i

.152

1
ut.‘
s. .

r-Igﬁ’h q

«q nous-"nu

 

mm

ifﬂ

 

LIBRARY

Midnvmg State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

EXPLORING THE USE OF MENTORING WITHIN STATE
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AGENCIES AND THE ISSUES
OF RETENTION, JOB SATISFACTION AND CAREER

Ph.D.

MOTIVATION

presented by

Cozetta Dionne Shannon

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

Rehabilitation Counselor
Education

degree in

 

 

 

./
7~pﬂjﬁ /

Major Professor‘s Signature\é

7/23/0?

Date

MSU is an Afﬁnnative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/08 K:IProj/Acc&Pres/ClRC/Dateoue.indd

EXPLORING THE USE OF MENTORING WITHIN STATE VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION AGENCIES AND THE ISSUES OF RETENTION, JOB
SATISFACTION AND CAREER MOTIVATION
By

Cozetta Dionne Shannon

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Rehabilitation Counselor Education

2009

 

ABSTRACT
EXPLORIN G THE USE OF MENTORING WITHIN STATE VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION AGENCIES AND THE ISSUES OF RETENTION, JOB
SATISFACTION AND CAREER MOTIVATION
By
Cozetta Dionne Shannon

The purpose Of this study was to explore the impact of mentoring on factors
related tO turnover and retention levels within state vocational rehabilitation agencies. An
examination of differences in career motivation (CM) and job satisfaction (I S) among
mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation counselors was conducted. The relationship
between functions Of mentoring and demographic characteristics was also explored. The
likelihood of participants leaving their position and impact of mentoring on this decision
was also investigated.

Rehabilitation counselors employed within the Office Of Vocational
Rehabilitation in Kentucky and Illinois Department Of Human Services, Ofﬁce of
Rehabilitation Services, were identiﬁed as potential participants. The sample included
123 rehabilitation counselors. Of these participants, 23 reported being involved in a
mentoring relationship. Empirical data was gathered utilizing several instruments
including Noe’s Mentoring Roles Instrument, Day and Allen’s Career Motivation Scale
and the Abridged Job Descriptive Index. Qualitative data was gathered regarding
participants’ perceptions of factors inﬂuencing their decision tO leave or remain
employed in their current position. Eight emergent themes were identiﬁed: (a)

Retirement; (b) Pay and Beneﬁts; (c) Enjoyable and Meaningful Work; (d) Work

 

Environment; (e) Opportunity of Advancement; (t) Job Security; (g) Family and Personal
Issues, and (g) Burnout.

Participants reported moderate to high levels Of CM and .I S. However, mentored
rehabilitation counselors reported signiﬁcantly higher resilience scores than their non-
mentored counterparts. The lowest CM scores across groups were found in relation to
career identity. Positive relationships between CM and J S and functions of mentoring
were found. Prote’gés reported signiﬁcantly different psychosocial functions of mentoring
scores relative to agency type. NO other signiﬁcant results were found between functions
Of mentoring and participant demographic characteristics.

Lastly, ﬁndings of the study suggest that rehabilitation counselors are not more
likely to participate in mentoring relationships later in their careers. Participants further
reported that they are not likely to leave their current position over the next ﬁve years.
Mentored participants had Signiﬁcantly higher mean scores regarding how involvement
in mentoring impacts this decision. The implications for state vocational rehabilitation

agencies, rehabilitation counselors and future research are discussed.

 

To My Mother and Father.
Without your support, guidance, and most Of all love, the completion of this work
would not have been possible.

To My Grandmother, Fannie Mae Shannon.
Your resilience, faith and wisdom inspired me to follow my dreams.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would not have completed this dissertation without the support and guidance Of
my committee members, Dr. Timothy Tansey, Dr. Georgia Chao, Dr. Amita Chudgar, Dr.
Chandra Donnell and Dr. John Kosciulek. Dr. Tansey, you helped me to take a vision and
shape it into a quality piece Of research. I appreciate your willingness to take time to
work closely with me throughout this entire process. I could not have asked for a better
advisor and dissertation chair. Dr. Donnell, I am indebted to you for your encouragement
and mentoring throughout both my master’s and doctoral studies. I appreciate you for
believing in me and introducing me to a world of possibilities that I never could have
imagined. You helped me to understand the meaning of and value in being patient.

Dr. Thielsen and Dr. Leahy, thank you for supporting me and having conﬁdence
in my abilities. My work in Project Excellence deﬁnitely helped to ease my use Of SPSS!
I would like to acknowledge Eniko Rak and Allison Fleming for their statistical and
editing assistance as well as the Ofﬁce of Vocational Rehabilitation in Kentucky and
Illinois Department Of Vocational Rehabilitation for their participation in my study.

