Academy of Strategic Management Journal (Print ISSN: 1544-1458; Online ISSN: 1939-6104)

Research Article: 2018 Vol: 17 Issue: 1

The Contribution of Mentoring on Employee's Career Development with Non-Dependent Work Relation: The Case of the Networking Company LR Health & Beauty Systems

Ktena Chrysoula, Piraeus University of Applied Sciences

Sidiropoulos Georgios, Piraeus University of Applied Sciences

Chalikias Miltiadis, Piraeus University of Applied Sciences

Ntanos Stamatios, Democritus University of Thrace

Kyriakopoulos Grigorios, National Technical University of Athens

Keywords

Career Development, Mentoring, Counseling, Contract with Non-Dependent Work Relation.

Introduction

The social and economic changes that have been taken place over recent years have created new data on people's working lives (Tsitmideli et al., 2016). The rapid development of new information, technologies, communication and also demographic changes because of globalization, has put employees ahead of new challenges (Skordoulis et al., 2017). Because of these changes, the existing perception of career development has also been affected and now is characterized as a continuous process which is developed throughout an individual’s life (Zapantis et al., 2017). It is therefore necessary in many cases for new employees to receive mentoring in order to successfully cope with new challenges through career development. Essentially, mentoring is a sustained relationship with a purpose for learning and growth. From the above, but also from the literature review, it is clear that mentoring and career development are two variables that are functionally related. Furthermore, mentoring is defined as an independent variable and career development of employees as a dependent variable. The variables that were mentioned before are referring in the literature review as the most crucial and important that are related to career development. The purpose of the study is to examine the contribution of mentoring on employee’s career development and especially those who work with a non-dependent work relation in LR Health & Beauty Systems in Greece. In this research it was also necessary to investigate the contribution of employees’ career development to mentor’s characteristics and functions and the contribution between employees’ career development with non-dependent work relation. In order to achieve the purpose of this study, an overview of the relevant literature was carried out and then the results of the survey were compared with these theoretical approaches.

Literature Review

For several years great effort has been devoted to the study of mentoring and career development. Mentoring as a term was founded in 1970 and since it is still popular in the field of business administration. From a business perspective, it was appeared essentially as a phenomenon and then it was applied to many other fields such as medicine, education, legal and social work (Fowler, 1998; Lankau & Scandura, 2002; Linney, 1999). Several authors have attempted to define mentoring. The following definitions below will be very useful in order to understand its importance: Mentoring denotes a strong interpersonal relationship between an experienced senior business executive and a new and less experienced business executive. Through this relationship, mentor provides support, advice, proper guidance and feedback on the career and personal development (Payne & Huffman, 2005). More specifically, mentoring is essentially an auxiliary link, wherein the most skilled person is called mentor, who guides and supports the professional development of another person, who is called mentee (Barton, 2001). Summarizing all the above definitions, mentoring can positively influence both mentor and mentee and it’s a strong caring relationship with a view to personal and professional development both for mentor and mentee (Caffarella, 1992). Also, mentoring has been argued by many researchers that are the most effective way to transfer skills and knowledge to people who starting up their cooperation with an organization, from people who can inspire confidence (Abiddin, 2012). According to the above, the relationship between mentor and mentee can lead to positive results, not only for a contacting party, but also for the organization in which the procedure take place (Burke, 1984; Kram, 1985; Ragins & McFarlin, 1990; Betts & Pepe, 2006). The benefits for a company which implements mentoring programs are plenty, such as increasing employee productivity, job satisfaction and organizational commitment, reduce of professional burnout, improving the workplace environment, maintaining high quality service to the customer and thus improving the efficiency of a company.

