Guest editorial: Mentoring and coaching in the workplace: an introduction

Citation

Weinberg, F.J. (2024), "Guest editorial: Mentoring and coaching in the workplace: an introduction", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 629-634. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-08-2024-716

This special issue aims to provide an integrative perspective on two closely related but distinct developmental tools: mentoring and coaching. The objective is to bridge the gap between research and practice, aligning with the Journal of Managerial Psychology’s developmental focus. This issue aspires to enrich both academic understanding and practical applications of mentoring and coaching by exploring their intersections, interactions and distinctions.

Two powerful developmental tools

The relevance of this special issue is underscored by the critical role that mentoring and coaching play in the contemporary workplace, especially in the post-pandemic era. These developmental tools are pivotal for organizational success as they empower employees and leaders to navigate new challenges. Despite their shared developmental characteristics, mentoring and coaching have traditionally followed parallel paths with minimal cross-referencing. This special issue aims to foster an interdisciplinary dialogue that will enhance the theoretical and practical foundations of both fields.

An integrative perspective

This special issue is interdisciplinary at its core: Mentoring and coaching research span multiple disciplines including a heavy presence in not only managerial and organizational psychology but also education, sports, nursing and has received attention by scholars in trade journals focusing on nearly all professions. Mentoring has a long and rich history of study within managerial psychology and organizational science; coaching has emerged more recently as an often featured and sought-after topic.

Despite their shared developmental characteristics, these two streams tend to follow parallel paths, with surprisingly little cross-reference among them. Mentorship practice has in many ways emerged from scholarship, having gained a solid foundation with dedicated researchers across industrial/organizational psychology, organizational behavior and relevant domains over a series of several decades. Coaching more recently emerged largely from practical discussions (with noted exceptions), and more recently has begun to gain a stronger conceptual/theoretical stronghold, finally supported by a body of emerging empirical evidence (Clutterbuck, 2008). There exists a great deal of advice and suggestions especially in the coaching realm that has precipitated much discussion and practice but in many cases without the academic grounding from which mentoring has benefitted. By examining mentoring and coaching through various lenses, this issue will highlight opportunities for cross-enrichment and integrative practices.

The integration of these practices can drive positive change at multiple levels (i.e. Yip and Kram, 2017), including individual mentor (coach)/mentee (coachee) characteristics (e.g. Allen et al., 2000; Lentz, 2007; Smith, 2015); dyadic relationships and their characteristics (e.g. Allen and Eby, 2004; Ensher and Murphy, 2011), developmental networks (e.g. Chandler and Kram, 2005; Dobrow et al., 2012; Higgins and Kram, 2001); organizations defined by their mentoring (coaching) culture (e.g. Clutterbuck and Megginson, 2005; Yu, 2007; Zachary, 2005) and broader societal impacts.

Timeliness and societal implications

The timing of this special issue is particularly relevant as organizations continue to make further progress in reconvening successfully post-pandemic. Mentoring and coaching have been discussed as crucial elements that will empower organizations to reconvene successfully as we emerge from the pandemic (Kane et al., 2021). As related but distinct constructs, these two concepts have intertwined in a dance of discussions for years, but this dance may be likened to two awkward teenagers attempting to make their way across the dancefloor, each moving rhythmically to their own individual beat. The term coaching often appears in many mentoring studies as a characteristic of mentoring’s career support, and coaching literature often pays homage to mentorship, predominately as a means of attempting to differentiate the two. Indeed, while one school of thought suggests that coaching is an element of mentoring (i.e. Higgins and Kram, 2001; Pellegrini and Scandura, 2005; Tharenou, 2005), Ibarra and Scoular (2019) suggest that mentoring serves as a (directive) form of coaching. This nonconformity of approach is promising as it allows us multiple perspectives from which to critically reflect on and advance knowledge across these disciplines with reference to overlaps, interactions and distinctions between the two constructs. Similarly, much attention has been paid to the notion of developmental networks in contemporary mentoring literature. Yet despite Kram and Higgins’ (2009) focus on coaching as an integral part of this network, research on developmental networks has remained largely in the mentoring discipline with very little attention in the emergent coaching literature, with the general exception of discussing coaching as one element of the career or vocational mentoring function.