Mom and Dad, I gained a greater understanding and appreciation of the values
that you have instilled in me. Your words Of wisdom were instrumental in helping me to
complete my dissertation. Angelique and Sheena, thank you for your never-ending
support and spiritual guidance. Faith, thank you for helping me learn the value in taking
time to fully evaluate situations and for assisting me with my critical thinking skills.
Jamie, your optimism and work-ethic encouraged me to keep going during difﬁcult

moments. Asante Sana! You all have helped me to grow personally and professionally.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. xi
CHAPTER I ........................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
Purpose Of the Study ................................................................................... 5
Need for the Study ...................................................................................... 6
Quantitative Questions ............................................................. 7
Qualitative Question ................................................................................... 8
Deﬁnitions of Terms ................................................................................... 8
Assumptions and Limitations ................................................................... 11
CHAPTER II ......................................................................................... 12
LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 12
MENTORING. ................................................................................................................. 13
History and Background ........................................................................... 13
Concept Of Mentoring ............................................................................... 15
Research Areas of Mentoring ................................................................... 16
Types Of Mentoring Relationships ............................................................ 19
Functions Of Mentoring ............................................................................ 24
Beneﬁts Of Mentoring .............................................................................. 26
DIFFERENTIATING MENTORIN G FROM SUPERVISION ....................................... 28
RETENTION. . . .. ............................................................................................................ .32
TURNOVER. . . . .. ............................................................................................................ .34
JOB SATISFACTION ..................................................................................................... .36
Job Satisfaction and Mentoring ............................................................... .40
CAREER MOTIVATION ................................................................................................ 41
Career Motivation and Mentoring ............................................................ 45
SUMMARY.. ................................................................................................................... 47
CHAPTER III. .................................................................................................................. 48
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 48
Quantitative Questions .............................................................................. 48
Qualitative Question ................................................................................. 49
Research Design ....................................................................................... 49
Participants ................................................................................................ 50
INSTRUMENTATION .................................................................................................... 57
Mentoring Functions ................................................................................. 57
Career Motivation ................................................................. 5 7
Job Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 58
Turnover and Mentoring ........................................................................... 59
Factors Impacting Decision to Leave or Remain ...................................... 59

vi

Questionnaires .......................................................................................... 60

DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................................... .60

DATA ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 61

Quantitative Data ..................................................................................... .61

Research Question One ............................................................................ .62

Research Question Two ........................................................................... .62

Research Question Three ......................................................................... .63

Research Question Four .......................................................... 63

Research Question Five ........................................................................... .63

Qualitative Data ........................................................................................ 64

SUMMARY......... .......................................................................................................... 64

CHAPTER IV. .................................................................................................................. 65

RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 65

Differences in Career Motivation and Job Satisfaction .................................................... 65

Career Motivation ..................................................................................... 66

Job Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 71

Functions Of Mentoring Relative to Demographic Differences ........................................ 73

Gender ....................................................................................................... 74

Race .......................................................................................................... 74

Agency .............................................................................. 75

Type ofMentoring Relationship 75

Years in Position .......................................................................... 76

Time Spent with Mentor ........................................................................... 76

Descriptive Variables and Mentoring ............................................................................... 78
Relationship Between Functions Of Mentoring and Career Motivation and Job

Satisfaction. . . .................................................................................................................... 79

Involvement in Mentoring Relationships and Intent to Leave ....................................... .83

Qualitative Data Analysis ................................................................................................. 86

CHAPTER V... ................................................................................................................ 89

DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 89

Career Motivation ..................................................................................... 89

Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................ .92

Psychosocial Functions of Mentoring ....................................................... 93

Career Functions Of Mentoring ................................................................. 94

Predictors Of Involvement in Mentoring Relationships ............................ 95

Functions of Mentoring and Career Motivation ....................................... 96

Functions of Mentoring and Job Satisfaction ........................................... 97

Turnover .................................................................................................... 98

Emergent Themes .................................................................................. .101

Limitations ............................................................................................. . 1 03

Implications ........................................................................................... . 104

Implications fOr Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies .............. 105

Implications for Rehabilitation Counselors .............................. .107

Implications for Research ........................................................... 108

vii

Conclusions ............................................................................................ .1 1 1

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ 113
Appendix A: Noe's Mentoring Role Instrument ..................................... 114
Appendix B: Day & Allen Career Motivation Scale .............................. 116
Appendix C: Abridged Job Descriptive Index ........................................ 117
Appendix D: Turnover and Mentoring Scales ........................................ 118
Appendix E: Qualitative Question .......................................................... 119
Appendix F: Demographic Questionnaire .............................................. 120
Appendix G: Survey Introduction and Informed Consent ...................... 124
REFERENCES .................................................................................... 126

viii

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Characteristics Of F orrnal and Informal Mentoring Relationships ................ 21
Table 2 - Characteristics of Mentoring and Supervisory Relationships ..................... 32
Table 3 - Demographic Characteristics of Participants ........................................ 53
Table 4 - Demographic Characteristics Of Participants ........................................ 54
Table 5 - Demographic Characteristics of Mentored Participants ............................ 55
Table 6 - Demographic Characteristics of Mentored Participants ........................... 56
Table 7 - Insight Domain: Career Motivation ................................................... 68
Table 8 - Resilience Domain: Career Motivation ............................................... 69
Table 9 - Identity Domain: Career Motivation .................................................. 70
Table 10 - Job Satisfaction Subscales: Means and Standard Deviations ..................... 73
Table 11 - Variation in Functions of Mentoring Relative to Type of Mentoring ........... 76
Table 12 - Variation in Functions of Mentoring Relative to Years in Position ............. 77