Mentor’s functions can be divided into two categories: Functions that are related to career and those which are related to the psychosocial situation of the mentee (Bernard, 1996; McDonald, 2003). Mentor can actually achieve this goal through teaching, counseling, providing psychological support and sometimes offering support and sponsorship. He can support everything or nothing of the above functions during a mentoring relationship (Zey, 1984). According with mentoring process, mentor and mentee cooperate to achieve goals, which are personal from mentee’s aspect. Based on this approach, the traditional model isn’t applied and mentor acts as the one who is setting goals and designing the learning program (McDonald, 2003). Mentor’s action depends on the organization and the role he wants to play in it. Mentee can better understand the goals, policies and strategy of the organization (Chao, 1997). Mentor’s main benefit from a counseling relationship is the satisfying feeling of helping someone else. In this way, mentor shares his knowledge and experience to improve mentee’s career development (Clark, 1995; Scandura, 1999; McDonald, 2003). Furthermore, a mentor should also be flexible and willing to accept any decision that can take his protégé (McIntyre, 1993). Mentee is based on his present knowledge and experiences and with mentor’s encouraging he discovers new knowledge in order to fulfill common objectives. In this way, learning process is flexible and dynamic, while it’s possible to adapt goals into specific data (Linney, 1999; McDonald, 2003). The most important role of a mentor is to provide guidance and giving advices (Wilkin, 1992). In that way, mentees can examine and identify the advantages and their possibilities for further career development (Mountford, 1993).

Multiple different definitions and very different dimensions were given for career development. According to Greenhaus (1987), career development is an ongoing process by which individual’s progress through a series of stages, each of which is characterized by a relatively unique set of issues, themes and tasks. Kantas & Chantzi (1991) proposed another definition, in which career development is described as the evolutionary course of a person, regarding his orientation in the workplace and the decisions he takes for his career. Career development is a course of life and refers to the dialectical relationship between an individual and his work which is developed throughout his life (Kedraka, 2004). For every single person, career development includes a wide range of activities that are related to career planning and decision making, while for businesses it’s an integral part of the effective Human Resource Management Practice. According to Dimitropoulos (1998), the factors that affecting career development is divided mainly into individual factors, e.g. all those factors that exist in a person and environmental factors that are exogenous with respect to individual (Sidiropoulou-Demakakou, 2008). McKay (2014) indicate that the factors that affecting individual’s career development can affect also other aspects of human development and are divided into four categories: a) Personal characteristics (type of personality, individual’s values and interests), b) Social economic agents, c) Physical and cognitive abilities and d) Random factors (factors and life events on which a person can exert little or less control).

Methods and Materials

The present research is descriptive, conclusive and aims to estimate the contribution of mentoring in LR Health & Beauty Systems Company as a case study. In this research both primary and secondary data were used. The research part of this study was based on the primary data because the purpose is to calculate the contribution degree of mentoring to employees’ career development for the company LR Health & Beauty Systems. Secondary data were used in the literature review in order to refer the most important theoretical approaches. For the purposes of this research, Complex Adaptive Systems or CAS model was used to estimate the contribution of mentoring on career development. Despite of the uniqueness of the system, it has been researched that has some common characteristics (Fryer, 2011; Palmberg, 2009). This new approach that has been developed in recent years was chosen because it allows a complex, dynamic and unpredictable non-linear conception of guidance, which is particularly helpful in this competitive business environment (Jones & Brown, 2011). This study presents a new approach that didn’t apply before in the past and therefore there are no secondary data results. The data for the research were collected from 164 questionnaires and were analysed using the statistical package SPSS. The electronic form of this questionnaire included standardized questions for collecting data because it’s the most effective data collection method. The questionnaire was distributed online via email and consists of closed questions and Likert-scale questions in order to be known the demographic characteristics of the respondents and some of their preferences. The questionnaire was posted to all active partners of this company with non-dependent work relation and answered online. The sample consisted of all employees of the company LR Health & Beauty Systems in Greece who promote products with non-dependent work relation. Also, factor analysis was necessary to be used because of the nature of statistical data, where there are many associated variables which are important and can’t be measured directly. It is noted that an array of 25 variables is represented by three basic variables called factors. Bartlett’s test was used to assess whether the correlation between items was adequate. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statistic was used to assess sample adequacy. The appropriate number of derived factors was identified using the Scree-plot (looking for inflexion points) and Kaiser’s criterion of eigenvalues greater than 1. Cronbach’s alpha values were calculated to assess internal consistency of the identified factors.

