March 2017 Monthly Article - Reverse Mentoring at Work

REVERSE MENTORING AT WORK:
FOSTERING CROSS-
GENERATIONAL LEARNING
AND DEVELOPING MILLENNIAL
LEADERS
WENDY MARCINKUS MURPHY
Reverse mentoring is an innovative way to encourage learning and facilitate

cross-generational relationships. It involves the pairing of a younger, junior
employee acting as mentor to share expertise with an older, senior colleague
as mentee. The purpose is knowledge sharing, with the mentee focused on
learning from the mentors updated subject or technological expertise and
generational perspective. In addition, there is an emphasis on the leadership
development of the mentors. Reverse mentoring is situated in the mentor-
ing literature as an alternative form of mentoring, with unique characteris-
tics and support functions exchanged that distinguish it from other develop-
mental relationships. A model is developed that focuses on key variables to
consider and how reverse mentoring may benefit individuals and organiza-
tions. Generational differences are also presented, and the ways in which
reverse mentoring capitalizes on millennial capabilities and preferences are
highlighted throughout. Finally, theoretical and practical contributions
are discussed, including essential components for creating a reverse mentor-
ing program. 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Keywords: reverse mentoring, mentoring, developmental relationships,

millennials, generations, leadership development
Introduction his article introduces reverse mentor-

Executives are beginning to realize that
knowledge isnt a one-way street. Its in
everyones best interest to share expertise.
(Greengard, 2002) T ing as an opportunity for human re-
sources practitioners to facilitate
cross-generational knowledge sharing
and builds a theoretical foundation
Correspondence to: Wendy Marcinkus Murphy, Babson College, Management Division, Tomasso Hall 126,
Babson Park, MA 02457-0310, Phone: 781.239.4539, E-mail: wmurphy@babson.edu
Human Resource Management, JulyAugust 2012, Vol. 51, No. 4. Pp. 549574
2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).
DOI:10.1002/hrm.21489
HRM21489.indd 549 16/06/12 11:55 AM

550 HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, JULYAUGUST 2012
for academic studies. Research has established Stillman, 2005; Smola & Sutton, 2002).
that mentoring is beneficial for both individu- Millennials and the baby boomers are each
als and organizations (Allen & Eby, 2007; Allen, roughly twice the size of Generation X, and
Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004; Ragins & both groups rank high-quality colleagues as
Kram, 2007). Traditionally, mentoring rela- the most important reward for their work,
tionships have consisted of an older, senior beyond compensation (Hewlett, Sherbin, &
executive providing advice and counsel to Sumberg, 2009a). Since these two generations
a younger, junior colleague (Kram, 1985). will emerge as a large majority of the work-
Reverse mentoring turns this formula on force when the economy recovers, finding
its head. ways to develop relationships between these
Reverse mentoring is defined as the pair- groups should be a top priority for organiza-
ing of a younger, junior employee acting as tions. Reverse mentoring is an innovative
mentor to share expertise with an older, se- and cost-effective professional development
nior colleague as the mentee. General Elec- tool that capitalizes on building bridges be-
trics former CEO, Jack Welch, is generally tween generations (Harvey & Buckley, 2002;
credited with introducing a Hewlett et al., 2009b; Meister & Willyerd,
formal reverse mentoring pro- 2010).
Reverse mentoring gram in 1999 when he or- While reverse mentoring has clear practi-
dered 500 of his top managers cal application, there has been little academic
is an innovative
to find young employees who interest and no empirical work on reverse
and cost-effective could teach them about the mentoring in the management field (for edu-
Internet (Greengard, 2002). cational studies, see Cotugna & Vickery,
professional Since then, reverse mentoring 1998; Leh, 2005). This article begins to fill
has become a best practice this gap by creating a theoretical basis for
development tool among several large corpora- conceptualizing reverse mentoring, how it is
that capitalizes tions, including Dell (Harvey similar to and different from traditional men-
& Buckley, 2002), Procter & toring, and the potential benefits and chal-
on building Gamble (Greengard, 2002), lenges of reverse mentoring relationships for
and Time Warner (Hewlett, individuals and organizations. The frame-
bridges between Sherbin, & Sumberg, 2009b). work for understanding how these relation-
generations.
For organizations, tapping ships can thrive is developed drawing on the
into the expertise and tech- literatures on mentoring, social exchange
nology savvy of young work- theory, high-quality connections, and work-
ers is a clear benefit of reverse mentoring. based learning. Reverse mentoring character-
However, reverse mentoring also holds prom- istics are presented and a model developed
ise for building the leadership pipeline, fos- highlighting key antecedents and conse-
tering better intergenerational relationships, quences of this process to assist HR practition-
enhancing diversity initiatives, and driving ers in designing programs. In practice, while
innovation. For individuals, reverse mentor- reverse mentoring is not new, it holds par-
ing is an opportunity for learning by both ticular promise for fostering cross-generational
participants and a creative way to engage mil- learning and the leadership development of
lennial employees. millennial employees, who will be critical to
As the youngest cohort of workers, mem- the future success of organizations. Finally, the
bers of the Millennial Generation, born from discussion includes theoretical contributions
1978 through 1999, currently constitute 76 and actionable steps for creating a successful
million employees and comprise the fastest- reverse mentoring program.
growing segment of the workforce. The other
three generations are generally defined as: vet-
Theoretical Background
erans, or the Greatest Generation, born be-
fore 1945; baby boomers, born 19461964; and Research and interest in mentoring and
Generation X, born 19651978 (Lancaster & developmental relationships has steadily
Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm
HRM21489.indd 550 16/06/12 11:55 AM

REVERSE MENTORING AT WORK 551
increased over the last 30 years (Chandler, tool for senior organizational members to
Kram, & Yip, forthcoming). With the increas- acquire technical knowledge, learn about
ing number of millennial employees entering current trends, gain a cross-cultural global
the workplace, researchers and practitioners perspective, and understand younger genera-
alike would be well advised to renew their tions. It also gives junior employees insight
focus on the potential of mentoring for at- into the higher levels of the organization to
tracting and retaining young talent. Most enhance their understanding of the business
importantly, millennials want personalized (Meister & Willyerd, 2010). While to date
opportunities to contribute immediately and there has been no empirical management re-
to have their voices heard (Twenge, 2006). search on reverse mentoring, two case studies
Reverse mentoring provides a forum for mil- in the education literature report positive re-
lennial employees to have immediate impact sults (Cotugna & Vickery, 1998; Leh, 2005).
and develop strong work relationships with In Cotugna and Vickerys (1998) study, col-
organizational leaders (Hewlett et al., 2009a). lege students were paired with professionals
To build a foundation for understanding re- to teach Internet skills. Mentees indicated
verse mentoring relationships, HR academics that they were very comfortable in this role
and practitioners can draw upon a long his- and enjoyed learning from stu-
tory of research in the areas of mentoring and dent mentors. In Lehs (2005)
social exchange, as well as more recent work study, graduate students were
on high-quality connections and learning. paired with faculty to support Mentoring scholars
The classic qualitative work by Levinson, their new technology use in the emphasize
Darrow, Klein, Levinson, and McKee (1978) classroom. Findings indicate that
and Kram (1983, 1985) defined mentoring as mentees found the customized reciprocity and the
a work relationship between an older, more training valuable and the experi-
experienced adult (mentor) and a young ence raised mentors self-esteem. relationship that
adult (mentee or protg) that enhances ca- The study of mentoring has develops as an
reer development. Kram (1985) found that been related to social exchange
mentors provided both career and psychoso- theory due to its focus on dyadic important element
cial support resources important for the ca- relationships (Ensher et al., 2001;
reer success of mentees. Subsequent studies Noe, Greenberger, & Wang, 2002, for individuals
link having a mentor and the support pro- Olian, Carroll, & Giannantonio,
growth in their
vided by such a developmental relationship to 1993; Raabe & Beehr, 2003). From
several positive career outcomes, including sal- this perspective, individuals de- careers.
ary (Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Dreher & velop mentoring relationships if
Ash, 1990), promotions (Scandura, 1992), job they perceive that the benefits
satisfaction (Ensher, Thomas, & Murphy, 2001), outweigh the costs (Allen, 2007;
learning (Lankau & Scandura, 2002), and orga- Ensher et al., 2001; Olian et al., 1993). Social
nizational commitment (Ragins, Cotton, & exchanges involve a series of interactions
Miller, 2000), among others. In addition, characterized by rules and norms (i.e., reci-
mentors themselves may benefit from in- procity or quid pro quo), resources exchanged,
creased visibility, learning, and a loyal base and the relationship that may emerge
of support (Allen & Eby, 2003; Ragins & (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005). Correspond-
Scandura, 1999). ingly, mentoring scholars emphasize reci-
Reverse mentoring is defined here as procity and the relationship that develops as
the pairing of a younger, junior employee as the an important element for individuals growth
mentor to share knowledge with an older, in their careers (e.g., Kram, 1983, 1985; Allen,
senior colleague as the mentee. This is the Eby, & Lentz, 2006). In addition, social
opposite relationship structure from tradi- exchange resources have economic (e.g., infor-
tional mentoring relationships. Harvey, mation, services) and/or symbolic (e.g., love,
McIntyre, Heames, and Moeller (2009) sug- status) value (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005;
gest that reverse mentoring is an excellent Foa & Foa, 1980), which aligns with the two
HRM21489.indd 551 16/06/12 11:55 AM