Lastly, coaching is popular. A 2022 report by IBISWorld reports that in the USA alone business coaching commands a market size of over $14bn (up 2.8% from the past year), employing approximately 113,374 individuals across 60,825 companies. And the summary of findings from a 2020 collaborative PriceWaterhouseCoopers, LLP and International Coaching Federation (ICF) 2020 Global Coaching Study indicate that 74% of managers/leaders intend to invest in more hours of coach-specific training. With the number of coaches on the rise and growing demand for coaching from practitioners, it is worth noting that many conversations are being held in this realm without reference to academic study – this is beginning to change, but it could use some propulsion. The majority of coaching practitioners are situated in techniques that Ibarra and Scoular (2019) term “nondirective coaching,” a facilitation that involves energizing a coachee to exercise their own ideas and solutions rather than the more directive, “telling” approach of traditional mentoring. Moreover, there have been calls by mentoring scholars for mentoring to become more adaptable in authentic and situated manners associated with the coaching process (e.g. Weinberg, 2019; Weinberg and Locander, 2014). Thus, the literature is curious about opportunities for these two constructs to co-enrich one another, and it is the purpose of this Special Issue to begin to address these considerations. As will become evident after reading the articles in this special issue, mentoring and coaching are crucial for developing resilient, adaptable and high-performing workforces across diverse contexts.

Moreover, the articles in this issue will provide insights into how mentoring and coaching can contribute to several of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals, particularly in areas such as Quality Education (mentoring and coaching research is by nature related to the process and production of high quality education across contexts); Good Health and Well-being (mentoring and coaching have been distinctly recognized for their capacities to produce greater well-being for both the recipients and the providers); Decent Work and Economic Growth (as with many developmentally-focused organizational behavior mechanisms, mentoring and coaching have been tied both conceptually and empirically to outcomes of individuals, teams and organizations, including performance outcomes) and Reduced Inequalities (mentoring research has been at the forefront of diversity and inclusion initiatives, and coaching research is poised to contribute well to this important area of focus).

Overview of special issue articles

This special issue comprises two editorials and 11 accepted articles, each contributing unique perspectives and empirical findings to the discourse on workplace development through mentoring and coaching. The articles cover a range of topics, including:

Diversity and Inclusion – Exploring how coaching and mentoring can bridge cultural and linguistic barriers, fostering inclusive practices in global organizations. This theme is highlighted by Steel and Karmowska in their discussion of coaching in a non-native language, and by Weinberg and Hausfeld in their research on coaching across distance. Importantly, Zhang, Ma, Xu and Lu include studies from twelve unique countries in their meta-analysis, paving the way for a more universal understanding of the benefits of mentoring on professional development.

Creating Change – Investigating the transformative potential of mentoring and coaching, particularly in promoting personality and behavioral changes. Jones and Woods find that developmental interventions can support personality change, while Musselman and Becker explain how generativity – a stable individual difference – can affect the degree to which mentoring brings about positive organizationally-relevant outcomes. Ren, Yin, Zhang and Zhu demonstrate the importance in work meaningfulness, that is, the value and importance that one places in their work, toward change behavior among coachees.

Identifying Candidates – examining the traits and readiness factors that predict successful mentoring and coaching outcomes. Several articles point to factors among clients that can be identified ahead of coaching and mentoring that are likely to produce high-quality results, including readiness for coaching (Weinberg and Hausfeld) and generativity (Musselman and Becker).

