regarding human resources input/output management, the organization benefits result from employee involvement [GRA 17], increased engagement [DOU 97, JON 17] and increased loyalty [MAN 12]. It benefits also from the creation of a more solid contributory culture with a focus on diversity [ASS n/d]; the creation of a good organizational environment based on cooperation between employees [MAN 12, ENV 17]; and, from the reduction of turnover, which in turn increases retention rates and decreases costs with the loss of workers and talent [JON 17, GRA 17, ENV 17]. According to O’Brien and Allen [OBR 06] mentoring is particularly interesting for organizations that aspire to growth and that want to attract and retain talent. According to the Association of Legal Administrators [ASS n/d], mentoring can serve as an organizational tool that simultaneously attracts and retains the best employees, because, for many, the existence of a mentoring program may be more relevant than a better remuneration offer, when they have to decide to stay in the organization or accept a job offer.

Another benefit results from career management. According to Grayless [GRA 17], top executives have attributed their career success to their mentors. Mentoring helps to create succession plans [DOU 97], to form future leaders [JON 17] and works on the development of leadership skills [MAN 12, ERL 15]. In addition, mentoring relationships provide increased networking for the people involved [ERL 15]. Thus, according to Erlich [ERL 15], mentoring provides the organization with feasibility in terms of more functional career development processes.

The organization also benefits in terms of learning and knowledge, since it is in mentoring relationships that 80% of learning takes place in the workplace, and is the most cost-effective form of learning for the organization [DOU 97, GRA 17], which in turn allows for cost savings with training and development. Jones [JON 17] presents an example of a mentoring program for new teachers where, for every $ 1 spent on the program, there was a return of $ 1.50. Mentoring relationships also speed up the organizational learning process as well as the adaptation of new employees, which in turn contribute to greater productivity [ERL 15] as well as create a better and more informed workforce [ENV 17]. Mentoring relationships allow both parties involved (mentors and mentees) to develop soft skills, especially those related to interpersonal relationships [ENV 17]. According to the Association of Legal Administrators [ASS n/d], mentoring, through its role model, can be more effective than certain training actions, as mentoring is a good leadership model that allows the learning of skills difficult to achieve with training in a classroom environment. The same association adds that mentoring encourages excellence for mentors and mentees, since the mentee learns and gains knowledge from a good mentor and, in turn, the mentor has the opportunity to recapitulate knowledge and rethink while explaining things to the mentee.

Also, the image of the organization can benefit from mentoring. With the development and implementation of mentoring programs, organizations internally convey the idea that management is committed to investing in its employees [MAN 12]. At the same time, organizations transmit to their external environment the idea that they value their human resources [MAN 12].

8.2.6.4. Disadvantages of mentoring

Despite the scarcity of studies dedicated to the disadvantages of mentoring [COL 01, BUR 10], it is important to note that dysfunctional mentoring relationships can lead to very harmful results for all parties involved [BAU 05]. According to Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04], these problems are more likely to occur when it comes to formal mentoring, since the relationship may not be voluntary and always depends on the involvement of a third element external to the relationship: the organization. Another situation that can contribute to the emergence of problems in terms of mentoring, according to Clutterbuck [CLU 12], is the dispersion and lack of a clear definition of the end of the relationship and consequent lack of recognition of the contribution made by both parties.

Next, the disadvantages for each of the mentoring members will be addressed.

8.2.6.5. Disadvantages to the mentee

One disadvantage or problem that may result from mentoring to the mentee is related with carelessness with work. According to Douglas [DOU 97], the fact of assigning a mentor to a worker can, wrongly, make the latter relax and feel more comfortable to unravel small details, since the mentee believes that the mentor will supervise and filter their mistakes. Another possible problem may emerge from a conflict between mentor–boss. If there is a conflict between the mentor and the boss of a worker, the worker can be harmed, since the boss can interfere and damage the relationship with the person who has the most contact and who protects them – their mentor. The boss may be influenced by the fact that the mentee may be somewhat the mirror of their mentor, and unfairly harm the mentee [DOU 97].

