Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Research on mentorships has suffered from fragmentation of key issues; specifically, type of mentoring relationship, functions served by the mentor, and outcomes of the mentoring relationship. A field study was conducted comparing 212 protégés who were involved in informally developed mentorships, 53 protégés involved in formal mentor‐ship programs, and 284 individuals who did not have mentors. Individuals in informal and formal mentorships were compared along two mentoring dimensions: psychosocial and career‐related functions. All groups were compared on three outcome measures: organizational socialization, job satisfaction, and salary. Results indicated protégés in informal mentorships reported more career‐related support from their mentors and higher salaries than protégés in formal mentorships. For all outcome variables, protégés in informal mentorships also reported more favorable outcomes than nonmentored individuals. However, outcomes from protégés in formal mentorships were generally not significant from the other two groups. Implications for mentorship practices and research are discussed.
Chao et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: