The Impact of Career Mentoring and Psychosocial Mentoring on Affective Organizational Commitment, Job Involvement, and Turnover Intention

• Author: Christopher A. Craig,Deborah J. Armstrong,Myria W. Allen,Cynthia K. Riemenschneider,Margaret F. Reid
• DOI: 10.1177/0095399712451885
• Published date: 01 October 2013
• Date: 01 October 2013
• Subject Matter: Articles

451885AAS45810.1177/009539971245
1885Craig et al.Administration & Society
© 2012 SAGE Publications
Article
Administration & Society
45(8) 949 –973
The Impact of Career
© 2012 SAGE Publications
DOI: 10.1177/0095399712451885
aas.sagepub.com
Mentoring and
Psychosocial Mentoring
on Affective Organizational
Commitment, Job
Involvement, and Turnover
Intention
Christopher A. Craig1, Myria W. Allen2,
Margaret F. Reid2, Cynthia K. Riemenschneider3,
and Deborah J. Armstrong4
Abstract
This study explores the relationships between career and psychosocial men-
toring, and the employee outcomes of affective organizational commitment
(AOC), job involvement, and turnover intention. The relationships between
psychosocial mentoring and the employee outcomes of AOC and turnover
intention were significant. Building from affective events theory, the authors
found that AOC mediated the relationship between psychosocial mentoring
and employee turnover intention. The study emphasizes the importance of
emotion and affect by showing that employees who experienced positive
mentoring events at work exhibited higher levels of AOC, which in turn led
to reduced turnover intention. The implications are discussed.
1CLEAResult, Austin, TX, USA
2University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
3Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA
4Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
Corresponding Author:
Myria W. Allen, Department of Communication, University of Arkansas, 417 Kimpel Hall,
Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.
Email: myria@uark.edu

---

950
Administration & Society 45(8)
Keywords
mentoring, affective events theory, organizational commitment, job
involvement, turnover intentions
The outcomes of mentoring relationships have been studied in a wide vari-
ety of contexts for decades, with the majority of empirical research being
done in the private sector (e.g., Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004;
Packard, 2003). Traditionally, scholars have focused on the benefits associ-
ated with mentoring; however, a growing body of literature highlights the
negative aspects associated with implementing and maintaining mentoring
relationships (e.g., Eby, Durley, Evans, & Ragins, 2008; Scandura, 1998).
Individuals involved in formal and informal mentoring programs may face
positive, negative, and/or neutral outcomes (Bozeman & Feeney, 2008; Eby
et al., 2008). Uncertainty related to mentoring outcomes may be magnified
by the unique nature of the public sector that includes elected positions,
election cycles, expanded service offerings, and budgetary constraints (Kim,
2005; Reid, Allen, Riemenschneider, & Armstrong, 2008). This study takes
place in a public sector organization and seeks to replicate private sector
results. With the exception of relatively few studies, mentoring research in
the public sector has been limited (Reid, Allen, et al., 2008). Replication
studies are important, given the range of differences IT employees face in
public and private settings (see Reid, Riemenschneider, Allen, & Armstrong,
2008, for a review of some of these differences).
The vast majority of mentoring literature has focused on more objective
issues such as salary or promotion (e.g., Allen et al., 2004; Joiner, Bartram,
& Garreffa, 2004) rather than on more intrinsic issues such as affective orga-
nizational commitment (AOC) or job involvement. Yet, emotional reactions
and other subjective issues do matter. Research has demonstrated a mixed
relationship between employee AOC and job involvement (e.g., Meyer,
Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002), and shown these work attitudes
to provide predictive value in reducing employee turnover intention and
turnover (e.g., Cheng & Chan, 2008; Griffith, Hom, & Gaertner, 2000;
Huselid & Day, 1991; Reid, Allen, et al., 2008; Shim & Rohrbaugh, 2011).
Given the importance of emotions, this study discusses the utility of affec-
tive events theory (AET; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) in enhancing our
understanding of employee perceptions and reactions.
In this study, we examine the relationships that career (the more objective
and extrinsic) and psychosocial (the more subjective and intrinsic) mentor-
ing potentially have with AOC, job involvement, and turnover intention.