mentoring exchange categories of career (i.e., which are often designed with learning as a
instrumental/economic) and psychosocial key goal for mentees (Lankau & Scandura,
(i.e., symbolic) support (Allen et al., 2006; 2002). According to Wanberg, Welsh, and
Kram, 1985). Hezlett (2003), three types of learning may
Social exchange theory has been extended result from mentoring relationships, including
into the leadership domain, with leader- (1) cognitive, which enhances strategic or tacit
member exchange theory (LMX). High-quality knowledge; (2) skill-based, which improves
LMX relationships are characterized by re- technical or motor skills; and (3) affective-
spect and trust (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995), in based, which can be attitudinal or motiva-
which leaders exchange resources including tional. For example, traditional mentors
strategic advice, social support, and feedback share their perspective on organizational is-
with members, who reciprocate with com- sues, convey organizational processes and
mitment and cooperation (Sparrowe & Liden, routines, and teach the norms and values of
2005). LMX relationships overlap with tradi- the organization (Swap, Leonard, Shields, &
tional mentoring relationships in the inclu- Abrams, 2001). Mentors transfer skills by pro-
sion of the psychosocial support function viding training, feedback, and coaching (Noe,
(Scandura & Schriesheim, 1994). This is likely 1988). Finally, mentors may alter mentees at-
to be consistent with reverse mentoring rela- titudes by affecting changes in self-awareness
tionships as well, with the difference being or improved tolerance for diversity, and alter
that strategic advice is more likely from the motivation by improving self-efficacy or
mentee than the mentor. goal-setting (Wanberg et al., 2003). Individ-
Most recently, research in the area of ual learning translates to organizational
positive organizational scholarship has iden- learning when individual mental models
tified high-quality connections as key for ac- (i.e., explicit and implicit knowledge of how
complishing work (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). and why the organization works) become
Successful relationships between mentors incorporated into the organization through
and mentees serve as examples of positive shared mental models (Kim, 1993). Thus,
connections at work that enable the thriving mentoring relationships can be considered a
of individuals and organizations (Dutton & strategic tool for creating shared mental
Heaphy, 2003; Dutton & Ragins, 2007). The models that enhance organizational learning.
concept of high-quality connections is in-
formed by an exchange lens as well as a
Reverse Mentoring as a
learning lens (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003),
which aligns with the relational perspective
Cross-Generational Leadership
described by Ragins and Verbos (2007). This Development Tool
relational perspective moves beyond a social Developmental relationships play a key role
exchange perspective in suggesting that the in the learning and growth of leaders. In par-
development of close mentoring relation- ticular, the opportunity to interact one-on-
ships may rely on communal rather than one with members of senior management
exchange norms (Ragins & Verbos, 2007). Ac- helps newer employees develop a more so-
cording to Ragins and Verbos (2007), under phisticated and strategic perspective on the
communal norms, benefits are provided for organization (Day, 2000). Developing millen-
the needs of others or to demonstrate a gen- nial leaders should be a major strategic goal
eral concern without creating a repayment for organizations, as this group is the second
obligation. When traditional mentoring rela- largest in population following baby boomers
tionships move from exchange to communal and represents a major source of talent and
norms, they are then classified as relational new ideas. Recent studies on generational
mentoring relationships, which enable mu- value differences (Smola & Sutton, 2002;
tual learning, growth, and development. Twenge, 2006; Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, &
Learning is an important outcome, par- Lance, 2010), generational identities (Joshi,
ticularly in formal mentoring programs Dencker, Franz, & Martocchio, 2010), and
HRM21489.indd 552 16/06/12 11:55 AM

generational leadership differences (Meister & 2010). Millennials are characterized as tech-
Willyerd, 2010; Sessa, Kabacoff, Deal, & nologically savvy, globally concerned, com-
Brown, 2007) support the idea that, overall, fortable with diversity, highly innovative,
members of different generations exhibit dif- and willing to try anything (Reisenwitz &
ferences in work values, personality, collec- Iyer, 2009; Twenge, 2006). As employees,
tive memories, and behaviors in the work- they tend to learn best through collabora-
place. The prototypical reverse mentoring tion (Twenge, 2006).
relationship discussed here is between a mil- Reverse mentoring capitalizes on gen-
lennial mentor and a baby boomer mentee. erational similarities and differences by
This does not preclude reverse mentoring encouraging organizations to recognize,
relationships composed of other genera- understand, and build on the strengths of
tional members, but they are less likely generations. It is expected that
due to demographic trends and the content/ the development of one-on-one
technology expertise necessary in the men- relationships should help reduce Developmental
tor role (Hewlett et al., 2009a, 2009b; Twenge, assumptions and negative ste-
2006). reotypes and even highlight relationships
Much of the writing on generations is similarities. For example, both play a key role in
derived from consulting and popular press millennials and baby boomers
articles, which categorize generations accord- share a strong desire for high- the learning and
ing to birth year (e.g., baby boomers). This is quality colleagues and access to
rooted in Mannheims (1952) work, which new experiences and challenges growth of leaders.
suggests that generations are distinguishable (Hewlett et al., 2009a). A reverse
In particular, the
by their shared experience of a time period mentoring relationship has the po-
and a distinctive consciousness based on tential to fulfill both of these pref- opportunity to
important events of that time (see Joshi et al., erences. Perhaps more than
2010, p. 397). Joshi et al. (2010) suggest that traditional mentoring programs, interact one-on-one
these generational differences are due to reverse mentoring has a dual
with members of
distinct age-based and cohort-based genera- focus on the leadership develop-
tional identities. The age-based view builds ment of both mentor and men- senior management
on Mannheims (1952) idea that different age tee. Millennial mentors have the
groups recall different events as formative opportunity to demonstrate ca- helps newer
experiences, which create collective memo- pabilities as leaders through
employees develop
ries (Joshi et al., 2010) or mental models their coordination of tasks and
(Kim, 1993) representing shared attitudes goals in this relationship. In a more sophisticated
and values. The cohort-based view is rooted addition, as one executive ex-
in social identity theory, such that members plained, The mentors are getting and strategic
share a collective identity with the cohort access to more senior people,
group based on common experiences and and they get to go behind the perspective on the
outcomes for individuals (Joshi et al., 2010). scenes, so to speak, to see how organization.
Therefore, millennials, the newest generation leaders think and offer insights
to enter the workforce, are distinct from pre- (Meister & Willyerd, 2010, p. 2).
vious generations in several ways (see Table I Investing in high-quality relationships
for a more complete summary of genera- is important for individuals, as research
tional characteristics). shows that effective leaders drive
For example, millennials tend to be more results through networks (Cross, Cowen,
individualistic and self-focused than baby Vertucci, & Thomas, 2009). Thus, reverse
boomers and place a higher value on leisure mentoring is a useful leadership develop-
time and extrinsic rewards (Twenge et al., ment tool for both mentors and mentees
2010). This emphasis on leisure time mani- that enhances their individual networks and
fests itself as prioritizing work-life balance in builds intergenerational bridges across the
the workplace (Twenge, 2006; Twenge et al., organization.
HRM21489.indd 553 16/06/12 11:55 AM

HRM21489.indd 554
TABLE I Generational Characteristics*
Generation Key Events/Issues Typical Characteristics
Veterans, or the Greatest World War I Loyal to institutions; stay due to loyalty to clients and customers
Generation Great Depression Value job stability
Born before 1945 World War II Patriotic with a high work ethic
75 million (25% still FDRs New Deal Take care of possessions and responsibilities
in workforce) The Cold War
Baby Boomers John F. Kennedy Want to put their stamp on institutions; stay to make a difference
Born 19461964 assassination Value individuality, self-fulfillment, and integrity
80 million Vietnam War Embrace a psychology of entitlement, expecting the best from life
Martin Luther King Strengths in building consensus and effecting change
assassination May experience simultaneous pressures of caring for children and
Watergate elders
Woodstock
Generation X, or Baby Busters End of the Cold War Are skeptical of in stitutions; stay to build a career
Born 19651978 First Gulf War Value independence and advancement opportunities
46 million Sesame Street and MTV Accustomed to immediate feedback
AIDS worldwide Comfort with diversity, emphasizing similarities rather than differences
Dual-career households Technically competent
High divorce rates Value stable family life
Personal computers/video
games
Worldwide competition
Millennials, or Generation Y, Rapid technology advances Judge institutions on their own merit; stay for praise and rewards
Nexters, Generation Me Globalization Value work-life balance, education, and innovation
Born 19781999 High immigration Wired or connected 24 hours/day
76 million Internet and social Comfort with global issues
networking Desire to be heard, have an immediate impact
9/11/2001 Prefer working in teams
Iraq/Afghanistan wars Close relationships with parents
The Great Recession
*Primary sources: Smola and Sutton (2002); Twenge (2006); Twenge et al. (2010).
16/06/12 11:55 AM
Developmental Relationships functions. In addition, reverse mentoring

in Organizations may be considered a type of alternative men-
toring or a developer in ones developmental
Approximately 70 percent of Fortune 500 network. Reverse mentoring relationships are
companies offer formal, traditional mentor- distinguished by several unique characteris-
ing programs (Gutner, 2009). Beyond tradi- tics that facilitate an exchange process
tional mentors, other sources have been and functions that are detailed in Table II and
identified that offer support to enhance ca- discussed below.
reer development. Alternative developmental
relationships may include both intraorgani-
Reverse Mentoring Characteristics
zational and extraorganizational relation-
ships. Allen and Finkelstein (2003) found While there is certainly overlap in the con-
that coworkers, educational sources, profes- tent of reverse mentoring with traditional
sional associations, supervisors, subordinates, mentoring and alternative mentoring, there
and family members were commonly cited are different emphases due to its structure
sources of alternative mentoring support. and purpose. Reverse mentoring relation-
These relationships may also be considered ships are characterized by several elements,
part of ones developmental network, the including (1) unequal status of
constellation of relationships that individu- partners with the mentee, rather
als rely on for career development (Higgins & than the mentor, the senior mem- Research findings
Kram, 2001). Research findings on develop- ber in the hierarchy of the organi-
on developmental
mental networks show that individuals re- zation; (2) knowledge sharing with
ceive support from various relationships at the mentee focused on learning networks show
work, which may include supervisors, upper- from the mentors technical or
level managers, coworkers, and subordinates, content expertise and generational that individuals
as well as family, friends, and community perspective; (3) emphasis on pro-
receive support from
members (Murphy & Kram, 2010). fessional and leadership skill de-
While there is consensus that develop- velopment of mentors; and various relationships
mental relationships are important, scholars (4) commitment to the shared
have distinguished traditional mentoring re- goal of support and mutual learn- at work, which
lationships from others, including alternative ing. Organizations as well as par-
mentoring (Allen & Finkelstein, 2003), peer ticipants must be aware of these may include
mentoring (Kram & Isabella, 1985), coaching structural and content-based char- supervisors, upper-
(Hall, Otazo, & Hollenbeck, 1999), peer acteristics in order to effectively
coaching (Parker, Hall, & Kram, 2008), and manage reverse mentoring rela- level managers,
developers (i.e., relationships in ones devel- tionships. As these characteristics
opmental network; Higgins & Kram, 2001). are discussed, the prototypical re- coworkers, and
These distinctions are generally based on verse mentoring relationship be-
subordinates,
structural characteristics and the content ex- tween a millennial mentor and
changed in the relationship. For example, baby boomer mentee is used to il- as well as
peer mentoring is defined as a relationship lustrate.
between two coworkers with similar status in family, friends,
the same organization who may provide a
Unequal Status of Partners and community
full range of developmental functions,
whereas peer coaching is similar in structure By definition, a reverse mentoring members.
but is specifically focused on career learning relationship is composed of a
(Parker et al., 2008). Structurally, reverse men- younger employee in the role of
toring is unique because it is a relationship mentor and an older, more experienced em-
between a younger, junior employee as men- ployee in the role of mentee. Participants
tor and an older, senior colleague as mentee unequal status is reinforced by differences in
that offers the full range of developmental hierarchical rank in the organization, where
HRM21489.indd 555 16/06/12 11:55 AM

HRM21489.indd 556
TABLE II Reverse Mentoring Compared to Traditional Mentoring*
Reverse Mentoring Traditional
Reverse Mentoring Exchange Functions Mentoring Functions Traditional Mentoring Exchange (Kram, 1985)
Career Support Career Support
Shares technical or content expertise and en- Knowledge sharing Sponsorship Public support for advancement in the
hances understanding of generational trends organization
Provides guidance and feedback on training Coaching* Coaching Enhances knowledge and understanding of
and mastery of new skills and knowledge how to navigate effectively in the corporate
Collaboration on projects and research that Exposure and Exposure and world
create contact with each others colleagues visibility visibility Create opportunities to demonstrate com-
Demonstrates technology savvy and identi- Skill development* Protection petence through contact with other senior
fies opportunities to apply knowledge managers
Generates new approaches to problems and Challenging ideas Challenging Shields mentee from untimely or potentially
suggestions for implementing solutions assignments damaging contacts with other senior
Teaches about social networking sites and so- Networking* managers
cial media; introduces to peers/colleagues to Assigning challenging work, supported with
increase social integration and social capital training and ongoing performance feedback
Psychosocial Support Psychosocial Support
Provides support for learning and feedback on Support and feedback Role modeling Attitudes, values, and behavior provide a
new knowledge and skill acquisition model for mentee to emulate
Provides support and encouragement that en- Acceptance and Acceptance and Provides support and encouragement that
ables mentee/mentor to experiment with new confirmation confirmation enables mentee to experiment with new
behaviors behaviors
Mutual liking and sharing of life events Friendship Friendship Social interaction characterized by mutual
through informal exchange; connecting liking, understanding, and informal
friends across levels or divisions in the exchanges about work and nonwork
organization experiences
Openly discuss developmental needs and Affirmation and Counseling Enables mentee to explore personal con-
encourage career and personal development encouragement* cerns that may interfere with a positive
sense of self in the organization; talk openly
about anxieties/fears
Role Modeling
Offers fresh perspective on the organization New perspective*
and its business(es)
Demonstrates openness to new ideas, Behavior to emulate
innovation, and a global perspective
Shares willingness to learn Identifying with values
*Reverse mentoring functions that differ from traditional mentoring are in bold. Asterisks indicate overlap with alternative mentoring functions (see Allen & Finkelstein, 2003).
16/06/12 11:55 AM
the mentee has higher status and power motivational changes. Beyond the mentors
in the organization relative to the mentor. expertise and generational perspective upon
For senior executive mentees, who tend to be which the reverse mentoring assignment is
baby boomers, this structural role reversal based, they may share other declarative
presents unique challenges, including the knowledge (Wanberg et al., 2003) about
need to give up some control of the process technology trends, subject-matter advances,
and demonstrate their willingness to learn social media, generational interpretations of
from their mentor. According to one execu- issues, a global perspective, and new ideas
tive, Its difficult not to slip into our tradi- (Harvey et al., 2009; Piktialis, 2009). Mentees
tional roles, but this arrangement is building may share declarative knowledge about the
relationships (Meister & Willyerd, 2010, companys history or politics, procedural
p. 2). Fortunately, millennial employees tend knowledge about how to get things done in
to be less concerned with status differences the organization and how different roles and
than previous generations, perhaps due to responsibilities fit together in integrated sys-
their close relationships with their parents, tems, and cognitive strategies such as plan-
many of whom are Baby Boomers them- ning, problem solving, or decision making
selves (Hewlett et al., 2009a; Twenge, 2006). (Wanberg et al., 2003).
Thus, it is likely that mentees and mentors
approach their unequal status from different
Emphasis on Leadership Development
perspectives, an intergenerational difference
that may be a source of learning in and of Reverse mentoring capitalizes on the as-
itself. sumption that much of leadership develop-
ment is personal development (Parker et al.,
2008) and providing support to nurture
Focus on Knowledge Sharing
leaders to grow (Spreitzer, 2006). In tradi-
Learning from the mentors expertise tional mentoring relationships, personal
through knowledge sharing and skill devel- learning, a combination of interpersonal skills
opment is the main focus for mentees in a (communicating, listening, problem solv-
reverse mentoring relationship. Ensuring ing, and developing relationships) and rela-
that both parties understand this goal is es- tional learning (understanding the interde-
sential, as senior-level mentees will be more pendence of ones job to others), is an
likely to seek information when it is consid- important outcome for protgs (Lankau &
ered appropriate and when they perceive Scandura, 2002), whereas only relational
that their mentors are competent (Mullen & learning is a significant outcome for men-
Noe, 1999). While mentees also learn from tors (Allen & Eby, 2003). In a reverse mentor-
mentors in traditional mentoring relation- ing relationship, leadership development in
ships, this expertise is usually based on ac- the form of personal learning is particularly
cumulated experience (Kram, 1985) rather important for mentors because it can reduce
than the current topic/technological role ambiguity and increase job satisfaction
expertise of millennials based on recent (Lankau & Scandura, 2002). This is espe-
educational experiences or a different cially helpful for millennial employees who
generational perspective. Wanberg et al. tend to be uncomfortable with ambiguity
(2003) define three types of learning through and have a desire for clear direction and im-
the knowledge exchanged in mentoring rela- mediate feedback in their professional expe-
tionships, including (1) cognitive learning, riences (Gerdes, 2007; Johnson & Romanello,
which enhances declarative knowledge, proce- 2005; Twenge, 2006). In addition, the devel-
dural knowledge, strategic or tacit knowledge, opment of relationships that enhance
knowledge organization, or cognitive strate- leadership skills, cross-generational commu-
gies; (2) skill-based learning, which improves nication, and professional understanding
technical or motor skills; and (3) affective- will benefit both participants as well as the
based learning, which enables attitudinal or organization.
HRM21489.indd 557 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Mutual Support authentic expression of positive emotions

to create opportunities for growth (Spreitzer,
Both mentors and mentees must make a 2006).
commitment to the shared goal of mutual It is important to acknowledge that the
support and learning. While this is important organizational context in which reverse men-
for any mentoring relationship, it is espe- toring relationships are embedded plays an
cially crucial for reverse mentoring partici- overarching role in participants motivation
pants due to the unique dynamics of this to participate in this process (Wanberg et al.,
relationship, which includes generational 2003). Research on work-based learning sug-
differences among other antecedents detailed gests that if knowledge creation and utiliza-
in Figure 1. To enhance reverse mentoring tion is valued by the organization, then
outcomes, participants should be encouraged learning becomes everyones job (Raelin,
to share knowledge, positive meaning, and 2000). Thus, an organizational culture that
emotions in the creation of a positive con- supports continuous learning through men-
nection (Spreitzer, 2006). Mutual support for toring is likely to be most conducive to high-
learning is more likely to occur if participants quality reverse mentoring relationships
develop a close mentoring bond (Ragins & (Dutton & Ragins, 2007; Wanberg et al., 2003).
Verbos, 2007), which is essentially the high- The model presented here is parsimoni-
quality connection that characterizes rela- ous in its inclusion of key variables for human
tional mentoring. High-quality connections resource managers to consider for formal re-
have greater strength than others, as indi- verse mentoring relationships and programs.
cated by higher emotional carrying capacity, It is noteworthy that the general relation-
tensility (the capacity to withstand strain and ships among antecedents, mediators, and
function in many circumstances), and gen- outcomes follow the model suggested by
erativity (openness to new ideas/influences Wanberg et al. (2003) for formal traditional
and ability to deflect negative processes) mentoring relationships; however, there are
(Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). By explicitly sup- several differences. Specifically, a majority of
porting one anothers learning, both partici- the outcomes are different, as the goals of the
pants may experience positive meaning relationship are distinct and the inclusion of
through their relationship and encourage the generational differences, role reversal, and
Mentor Outcomes
Leadership development
Mentor Organizational knowledge
Individual differences Relationship Direct exposure to baby boomers
Characteristics Mentoring Functions Personal/relational learning
(gender, ethnicity, etc.)
Role reversal (see also Table II) Social capital
Millennial generation
Interaction frequency Career support
Junior role/position
Trust Psychosocial support
Interpersonal comfort Role modeling
Mentee Outcomes
Content/technical knowledge and skills
Mentee Direct exposure to millennials
Individual differences Relational learning
(gender, ethnicity, etc.) Social capital
Baby boomer generation
Senior role/position
Organizational Outcomes
Talent management (succession planning)
Recruiting and retention
Social equity and diversity
Bridging technology gaps
Understanding trends and customers
Innovation
Organizational learning
FIGURE 1. Key Variables in the Prototypical Reverse Mentoring Relationship*

*Refer to Wanberg et al. (2003) for a comprehensive model of formal, traditional mentoring relationships.
HRM21489.indd 558 16/06/12 11:55 AM

trust as relationship antecedents is new. Im- subfunctions identified by Allen and

portantly, although the broad mentoring Finkelstein (2003) are relevant, including
functions of reverse mentoring are similar to skill development, support, affirmation, net-
traditional mentoring, the particular sub- working, and new perspectives. In the pro-
functions and exchange process are quite dif- cess of reverse mentoring, it is likely that
ferent. both parties benefit from each function
through dynamic exchange processes, as out-
lined in Table II, although the importance of
Reverse Mentoring Functions
various subfunctions may vary for each indi-
Reverse mentoring relationships are develop- vidual depending on their needs and role in
mental relationships in which several types the relationship.
of support are important for the growth of Due to the structure and goals of a
both mentee and mentor. These relationships reverse mentoring relationship, the career
may include support typically associated subfunctions are the most distinct from
with traditional as well as alternative mentor- traditional mentoring relationships. The pri-
ing relationships. Since many organizations mary career function is the sharing of knowl-
have traditional formal mentoring programs edge in terms of technical or
and a vast majority of empirical studies on topic expertise and generational
Studies on
mentoring at work are based on Krams perspectives. The expectation is
(1985) study (Allen et al., 2004), the subfunc- that the mentor shares his or her traditional mentoring
tions are compared to traditional mentoring expertise on topics such as tech-
relationships. nology, subject-matter advances, relationships, those
Studies on traditional mentoring relation- generational trends, diversity, risk
ships, those in which older, more experienced taking, or understanding a global in which older,
mentors are paired with junior mentees, have perspective (Harvey et al., 2009; more experienced
generally confirmed that mentees receive the Piktialis, 2009). In return, the
broad functions of career support and psy- mentee may also share expertise mentors are paired
chosocial support (Allen et al., 2004; Kram, on such topics as organizational
1985; Noe, 1988; Ragins & McFarlin, 1990). issues, job responsibilities, or ca- with junior mentees,
Career support includes sponsorship, coach- reer planning and development.
have generally
ing exposure and visibility, protection, and Thus, some of the knowledge
challenging assignments. These functions are sharing provided by mentees ful- confirmed that
possible because of the senior persons experi- fills the traditional subfunction of
ence, organizational rank, and influence in coaching, which enhances a ju- mentees receive
the organizational context. In contrast, psy- nior persons understanding of
the broad functions
chosocial support includes role modeling, how to navigate the organization
acceptance and confirmation, counseling, (Kram, 1985) and may be the of career support
and friendship. These functions are based on most important function that
an interpersonal bond that fosters mutual mentees provide to mentors. Both and psychosocial
trust and increasing intimacy (see Kram, parties may receive exposure and
support.
1985, p. 23). Recent work has found that visibility among each others
role modeling is a distinct broad function peers whom they would other-
(Pellegrini & Scandura, 2005; Scandura, 1992), wise not come in contact with
rather than a subfunction of psychosocial during regular work interactions. In contrast,
support (e.g., Kram, 1985; Ragins & Cotton, protection and challenging assignments are
1999). unlikely because the junior person is in the
Reverse mentoring relationships have the role of mentor rather than mentee. Rather,
potential to provide all three broad func- skill development may occur through men-
tions, including several subfunctions in com- tors actively teaching mentees or collabora-
mon with traditional relationships. In addition on joint projects that enhance the
tion, several alternative developmental learning of both parties.
HRM21489.indd 559 16/06/12 11:55 AM

As new organizational members with dis- Younger mentors offer new ways to under-
tinctive generational identities (Joshi et al., stand problems, learn, and develop ideas. In
2010), mentors are likely to challenge stereo- contrast, more experienced mentees model
types and assumptions of mentees, while both appropriate professional and interpersonal
parties may offer each other insight into their skills, and demonstrate the career benefits of a
respective generational attitudes and values. commitment to continuous learning.
Mentors comfort with technology and build-
ing networks online may also enhance net- Key Antecedents for Reverse
working opportunities for mentees, whereas Mentoring
mentees may connect mentors with estab-
lished intraorganizational contacts. Finally, While there are many potential benefits of
sponsorship may still happen, although in re- reverse mentoring, both individuals and or-
verse, whereby the mentee nominates the ganizations need to be attentive to a few key
mentor for desirable lateral moves and promo- challenging antecedents. As with any inter-
tion (Kram, 1985), although this is not a goal personal relationship, it is important to be
of the relationship and thus is not included in sensitive to individual differences among par-
the framework presented. ticipants in reverse mentoring relationships.
As the relationship develops, In particular, the structural role-reversal re-
Younger mentors
both parties exchange psychoso- quirements of reverse mentoring may be
offer new ways cial functions through the process challenging for both mentor and mentee.
of mutual sharing, open discus- Finally, thoughtful time management and
to understand sion, and learning from one commitment to building these nontradi-
anothers life experiences. Devel- tional relationships is necessary for success.
problems, learn, oping a friendship makes the in-
teraction enjoyable and allows
and develop ideas. Individual Differences
the mentor to feel more like a
In contrast, more peer or colleague than a junior Individual differences such as gender, race/
employee (Kram, 1985). In addi- ethnicity, and personality have long been
experienced tion, friendship is a strong moti- acknowledged as a potential challenge in
vator for millennial employees mentoring relationships (Ragins & Kram,
mentees model
(Trunk, 2007). Cross-generational 2007). Individuals tend to be attracted to
appropriate friendships reinforce similarities those they see as similar to themselves
and respect for differences as well (McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Cook, 2001),
professional and as foster understanding across thus cross-gender and cross-race mentoring
managerial levels or divisions in relationships may be challenging. Individu-
interpersonal skills,
the organization. als growth may be limited due to gender bar-
and demonstrate Gibson and Barron (2008) riers, including a lack of diversity in senior
show that older employees tend to management, intimacy concerns, stereotypes,
the career benefits find role models at higher hierar- and power dynamics (McKeen & Bujaki,
chical levels regardless of age, 2007). Cross-race relationships are similarly
of a commitment to
which suggests that it is the posi- complex, including a potential lack of trust,
continuous learning. tion that the role model occupies commitment, and satisfaction (Blake-Beard,
that affects identification with a Murrell, & Thomas, 2007). In reverse mentor-
role model. In reverse mentoring, ing, these issues may be magnified when
the organization designates the younger em- younger and less experienced members of the
ployee in a position as expert mentor in the minority are in the role of mentor instead of
relationship, thus sanctioning the role reversal. mentee. The personalities of participants will
Developing a strong bond will enable both also affect the development of reverse men-
mentor and mentee to identify with each other toring relationships. According to research by
and find positive aspects of the other upon Turban and colleagues (Turban & Dougherty,
which to model his or her future behavior. 1994; Turban & Lee, 2007; Wu, Foo, & Turban,
HRM21489.indd 560 16/06/12 11:55 AM

2008), personality traits that reflect comfort student again. And that is a little bit difficult
in social situations, such as extraversion, are for some of us, where were used to running
associated with the successful initiation of organizations of up to 20,000 people and call-
mentoring relationships. In addition, certain ing the shots (Solomon, 2001). In order for
personality characteristics are likely to make experienced executives to embrace learning
mentors more attractive to mentees, such as from younger, less experienced colleagues,
ability, competence, and willingness to learn. they also must be willing to question their own
Therefore, consideration of these individual assumptions and consider alternative ways of
differences is important in the selection of thinking about their role in the organization
participants, particularly mentees, who will (cf. Argyris, 1991). This role reversal challenges
need to be sensitive to such issues. both mentee and mentor to openly communi-
cate their developmental needs and determine
how each might contribute to the success of
Cross-Generational Differences
their relationship. Thus, there is a vulnerability
Generational cohorts are united by a collective required of each participant in acknowledging
mind-set, with each generation having a their lack of experience and familiarity with
unique set of values, ideas, and culture result- such a process.
ing from shared experiences (Strauss & Howe,
1991). In the workplace, millennial employees
Interaction Frequency
tend to be more assertive with a desire to be
heard and to have an immediate impact The time and energy involved in developing
(Twenge, 2006). Reverse mentoring capitalizes and nurturing a mentoring relationship is a
on these values by giving young employees potential challenge for both mentors and
the responsibility of developing their mentees mentees (Ragins & Scandura, 1994). For men-
skills. In traditional mentoring relationships, tors at the start of their careers, managing
for mentors a primary benefit is the sense of multiple unfamiliar job and organizational
satisfaction and fulfillment from fostering the demands along with learning how to facili-
development of a younger adult (Ragins & tate a reverse mentoring relationship may
Scandura, 1999, p. 20). While this may benefit feel overwhelming. For mentees in senior or-
reverse mentees, they will also learn how their ganizational roles, creating the time to de-
millennial mentors prefer to teach and learn, vote to a reverse mentoring relationship is
as well as the way they approach work and life likely in addition to an array of compelling
generally. Likewise, younger mentors will learn demands. Building a meaningful and success-
about baby boomers perspectives on work ful relationship takes time, as illustrated by
and gain an understanding of how to interact several studies of traditional mentoring in
with more experienced professionals. which the duration of the relationship is
linked to support received, satisfaction, perfor-
mance, and other positive outcomes (e.g.,
Role Reversal
Chao et al., 1992; Turban, Dougherty, & Lee,
Reverse mentoring provides an opportunity for 2002). In addition, formal programs that create
early-career employees to participate in a chal- opportunities for frequent interactions between
lenging professional development experience. mentors and mentees are more successful
In their role as mentors, junior employees gain (Gibb, 1999; Ragins et al., 2000). Leh (2005)
exposure to senior-level executives, however, it found that reverse mentoring relationships
is likely that they are inexperienced in manag- flourished when adequate time was allocated
ing a mentoring relationship in a professional by the mentees, whereas mentors expressed
context.1 Mentees may also be thrown off bal- frustration when they spent more time figur-
ance by this role reversal, as one Procter & ing out a schedule with their mentee than on
Gamble mentee explained, This is not a boss- actual training. Participants must dedicate
subordinate relationship. This is one where, the time necessary to build a meaningful and
particularly in reverse mentoring, youre the productive reverse mentoring relationship.
HRM21489.indd 561 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Trust and Interpersonal Comfort talent management, recruiting and retention,