Table 13 - Variations in Functions of Mentoring Relative to Time Spent with

Mentor ................................................................................... 78
Table 14 - Distribution of Variables: Logistic Regression .................................... 80
Table 15 - Final Model for Binary Logistic Regression ....................................... 81
Table 16 - Correlation Matrix: Functions of Mentoring with CM and J S Scores .......... 82
Table 17 - Intent to Leave .......................................................................... 84
Table 18 - Importance of Mentoring .............................................................. 85
Table 19 - Correlation Matrix: Importance of Mentoring and Decision to Leave or

Remain With State Agency ........................................................... 86
Table 20 - Emergent Qualitative Themes ........................................................ 87
Table 21 - Emergent Qualitative Themes and Intent to Leave ................................ 88

ix

Table 22 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Likely tO Leave ................................... 99

Table 23 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Not Likely to Leave ............................ 100
Table 24 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Protégés .......................................... 101
Table 25 - Emergent Qualitative Themes ...................................................... 102

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Directional Patterns Of Formal and Informal Mentoring Communication Paths
......................................................................................................... 23

xi

Chapter I
Introduction

During the early part of the 20th century, the specialty of rehabilitation counseling
evolved from vocational guidance and general counseling (Cottone & Tarvydas, 2003).
Empirical research and changes within society has since shaped the perception of the
discipline by “solidifying the argument that rehabilitation counseling has evolved from a
skilled occupation into a true profession” (Leierer, Strohmer, Blackwell, Thompson, &
Donnay, 2008, p.68). Rehabilitation counselors have a vested interest in assisting
individuals who have physical, mental and emotional disabilities to maximize their
potential and independence. Through the evolution of the profession, the nature of
practice for rehabilitation counselors has also advanced. Historically, vocational
rehabilitation counselors worked primarily within state-federal and veterans
administration systems. Rehabilitation counselors, among other duties, guide and counsel
students transitioning from high school to work, adults with work-related injuries, and
veterans with disabilities looking to reintegrate back into society. In recent years, more
diverse employment settings, including substance abuse treatment centers, employee
assistance programs, and case management practices have also begun to emerge as
increasingly essential areas for rehabilitation counselor practice (Cottone & Tarvydas,
2003; Shaw, Leahy, Chan & Catalano, 2006). Regardless of the setting, vocational
rehabilitation counselors are diligently working to assist persons with disabilities in their
independent living, vocational and educational pursuits.

In comparison to recent years, there have been an increasing number of persons

with disabilities accessing services provided by state vocational rehabilitation (V R)

counseling agencies. Thus, the need for vocational rehabilitation counselors is becoming
increasingly necessary. With this increased need, researchers have asserted that the
“system and its consumers expect counselors to provide quality rehabilitation services”
(Roessler & Mullins, 1995, p. 22). Unfortunately, the ability to adequately serve
consumers of VR services may become more difﬁcult. This may be related to issues
surrounding the expected number of vacant positions within state VR agencies and the
overall need for qualiﬁed vocational rehabilitation counselors. According to FY 2001-
2002 data, Chan and Ruedel (2005) reported that there were a total of 11,110 professional
rehabilitation personnel employed with state agencies. VR counselors accounted for
9,649 of these employees. As reported by Chan (2003), nearly 3,800 rehabilitation
counselor positions and 850 supervisor positions will need to be ﬁlled over a ﬁve-year
period (FFY 2002-F FY 2007). The expected number of vacant positions represents 40%
of the counselor workforce. State agencies have attempted to address this issue, but the
issue still exists and warrants further attention and investigation. Further, rehabilitation
counselor education programs will not be able to train enough counselors to meet the
state agencies projected needs (Shaw, Leahy, Chan & Catalano, 2006). This issue creates
concern for not only the quality of care for consumers but also the training and retention
process for state vocational rehabilitation counselors. Further, “constantly competing,
recruiting, selecting, orienting, and training new employees continues to maintain or
increase the already high turnover costs; funds not addressing consumer needs” (Barrett,
Riggar, Flowers, Crimando & Bailey, 1997, p. 3). To ensure that allocated resources for
consumer needs are used for appropriate services, it is imperative that state VR agencies

not only recruit qualiﬁed employees, but also develop and implement ways to retain

existing staff and demonstrate that state agencies should continue to be the employer Of
choice.

Due to such pressures and challenges, concerns regarding retention of qualiﬁed
rehabilitation counseling professions have emerged (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). The
issue of retention has been considered “both an enigma and a well known documented
phenomenon” (Barrett, Riggar, Flowers, Crimando & Bailey, 1997, p.36). Such issues
within the State Vocational Rehabilitation System may be related to factors including: (a)
downsizing; (b) large case loads; (c) minimal recognition, and (d) retirement (Dew, Alan
& Tomlinson, 2008). Case in point, in a recent study by Dew, Diller & Peters (2005),
indicated that 46% of vacancies within Region III would occur because of the following
reasons: “retirement, termination, family needs, higher salary, death, reassignment, and
other” factor (p.26). This area warrants further exploration in the rehabilitation
counseling literature.

Concerns of VR counselors and state agency administrators will continue to exist
with the increased turnover. To assist administrators in understanding the causes of
turnover, several factors have been identiﬁed that may inﬂuence a counselor’s ability to
meet standards expected by the agency, consumers, and counselors. These factors include
managing a large caseload of consumers, counselor burnout, lack of access to resources
and dissatisfaction with job functions and Often serve as unique barriers for counselors
(Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). Such factors have been shown to dramatically impact
rehabilitation counselor retention levels (Riggar, 1985; Dew, Alan, Tomlinson, 2008).
Agencies have attempted to address these issues by enhancing the current paradigm of

employee development including supervision, multicultural training, and continuous

education (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). Such measures have been helpful, but the
task of addressing retention levels within state vocational rehabilitation agencies warrants
exploration Of other methods that may assist in this process. One promising retention
strategy for state vocational rehabilitation agencies, adapted from general education and
business, is the use of mentoring. Even though the literature is limited, researchers have
suggested that mentoring is an appropriate method for promoting professional
development of rehabilitation counselors (F iest-Price, 1994; Viranyi, Crimando, Riggar
& Schmidt, 1992). Mentoring has been regarded as an inﬂuential process for improving
the development of individuals and organizations (Whiting & de Janasz, 2004). Further, a
number of state agencies (e.g. Ofﬁce of Vocational Rehabilitation in Kentucky [OVR])
have implemented formal mentoring programs to assist with addressing issues related to
retention and to promote the development of a positive work environment. State
vocational rehabilitation counselors may also be involved in informal mentoring
relationships. Involvement in both types of mentoring relationships may facilitate the
socialization process and assists novice employees in adjusting to the workplace culture.
The mentoring process impacts factors that relate to retention of personnel
(Burke, McKen & McKenna, 1994; Wanberg, Kammeyer-Mueller & Marchese, 2006) by
speciﬁcally assisting employees in adapting to a ﬁeld by familiarizing new entrants with
the values, practices, beliefs and standards of an agency, organization or corporation
(Chung, Bemak & Talleyrand, 2007). Findings suggest that employees involved in
mentoring relationships have higher levels Of career motivation and job satisfaction.
These distinct factors (e.g. career motivation and job satisfaction) have been linked to

reasons why employees decide to leave or remain employed with an organization

(Faubion, Palmer, Andrew, 2001; Wright and Terrian, 1987). Therefore, exploring the
relationship between mentoring and levels of job satisfaction and career motivation is a
way of evaluating potential methods of addressing issues related to retention within the
state vocational rehabilitation agencies.

Literature exploring the impact Of mentoring on levels of career motivation and
job satisfaction has grown increasingly popular (Allen & Eby; 2007; Chao, 1992;
Fagenson, 1989). Even with research linking increased job satisfaction and career
motivation to involvement in mentoring relationships, there is a signiﬁcant absence of
research regarding the beneﬁts of mentoring on retention levels in rehabilitation
counseling literature. Several studies have focused on the career motivation and job
satisfaction of rehabilitation counselors, but the inclusion of mentoring is relatively
nonexistent. Mentoring has been a proven method of workplace support that is related to
and improves levels of job satisfaction and career motivation. With the percentage of
persons with disabilities accessing vocational rehabilitation services increasing annually,
it is imperative that the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling retain qualiﬁed and competent
rehabilitation counselors and minimize turnover (Andrew, Faubian, & Palmer, 2002).
Purpose of the Study

Research exploring the underlying processes and impact of successful mentorship
is lacking within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. The purpose of this study is to
contribute to the understanding Of the impact that mentoring has on several factors (e. g.
career motivation and job satisfaction) related to turnover among rehabilitation

counselors employed within state vocational rehabilitation agencies.

Among other areas, this study examines whether there were differences in levels
of career motivation and job satisfaction among state mentored and non-mentored
vocational rehabilitation counselors. This study also examined the differences in
mentoring functions (e. g. psychosocial and career) received by VR counselors involved
in formal or informal mentoring relationships relative to speciﬁc demographic
characteristics. The relationships between functions of mentoring received by VR
counselors and levels Of career motivation and job satisfaction were also explored. Lastly,
this study examined how involvement in a mentoring relationship impacts VR
counselors’ decision to leave or remain employed within state vocational rehabilitation
agencies. Factors other than mentoring that impact counselor decisions to leave or remain
were also identiﬁed. The objective of the present study is to begin to bridge the gap in
existing literature by examining career motivation and job satisfaction as mediators of the
relationship between mentoring and retention among state VR counselors.

Need for the Study

In an effort to address issues related to retention, exploration of methods that may
improve rehabilitation counselor career motivation and job satisfaction are necessary.
Researchers have identiﬁed potential issues for the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling
(Andrew, Faubian, & Palmer, 2002). The expected shortage Of vocational rehabilitation
counselors within state agencies over the next ﬁve years is a major issue and needs to be
investigated by researchers. To address this issue, studies related to methods of keeping
current VR counselors in the ﬁeld are necessary (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). There
is a strong relationship between socialization and effective commitment to organizations

(Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008; Mitus, 2006). Therefore, exploring mentoring

relationships and the impact on the career motivation and job satisfaction Of current
vocational rehabilitation counselors will aid in the process of discovering what aspects
can assist in the process of retention and keeping rehabilitation counselors employed
within state agencies. The research questions to be addressed in the proposed study will
include:
Quantitative Questions
1. Among mentored (formal or informal) and non-mentored state vocational
rehabilitation counselors, what differences exist in their levels of career
motivation and job satisfaction?
2. Are there differences in the functions Of mentoring received by vocational
rehabilitation counselors relative to speciﬁc demographic characteristics (i.e. race,
gender, certiﬁcation level, years in position, salary, caseload, and amount of time
spent with mentor).
3. Are speciﬁc demographic characteristics (i. e. race, gender, years in position,
caseload and agency) of state vocational rehabilitation counselors associated with
the provision of mentoring?
4. What is the relationship between functions Of mentoring received by vocational
rehabilitation counselors and levels of career motivation and job satisfaction?
5. How does involvement in mentoring relationships impact vocational
rehabilitation counselors’ decisions to leave or remain employed within state

vocational rehabilitation agencies?

Qualitative Question

6. What factors other than mentoring inﬂuence vocational rehabilitation counselor

decisions to leave or remain employed within state vocational rehabilitation

agencies?

There is a paucity of research literature available on the impact Of mentoring
relationships on counselors working within the state vocational rehabilitation system.
Minimal literature has focused on the signiﬁcance of mentoring for rehabilitation
counselors (Fiest-Price, 1994; Viranyi et al., 1992). This study aims to increase attention
to the retention needs that exist within state agencies and to highlight the value of
mentoring relationships in addressing the retention rates of state VR counselors.

Increasing understanding Of the impact Of mentoring on levels of career
motivation and job satisfaction of rehabilitation counselors is one innovative method of
addressing retention issues within state VR agencies. To do this, there must be a clear
deﬁnition of mentoring and other identifying variables that may be inﬂuenced by such
relationships.

Deﬁnitions of Terms
The following terms are offered for clariﬁcation:

Retention. The number of employees that remain employed with a business or
organization over a period of time. Employers oﬁen use systematic efforts to create and
foster a work environment that encourage current employees to remain employed with
their current organization.

Turnover. The voluntary, involuntary or other means Of separation of an

employee from a work establishment (Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis &

Hurley, 2008; Bureau of Labor Statistics). This separation includes variables that are and
are not within the control of the employee (i.e. death, layoff).

Mentoring. The term mentoring has been deﬁned in numerous ways. For the
purpose of this study, mentoring is deﬁned as “a nurturing process in which a more
skilled or more experienced person, serving as a role model, teaches, sponsors,
encourages, counsels, and befriends a less skilled or less experienced person for the
purpose of promoting the latter’s professional and/or personal development” (Anderson
and Shannon, 1988, p.40). Through this developmental process, opportunities are
provided by a mentor to a protégé which, in turn, shapes the protégé’s career experiences
(Kram, 1985).

Mentor. A mentor is deﬁned as “. . .a senior, experienced employee who serves as
a role model, provides support, direction, and feedback to the younger employee
regarding career plans and interpersonal development and increases visibility of the
protégé to decision-makers in the organization who may inﬂuence career opportunities”
(Noe, 1988, p. 458).

Prote'gé. A less experienced employee who is trained and guided by a more
experienced employee. Protégés receive diverse types of psychosocial and career-related
support and assistance in advancing his/her career (Healy, 1997).

Mentoring Relationship. Types of mentoring relationships differ in several
fundamental ways. They differ in terms of structure, initiation, length and milestones
(Ragins, 2002; Ragins & Cotton, 1999). Formal mentoring relationships are developed,
structured and endorsed by the employer and/or organization. Informal mentoring

relationships are not managed or structured by organizations.

Mentor Functions. Mentors can provide two broad categories Of mentoring
functions: career functions and psychosocial functions (Day & Allen, 2004; Kram, 1985).
These categories are supported by studies exploring the components of mentoring (Noe,
1988 & Day & Allen, 2004). Career functions of mentoring relationships provide
feedback and guidance that assist the prote’gé in career advancement (Noe, 1988). Career
functions include “sponsorship, coaching, exposure/visibility, protection and the
provision of challenging assignments” (Day & Allen, 2004, p. 73). Psychosocial
functions provide feedback and guidance related to interpersonal aspects of the
relationship (Day & Allen, 2004; Noe, 1988). Such ﬁinctions of mentoring relationships
include role modeling, friendship, counseling and acceptance (Day & Allen, 2004; Kram,
1985)

Job Satisfaction. Job satisfaction is often considered a bidimensional element
comprised of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, &
Capwell, 1957; Andrew, Faubion, & Palmer, 2002). For the purpose of this study, job
satisfaction is deﬁned as the feelings a worker has about his or her job or job experiences
in relation to previous experiences, current expectations, or available alternatives
(Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis & Hurley, 2008).

Career Motivation. Career motivation is multidimensional construct comprised of
three critical components: career resilience (CR), career insight (CI), and career identity
(CID) (Day & Allen, 2004; London, 1983). Career resilience is having the skill to adapt
to changing circumstances. It includes having characteristics such a positive belief in

oneself and risk taking. Career insight is being able to develop clear and concrete career

10

goals while being realistic about the direction Of one’s career, strengths, and weaknesses.
Career identity is how employees deﬁne themselves by the work that they do.
Assumptions and Limitations

This research study is the ﬁrst to examine the relationship between mentoring
relationships and factors (i.e. career motivation and job satisfaction) related to retention
levels within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. Only limited research has focused on
whether mentorship and its impact across these variables can possibly impact retention
levels. It is assumed that the survey instruments are able to capture perspectives of the
mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation counselors involved in the study. The
instruments were designed to be standardized methods of addressing functions of
mentoring, career motivation and job satisfaction of workers. Questions regarding intent
to leave, impact of mentoring and reasons for leaving or remaining in current position
have not been validated by previous studies. However, the development of these speciﬁc
questions was completed using relevant research literature and valid survey design

techniques. Further limitations of the study are presented in Chapter 5.

