Page 313 - Psychological Management of Individual Performance

dimensions of performance 299
coaching and instruction a mentor provides, the less uncertainty employees experience
about their duties and what is expected of them on the job (Lankau & Scandura, 1997). In
developingthislinkage,newconceptualizationsofmentoringmaybeneededwhichfocus
more on coaching for specific technical and interpersonal skills, rather than the mentoring
literature’s traditional focus on career development outcomes. Performance indicators of
career success (promotions and salary, for example) have been linked to the vocational
function of mentoring (Dreher & Ash, 1990; Scandura, 1992). These measures represent
relatively more “objective” (i.e., non self-report) measures of individual performance.

ATTITUDINAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Organizational socialization, professional development, personal learning, job satisfac-
tion, and organizational commitment are all attitudes that have been linked to having a
mentor and receiving mentoring functions (cf. Scandura, 1998, for review). Support from
a mentor has also been related to lower levels of burnout from work (Lankau, 1996).
Socialization of the prot´eg´e into the politics of the organization is also a potentially
important process that may indirectly affect performance (Ostroff & Kozlowski, 1993).
The more an employee knows about the history and rituals of the organization, and who
the influential people are in the organization, the employee is likely to be more satisfied
and experience less uncertainty with respect to his or her role in the organization.

LEARNING AND INNOVATION

Mentoring should support employees through coaching and support and allow employ-
ees to learn through their mistakes (Lankau & Scandura, 1997). This type of organization
supports learning for all employees through its values, policies, practices and structure,
and takes an active role in ensuring that new learning is disseminated throughout the or-
ganization so that it can gain insights and learn from mistakes (Bennett & O’Brien, 1994;
Senge, 1990). In this knowledge era, organizational performance is dependent on the
experience and capabilities of individuals (Carley, 1992; Clawson, 1996). Mentoring has
increasingly become a forum for learning as it facilitates and promotes the growth and
development of individuals in organizations (Hunt & Michael, 1983; Lankau, 1996). The
developmentofasuccessfulmentoringrelationshipreinforcestheprot´eg´e’sconfidencein
his or her ability to learn and may support risk taking and innovation (Lankau & Scandura,
1997). The more information, skills and knowledge an employee acquires, the more value
he or she can contribute to the job, work group and organization. Lankau (1996) found
that mentoring functions significantly impacted personal learning. Increased levels of
role modeling provided by a mentor may be associated with increased personal learning
through skill development, and the broadening of the prot´eg´e’s repertoire of skills and
abilities.
Zey (1984) postulated that the relationship between mentoring and creativity, though
subtle, is quite powerful. The mentoring process facilitates the exchange of ideas between
two partners, thus mentoring may act as a catalyst for innovation. A talented mentor
will establish a safe, secure environment in which novel ideas are developed, nurtured,
experimented with and successfully introduced into the corporate mainstream. It is the
mentor’s job to ensure that the prot´eg´e has ample time and freedom necessary to develop