improving social equity and diversity, bridg-
Building trust and rapport in reverse mentoring technology gaps among employees, un-
ing relationships is critical since knowledge is derstanding trends and customers, and driving
absorbed faster and more completely when innovation. In addition, the individual learn-
the connection between mentee and mentor ing of participants may extend to organiza-
is high-quality (Dutton & Heaphy, 2003). Ac- tional learning and promote a culture of
cording to Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman continuous learning.
(1995, p. 712) trust is the willingness of a
party to be vulnerable to the actions of an-
Mentor Outcomes
other party . . . irrespective of the ability to
monitor or control that party. Thus, indi- For mentors, the primary benefit of participat-
viduals are more willing to take risks, such as ing in a reverse mentoring relationship is their
asking dumb questions in the learning pro- own leadership development and the experience
cess, in relationships characterized by trust of managing a professional mentoring rela-
(Schoorman, Mayer, & Davis, 2007). To max- tionship. Through interactions with seasoned
imize mentor-mentee interac- executives, young professionals gain organiza-
tions, it is critical to build in tional knowledge, such as insight into the lead-
Building a ership hierarchy of the organization and learn-
opportunities for reflection, both
meaningful individually and together, to in- ing how to navigate and get work done in the
crease self-awareness, trust, and organization. The direct, one-on-one exposure to
and successful learning (Argyris, 1994). Trust baby boomers in the workplace challenges
may come more naturally in men- mentors to understand differing work values
relationship takes toring relationships in which par- and approaches and to communicate effec-
ticipants also feel a high level of tively. Through the process of reverse mentor-
time, as illustrated
interpersonal comfort. Interper- ing, mentors should increase personal learning
by several studies sonal comfort refers to the ease in terms of improved interpersonal skills such
with which mentees relate to their as self-disclosure, active listening, empathy,
of traditional mentors and is often based on and feedback (Kram, 1996; Lankau & Scan-
overlapping identities (e.g., same- dura, 2002). In addition, increases in relational
mentoring in which
sex, same-race) and shared experi- job learning are based on a greater understand-
the duration of the ences (Allen, Day, & Lentz, 2005). ing of the interdependence or connectedness
Research has demonstrated that of ones job to others (Lankau & Scandura,
relationship is linked interpersonal comfort is positively 2002, p. 780). Finally, reverse mentoring
associated with developmental should expand mentors intraorganizational
to support received,
support exchanged (Allen et al., network thus increasing their social capital in
satisfaction, 2005). the organization, which is the ability to gain
access to the resources of others through social
performance, and ties (Hezlett & Gibson, 2007). Mentors who
Outcomes of Reverse
develop strong ties with their mentee, typi-
other positive Mentoring cally an executive with whom they would
outcomes. A successful reverse mentoring otherwise be unlikely to interact, may also
program offers several benefits for gain access to their mentees network both
individuals learning and profes- within and beyond the organization.
sional development. Many of these positive
proximal outcomes have been discussed
Mentee Outcomes
throughout this article, so they are summa-
rized briefly here. The positive distal outcomes For mentees, the primary benefit of partici-
for organizations that extend from individual pating in a reverse mentoring relationship is
participants are numerous. For organizations, the opportunity to learn the newest content
reverse mentoring is an innovative tool for knowledge or technical skills and gain exposure
HRM21489.indd 562 16/06/12 11:55 AM

to the perspective of new organizational en- Recruiting and Retention

trants. Through one-on-one interactions with
Reverse mentoring is one of several tools for
millennial mentors, mentees also hone lead-
organizations who provide developmental
ership skills through an increased ability to
opportunities as a strategy for recruiting and
understand and communicate across genera-
retaining talent. In particular, millennial em-
tions in the workplace. In the process of re-
ployees want personalized opportunities to
verse mentoring, mentees are reintroduced
contribute in the workplace and to feel that
to employees on the front lines of the orga-
their ideas are being heard (Meister & Willyerd,
nization, and through relational learning
2010; Twenge, 2006). As one millennial men-
they gain a fresh perspective on the network
tor explained, When you work in a large
of relationships in which their job is embed-
corporation and youre one of the younger
ded (Lankau & Scandura, 2002). In success-
individuals, its nice that people see value in
ful relationships, mentees develop a strong
your capabilities and they come to you and
tie to their mentors as well as learn the new-
you have a feeling of expertise and knowl-
est technologies and social networking
edge (Cohen, 2003, p. 1). Reverse mentoring
media. This process should enable mentees
provides an opportunity for newer
to expand their network and enhance their
employees to be stimulated and
social capital through an increased intraorga-
challenged in a meaningful way In successful
nizational base of loyal support (Kram,
that expands their network and
1985). relationships,
benefits their career. This process
is also helpful in early layers of
mentees develop a
management. For example,
Organizational Outcomes Procter & Gambles Mentor Up strong tie to their
program, which pairs mid- or ju-
Talent Management nior-level female managers with mentors as well as
senior-level male executives, is
While organizations may use a variety of learn the newest
credited with significantly reduc-
tools to identify high-potential employees
ing turnover among female man- technologies and
including performance appraisal, personality
agers (Zielinski, 2000). DiBianca
instruments, cognitive ability measures,
(2008) suggests that reverse men- social networking
competency ratings, or situational judgment
toring is a way to develop com-
inventories, the reliance on such assessments
mon ground between generations media. This process
for leadership development is still relatively
and to uncover motivations and should enable
rare (Konczak & Foster, 2009). Instead, orga-
disincentives that should inform
nizations tend to rely on the subjective judg-
recruiting and retention policies. mentees to expand
ment of higher-level managers to identify
Therefore, reverse mentoring
future leadership talent. Reverse mentoring their network and
should be a useful tool for organi-
increases the frequency and quality of inter-
zations to recruit and retain early- enhance their social
action that these high-level managers have
career employees.
with young employees, which should im-
capital through
prove the accuracy and reliability of subjective
assessments. In addition, young employees an increased
have an opportunity to demonstrate their Social Equity and Diversity
competence in the content that is shared As a formal initiative, reverse men- intraorganizational
(e.g., technology, subject matter, genera- toring has the potential to enhance
tional trends) as well as interpersonal and the access of young women and base of loyal
teaching skills. Thus, reverse mentoring may minorities to individuals in power- support.
lead to earlier identification and develop- ful organizational positions (Harvey
ment of high-potential employees, also et al., 2009). Informally, traditional
known as talent management or succes- mentors tend to select mentees who are
sion planning. viewed as younger versions of themselves, and
HRM21489.indd 563 16/06/12 11:55 AM

mentees select mentors who are role models not the primary focus of the relationship.
(Ragins & Cotton, 1999). Research indicates Both individuals and employers increasingly
that individuals tend to choose same-sex use online social media, such as LinkedIn,
or same-race role models or career referents Twitter, and Facebook (Zeidler, 2009) for
(Gibson & Lawrence, 2010). However, mentor- multiple purposes, such as sharing informa-
ing studies show that similarity (i.e., demo- tion, networking, keeping in touch, and
graphics) is more important for shorter-term entertainment, among others. Through a re-
relationships. For example, while gender dis- verse mentoring relationship, mentees will
similarity may be harmful early in the rela- be exposed to the full range of uses and pos-
tionship, it is beneficial in terms of the amount sibilities for technology as well as current
of support received in longer-term relation- and emerging trends. As one baby boomer
ships (Allen, 2007; Turban et al., 2002). Formal mentee noted, Its a situation where the old
reverse mentoring programs might purposely fogies in an organization realize that by the
pair individuals with different back- time youre in your forties and fifties, youre
grounds who would otherwise be not in touch with the future the same way
Developing
unlikely to connect with one an- that the young twenty-somethings are. They
interpersonal other. The development of a deeper come with fresh eyes, open minds, and in-
professional relationship in which stant links to the technology of our future.
comfort and trust the younger mentor has the oppor- (Starcevich, 2001). For example, Booz Allen
tunity to demonstrate his or her created an information and social network-
in a long-term
knowledge and skills should miti- ing site for its workforce and found that mil-
cross-gender gate perceptual biases of senior lennial employees are encouraging Baby
mentees and increase the promot- Boomers to join and teaching them how to
or cross-racial ability of individuals with different use it effectively (Hewlett et al., 2009a).
backgrounds (cf. Hoobler, Wayne, & Thus, mentors gain experience teaching
reverse mentoring Lemmon, 2009). Intel suggests that about technology and work toward bridging
relationship will nontraditional formal mentoring intergenerational gaps in utilization of these
relationships lasting six to nine new mediums.
support the mentors months work best (Warner, 2002).
Programs of this length should be
success and the adequate for building strong rela- Understanding Trends and Customers
tionships as Watson, Kumar, and In the process of reverse mentoring relation-
success of the
Michaelsen (1993) found that di- ships, senior members of the organization are
organization. verse pairs performed better after exposed to the worldviews and desires of
only 17 weeks (see also Turban their younger colleagues. Recent college grad-
et al., 2002). Thus, developing inter- uates and young professionals tend to be
personal comfort and trust in a long-term highly conscious of new trends and part of
cross-gender or cross-racial reverse mentoring the target market for early adoption of new
relationship will support the mentors success products. For example, at Bharti Airtel,
and the success of the organization (Allen Indias largest cellular services company, re-
et al., 2005; Murrell, Blake-Beard, Porter, & verse mentoring is being used to help high-
Perkins-Williamson, 2008). level managers understand the demands of
young cell phone users (Rai, 2009). The advan-
tage of reverse mentoring is that while mentee
Bridging Technology Gaps needs dictate the topics that are addressed,
Millennials have been characterized as tech- mentors drive the agenda in terms of the ma-
nologically sophisticated with a strong pref- terial covered. Mentors will naturally present
erence for multitasking (Sacks, 2006; Twenge, topics from their own perspective and experi-
2006). Since technology is so salient to this ences, representing the very customers that
group, reverse mentoring will likely involve corporations spend millions in marketing
some discussion of technology even if this is budgets trying to analyze and understand.
HRM21489.indd 564 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Driving Innovation and utilizing reflective practice (Argyris,