11

Chapter 11
Literature Review

Throughout, comprehensive information regarding mentoring will be provided.
More speciﬁcally, the differences and similarities Of mentoring and supervision will be
discussed as well as the most common types and functions of mentoring relationships.
Data will also be provided on the beneﬁts Of the various functions and types of
mentoring. Background information on career motivation and job satisfaction as it relates
to the mentoring process, retention levels and turnover within the workplace will also be
provided throughout this chapter. Along with detailed information on general retention
issues within the American workforce, literature on the current issues within state
vocational rehabilitation agencies will be discussed. This in—depth literature review will
support the need for and purpose of the study.

The inclusion of mentoring in this study is due to the empirical evidence that
supports how mentoring can be a tool for improving career motivation and job
satisfaction among employees. Despite apparent issues with retention levels and turnover
in the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling, minimal literature has explored the relationship
between mentoring and retention levels as related to counselor levels of career motivation
and job satisfaction. Mentors role model behaviors and provide valuable information that
highlights most effective organizational practices and behaviors. The mentoring process
can assist in increasing levels of career motivation and job satisfaction needed to help

protége's progress in their careers (Kram, 1985; Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz & Lima, 2004).

12

Mentoring
History and Background

Over the last ten years, mentoring has become more widely recognized as an
effective tool for increasing retention within the workplace. However, the question
remains: What is this phenomenon called mentoring? It is not a new trend and can be
traced back to ancient Greek mythology (Chao, 1997; Scandura & Pellegrini, 2007). Over
two thousand years ago, the concept Of mentoring was mentioned by Homer in The Iliad.
As the adventurer Odysseus prepared to depart for the siege Of Troy, he assigned a
guardian, Mentor, to watch over his household. Over the next ten years, Mentor acted as
a faithful and dependable advisor, friend, teacher, and surrogate father to Telemachus,
son of Odysseus. This narrative is one of the ﬁrst attempts to facilitate discussion on the
concept of mentoring. Even today, individuals can identify a person who had a
momentous impact on their learning and development. Such inﬂuences come “in many
guises: teachers, bosses, coworkers, and friends” (Darwin, 2000, p. 197). For this reason,
mentoring has become a major preoccupation of popular culture and educational
discourse. Mentoring can take place in a variety of contexts as a driving force for
transmitting knowledge, deﬁning culture, supporting talent, and securing future ’
leadership (Darwin).

With such a history, researchers have taken a vested interest in mentor-protege
relationships over the years, “mostly in corporate and academic settings and spanning a
diverse set of research questions” (Paglis, Green & Bauer, 2006, p.451). This interest was
inspired by the popularity Of books and articles (e. g. Seasons of a Man’s Life and

Everyone Who Makes It Has a Mentor) published in the late 19703. The modern concept

13

Of mentoring matured out of social learning theory. Social learning theory predicts the
changes associated with the vicarious learning and development that transpires while a
protégé is being guided and trained by a more senior or authoritative person. It emerges
from two conventional relationships: youth/adult role model and apprentice/master. Both
types of relationships involve a distinct level of learning and occupational development.
Mentors may be directly involved “. . .as a guide, a tutor or coach, and a conﬁdant”
(Bolton, 1980, p.198). Further, mentoring interactions may become personal and suggest
a type Of support not Often seen in a conventional apprenticeship relationship.
Researchers suggest that, in today’s employment settings, the need for mentoring
is greater than ever (Dougherty, Turban & Haggard, 2007). Organizations understand and
appreciate the importance of technology in daily operations. People, however, continue to
be the most important component of many organizations including the State Vocational
Rehabilitation system. Rehabilitation counselors are in need of consistent professional
and personal skill development for mastering the complex issues and changes of the work
environment (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). The overall complexity of “today’s
organizations, coupled with an increased emphasis on cost containment, makes mentoring
an attractive, low-cost strategy for developing and keeping a skilled workforce” (Murray,
2001, p. 11). Organizations are also under a tremendous amount of strain from both
external and internal entities “to maintain a competitive edge by increasing efficiency,
reducing costs, and improving performance” (p.21). An ongoing point of interest is that
of determining the beneﬁts of mentoring and whether mentoring can be an effective tool

in increasing retention levels among state vocational rehabilitation counselors. Before

14

addressing this pertinent issue, understanding mentoring and the types and functions Of
the relationship are imperative.
Concept of Mentoring

Mentoring involves a plethora Of unique possibilities and experiences that impact
the fundamental aspects Of an organization and its impact- both internally and externally.
Deﬁning mentoring, however, has presented a challenge within the research literature
because Of a “lack of any one comprehensive, yet functional, deﬁnition” (Bogat &
Redner, 1985, p.851). In addition, mentoring is a diverse process that is ever-changing
and the deﬁnition of mentoring has taken on various forms and contexts over the years.
Mentoring can be considered the “nurturing process in which a more skilled or more
experienced person, serving as a role model, teaches, sponsors, encourages, counsels, and
beﬁiends a less skilled or less experienced person for the purpose of promoting the
latter’s professional and/or personal development” (Anderson and Shannon, 1988, p.40).
Comparable deﬁnitions of mentoring have been used in other prominent mentoring
research literature (6. g. Chao, 1997; Ragins & Cotton, 1991).

According to Noe (1988), “ The mentor is usually a senior, experienced employee
who serves as a role model, provides support, direction, and feedback to the younger
employee regarding career plans and interpersonal development and increases visibility
of the protégé to decisions-makers in the organization who may inﬂuence career
opportunities” (p.458). Mentors have often been theorized as those persons who rely on a
deep knowledge base to educate and guide others (Swap, Leonard, Shield, and Abrams,
2001). These individuals are committed to proving support in an attempt to help remove

barriers that may exist within an organization (Hunt & Micheal 1983; Kram, 1985).

15

Allen, Poteet, Russell, and Dobbins (1997) deﬁne mentors as “. . . persons usually
considered as more experienced, who support, train, ‘teach the ropes to’ or sponsor others
as they pursue their career goals. Although [the] boss, manager, and/or supervisor can be
a mentor, usually a mentor does not have to involve a day-to-day formal supervisory
relationship” (p.9). An individual whose welfare, training or career is promoted by an
inﬂuential person is a prote’gé (Healy, 1997). The protégé is Often seen as an achiever or
one that is being groomed for advancement in the workplace by being provided speciﬁc
Opportunities and tools to excel beyond the limits Of his or her position.

There is a distinct connection that exists between the mentor and prote'gé.
Working together to complete speciﬁc goals is a major premise of the mentoring process.
During this complex process Of educating and guiding protégés, mentors assist in the
personal and professional growth Of the protégé. More speciﬁcally, researchers have
found that mentors can assist with the transition process and skill development of
employees within the world of work by simultaneously assisting in career growth and the
encouragement of development and involvement outside the organization.
Communication and feedback are central components of the process that assist the
protége' and mentor in reaching set goals and developing meaningful relationships. The
overall purpose of the relationship and how it develops are central components of the
mentoring process.

Research Areas of Mentoring

Mentoring can occur at various life stages. Research on the concept of mentoring

occurs in three major areas: youth mentoring, academic mentoring and workplace

mentoring (Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng & DuBois, 2008). Kammeyer-Mueller and Judge

16

(2008) conducted a review Of mentoring research in the PsycIN F 0 database (1887-2007)
and identiﬁed approximately 3,175 abstracts across these areas that referenced the terms
“mentor”, “mentoring” or “mentorship”. The focus of these studies varied and included,
among others, research studies that focused on differences between protége’s and non-
protégés’ career-related outcomes and perceived beneﬁts of mentoring relationships for
both the mentor and protégé. Even though the scale is much smaller, research on
workplace mentoring is as diverse as the general mentoring research literature. According
to Scandura and Pellegrini (2007), the vast majority of research on workplace mentoring
has been published in the last 25 years. This increase in publications was after the works
of Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, and McKee (1978) and Kram (1985). These
seminal pieces of research were groundbreaking and set the tone for research that
suggests that mentoring is an important factor in successful career development (Kram,
1985)

As highlighted, a signiﬁcant amount of research has focused on the impact of
mentoring on careers (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz & Lima, 2004). Organizational
development and beneﬁts have also been an instrumental line of research within the
mentoring literature. Along with theories of mentoring, research on the concept has been
both relevant and instrumental in proving results that identify “practical ﬁndings relevant
to individual and social needs” (Bozeman & Feeney, 2007). Researchers have great
enthusiasm for investigating mentoring because this developmental process often results
in positive and meaningful outcomes for the prote'ge’ (Paglis, Green & Bauer, 2006). This
enthusiasm and implementation Of research has not been in vain because an extensive

amount of research has found relationships between mentoring and positive protégé

l7

outcomes. Research studies have taken place in various contexts. A substantial number Of
studies, however, have taken place in business contexts.

As mentioned, research on mentoring in the workplace has focused primarily on
career outcomes for prote'gés. Some Of this research has consisted of cross-sectional ﬁeld
studies. Scandura and Pellegrini (2007) suggests that mentoring research must go
“beyond Showing association with career outcomes”and include “. . .more qualitative
ﬁeld studies in order to have a more holistic and an in-depth understanding of mentoring
relations” (p. 83). Other research studies have included ﬁeld experiments. For example,
Seibert (1999) found that after one year Of being involved in a formal mentoring
program, participants reported higher levels of job satisfaction than those not involved in
mentoring relationships.

It is difﬁcult to identify when mentoring research began. However, literature
would support that Krarn’s dissertation and subsequent work provided the foundation for
the beginning of comprehensive mentoring research. Mentoring has also been studied
from various research directions (Chao, 1997). These directions include exploring the
phases of mentorship (Kram, 1983; Noe, 1988), outcomes of mentorship (Allen & Eby,
2007; Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Scandura, 1992) and functions served by the mentor
(Chao, Walz & Gardner, 1992; Noe, 1988).