---

Craig et al.
951
Previous mentoring research has demonstrated a positive relationship with
various employee outcomes, including low turnover intention and high AOC
levels (e.g., Allen et al., 2004; Joiner et al., 2004; Kammeyer-Mueller &
Judge, 2008; Kraimer, Seibert, Wayne, Liden, & Bravo, 2010; Magni &
Pennarola, 2008; Pare & Tremblay, 2007). However, the link between men-
toring and job involvement has been largely overlooked. Few studies have
examined the relationships between mentoring and AOC, job involvement,
or turnover intention in the context of the public sector, in IT departments,
or in both (for exceptions, see Freund, 2005; Kim & Lee, 2006; Magni &
Pennarola, 2008; Pare & Tremblay, 2007; Reid, Allen, et al., 2008; Reid,
Riemenschneider, et al., 2008; Thatcher, Bennet, Stepina, & Boyle, 2002-
2003). In this study, we seek to help close this gap identified by previous
researchers (e.g., Joiner et al., 2004).
In addition, the current study examines the possible mediating role that
AOC plays between psychosocial mentoring and employee turnover inten-
tion. With the exception of the longitudinal study conducted by Payne and
Huffman (2005), where AOC acted as a partial mediator between mentoring
and turnover intention, the mentoring literature has primarily focused on
direct relationships between antecedents and consequences. Our study
moves in this newer direction by building on Payne and Huffman’s (2005)
research to test the impact that more complex relationships have on employee
turnover intention. Guided by AET (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996) and related
empirical studies (e.g., Choi, Sung, Lee, & Cho, 2011; Huang, Lee, Ashford,
Chen, & Ren, 2010; Li, Ahlstrom, & Ashkanasy, 2010; Payne & Huffman,
2005; Rosen, Harris, & Kacmar, 2009), we propose that an employee’s
affective reaction to mentoring in the form of AOC will mediate the relation-
ship between psychosocial mentoring and turnover intention.
In its most basic form, AET is based on the premise that when salient,
emotionally driven events happen at work, employee affective reactions
occur (Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). These affective reactions in turn influ-
ence employee and organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction or turn-
over intention (Ammeter, Douglas, Gardner, Hochwarter, & Ferris, 2002;
Ashkanasy & Daus, 2002; Weiss & Cropanzano, 1996). Rosen et al. (2009)
indicated that emotions play an important role in explaining how employees
evaluate and respond to their workplaces. Although scholars investigating
AET have not explored mentoring as an independent variable, Rosen et al.’s
(2009) article provides empirical support for the mediating relationship that
leadership characteristics share with turnover intention. Mentors can assist
their protégés to process emotional reactions to workplace experiences,
which can influence their emotional connection to their organization.

---

952
Administration & Society 45(8)
The purpose of the study is essentially twofold: (a) to examine the more
affective, or emotionally driven, aspects of mentoring and AOC as guided by
AET and (b) to add further support to the positive role mentoring plays in the
public IT context.
Literature Review
Mentoring
Multiple definitions of mentoring exist (see Bozeman & Feeney, 2007, for
a brief review) although most are based on Kram’s (1985) discussion of
mentoring as involving an intense relationship between two people where a
more experienced person (the mentor) helps the junior person (the protégé)
by providing advice or modeling about career development issues as well as
personal (psychosocial) support. We utilize the definition offered by
Bozeman and Feeney (2007) whereby mentoring “is a process for the infor-
mal transmission of knowledge, social capital, and psychosocial support
perceived by the recipient as relevant to work, career, or professional devel-
opment” (p. 731). Mentoring involves informal communication, usually
face-to-face occurring over time “between someone perceived to have
greater relevant knowledge, wisdom, or experience (the mentor) and a per-
son who is perceived to have less (the protégé)” (p. 731). A mentor is often
seen by his or her protégé as a resource person or counselor whose perspec-
tives and judgment are trusted and valued (Koberg, Boss, & Goodman,
1998; Missirian, 1982). A mentor may fulfill one or many roles for the
protégé (Packard, 2003).
Mentoring has been linked with beneficial employee outcomes such as
AOC, job involvement, and lower employee turnover intention (e.g., Allen
et al., 2004; Kammeyer-Mueller & Judge, 2008; Kram, 1985). In this study,
we investigate the relationships career and psychosocial mentoring have
with three outcome variables: AOC, job involvement, and turnover inten-
tion. In the next section, the types of mentoring will be discussed in more
detail followed by our three outcome variables.
Career mentoring. Career mentoring, or career-related support, involves
coaching, sponsorship, exposure, and protection of the lesser skilled protégé
(Allen et al., 2004; Baugh, Lankau, & Scandura, 1996; Kram, 1985; Reid,
Allen, et al., 2008). Career mentoring behaviors involve task-related aspects
of work and are often positively linked to more objective measures of success
(Joiner et al., 2004)....