1991, 1994) enhances the likelihood that
In reverse mentoring relationships, mentees
both mentor and mentee will demonstrate a
and mentors serve as sounding boards for
commitment to continuous learning beyond
one anothers ideas. Since participants are
their participation in reverse mentoring,
not directly evaluating one another in terms
which benefits their careers and the long-
of performance, the capacity to openly brain-
term success of the organization.
storm should be encouraged. This unique
dynamic has the potential to engage both
participants in a creative process that gener- Discussion
ates new approaches to problem identifica-
tion, research efforts (data collection and Theoretical Contributions
analysis), solution generation, and imple-
Reverse mentoring is an innovative and cost-
mentation (cf. Zhang & Bartol, 2010). Thus,
effective approach for organizations to foster
bringing together millennial mentors, who
cross-generational relationships and develop
tend to be entrepreneurial and have a fresh
millennial leaders. The model created here
perspective on products, services, and organi-
builds on the foundation of re-
zational processes, with baby boomer men-
search on traditional mentoring
tees, who understand how to get things done Understanding and
relationships (e.g., Allen et al., 2004;
in the organization, creates new opportuni-
Kram, 1985; Ragins & Kram, 2007) utilizing reflective
ties for driving innovation. The key is to tap
and integrates ideas from social
into the creativity of mentors as newcomers
exchange theory (Cropanzano & practice enhances
before they get socialized into the organiza-
Mitchell, 2005), positive organi-
tions old ways of thinking (i.e., old mental the likelihood
zational scholarship (Dutton &
models) (Rollag, Parise, & Cross, 2005).
Heaphy, 2003; Dutton & Ragins, that both mentor
2007), and learning (Kim, 1993;
Wanberg et al., 2003). Reverse and mentee will
Organizational Learning
mentoring is classified as an alter-
Individual learning is transferred to the orga- native mentoring relationship demonstrate a
nization through mental models (Kim, 1993). (Allen & Finkelstein, 2003) or an-
commitment to
Mental models are defined as the images, other developer in ones develop-
assumptions, and stories which we carry in mental network (Higgins & Kram, continuous learning
our minds of ourselves, other people, institu- 2001). The key difference from
tions, and every aspect of the world (Senge, traditional mentoring is the struc- beyond their
Kleiner, Roberts, Ross & Smith, 1994, p. 235). tural role reversal, with the men-
participation in
Mental models are usually tacit, affecting tee, rather than the mentor, in the
what we see and how we behave (Senge et al., senior position in the hierarchy of reverse mentoring,
1994). Because reverse mentoring challenges the organization. It is a unique
participants to learn outside their typical mentoring relationship in its ex- which benefits their
roles, they may be more open to new inter- plicit focus on knowledge sharing,
careers and the
pretations or changing and revising their including current topic/technology
mental models. Organizational learning is and generational perspectives, long-term success
defined as increasing an organizations ca- and the leadership development
pacity to take effective action (Kim, 1993, of the mentor. Because of this, the of the organization.
p. 40). Individuals influence organizational developmental functions ex-
learning through changes in shared mental changed also differ from tradi-
models. The process of sharing knowledge and tional and other alternative mentoring rela-
active reflection increases the likelihood of re- tionships. This article contributes to the
taining what has been learned and the motiva- mentoring and social exchange literatures
tion and capacity to apply new knowledge in by delineating reverse mentoring functions,
practice (cf. Bandura, 1977). Understanding exchange processes, and consequences for
HRM21489.indd 565 16/06/12 11:55 AM

individuals and organizations, as well as of relational mentoring (Dobrow, Chandler,

highlighting antecedents that are critical Murphy, & Kram, 2012; Dutton & Heaphy,
considerations for the success of a reverse 2003; Ragins & Verbos, 2007). When learn-
mentoring program. ing among reverse mentoring pairs encour-
While there is little academic research on ages new shared mental models in the orga-
generations and generational differences (see nization, we may expect increases in
for exception, Hewlett et al., 2009a; Joshi et al., knowledge sharing and cross-generational
2010; Meister & Willyerd, 2010; Reisenwitz & communication that facilitates organiza-
Iyer, 2009; Sessa et al., 2007; Smola & Sutton, tional learning and innovation.
2002; Twenge, 2006; Twenge et al., 2010), the While reverse mentoring is presented as a
perception that these differences matter is new phenomenon, it has certainly occurred
rampant in the popular press and consulting throughout time informally. In fact, the alter-
(Hoover, 2009). The value of including gen- native mentoring relationships with subordi-
erational differences as a key antecedent for nates as the mentor and supervisors as the
reverse mentoring is that it addresses the age- mentee identified in Allen and Finkelsteins
based or cohort-based differences (Joshi et al., (2003) study may have been reverse mentor-
2010) upon which these perceptions are built ing relationships. The assumption in this ar-
in the workplace. Reverse mentoring is a rela- ticle is that by formalizing reverse mentoring
tional tool for capitalizing on millennial em- relationships, organizations may capitalize
ployees updated content and technological on generational demographic trends and
knowledge for the benefit of senior manage- preferences to engage their employees in
ment and the organization. In addition, orga- knowledge sharing and leadership develop-
nizations that use a relational approach tend ment. In practice, organization may use a va-
to be more successful at integrating newcomers riety of mentoring relationship structures (e.g.,
and helping new hires to establish informa- traditional, reverse, peer) effectively. An ex-
tion networks that enhance their productiv- treme example of this is Intels program that
ity (Rollag et al., 2005). electronically matches employees with men-
Reverse mentoring programs, similar to tors based on topics and skills they want to
traditional mentoring programs, should be learn about regardless of hierarchical position
designed with learning as a key goal for both or geographical location (Warner, 2002). Thus,
participants (Lankau & Scandura, 2002). Or- reverse mentoring is one of many relational
ganizations that encourage high-quality con- tools to encourage employee development.
nections in the form of relational reverse
mentoring relationships will create opportu-
Practical Implications: Creating
nities for three forms of learningcognitive,
skill-based, and affective-based (Wanberg
a Reverse Mentoring Program
et al., 2003). For example, mentees may ben- Successful mentoring relationships are built
efit from direct exposure to mentors tacit on the principles of reciprocity and respect
generational knowledge (cognitive), updated (Kram, 1985). As with most workplace initia-
content or technical knowledge (skill-based), tives, fostering good reverse mentoring rela-
or attitudinal/motivational issues (affective- tionships requires thoughtful planning and
based) that mentors share. Mentors may attention. The more that the dynamics of
benefit from access to strategic knowledge formal mentoring relationships mimic infor-
(cognitive) due to their mentees experience mal relationships, the more successful they
and more senior roles in the organization, should be in terms of support exchanged, par-
technical knowledge (skill-based) of internal ticipant satisfaction, and evaluations of pro-
systems or processes, and sustained motiva- gram effectiveness (Allen et al., 2006; Ragins
tional (affective-based) strategies. As illus- et al., 2000). Research on formal mentoring
trated, learning from reverse mentoring is programs suggests that management support,
most likely from high-quality relationships participant input into the matching process,
characterized by mutuality, a key component and training are key features (Allen et al.,
HRM21489.indd 566 16/06/12 11:55 AM

2006; Parise & Forret, 2008). Given the ONeill, & McGowan, 2007; P-Sontag, Vappie,
unique dynamics of reverse mentoring, it is & Wanberg, 2007). For a reverse mentoring
also important to encourage the use of tech- program, selecting mentees with good inter-
nology, as both participants are likely to learn personal skills is especially important for
from utilizing and discussing technology in women and minority mentors, who report
their relationship. Thus, organizational lead- mixed results with formal, traditional men-
ers who pursue the creation of a reverse mentoring relationships (Ragins et al., 2000).
toring program must consider the up-front Therefore, attention to understanding partici-
resources required and how to manage the pants, their skills, and their needs is impor-
process to best support participants profes- tant for the matching process.
sional development.
Training and Development
As with most
Leadership Support
Training for a reverse mentoring
workplace
Reverse mentoring initiatives require the ad- program is critical for increasing
vocacy and active support by executive lead- the personal competence of initiatives,
ership. Visible and sincere support by upper mentors, who are unlikely to
management signals the significance of the have significant prior profes- fostering good
program and that it serves a valuable role in sional mentoring experiences in
reverse mentoring
the organization (Parise & Forret, 2008). Par- the role of mentor to draw upon.
ticipants need to feel that the program is Mentees also need to under- relationships
important and worthy of their time and ef- stand the challenges of this role
forts. The lack of such support is consistently reversal from the perspective of requires thoughtful
cited as problematic by participants in formal both participants, and consider
mentoring programs (Ehrich, Hansford, & how they can best learn from planning and
Tennent, 2004). In particular, leaders and this experience. Training can as- attention. The more
managers can positively influence the alloca- sist participants in getting the
tion of resources for training and develop- relationship started, help partic- that the dynamics
ment, flexibility for arranging meeting times ipants understand their roles
and coordinating schedules, and recognition and responsibilities, and enable of formal mentoring
for participation in the reverse mentoring both participants to manage
relationships
program. The ongoing support by leaders at their expectations (Parise &
all levels of the organization is necessary to Forret, 2008). Two key reasons mimic informal
encourage the commitment of participants that formal mentoring relation-
to the process of reverse mentoring. ships fail are a lack of commit- relationships, the
ment and misaligned expecta-
more successful
tions between mentors and
The Matching Process
mentees (P-Sontag et al., 2007). they should be in
Research shows it is important that partici- Effective training will give par-
pants in a formal mentoring initiative feel ticipants a better understanding terms of support
they had input into the mentor-mentee of the purposes of the program,
exchanged,
matching process (Allen et al., 2006; Ragins guidelines for setting clear goals
et al., 2000). Generally, the more data-driven and expectations, and raised participant
the matching process, in terms of what infor- awareness of the benefits of this
mation that program administrators gather experience. In addition, effec- satisfaction,
about participants, the more successful the tive training has been linked
results. Data may include a program adminis- to improved commitment to and evaluations
trators personal knowledge of participants, mentoring, support exchanged, of program
interviews of participants, soliciting choice and perceived program effec-
lists from participants, mutual activities, and/ tiveness (Allen & Eby, 2008; effectiveness.
or standardized assessment tools (Blake-Beard, Parise & Forret, 2008). Finally,
HRM21489.indd 567 16/06/12 11:55 AM

training will also allow the organization to is that participants are placed in nontradi-
put the reverse mentoring program into per- tional roles. Thus, any newcomer to an orga-
spective as one of many tools for employees nization with relevant knowledge to share
ongoing professional development. may be considered for the role of mentor,
which could certainly include Generation X
or baby boomer mentors. Future empirical
Using Technology
research is needed to explore the impact of
Electronic media are increasingly used in generational differences as well as other indi-
both personal (e.g., Facebook) and profes- vidual differences on the process of reverse
sional (e.g., LinkedIn) contexts, and employ- mentoring.
ees of all generations need to be technically This article focused on generational dif-
competent in the workplace. Studies on virtual ferences found in the United States that
mentoring indicate that technology can play a likely have limited global generalizability.
positive role in the development and coordi- Recent research on generational differences
nation of mentoring relationships (Allen et al., in China found that although younger gen-
2006; de Janasz, Ensher, & Heun, 2008; erations retain some traditional cultural
Murphy, forthcoming). It is likely values, they are moving more toward Western-
that reverse mentoring relation- style values and behaviors (Yi, Riddens, &
Certainly reverse
ships, particularly due to the tech- Morgan, 2010). Thus, as businesses and tech-
mentoring has nology savvy of millennial men- nologies become increasingly global and as
tors, will benefit from the use of a young people have increasingly similar expe-
the potential to combination of face-to-face meet- riences and media exposure to the same
ings and electronic media. As part events, we may see a convergence of genera-
bridge generational of reverse mentoring, organizational values and behaviors across the globe.
differences in other tions should encourage the discus- Certainly reverse mentoring has the poten-
sion of current media communica- tial to bridge generational differences in
regions around the tion trends and their effectiveness other regions around the world, although
among mentors and mentees. This the addition of cross-cultural differences
world, although the is also a growth opportunity for would further complicate these relation-
mentees to ensure they are maxi- ships. Empirical research on reverse mentor-
addition of cross-
mizing their time and appropri- ing in global organizations would shed light
cultural differences ately tapping technology resources. on the importance and generalizability of
It is likely that the use of technol- generational differences.
would further ogy as a supplement to regular Finally, this article did not address nega-
meetings will enhance the com- tive or dysfunctional reverse mentoring rela-
complicate these
munication and frequency of in- tionships. Traditional mentoring relation-
relationships. teraction in reverse mentoring re- ships may run the gamut from dysfunctional
lationships. to relational (Ragins & Verbos, 2007), and
reverse mentoring relationships may also
Limitations and Future Research become negative for mentors or mentees.
A relationship may become dysfunctional or
This article discusses the prototypical reverse unhealthy with costs such as becoming an
mentoring relationship between a millennial energy drain, being more trouble than its
junior employee as mentor and a baby boomer worth, or reflecting poorly on either partici-
senior employee as mentee. However, in the pant (Ragins & Scandura, 1999). The oppor-
era of protean (Hall, 1996) and boundaryless tunities for research on reverse mentoring
(Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) careers, with em- are tremendous, as this is a fairly recent phe-
ployees moving in and out of organizations nomenon in organizations. Empirical work
and frequent career changes, age is no longer is needed to validate relationships in the
necessarily correlated with experience. The proposed model and to inform practicing
key for consideration as reverse mentoring human resources managers.
HRM21489.indd 568 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Conclusion mentoring relationships and suggests key con-