Results

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

The demographic characteristics collected from the sample of 164 employees who are subordinates and took part in the survey. The above data are presented in Table 1:

Table 1: Demographic Characteristics Of 164 Employees
General Characteristics Percentage (%)
Gender Male 57.93%
Female 42.07%
Age 18-23 years 0.61%
24-34 years 20.12%
35-44 years 28.05%
45-54 years 34.76%
55-64 years 14.63%
>65 years 1.83%
Working Experience with non-dependent work relation <1 year 13%
1-5 years 53%
6-10 years 21%
>10 years 13%

Based on Table 1 data, as far as the subordinates are concerned, it can be concluded that:

1. Men responded with almost twice number compared to women.

2. Age has a range of 24 to 64 years old.

3. The period time of working in the company with non-dependent work relation, for the majority of respondents ranges from 1 to 5 years.

Table 2 illustrates the areas that the institution of mentoring has helped employees, which shows that more than 50% of the four areas have been faced with a great deal by mentoring.

Table 2: Mentoring’s Contribution In Four Areas
Selected Question: To what extent do you believe that the institution of mentoring has helped you in the following areas? A great deal Much Somewhat Little Never
Career Planning 54.88% 32.93% 8.94% 2.03% 1.22%
Improvement skill 54.27% 31.10% 7.93% 5.48% 1.22%
Psychological support 49.39% 31.71% 7.93% 7.93% 3.05%
Acquiring knowledge 67.68% 24.39% 5.18% 2.14% 0.61%

Finally, Figure 1 shows employees’ belief about the most important advantages of non-dependent work relation and it was proved that more than 30% of the respondents believe that flexible schedule and creativity are the greatest of all. Other advantages with a percentage of 1.83% are not included.

Table 3: Hypotheses Testing
No Tested Variables Correlation Coefficient P value
1 My mentor is characterized by professionalism and integrity. 0.762 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
Decision: Reject the null hypothesis H1 accepted
2 My mentor is suitably qualified in his field. 0.710 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
3 My mentor promises me that he will do certain things and then fails his promise. -0.514 moderate negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
4 My mentor helped me to become more productive. 0.829 very strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
5 When something concerns me, my mentor listens patiently. 0.594 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
6 My mentor helped me to develop my skills. 0.845 very strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
7 Mentor presents me many useful ideas on addressing specific problems. 0.651 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
8 My mentor answered my questions satisfactorily. 0.738 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted

Figure 1.Basic Advantages Of Non-Dependent Work Relation.

Hypotheses Development

Research hypotheses were extracted and Spearman's correlation coefficient was used in order to confirm or reject the following hypotheses:

H1: Mentor’s characteristics and especially professionalism and integrity can contribute to employee's career development with non-dependent work relation.

H2: Mentor’s functions can contribute to employee's career development with dependent work relation.

H3: Mentoring procedures can contribute to employee's career development with dependent work relation.

H4: Relationship Characteristics are important for employees’ career development with a non-dependent work relation.

Hypotheses Testing

Test of H1 Hypothesis: Mentor’s Characteristics and Especially Professionalism and Integrity Can Contribute to Employee's Career Development with Non-Dependent Work Relation

In Table 3, correlation coefficients of the tested variables that are mentioned in mentor’s characteristic and the variable “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally” were presented in order to confirm or reject the previous hypotheses.

Based on the results, H0 hypothesis is rejected, so H1 is accepted: “Mentor’s characteristics and especially professionalism and integrity can contribute to employee's career development with non-dependent work relation”. The related variables about mentor's characteristics were correlated with the variable “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally” and there is a possible correlation for all variables that reflect mentor’s characteristics, e.g. professionalism, integrity, accountability, etc. (Table 3).

Test of H2 Hypothesis: Mentor’s Functions Can Contribute to Employee's Career Development with Dependent Work Relation

In Table 4, correlation coefficients of the tested variables that are mentioned in mentor’s characteristic and the variable “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally” were presented in order to confirm or reject the previous hypotheses.

