F O R U M Formal Mentoring as a Strategy for Human Resource Development: A Review of Research Christine D. Hegstad ���Everyone who succeeds has had a mentor,��� said Donald S. Perkins, former chairman and CEO of Jewel Companies (Roche, 1979, p. 14). Mentoring dates back as far as 800 B.C. when Mentor, a character in Homer���s Odyssey, served as an adviser to the son of King Odysseus (Ensher and Murphy, 1997). Although mentoring roles have not changed drastically since then, the preva- lence of mentors in the workplace certainly has. Roche (1979) reports that two-thirds of 1,250 top executives surveyed had mentors early in their careers. Some believe, as evidenced in the opening quote, that succeeding in the work- place requires a mentor. Yet with the extensive use of mentoring in the corpo- rate world and all of the information available on the topic, little has been written about its link to human resource development (HRD), training, or organizational development. Looking through the top journals in the field of HRD over the last several years, such as Human Resource Development Quarterly and Pufor-mance Improvement Quarterly, one would be hard pressed to find more than an article or two devoted to mentoring, though the topic has boomed in corporate popularity. Mentoring exists everywhere in the working world, but finding information on its connection with HRD can prove challenging. HRD occupies an important role in the effectiveness of formal menloring programs, however. Allen, Poteet, and Burroughs (1997) found that the top two facilitating dimensions of mentoring include organizational support for employee development and the existence of company training programs. Orga- nizations are realizing the benefits of mentoring as an HRD strategy and are investing in formal programs to serve as career development and management training tools (Burke, McKeen, and McKenna, 1993). Public organizations like the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the IRS, as well as private ones such N o w I would like to thank Dr. K. Peter Kuchiiike for his insightful commcnts and suggestions FORUM i j u nonrefereed section inviting readers��� reactions and apinions. HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERL). voI 10. no. 4. Winter 1999 0 Jossey-Bass Publishers 383

384 Hegstad as Jewel Companies and Federal Express, are partaking in this phenomenon (Kram, 1985). Although mentoring in organizations is rapidly growing, the role of training participants of these programs is still heavily underlooked, indicating that an experienced member of the organization is assumed to serve effectilzely as a mentor. I find this a dangerous assumption, much like assum- ing that having knou.ledge in a particular field equips one to effectively teach that subject. The need for research in participant training is strong, as dis- cussed later in this article. Various operational definitions of mentoring exist, but general themes have been established. A mentor is typically an experienced, high-ranking organi- zation member who assists in the career development of the person being mentored by serving as a coach. sponsor, and advocate (not necessarily as a sdpervisor) (Kram, 1985 Noe, 1988). The person being mentored is a new or less experienced organization member. A mentorship is the developmental rela- tionship bet\veen the two (Dreher and Cox, 1996). Some researchers propose that, to be effective, the mentor must be older and have higher ranking in the organization. Although this is commonly the case, I disagree with the notion that the only person qualified to mentor, for example, a company vice presi- dent is the company president. Peers and even subordinates can provide mentoring functions that uill aid In the success and visibility of a person being mentored. Research is just beginning to touch on such relationships, however. Two types of workplace mentoring programs exist: informal and formal. Informal mentorships are not constructed by the organization but rather arise spontaneously due to similar interests or roles between two parties. Conversely, formal mentorships are organizationally managed and generally developed by assignment or mentor selection (Chao, Walz, and Gardner, 1992). This literature review focuses specifically on formal mentoring pro- grams. 1 ~vill discuss the theoretical framework and offer a model through which mentoring can be interpreted, including antecedents and moderators. In addition, I will present outcomes of formal mentoring programs and address future research ideas. Theoretical Framework A useful framework in which to interpret mentoring and its relation to HRD is the theory of social eschange, yet few researchers have incorporated this framework into mentoring studies. Stemming from economics, this theory focuses on social transactions generated by perceived costs and benefits between two or more persons based on social scarcity, social cost, and i-eci- procity (Ekeh, 1974, Molm, 1994). When first developed, social exchange theory focused on mutual reciprocal exchanges. For example, A possesses something B desires and vice \'em, and the exchange between them results in loss and gain for both (Molm, 1994). Such exchanges occur in mentor- ships. such as when mentors share knowledge and information while those