The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Formal mentoring versus supervisor and coworker relationships: differences in perceptions and impact
Abstract
Formal mentoring programs in two companies were examined regarding (1) the extent to which mentees and mentors agreed on the nature of the mentoring relationships and (2) the extent to which dimensions of mentoring relationships were related to outcomes for the mentees, compared with the extent to which dimensions of supervisory and coworker relationships were related to the same outcomes: job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions. Mentors were at least two hierarchical levels above the mentee, and both were part of the companyies' formal mentoring program. Sixty‐one pairs of mentors and mentees participated. Overall, there was little agreement between mentees and mentors regarding the nature of the mentoring relationship. Furthermore, the mentoring relationship was not related to mentee outcomes, while supervisory and coworker relationships were. It is suggested that, if one desires to affect job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment, mentoring functions may be best performed by supervisors and coworkers rather than assigned formal mentors from higher up in the organizational hierarchy. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Eby, L. T. D. T., Allen, T. D., Hoffman, B. J., Baranik, L. E., Sauer, J. B., Baldwin, S., Morrison, M. A., Kinkade, K. M., Maher, C. P., Curtis, S., et al. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0029279 · Cited by 604
Mulki, J. P., Jaramillo, F., & Locander, W. B. (2006) · Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management · doi:10.2753/pss0885-3134260102 · Cited by 319
A Multi-Level Process Model for Understanding Diversity Practice Effectiveness
Nishii, L. H., Khattab, J., Shemla, M., & Paluch, R. M. (2018) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2016.0044 · Cited by 233
Babic, A., & Hansez, I. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.618250 · Cited by 184
Maximizing returns on mentoring: factors affecting subsequent protégé performance
Tonidandel, S., Avery, D. R., & Phillips, M. G. (2007) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.418 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Raabe, B., & Beehr, T. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Organizational Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-03-20
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 271-293
- ISSN
- 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1379
- OpenAlex
- W2113822702
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Formal mentoring versus supervisor and coworker relationships: differences in perceptions and impact. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/job.193
- The paper
- Raabe, B., & Beehr, T. A. (2003). Formal mentoring versus supervisor and coworker relationships: differences in perceptions and impact. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.193
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.