Table 4: Hypotheses Testing
No Tested Variables Correlation Coefficient P value
1 I accept criticism from my mentor in a way that I do not like. -0.384 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
2 My mentor encouraged me in my work. 0.711 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
3 My mentor promises me that he will do certain things and then fails his promise. -0.514 moderate negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
4 My mentor helped me to become more productive. 0.829 very strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
5 When something concerns me, my mentor listens patiently. 0.594 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
6 My mentor helped me to develop my skills. 0.845 very strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
7 Mentor presents me many useful ideas on addressing specific problems. 0.651 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
8 To what extent do you think that you have helped the institution of mentoring in the following areas? Psychological support. 0.573 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
9 To what extent do you think that you have helped the institution of mentoring in the following areas? Acquiring knowledge. 0.481 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted

As can be seen from Table 4, H0 hypothesis is rejected, so H1 is accepted: “Mentor’s functions can contribute to employee's career development with dependent work relation”. According with these results, many variables that are related to mentor's functions have a strong correlation, such as mentor’s guidance, counselling, etc. with the variable “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally”.

Test of H3 Hypothesis: Mentoring Procedures which are used to Guide Employees Can Contribute to their Career Development

As follows from Table 5, H0 hypothesis is rejected, so H1 is accepted: “Mentoring procedures can contribute to employee's career development with dependent work relation”. From Table 5, there is a strong correlation between many variables that are related to mentoring procedures, such as when and where the sessions take place, which is the complaint handling procedure, etc., with the variable “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally”.

Table 5: Hypotheses Testing
No Tested Variables Correlation Coefficient P value
1 I accept criticism from my mentor in a way that I do not like. -0.384 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
2 I wish my mentor have more time for me. -0.310 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
3 My mentor promises me that he will do certain things and then fails his promise. -0.514 moderate negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
4 My mentor was available whenever I needed him. 0.659 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
5 When something concerns me, my mentor listens patiently. 0.594 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
6 My mentor is easily accessible. 0.520 moderate relation Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted

Test of H4 Hypothesis: Relationship Characteristics are Important for Employees’ Career Development with a Non-Dependent Work Relation

Finally from Table 6 H0 hypothesis is rejected, so H1 is accepted: “Relationship Characteristics are important for employees’ career development with a non-dependent work relation”. Table 6 shows that many variables have a strong correlation related to relationship characteristics, e.g. if there is consistency and confidentiality between mentor and mentee, faith to mentor and the institution of mentoring, a sense of trust, etc.

Table 6: Hypotheses Testing
No Tested Variables Correlation Coefficient P value
1 I accept criticism from my mentor in a way that I do not like. -0.384 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
2 My mentor encouraged me in my work. 0.711 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
3 My mentor promises me that he will do certain things and then fails his promise. -0.514 moderate negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
4 To what extent do you think that you have helped the institution of mentoring in the following areas? Psychological support. 0.573 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
5 To what extent do you think that you have helped the institution of mentoring in the following areas? Acquiring knowledge. 0.481 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
6 I wish my mentor have more time for me. -0.310 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
7 My mentor was available whenever I needed him. 0.659 strong relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
8 When something concerns me, my mentor listens patiently. 0.594 moderate relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
9 My mentor is easily accessible. 0.520 moderate relation Sig (1-tailed)=0.000<0.05
H1 accepted
10 How often you feel the following? I feel that I need a motivation to be more productive in my job. 0.028 weak positive relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0.362>0.05
H1 rejected
11 How often you feel the following? I feel uncertainty about the outcome of my work. -0.138 weak negative relationship Sig (1-tailed)=0,039>0.05 H1 rejected

Reliability Analysis and Questionnaire Validation

The reliability analysis of the four question fields (mentoring system processes, mentor characteristics and functions, the contribution of mentoring to develop professional capacity) showed a reliability coefficient ranging from 0.4 to 0.96 for each question field and a quite value for the overall reliability coefficient (Cronbach's Alpha=0.792). In Table 7 the following results present Cronbach's Alpha coefficient for each question field separately:

Table 7: Reliability Statistics
Questions Cronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items N of Items
How often you feel the following? 0.698 712 5
How often do the following situations occur? -0.411 -0.098 6
To what extent do you think that the institution of mentoring contributes in the following areas? 0.871 0.877 5
How much do you agree with the following? 0.946 0.946 9

Factor Analysis

Factor Analysis will be conducted after KMO and Bartlett's test. From Table 8 it can be seen, Kaiser Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy value equals to 0.913 and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity p-value equals to 0 (Chalikias, 2012). The aforementioned values indicate that the performed factor analysis is valid and reliable. It is concluded that the variables are correlated highly enough to provide a reasonable basis for factor analysis as in this case.

Table 8: Kmo And Bartlett’s Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.913
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2852.538
  df 300
  Sig. 0.000

In this section, factor analysis was used in order to extract the components for the contribution of mentoring on employee’s career development, with non-dependent work relation. The questionnaire was constructed according with four set of questions-variables and each one concluded 5, 6, 5 and 9 variables. After the process of factor analysis, three set of questions were designed and each one consisted of 15, 5 and 5 variables. Also, three new factors were generated. Based on the initial eigenvalues greater than 1, as shown in Table 9, the analysis output showed that three components are the factors. The first factor explains 44.68% of the total variance, the second component explains 54.09% of the total variance and the third explains 60.15% of the total variance. The percentage of explained variance was 60.1%.

Table 9: Total Variance Explained
Component Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
  Total % of Variance Cumulative
%
Total % of Variance Cumulative
%
Total % of Variance Cumulative
%
1 11.171 44.684 44.684 11.171 44.684 44.684 8.108 32.431 32.431
2 2.351 9.405 54.088 2.351 9.405 54.088 4.394 17.578 50.009
3 1.516 6.062 60.151 1.516 6.062 60.151 2.536 10.142 60.151
4 0.989 3.955 64.106 - - - - - -
5 0.921 3.682 67.788 - - - - - -
6 0.879 3.514 71.302 - - - - - -
7 0.770 3.080 74.383 - - - - - -

The Scree-plot (Figure 2) graphs the eigenvalue against the factor number. These values can be seen in the first two columns of the table immediately above. The Scree-plot shows that after the first three components, differences between the eigenvalues decline (the curve flattens) and they are less than 1.0. This result supports a three-component solution. From the third factor on the line is almost flat, meaning the each successive factor is accounting for smaller and smaller amounts of the total variance.

Figure 2.Screen-Plot Graph With Eigenvalue Against The Factor Number.

According to Table 10 data, the examined variables were categorized into three dimensions which represent Mentor’s characteristics and functions (F1), Mentees’ belief for mentoring as an institution (F2) and Elements that affect mentees career development (F3) respectively.

Table 10: Component Matrix Rotateda
  Component Cronbach’sa
  1 2 3  
Whether you agree with the following? My mentor is characterized by professionalism and integrity. 0.805 0.302   0.792
My mentor is suitably qualified in this field. 0.803      
My mentor encouraged me in my work. 0.791 325    
My mentor helped me to become more productive. 0.783 0.379    
My mentor helped me to evolve professionally. 0.771 0.419    
How often the following statements happen? I wish I had another mentor. -0.770 -0.318    
Whether you agree with the following? My mentor helped me to develop my skills. 743 429    
My mentor answered my questions satisfactorily. 0.723 341    
My mentor was available whenever I needed him. 0.707 330    
How often the following statements happen? I accept criticism from my mentor in a way that I do not like. -0.704      
My mentor promises me that he will do certain things and then fails his promise. -0.665      
Mentor presents me many useful ideas on addressing specific problems. 0.649 0.437    
When something concerns me, my mentor listens patiently. 0.633 384    
Whether you agree with the following? My mentor is easily accessible. 520 431    
How often the following statements happen? I wish my mentor have more time for me. -0.393   326  
To what extent do you think that you have helped the institution of mentoring in the following areas? Improvement skill. 0.302 777    
Dealing with problems in everyday life.   0.742    
Acquiring knowledge. 315 0.723    
Psychological support. 0.402 0.718    
Career Planning. 401 652    
How often you feel the following? I feel I do not know how I could develop myself professionally.     0.701  
I feel that I need a motivation to be more productive in my job.     0.689  
I feel that I do not utilize my skills.     680  
I feel uncertainty about the outcome of my work.     676  
I need someone to talk about my problems on the job.     0.597  
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

