Give it your all or hardly give? The role of mentors' beliefs about protégé advancement potential and gender in mentoring relationships

Abstract

Our research challenges assumptions about equity in formal mentoring programs. Drawing on mentoring schema and diversified mentoring theory, we theorized that mentors' beliefs about their protégés' advancement potential predict the career support they provide and the quality of their relationship, and that these effects vary by gender. Using matched-pair designs, we tested our model in two field studies of mentors and their protégés (total n = 355 dyads). Supporting theoretical predictions, mentors showed less interest in their protégés' careers, provided less career guidance, experienced less respect, and were less satisfied with their relationship when they believed their protégé had low advancement potential. Protégés also experienced less respect in their relationship when their mentor perceived them as lacking potential. Gender played a nuanced role. While mentors saw female and male protégés as having equivalent advancement potential, female protégés were seen as having less potential and experienced less respect when assigned a male rather than a female mentor. Compared to their female counterparts, male mentors felt more respected in their relationship when they believed their assigned protégé had high potential. Our findings challenge assumptions about the career support and respect provided in mentoring programs, offer insights about the nuanced effects of gender, and call for interventions that help organizations fulfill the promise of mentoring.