User:Acv22/sandbox

Annotated Bibliography

Eby, L. T., McManus, S. E., Simon, S. A., & Russell, J. E. (2000). The protege's perspective regarding negative mentoring experiences: The development of a taxonomy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57(1), 1-21.

In this article, authors from the University of Georgia, University of Tennessee, and University of Maryland, paired up to describe the negative effects that mentoring could create. While mentoring is mainly associated with positive effects, it is important to note that it is an intense interpersonal relationship. Per social-psychological research, this means that interpersonal relationships can turn unpleasant and lead to many arguments, particularly if the protégé and mentor come from different backgrounds and do not agree on issues. The authors conducted a survey study where they asked protégées about their mentoring experiences and the results showed that 84 out of 156 reported having a negative experience. The negative experiences came from mentors not being open-minded about differing opinions and taking advantage of their power. The article highlights that while there is more research to show that mentoring is positive, it is important to understanding the negative consequences and more studies should be pursued. 

Kumar, P., & Blake-Beard, S. (2012). What Good Is Bad Mentorship? Protégé's Perception of Negative Mentoring Experiences. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 48(1), 79-93.

The article starts by describing the history of mentorship and gives early example of mentors through Greek mythology. It gives the positives that a protégé experiences such as better job satisfaction, the mentor gains loyal followers and a legacy, and the organization gains better communication between workers. The authors then emphasize the importance of acknowledging bad mentoring because protégées will remember negative experience with their mentor more than positive memories. Dysfunctional mentoring can affect a protégées goal attainment but the protégé also plays a part and can contribute to the negative experience. The authors conducted a series of interviews that examined the benefits of a negative mentoring experience. These included a protégé seeking opportunities in another department, reflecting on their goals and seeing if their organization will help them find growth to pursue those goals, they might seek another degree or certification to make up for the poor experience A protégé will also know how to cope with difficult circumstances, the protégé will want to become a better mentor for someone else, they will choose a better mentor in the future, and finally, they will be good at self-mentoring. This study challenges the notion that negative mentoring leads only to negative outcomes, which is an important topic to cover.

Ragins, B. (1997). Diversified Mentoring Relationships in Organizations: A Power Perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 482-521.

The article seeks to contribute more information over the theory of mentorship development in a non-traditional manner that does not only focus on power and diversity, but also by analyzing both the mentor and protégé. The article describes that mentors can either be in the same organization as the protégé and they are known as internal mentors who are able to provide workplace resources. External mentors are able to offer opportunities outside the protégés current workplace and are free of bias from workplace happenings. Power and minority are both defined by the author because is important to know how coming from different backgrounds will affect the mentoring relationship and discussions the equation for the degree of diversity in mentoring. The article proposes that a minority protégé will differ from a protégé from a majority counterpart in development, processes, and the overall mentor relationship. Organizations should strive to allow minorities a voice even if they do not have an official mentoring program by creating diverse work groups that could lead to mentoring relationships.

Ragins, B., Cotton, J., & Miller, J. (2000). Marginal Mentoring: The Effects of Type of Mentor, Quality of Relationship, and Program Design on Work and Career Attitudes. The Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1177-1194.

The first focus the study does is on the differences between informal, formal, and no mentoring and the way that a protégé perceives their experience. The second focus is on examining the programs the workplaces have implemented for mentoring and overall satisfaction with these programs. Informal mentoring is usually unstructured and partners meet as much as they deem necessary while formal mentoring is contracted to last a certain amount of time and meetings are not as often. While informal mentoring seems to have the upper hand, when studying a sample of 212 informal and 53 formal protégés, the scores did not differ greatly in job satisfaction. However, when compared to non-mentored individuals, protégés a part of formal mentoring showed greater interest in quitting their job. If the formal mentoring program is effective, the protégé will show greater job satisfaction. In designing a mentoring program, a company has to make sure that the formal mentoring is working for both parties.

Ragins, B. R., & Verbos, A. K. (2007). Positive relationships in action: Relational mentoring and mentoring schemas in the workplace. Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation, 91-116.

The article acknowledges that there is not a lot of information and research done over the effects of mentoring and it focuses on two aspects; how research on mentoring helps understand if mentoring creates positive relationships at work and the possibility of expanding mentoring theory by analyzing relational and social cognitive theory. There are three limitations of mentoring including a one-sided relationship, narrow view of mentoring where there is one easy answer for success, and lack of overall research. Knowing these limitations are important to note because it shows that workplace mentoring is still expanding. It also explains that the gender of the protégé also affects mentoring relationships because a woman is more likely to have an interdependent self-construal. In addition, it provides a worldview of mentoring; in the U.S, mentoring is viewed as beneficial and is promoted while in Europe, it is considered favoritism. 

Article Evaluation:

The article “Workplace Mentoring” needs to go through major improvements. While facts are correctly cited, the article is only one paragraph long. It contains only two references. I do not believe that the first reference is reliable. It is a PDF from a company called Vantage Financial Consultants that explains why they are participating in workplace mentoring and why it is beneficial. Since the purpose of the PDF is to promote workplace mentoring to the company’s employees, I do not find it reliable and think it should be taken down. The PDF shows bias because the company Vantage Financial Consultants are trying to “sell” workplace mentoring and would only show what they believe will make their employees happy. The second resource is a book but the PDF can be found online. This source seems more reliable and has funds from the U.S. Department of Education. I do not think that there is bias in the reference. This resource would be acceptable to keep in the wiki article.

Overall, while the article includes a bias source, it does not feel like the information is biased. The author only stated the facts and did not include personal opinions about any subject. It does not say if they think mentoring is good or bad. All the links on articles work and there was no plagiarism since information is followed by a citation. There is a lot of underrepresented information in the article. It needs to expand on informal and formal mentoring, since they only have one sentence on each. The last sentence needs to be deleted since it has unrelated information and is a bad transition.