Differently, but which may also result in a problem, is excessive expectations of promotion. According to Douglas [DOU 97], the mentee can naively feel that by being protected and sponsored by their mentor, they can more easily achieve an ascendancy in their career. Another problem may arise from dependency. Douglas [DOU 97] and Clutterbuck [CLU 12] point to the danger of the mentee creating such a state of dependence on their mentor that results in them being unable to develop their own autonomy. There is also a possibility that the mentee will not create other relationships or be in isolation. The mentee, by spending a lot of time and depending a lot on their mentor, may be discouraging other socialization opportunities that they could have with other colleagues, who are also willing to help them [DOU 97].

A possible disadvantage emerges from less positive experiences and “bad” mentors. Douglas [DOU 97] and Broder-Singer [BRO 11] claim that worse than a worker not having a mentor is having a mentor who is not committed to their role. This can disturb the mentee’s morale and their intention to stay in the organization [BRO 11]. Colley [COL 01] also points out that there is a danger that the mentor will be interpreted as the most powerful member of the relationship and the mentee as incapacitated or powerless. Thus, in the transmission of knowledge, the mentor’s knowledge may be reinforced, overlapping the established practice and nullifying the importance of new knowledge brought by the mentee [COL 01].

In addition to the mentioned disadvantages, Colley [COL 01] goes further and points out that, in extreme cases, mentoring can be considered a tool for controlling and manipulating minds, in order to do what the organization or even the mentors want.

8.2.6.6. Disadvantages to the mentor

Mentors do not only benefit from mentoring, their participation in a mentoring relationship also has some disadvantages. First, less time and availability – a worker with a mentee in charge, if they want to play an active role as a mentor, will be left with more tasks to do than they had before making that commitment [DOU 97, KAR 16]. In turn, this increase in the workload is not usually reflected proportionally in the reduction of the usual tasks under their responsibility or in an extension of deadlines [KAR 16]. Second, unclear benefits – the poor definition and presentation of the benefits of mentoring to the mentor may prevent the mentor from being able to take full advantage of them [DOU 97]. Third, pressure to be a mentor – there is sometimes pressure on workers to assume the role of mentors, mainly by their managers [DOU 97]. This can lead to the fact that, from the perspective of the mentors, the denial of participation in a mentoring relationship can be seen as a limitation and a disillusionment for their leadership. Fourth, lack of skills – as it is difficult to ensure that mentors have all the key skills necessary to perform their role well [JOH 03]. Thus, mentors who do not have them, may be playing a less positive role in mentoring relationships, which may also bring them a little personal and professional frustration [DOU 97].

8.2.6.7. Disadvantages to the organization

As with the advantages, mentoring can also have direct disadvantages for the organization. First, failure due to the lack of organizational support – Douglas [DOU 97] and Jones [JON 17] consider that a poor or weak execution of a mentoring program can translate into negative feelings about a certain organization. Second, an environment of favoritism and resentment from those who have been left out – when organizations choose to limit access to mentoring programs to certain workers, feelings of injustice may arise from those who were not included in this group, regardless of the role they could possibly play – mentor or mentee [DOU 97]. Third, difficult coordination – coordinating a mentoring program requires time, dedication, resources and constant and professional monitoring. In a highly competitive environment where this type of initiative is still not seen as a priority, there may be a certain neglect in monitoring mentoring relationships [DOU 97].

In addition to the disadvantages presented above, Jones [JON 17] adds that any negative experience regarding mentoring causes more intense emotional and behavioral responses compared to positive situations. It is therefore extremely important to prevent this type of situation.

8.2.7.1. Success of mentoring programs

Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] state that the facilitators of successful mentoring programs are: assertive communication of program objectives; a good match between mentor and mentee; presentation of targets regarding participation in the mentoring program; better and greater monitoring/management of mentoring programs.

Cuerrier [CUE 01] points out five premises and three essential conditions for the success and sustainability of a mentoring program: the program should focus on the mentor and the mentee; the match process must establish criteria for selection and participation; the program must include a coordination and management team; the program must contain pre-mentoring training to clarify the roles to be developed; and, the program must include a process for evaluating the results (based on comparison with the pre-established objectives) and collect feedback on the satisfaction and quality of the program.