siderations in creating a reverse mentoring
Reverse mentoring programs pair younger, ju- program. Reverse mentoring is an innovative
nior employees as mentors with older, senior tool for organizations looking to foster cross-
colleagues as mentees to share knowledge. The generational learning and to develop their cur-
objectives of these relationships are learning rent and future leaders.
and leadership development. Since much of
our knowledge and experience is filtered
through a generational lens (Twenge, 2006), Note
reverse mentoring relationships also expose
participants to different generational perspec- 1. Although young professionals may have partici-
tives and build on the strengths of participants. pated in mentoring relationships through their edu-
This article identifies the characteristics, func- cational experiences in either role, this is likely their
tions, antecedents, and consequences of reverse first experience as mentors in a professional context.
WENDY MARCINKUS MURPHY is an assistant professor of management at Babson Col-

lege. She earned her PhD at Boston College. Her research interests are broadly in the
area of careers. Her current work focuses on mentoring and developmental networks,
learning, and the work-life interface. She has published her research in Academy of
Management Learning and Education, Career Development International, the Journal
of Management, Gender in Management, and the Journal of Vocational Behavior, among
others.
References between research and practice. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 91, 567578.
Allen, T. D. (2007). Mentoring relationships from the
perspective of the mentor. In B. R. Ragins & Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L.
K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at (2004). Career benefits associated with mentoring
work: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 123148). for protgs: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Psychology, 89, 127136.
Allen, T. D., Day, R., & Lentz, R. (2005). The role of Allen, T. D., & Finkelstein, L. (2003). Beyond mentor-
interpersonal comfort in mentoring relationships. ing: Alternative sources and functions of develop-
Journal of Career Development, 31, 155169. mental support. Career Development Quarterly, 51,
346355.
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2003). Relationship effective-
ness for mentors: Factors associated with learning Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn.
and quality. Journal of Management, 29, 465483. Harvard Business Review, 69(3), 99109.
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2007). The Blackwell handbook Argyris, C. (1994). Good communication that blocks
of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach. learning. Harvard Business Review, July-August,
Malden, MA: Blackwell. 72(4), 7785.
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2008). Mentor commitment Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (1996). The boundary-
in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of less career: A new employment principle for a new
Vocational Behavior, 72, 309316. organizational era. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., & Lentz, E. (2006). Mentorship
behaviors and mentorship quality associated Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York,
with formal mentoring programs: Closing the gap NY: General Learning Press.
HRM21489.indd 569 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Blake-Beard, S. D., Murrell, A., & Thomas, D. (2007). professional, and technical positions. Journal of Ap-
Unfinished business: The impact of race on under- plied Psychology, 75, 539546.
standing mentoring relationships. In B. R. Ragins &
Dutton, J. E., & Heaphy, E. D. (2003). The power
K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at
of high quality connections. In K. Cameron,
work: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 223248).
J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organiza-
Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
tional scholarship (pp. 263278). San Francisco, CA:
Blake-Beard, S. D., ONeill, R. M., & McGowan, E. M. Berrett-Koehler.
(2007). Blind dates? The importance of matching
Dutton, J. E., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). Exploring posi-
in successful formal mentoring relationships. In
tive relationships at work: Building a theoretical
B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of
and research foundation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice
Erlbaum.
(pp. 617632). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Chandler, D. E., Kram, K. E., & Yip, J. (forthcoming). Ehrich, L. C., Hansford, B., & Tennent, L. (2004).
Mentoring at work: From Homers Odyssey to new Formal mentoring programs in education and other
questions and theoretical perspectives. Academy of professions: A review of the literature. Educational
Management Annals. Administration Quarterly, 40, 518540.
Chao, G. T., Walz, P. M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Formal Ensher, E. A., Thomas, C., & Murphy, S. E. (2001).
and informal mentorships: A comparison on men- Comparison of traditional, step-ahead, and peer
toring functions and contrast with nonmentored mentoring on protgs support, satisfaction, and
counterparts. Personnel Psychology, 45, 619636. perceptions of career success: A social exchange
perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology,
Cohen, S. E. (2003, NovemberDecember). This isnt 15, 419438.
your fathers mentoring relationship: Mentoring
across all generations has become an integral part Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1980). Resource theory: Inter-
of corporate culture. AARP Magazine. personal behavior as exchange. In K. J. Gergen,
M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.). Social ex-
Cotugna, N., & Vickery, C. E. (1998). Reverse mentor-
change: Advances in theory and research
ing: A twist to teaching technology. Journal of the
(pp. 7794). New York, NY: Plenum.
American Dietetic Association, 98, 11661168.
Gerdes, L. (2007, September 13). The best place to
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social ex-
launch a career. BusinessWeek. Retrieved from
change theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal
http://www.businessweek.com/careers/content/
of Management, 31, 874900.
sep2007/ca20070913_595536.htm
Cross, R., Cowen, A., Vertucci, L., & Thomas, R. J.
Gibb, S. (1999). The usefulness of theory: A case study
(2009). Leading in a connected world: How effec-
in evaluating formal mentoring schemes. Human
tive leaders drive results through networks. Orga-
Relations, 52, 10551075.
nizational Dynamics, 38, 93105.
Gibson, D. E., & Barron, L. A. (2008). Exploring the
Day, D. V. (2001). Leadership development: A review in
impact of role models on older employees. Career
context. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 581613.
Development International, 8, 198209.
de Janasz, S. C., Ensher, E. A., & Heun, C. (2008). Virtual
relationships and real benefits: Using e-mentoring Gibson, D. E., & Lawrence. B. S. (2010). Women and
to connect business students with practicing mens career referents: How gender composition
managers. Mentoring and Tutoring, Partnership in and comparison level shape expectations. Organi-
Learning, 16, 394411. zation Science, 21, 11591175.
DiBianca, M. (2008, October 29). How to use reverse Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-
mentoring as a retention tool for Gen Y employees. based approach to leadership: Development of
The Delaware Employment Law Blog. Retrieved leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leader-
from http://www.delawareemploymentlawblog ship over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-
.com/2008/10/how_to_use_reverse_mentoring_a.html domain perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 219247.
Dobrow, S. R., Chandler, D. E., Murphy, W. M., & Greengard, S. (2002, March). Moving forward with
Kram, K. E. (2012). A review of developmental reverse mentoring. Workforce, pp. 15.
networks: Incorporating a mutuality perspective.
Gutner, T. (2009, January 27). Finding anchors in
Journal of Management, 38, 210242.
the storm: Mentors. Wall Street Journal. Re-
Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of trieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/
mentoring among men and women in managerial, SB123301451869117603.html
HRM21489.indd 570 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Hall, D. T., Otazo, K. L., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (1999, Winter). Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental
Behind closed doors: What really happens in execu- relationships in organizational life. New York, NY:
tive coaching. Organizational Dynamics, pp. 3953. Scott, Foresman and Company.
Harvey, M., & Buckley, M. R. (2002). Assessing the Kram, K. E. (1996). A relational approach to career
conventional wisdoms of management for the development. In D. T. Hall (Ed.). The career is
21st century organization. Organizational Dynam- deadLong live the career: A relational approach
ics, 30, 368378. to careers (pp. 132157). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Harvey, M., McIntyre, N., Heames, J. T., & Moeller, M.
(2009). Mentoring global female managers in the Kram, K. E., & Isabella, L. A. (1985). Mentoring alter-
global marketplace: traditional, reverse, and recip- natives: The role of peer relationships in career
rocal mentoring. International Journal of Human development. Academy of Management Journal,
Resource Management, 20, 13441361. 28, 110132.
Hewlett, S. A., Sherbin, L., & Sumberg, K. (2009a). Lancaster, L., & Stillman, D. (2005). When generations
How Gen Y and boomers will reshape your agenda. collide: Who they are. Why they clash. How to solve
Harvard Business Review, 8(7/8), 7176. the generational puzzle at work. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
Hewlett, S. A., Sherbin, L., & Sumberg, K. (2009b).
Let Gen Y teach you tech. Retrieved from http:// Lankau, M. J., & Scandura, T. A. (2002). An investiga-
blogs.harvardbusiness.org/hbr/hewlett/2009/06/ tion of personal learning in mentoring relation-
let_gen_y_teach_you_tech.html ships: Content, antecedents and consequences.
Academy of Management Journal, 45, 779790.
Hezlett, S. A., & Gibson, S. K. (2007). Linking mentor-
ing and social capital: Implications for career and Leh, A. S. C. (2005). Lessons learned from the service
organization development. Advances in Developing learning and reverse mentoring in faculty develop-
Human Resources, 9, 384411. ment: A case study in technology training. Journal
of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 2541.
Higgins, M. C., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptual-
izing mentoring at work: A developmental network Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. M., Klein, E. G., Levinson,
perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26, M. H., & McKee, B. (1978). Seasons of a mans life.
264288. New York, NY: Knopf.
Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Lemmon, G. (2009). Mannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. In
Bosses perceptions of family-work conflict and K. Mannheim (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowl-
womens promotability: Glass ceiling effects. Acad- edge (pp. 276322). London, England: Routledge.
emy of Management Journal, 52, 939957.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Shoorman, F. D. (1995). An
Hoover, E. (2009, October 11). The millennial muddle: integrative model of organizational trust. Academy
How stereotyping students became a thriving of Management Review, 20, 709734.
industry. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved
McKeen, C., & Bujaki, M. (2007). Gender and men-
from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Millennial-
toring: Issues, effects, and opportunities. In B. R.
Muddle-How/48772/
Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of men-
Johnson, S. A., & Romanello, M. L. (2005). Genera- toring at work: Theory, research, and practice
tional diversity teaching and learning approaches. (pp. 197222). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Nurse Educator, 30, 212216.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001).
Joshi, A., Dencker, J. C., Franz, G., & Martocchio, Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.
J. J. (2010). Unpacking generational identities in Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415444.
organizations. Academy of Management Review,
Meister, J. C., & Willyerd, K. (2010). Mentoring millen-
35, 392414.
