Formal or Informal Mentoring: What Drives Employees to Seek Informal Mentors?

Broadly speaking, mentoring relationship occurs when more experienced, senior employee (mentor) takes an active interest in and encourages less experienced, junior employee (protege) by providing support, direction, and feedback regarding career plans and personal development (e.g., Eby et al., 2008; Ragins and Kram, 2007). Mentoring is thought to be beneficial for all involved. For proteges, mentoring has been positively related to increased job satisfaction, greater promotion possibilities, opportunities for increased pay, higher self-esteem, and heightened sense of professional competence (cf., Allen et al., 2004). For mentors, the positive feelings generated by playing key role in protegeu0027s development can lead to more productive work and greater commitment (Chun et al., 2012). In addition, mentors may feel that their identification of and support for up-and-coming stars will increase their own chances for further advancement (Kram, 1988). Several have suggested that the organization benefits as well, as mentoring increases the speed with which proteges learn and reduces the likelihood that proteges will leave the organization voluntarily (e.g., Dulebohn et al, 2012; Scandura and Viator, 1994). Because of the positive effects of mentoring, many organizations, including 71% of the Fortune 500 (Bridgeford, 2007), have adopted formal mentoring programs in the hopes of cultivating meaningful developmental relationships. These formal programs develop mentoring relationships through the assistance of the organization, establishing guidelines that outline how the relationships are formed and the roles and responsibilities for those involved (Burke and McKeen, 1989). While well intended, as mentoring becomes more formal, research suggests that the level of interaction as well as the quality of information shared decreases (Johnson and Anderson, 2009), resulting in fewer long-term advantages for proteges, mentors, and organizations when compared to mentoring relationships that develop naturally and voluntarily, based on perceived competence and interpersonal comfort (e.g., Chao et al, 1992; Eby et al., 2007; Ragins and Cotton, 1999; Underhill, 2006). In cases where formal mentoring is less than fully effective, proteges often seek an additional informal mentor to realize those benefits that are not being gained as part of the formal program. Despite this understanding, little is known about the specific conditions that lead protege with formal mentor to supplement that relationship by finding his or her own informal mentor (cf., Allen et al., 2006). This study sheds light on this by empirically examining factors that lead protege to look for an informal mentor. Specifically, using multi-source data, the dynamics of the mentor-protege relationship are captured by examining the quality of leader-member exchange, the amount of work-related contact time, and the similarity between the formal mentor and the protege. Additionally, protege performance is investigated as predictor of the identification of an informal mentor. In doing so, this study responds to recent calls for work that extends researchersu0027 understanding of what actually occurs in mentoring relationships that affects the cultivation of positive relationship whether it be formal or informal (Eby et al, 2013; Weinberg and Lankau, 2011). A better understanding of the reasons proteges seek informal mentors, especially when they already have an assigned mentor available, extends knowledge with regard to what makes mentoring relationship positive so that more effective, high-quality mentoring programs can be facilitated. This phenomenon is examined in unique context, the U.S. Air Force. As part of the organizationu0027s formal mentoring program, mentor is described as a trusted counselor or guide with directives placing the primary responsibility for this activity on supervisors (U. S. Air Force Policy Directive 36-34, 2000: 1). …