According to Cuerrier [CUE 01], the three necessary conditions are: ensure the exchange of knowledge between the parties; guarantee the resources and conditions necessary for the development of the program’s activities; recognition by management and promotion of the program’s importance to the organization’s strategic vision.

Finally, the Environmental Careers Organization of Canada [ENV 17] only point out four basic considerations for the success of a mentoring program, namely:

• – Compatibility: the success of the program will largely depend on how good the mentor–mentee match is. It is necessary for them to be able to communicate easily and to be genuinely interested in each other.
• – Double contribution: mentoring must flow through both parties. The mentees must feel that they are also making a significant contribution to the relationship and not just waiting for advice from the mentor.
• – Clear expectations: having realistic expectations and goals helps to guide the partnership in a good way.
• – Objectives of the relationship: defining objectives for the mentoring relationship is essential for its success. Both parties must be taken into account as well as how they can work to achieve something concrete together.

8.2.7.2. Problems with mentoring programs

As for the problems identified in the mentoring programs, it is possible to distinguish between the problems identified by the main players in the relationship (mentor and mentee) and also the different problems that occur in formal and informal mentoring. These problems can provide valuable clues about some obstacles that can be overcome by mentoring program managers, which will be presented in detail later.

Thus, Clutterbuck [CLU 12] identified three problems simultaneously identified by mentors and mentees: first, incompatibility in the formation of mentor–mentee pairs; second, difficulty in scheduling meetings and poor availability of the other; third, geographic distance (which happens in cases of virtual mentoring).

Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] are able to distinguish the problems identified by both mentors and mentees. Thus, the main problem identified by the mentors is the feeling of not being personally suited to the role, of not feeling like the best person to take on someone else’s mentoring. As for the mentees, the problems most pointed out by them are: negligence of the mentor; unmet expectations; and structural separation (at organizational level) from the mentor.

Regarding the formal mentoring and informal mentoring dichotomy, Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] argue that the most common problems identified in formal programs in comparison with informal programs are: greater mentor disinterest and less interpersonal competence on their part, greater selfishness and neglect on both sides.

8.2.7.3. Planning, creating and implementing mentoring programs

Jones [JON 17] explains that competition between companies is growing and fierce, especially when it comes to talent recruitment. In order to face this pressure, management feels the need to offer something different to its employees to attract and retain them, and often the option is mentoring. One consequence of this pressure is the decrease in the quality of organizational mentoring as well as the mentoring programs seeming fictitious and devoid of scientific validity. Jones [JON 17] thus stresses that any mentoring program is unique and cannot be simply copied to another organization. The specificities and objectives of each organization must be taken into account.

However, for Broder-Singer [BRO 11], mentoring programs are extremely difficult to design and implement. Jones [JON 17] adds that in order to create these programs, a deep reflection is necessary when planning the different phases and they have to stop being seen as band-aids of the organization. Mentoring programs must stop being made by people who are very busy and overworked, who had never even built any type of program of this kind, or by workers who have never had contact with any type of mentoring role [JON 17]. According to Jones [JON 17], one of the obstacles found for the success of mentoring programs is the low investment in their construction and implementation, because while the organization hires a specialist consultant to provide training, the same investment is not applied to mentoring. According to the same author, organizations have a habit of placing employees with little training or availability at the forefront of the development of these mentoring programs without setting clear expectations for them. It is essential to have a well thought out planning of the program’s objectives as well as for each of its phases, as mentoring has different needs and requires different skills in its different phases [TJA 11, ROD 18].

Another dimension to be taken into account when building mentoring programs is the organizational complexity itself. The Talent Management Staff [TAL 14a] recalls that organizations currently work with multidisciplinary teams – narrowing the interconnections between research and development areas and production and commercial areas in order to provide more flexible business strategies – which requires equally flexible processes by the organization. Broder-Singer [BRO 11] supports this idea, remembering that overly structured and rigid mentoring programs can lead to interpersonal relationships not developing as they should.

Finally, the Association of Legal Administrators [ASS n/d] proposes a series of measures for organizations to be successful with their mentoring programs: have a support structure for both parts of the relationship; have a mechanism that provides constant feedback; have evaluation mechanisms; and, have a benchmarking routine.