Organizations provide mentoring in the hopes of reaping benefits greater than the costs of providing the opportunity. But today’s employees are more likely to switch jobs when opportunities strike, bringing their newfound knowledge, skills, abilities and understanding with them (Musselman and Becker). Musselman and Becker’s generative mentoring article suggests a ripple effect similar to the one described by Sims and Weinberg (2024) that more generally affects participants in various forms of dyadic leadership processes. In a similar vein, several articles point to factors that should be evaluated during the ongoing coaching and mentoring processes, as they may indicate likelihood of success. Examples include client trust in coach (Weinberg and Hausfeld), cognitive processing (Steel and Karmowska) and shifts in personality (Dong et al.).

Matching Mentors and Protégés – analyzing the importance of fit and mutual understanding in developmental relationships. Given the importance of the dyadic relationships in mentoring and coaching, it may be unsurprising that several articles discuss the roll of fit, perhaps most immediately evident in Alonso, Marshall, Porter and Kraiger’s discussion of mentoring co-creation and Hu et al.’s article on moqi. Interestingly, perceptions of similarity to one’s coach (evaluated by Weinberg and Hausfeld) did not appear to affect developee personal learning. Another consideration about matching is highlighted by Jones and Woods’ fascinating finding that coaching can result in personality change, which implies an opportunity to reflect on the importance of matching a developmental pair based on factors relevant to the purpose of the mentoring or coaching.

Context of Coaching and Mentoring – assessing the impact of different modes (online, offline, blended) and external environments on coaching and mentoring effectiveness. Several articles in the special issue draw attention to the trend by which coaching is becoming increasingly conducted in distance formats as opposed to traditional face-to-face sessions (e.g. Michalik and Schermly; Marras, Opizzi and Loi; and Weinberg and Hausfeld). In their review article, Marras et al. draw light on couple further contextual considerations, as well. The first is whether a developmental initiative takes place within an organization or within another program such as an external incubator or an intra-organizational intrapreneurship program.

A second context consideration that their systematic review brings to light is the consideration of industry- or job-specific mentorship and coaching, a notion that is exhibited also in Zhang, Ma, Xu and Lu’s meta-analysis of mentoring specifically for teachers’ professional development. This points to a promising area for future research, as organizational training and development research has found mixed results when testing the premise about whether greater outcomes come about when mentoring or coaching programs are designed for a specific audience (Salter and Gannon, 2015).

Formal vs Informal Structures – contrasting the dynamics and outcomes of structured programs versus organic developmental relationships. In mentoring literature, we refer to this as formal mentoring programs versus organic mentorship, a distinction that has been studied rather exhaustively. But the coaching literature lacks behind in studying the distinction between formally-assigned coach-client pairs and those who found each other through alternative means.

Outcomes of Mentoring and Coaching – evaluating the diverse outcomes related to learning, performance, effectiveness and organizational identification. As Terri and I note in our “outro” article concluding this special issue, the studies comprising this issue investigate a wide array of mentoring and coaching outcomes. With a tint toward leadership, Ren, Yin, Zhang and Zhu, for example, demonstrate the coaching can empower the developee to take charge. But notably lacking across the articles in this issue is a focus on the three mentoring functions (job-relevant or vocational, psychosocial and role modeling) which dominated the interests of mentoring scholars in recent decades. Thus, the articles herein provide a glimpse into a new wave of thought of concern to organizational development scholars today.

Conclusion

The articles included in this special issue provide a robust foundation for advancing our understanding of mentoring and coaching in the workplace. By providing a resource for integrating mentoring and coaching techniques, we aim to develop new tools, methods and ways of thinking that will further enhance developmental relationships. The insights gained from these articles inform best practices and drive innovation in workplace mentoring and coaching programs. As outlined in our concluding article to this issue, Terri Scandura and I demonstrate how the articles herein highlight several benefits of interdisciplinary research and the potential for integrative approaches to enhance developmental outcomes. The special issue authors and I invite researchers, practitioners and policymakers to engage with this issue’s findings, suggestions and calls for future research and practice and to collaborate in pushing the boundaries of what is known about workplace mentoring and coaching.