nials. Harvard Business Review, 88(5), 6772.
Kim, D. H. (1993). The link between individual and or-
Mullen, E. J., & Noe, R. A. (1999). The mentoring infor-
ganizational learning. Sloan Management Review,
mation exchange: When do mentors seek informa-
35(1), 3750.
tion from their protgs. Journal of Organizational
Konczak, L., & Foster, J. (2009). Developing next gen- Behavior, 20, 233242.
eration leaders: High priority on high potentials. In-
Murphy, W. M. (forthcoming). From e-mentoring to
dustrialOrganizational Psychologist, 47(2), 3945.
blended mentoring: Increasing students develop-
Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. mental initiation and mentors satisfaction. Acad-
Academy of Management Journal, 26, 608625. emy of Management Learning and Education.
HRM21489.indd 571 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Murphy, W. M., & Kram, K. E. (2010). Understanding Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L., & Miller, J. S. (2000).
non-work relationships in developmental networks. Marginal mentoring: The effects of type of men-
Career Development International, 15, 637663. tor, quality of relationship, and program design on
work and career attitudes. Academy of Manage-
Murrell, A. J., Blake-Beard, S., Porter, D. M., & Perkins-
ment Journal, 43, 11771194.
Williamson, A. (2008). Interorganizational formal
mentoring: Breaking the concrete ceiling some- Ragins, B. R., & Kram, K. E. (2007). The handbook of
times requires support from the outside. Human mentoring at work: Research, theory and practice.
Resource Management, 47, 275294. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Noe, R. A. (1988). An investigation of the determinants Ragins, B. R., & McFarlin, D. B. (1990). Perceptions of
of successful assigned mentoring relationships. mentor roles in cross-gender mentoring relation-
Personnel Psychology, 41, 457479. ships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 321339.
Noe, R. A., Greenberger, D. B., & Wang, S. (2002). Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). Gender differ-
Mentoring: What we know and where we might ences in expected outcomes of mentoring rela-
go. Research in Personnel and Human Resources tionships. Academy of Management Journal, 37,
Management, 21, 129173. 957971.
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1999). Burden or
Olian, J. D., Carroll, S. J., & Giannantonio, C. M.
blessing? Expected costs and benefits of being a
(1993). Mentor reactions to protgs: An experi-
mentor. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20,
ment with managers. Journal of Vocational Behav-
493509.
ior, 43, 266278.
Ragins, B. R., & Verbos, A. K. (2007). Positive relation-
Parker, P., Hall, D. T., & Kram, K. E. (2008). Peer coach-
ships in action: Relational mentoring and mentor-
ing: A relational process for accelerating career
ing schemas in the workplace. In J. E. Dutton &
learning. Academy of Management Learning and
B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships
Education, 7, 487503.
at work: Building a theoretical and research founda-
Parise, M. R., & Forret, M. L. (2008). Formal mentoring tion (pp. 91116). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
programs: The relationship of program design and Rai, S. (2009). Young at heart. Forbes Asia, 5(10),
support to mentors perceptions of benefits and 2225.
costs. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 225240.
Reisenwitz, T. H., & Iyer, R. (2009). Differences in
Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2005). Construct Generation X and Generation Y: Implications for the
equivalence across groups: An unexplored issue in organization and marketers. Marketing Manage-
mentoring research. Educational and Psychological ment Journal, 19, 91103.
Measurement, 65, 323335.
Rollag, K., Parise, S., & Cross, R. (2005). Getting new
Piktialis, D. (2009). How reverse mentoring can make hires up to speed quickly. Sloan Management
your organization more effective. Retrieved from Review, 46(2), 3541.
http://www.encore.org/find/advice/how-reverse-
Sacks, D. (2006). Scenes from the culture clash.
mentoring.html
Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/
P-Sontag, L., Vappie, K., & Wanberg, C. R. (2007). The magazine/102/culture-clash.html
practice of mentoring: MENTTIUM Corporation. In Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility:
B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of An empirical investigation. Journal of Organiza-
mentoring at work: Theory research, and practice tional Behavior, 13, 169174.
(pp. 593616). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1994). Leader-
Raabe, B., & Beehr, T. A. (2003). Formal mentoring member exchange and supervisor career mentor-
versus supervisor and coworker relationships: ing as complementary constructs in leadership
Differences in perceptions and impact. Journal of research. Academy of Management Journal, 37,
Organizational Behavior, 24, 271293. 15881602.
Raelin, J. A. (2000). Work-based learning: The new Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007).
frontier of management development. Upper An integrative model of organizational trust: Past,
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. present, and future. Academy of Management
Review, 32, 344354.
Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions
and outcomes: A comparison of men and women Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., & Smith, B.
in formal and informal mentoring relationships. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook. New York, NY:
Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 529550. Doubleday.
HRM21489.indd 572 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Sessa, V. I., Kabacoff, R. I., Deal, J., & Brown, H. (2007). outcomes. In B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The
Generational differences in leader values and lead- handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research,
ership behaviors. PsychologistManager Journal, and practice (pp. 2150). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
10(1), 4774.
Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation Me: Why todays
Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational young Americans are more confident, assertive,
differences: Revisiting generational work values entitledand more miserable than before. New
for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational York, NY: Free Press.
Behavior, 23, 363382.
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., &
Solomon, M. (2001). Coaching the boss. Computer- Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in
world, 35(2), 42. work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increas-
Sparrowe, R. T., & Liden, R. C. (2005). Two routes to ing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal
influence: Integrating leader-member exchange of Management, 36, 11171142.
and social network perspectives. Administrative
Wanberg, C. R., Welsh, E. T., & Hezlett, S. A. (2003).
Science Quarterly, 50, 505535.
Mentoring research: A review and dynamic process
Spreitzer, G. M. (2006). Leading to grow and grow- model. Research in Personnel and Human Resources
ing to lead: Leadership development lessons from Management, 22, 39124.
positive organizational studies. Organizational
Warner, F. (2002). Inside Intels mentoring movement.
Dynamics, 35, 305315.
FastCompany, 57, 116121.
Starcevich, M. M. (2001). What is unique about reverse
mentoring, survey results. Retrieved from http:// Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993).
www.coachingandmentoring.com/reversementor- Cultural diversitys impact on interaction process
ingresults.htm and performance: Comparing homogenous and
diverse task groups. Academy of Management
Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history Journal, 36, 590602.
of Americas future, 15842069. New York, NY: Quill.
Wu, P. C., Foo, M. D., & Turban, D. B. (2008). The role of
Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., & Abrams, L.
personality in relationship closeness, developer as-
(2001). Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer
sistance, and career success. Journal of Vocational
knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Manage-
Behavior, 73, 440448.
ment Information Systems, 18, 95114.
Trunk, P. (2007). What Gen Y really wants. Time Maga- Yi, X., Riddens, B., & Morgan, C. N. (2010). Generational
zine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/ differences in China: Career implications. Career
magazine/article/0,9171,1640395,00.html Development International, 15, 601620.
Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T. W. (1994). Role of protg Zeidler, S. (2009). Looking for a job? Try LinkedIn or
personality in receipt of mentoring and career suc- Twitter. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/
cess. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 688702. article/newsOne/idUSTRE57B2EX20090812
Turban, D. B., Dougherty, T. W., & Lee, F. K. (2002). Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering
Gender, race, and perceived similarity effects in leadership and employee creativity: The influence
developmental relationships: The moderating role of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motiva-
of relationship duration. Journal of Vocational tion, and creative process engagement. Academy
Behavior, 61, 240262. of Management Journal, 53, 107128.
Turban, D. B., & Lee, F. K. (2007). The role of personality Zielinski, D. (2000). Mentoring up. Training, 37(10),
in mentoring relationships: Formation, dynamics, and 136141.
HRM21489.indd 573 16/06/12 11:55 AM

The author has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate.
HRM21489.indd 574 16/06/12 11:55 AM

March 2017 Monthly Article - Reverse Mentoring at Work

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

March 2017 Monthly Article - Reverse Mentoring at Work

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

REVERSE MENTORING AT WORK:

Reverse mentoring is an innovative way to encourage learning and facilitate

Keywords: reverse mentoring, mentoring, developmental relationships,

Introduction his article introduces reverse mentor-

HRM21489.indd 549 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 550 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 551 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 552 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 553 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Developmental Relationships functions. In addition, reverse mentoring

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 555 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 557 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Mutual Support authentic expression of positive emotions

FIGURE 1. Key Variables in the Prototypical Reverse Mentoring Relationship*

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 558 16/06/12 11:55 AM

trust as relationship antecedents is new. Im- subfunctions identified by Allen and

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 559 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 560 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 561 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Trust and Interpersonal Comfort talent management, recruiting and retention,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 562 16/06/12 11:55 AM

to the perspective of new organizational en- Recruiting and Retention

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 563 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 564 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Driving Innovation and utilizing reflective practice (Argyris,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 565 16/06/12 11:55 AM

individuals and organizations, as well as of relational mentoring (Dobrow, Chandler,

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 566 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 567 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 568 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Conclusion mentoring relationships and suggests key con-

WENDY MARCINKUS MURPHY is an assistant professor of management at Babson Col-

References between research and practice. Journal of Applied

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 569 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 570 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 571 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 572 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Human Resource Management DOI: 10.1002/hrm

HRM21489.indd 573 16/06/12 11:55 AM

Anda mungkin juga menyukai