8.2.7.4. Supervision of mentoring programs and feedback

For Rodrigues [ROD 18], it is extremely important for the success of mentoring programs to define who will supervise them, who will manage them and monitor the interactions between mentor and mentee.

In addition, Tjan [TJA 11] states that some organizations do not reflect, as they should, in their mentoring programs or collect feedback, they simply have the basics to be able to claim that they implement it. However, this proves to be an obstacle to the success of these programs at the organizational level, as it is difficult to correct and change mentoring programs if the organization, for example, does not collect feedback to know what employees think, what is not going well and how it can be improved [JON 17].

8.2.7.5. Mentor–mentee pair

As mentioned earlier, the mentor–mentee pair may be the result of a spontaneous process (informal mentoring) or a process created by the organization (formal mentoring). Regarding the latter, the fact that the formed pair results in the vast majority of a match process, can cause less comfort and interpersonal identification between them, and create an obstacle in building a close relationship, supported by trust [EBY 04].

However, when talking about the match process, it should be noted that this does not necessarily mean that the participation of workers is mandatory. Broder-Singer [BRO 11] states that organizations should not make participation in mentoring programs mandatory, but rather they must make sure that all workers understand the objectives and benefits of their participation, and how these objectives are connected with organizational objectives. Moreover, they should only participate if from that moment they demonstrate willingness to participate voluntarily.

8.2.7.6. Mentor–mentee relationship

For a mentoring relationship to work well it is necessary to have a series of conditions that facilitate its functioning. There are facilitators of the mentor–mentee relationship, but that is not enough, it is necessary that both mentor and mentee present a series of characteristics and situations in order to contribute to common success.

Thus, in relation to the mentor–mentee relationship, Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04] state that there are certain factors that can influence the benefits obtained in a mentoring relationship, such as the way the relationship is initiated, the structure of the relationship and the characteristics of the relationship. In addition to these facilitators, there are also factors which, according to Eby and Lockwood, can emphasize possible relational problems, such as the existence of a weak interpersonal adjustment between mentor and mentee or the perceived lack of commitment of some part in the relationship [EBY 04]. Clutterbuck [CLU 12], in addition to stating that there are certain personal qualities that can facilitate the success of the relationship, such as having behaviors that promote rapport, proposes two types of factors that facilitate the relationship resulting from the contract established between both. First, internal factors in the relationship: the establishment of expectations regarding the frequency of meetings and the way in which concepts and problems of the respective roles will be explored [CLU 12]; external factors to the relationship: the level of support of the organization and logistical issues related to the meetings [CLU 12].

Other authors also present their perspective on relationship facilitators such as Higgins and Kram [HIG 01], who stress that empathy between mentor and mentee is the key factor for a successful mentoring relationship. For the Talent Management Staff [TAL 14b], some of the essential characteristics for the success of mentoring relationships are the establishment of an authentic relationship, the sharing of the same perspectives and the fact that mentoring is relevant for both parties. Eby and Lockwood [EBY 04], however, conclude that the organizational characteristics and consequent characteristics of the mentoring programs themselves, especially the formal ones, can influence both the type and amount of mentor assistance and the receptivity of the mentee.

However, Clutterbuck [CLU 12] also recalls that, for example, difference can become an obstacle in the creation of affinity, which is essential and one of the first steps in the mentoring process. Another obstacle pointed out by the same author is the fact that the power in the relationship is on the side of the mentor. Nevertheless, Clutterbuck [CLU 12] also states that both participants tend to take steps to reduce the gap at this level, such as:

• – an agreement of the learning objectives for both;
• – establishing and recognizing that power should be used to influence and not to be authoritarian;
• – the mentee should always be encouraged to give their opinion before the mentor. There must be respect for the views of both parties;
• – mentoring meetings in places that demonstrate the mentor’s power (e.g. the mentor’s office) should be avoided;
• – one should have an equality discourse and avoid being imperative;
• – the mentee should be allowed to be responsible for managing the relationship and to learn from it;
• – a regular review to identify situations in which the mentee felt an imbalance of power should be established.