More specifically, loadings with a positive value for the first factor suggest that professionalism and integrity are defining characteristics of that component and have a positive correlation with each other of these loadings. It is evident that if mentor's professionalism and integrity increase (mentor‘s characteristics), mentee’s career development and growth will increase respectively. It is also observed that the variable “My mentor encouraged me in my work” has a positive correlation with the variable “My mentor helped me to develop my skills” and the variable, “My mentor helped me to evolve professionally”. In other words, if mentor’s encouragement for mentee’s work increases (one of mentor's tasks), assistance for mentee’s career development increases too. Furthermore, a negative correlation was found between the variables of the first factor, i.e., if mentor's integrity and professionalism decrease, mentee’s desire to have other mentor increases, while an increase is observed because mentor fails to default his obligations towards the mentee. Loadings of the second factor were positive and have a positive correlation with each other of these variables. If mentoring increases to assist mentee, an improvement increase to the most important issues that a mentee faces is observed (skills upgrading, coping with problems, acquiring knowledge, psychological support and career planning). Finally, the third factor has presented positive loadings for the tested variables, which means that there is a positive correlation. This result means that an increase in the feeling of doubt about mentee’s knowledge for career development will increase offering incentives in order to increase mentee’s productivity. This approach implies an increase of uncertainty for the outcome of mentee’s work and the sense that mentee doesn’t make the most of his skills. The obtained results were classified according to three factors. In this research, the three factors were determined by considering the majority of the items in the factors, including factor 1, “mentor characteristics and functions” with 15 items, factor 2, “mentees’ belief for mentoring as an institution” with 5 items and factor 3, “elements that affect mentees career development” with 2 items.

Conclusion

The purpose of the study was to examine the contribution of mentoring on employee’s career development. This paper highlights the importance and usefulness of the mentoring institution. Factor analysis was used to extract the components about the contribution of mentoring to employees’ career development with non-dependent work relation. This paper has proposed three factors which extracted from the factor analysis. This result demonstrates that as mentor’s characteristics (professionalism and integrity) and functions (guidance, encouragement and general assistance) increase, employee’s career development and skills will develop, which is a key factor for their professional perspective (Buddeberg-Fischer & Herta, 2006). It has been shown that mentor’s integrity and professionalism are the most basic characteristics that mentee’s expect to have. The company should develop its mentors because professionalism, integrity and mentor’s psychological support can lead to a differentiation of employee’s behavior, for the simple rules to a complex and adaptive results both for themselves and the company. Mentoring programs are emerging as tools for redefining professional culture. These results have shown that the company has good mentors and should continue this mentoring program because it manages to engage employees through the company. It was also proved that besides professional knowledge that a mentee acquires, personal development is acquired too. Personal development is an important element that forms the mentor to evolve professionally mentee. This characteristic is referred for the first time as a crucial element that a mentor must protect. This study highlights that if mentoring increases to assist mentee, the most important issues that a mentee faces will be increased. Also, it was founded that if e.g. mentor’s encouragement for mentee’s work increases (one of mentor’s tasks), assistance for mentee’s career development increases too. Many references and researches have been carried out for the impact of emotional intelligence and the various leadership styles. It would be particularly beneficial for future researches to examine the relationship between the above issues with the coexistence or not and the effectiveness of mentoring in Greece. Further research is necessary to consider the fact that makes mentee to give up the process and the benefits of mentoring. It seems worthwhile to examine both for the company itself and for improving existing knowledge.

References