Regarding the mentor, it can be said that they should have certain characteristics that must be developed and worked on in order to obtain successful mentoring relationships. Phillips-Jones [PHI 01], expert in mentoring and author of the book “The New Mentors and Protégés: How to Succeed with the New Mentoring Partnerships among other publications in the area, points out four key skills in mentoring, mainly for mentors:

• – Active listening: creates empathy, a positive and accepting environment that in turn allows for open communication. Thus, the mentor will be able to assist the mentee according to the mentee’s interests and needs. The mentor should: show interest in what the mentee says and reflect on it in order to show that they understand the mentee’s opinion; use body language, such as looking into the mentee’s eyes, showing that they are paying attention; reduce background noise and limit any interruption in order to give the mentee full attention; and wait for the mentee to express their ideas and thoughts first.
• – Building trust: a time-consuming process. To do this, the mentor may: maintain confidentiality, honor their commitments to the mentee, show interest and ongoing support, and be honest.
• – Define objectives and build capacities: the mentor can help the mentee to develop capacities and to identify and achieve their objectives by: helping the mentee find resources (people, tools, etc.); share knowledge through explanations, examples, demonstrations and rhetorical questions; and discuss actions the mentor has taken throughout their career and explain why.
• – Encourage and inspire: being encouraging is the mentor’s most valued skill. So, the mentor should: comment favorably on the achievements of the mentee; communicate to the mentee how much they believe in the mentee’s growth and their ability to achieve their goals; counteract the frustrations of the mentee with positive words of support, understanding and encouragement; talk about the mentor’s own achievements, challenges and mistakes and how they overcame them; talk about people who motivated and inspired them and introduce the mentee to people who can help them.

Having employees with mentoring skills is difficult to guarantee, especially in the case of complex organizations, with different competitive priorities and an unstable workforce [JON 17]. However, Clutterbuck [CLU 12] proposes an easy and inexpensive solution for the mentor: sharing their experience of personal discovery, since the influence of the mentor is central to the relationship. The mentor must use their “authority” to make introductions, protect and defend the mentee, and promote the name of the mentee.

Mentors’ motivations for participating in formal mentoring programs vary, especially if they do not result from voluntary entry into a formal mentoring process. The mentor may not be motivated to help the mentee to grow and develop [EBY 04]. Mentors can only be concerned with obtaining organizational recognition or participate simply because they are required to do so [EBY 04].

Regarding the mentee, little information is provided by the literature, but it is known that the mentees will feel more comfortable sharing their ideas with someone who shows openness and receptivity from the beginning [TAL 13]. Currently, employees are no longer used to waiting for information or answers to their questions. Thus, if the mentor is not very active, the mentee’s proactivity will lead to them seeking out other people, which can become an obstacle to the creation of a strong relationship between them. It is also known that younger workers are more receptive to aligning their behaviors with a respected mentor in the organization [TAL 12a].

8.2.7.7. Management support

Nowadays, in the job market where another job offer from another company is easily found, companies have invested in more benefits for employees, such as mentoring programs, especially if those same organizations cannot compete with others that offer higher wages [JON 17]. But, according to Jones [JON 17], creating a mentoring program is not an easy task, and programs often fail. One of the reasons cited for this failure is the fact that there is no due support from management – often because Management believes that mentoring programs are meaningless [JON 17].

Thus, after realizing the potential benefits of mentoring programs, according to Tjan [TJA 11], the organization should take the first step in establishing that this program is part of the strategy for developing and valuing its human resources. According to the same author, it does not need to be something complex, but it is essential that all organizational members know that the organization adopts mentoring as part of its organizational culture [TJA 11]. Broder-Singer [BRO 11] argues that the support and recognition of Management in relation to mentoring programs is extremely important, since this type of programs consumes a lot of time, for both the mentor and the mentee. They will only dedicate the necessary time to the relationship if Management supports it. The Talent Management Staff [TAL 14b] states that the organization must support the mentoring programs, and its importance must be corroborated by Management, by establishing the time and space necessary to facilitate the relationship between mentors and mentees.

It is therefore important to reaffirm that a mentoring program can be very well designed and planned, but it will only succeed if Management becomes a facilitator, being committed to mentoring as well [BRO 11]. Broder-Singer [BRO 11] suggests that organizations create clear incentives for these programs as systems of evaluation and incentives and rewards.