Phases Of mentoring are important because of the developmental process that
occurs throughout each of the phases. Krarn (1983, 1985) was the ﬁrst to propose and
deﬁne the four phases of mentoring: Initiation, Cultivation, Separation, and Redeﬁnition.
The Initiation phase usually occurs during the ﬁrst six to twelve months. During this time

the mentorship forms. According to Chao (1997), “through initial interactions that

18

involve junior and senior organizational members, a prospective protégé begins to respect
the competence of a potential mentor...” (p. 16). Further, the potential mentor begins to
notice the protége’ and believes that he or she deserves guidance and coaching. As the
relationship becomes more powerful and strengthens, it transpires into the Cultivation
phase. Depending on the nature of the relationship, this time period can last from two to
ﬁve years. The protégé and mentor “learn more about each other’s capabilities and
optimize the beneﬁts Of participating in mentorship” (Chao,1997, 1997, p.16). Mentoring
functions (i.e. psychosocial and career) are maximized during this phase. The Separation
phase is characterized by the breaking apart Of the relationship (for positive or negative
reasons). Depending on the nature of the relationship, this phase can generally last from
six to twenty-four months. This process is both a physical and psychological separation
for the protégé and mentor. Further, it can evoke a number of emotions, including
anxiety, deﬁance, or stress (Chao, 1997). The Redeﬁnition phase terminates the
mentoring relationship. The mentor-protege relationship becomes more of a “peer like
friendship” (p. 16). This period has no speciﬁed length. It has been suggested that career
functions usually emerge ﬁrst in the development of the mentoring relationship (Kram,
1985). As the protégé and mentor progress through the phases, psychosocial support
becomes more essential and valuable to the protégés (Chao, Walz, Gardner, 1992).
Types of Mentoring Relationships

Chao, Walz, and Gardner (1992) highlighted that traditional forms Of mentoring
include formal and informal types with the majority of individuals involved in informal
mentoring relationships (Clutterbuck, 2004; Noe, 1988; Phillips-Jones, 1983). Informal

relationships are not managed or structured by organizations and often develop as a result

19

of common interests, respect and admiration that usually transform into the sharing of
more interpersonal information as well as career-related issues (Noe, 1988). In
comparison to informal mentoring, formal mentoring relationships are developed,
structured and endorsed by the organization. According to Chao, Walz, and Gardner
(1992), formal mentoring programs may include speciﬁc requirements that are often
decided upon by an organization or committee that develops and implements the
mentoring program. These programs are Often analogous to concepts or principles Of
blind dates or arranged marriages.

To highlight the differences and Similarities of the two types of mentoring,
examples of characteristics Of design, allocation, selection, monitoring, communication,
connection and commitment have been included from the research literature (Table 1).

TO highlight that not all mentoring relationships are the same, further analysis of
differences and similarities that exist within relationships is imperative. According to
Ragins and Cotton (1999) there are two major areas of difference between formal and
informal mentoring relationships: career guidance and psychosocial support. Informal
mentoring relationships are more likely to provide a higher level of coaching, counseling,
social interaction, role modeling and friendship for the protége’. Further, prote’ge’s are
more likely to have visibility in the organizations if involved in an informal mentoring
relationship. Formal mentoring relationships often last less than a year. In comparison,
informal mentoring relationships may last for many years. Therefore, the mentor and
protége’ have more time to develop a much more effective and beneﬁcial mentoring
relationship (Ragins & Cotton, 1999). Even though formal mentoring programs last for a

designated amount of time, some may continue after the end of the program (Noe, 1988).

20

Table 1

Characteristics of Formal and Informal Mentoring Relationships

 

Characteristic

Formal Mentoring

Informal Mentoring

 

Design Structure
Assigning Of protége’ to the
mentor

Selection process

Monitoring procedures

Communication process

Status Of each person in the

relationship

Mentor connection with
protége’

Pre-determined length of
time in the relationship

Allocated by the
organization

Little or no involvement of
employee in the selection of
mentor to protége’

Monitored in terms of
expectations and goals
attainment

One-way communication

from mentor to protégé

Inequality Of status

Sometimes lack of
connection occurs

Often relationships last for
an extended period of time

Usually formed
spontaneously

Voluntary, Often based on
mutual professional
identity and respect

No formal monitoring

Communication takes
place in an informal
manner

Still hierarchical status but

communication less
formal

More personal connection
of protégé to mentor
through coaching,
counseling, and role
modeling strategies

 

This suggests that the interpersonal beneﬁts in addition to job-related information

can transpire from the formal mentoring experience. Whether formal or informal, the

same general principles apply to the relationship regardless of the type Of mentoring

21

received by protégés (Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002). Both the protégé and the mentor
have a shared responsibility to manage the relationship effectively.

All mentoring relationships are not created equal. The quality of mentoring
relationships and their effectiveness fall on a continuum that may vary across formal and
informal mentoring relationships. Ragins, Cotton and Miller (2000) found that “the
quality of the relationship has a greater impact on prote’gé work and career attitudes than
the presence of a mentor, the type Of relationship, or the design of the mentoring
program” (Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002, p. 45). Therefore, it can be that the type Of
relationship is important but the nature or quality of the relationship can be critical to an
employee’s experience within an organization.

Even though the popularity of formal mentoring programs has skyrocketed, there
continues a debate on the value, use and overall effectiveness of formal mentoring
relationships (Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002). A signiﬁcant number of formal mentoring
programs are developed and implemented to replicate the overall beneﬁts of informal
mentoring relationships (Burke & McKeen, 1989; Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002). As
mentioned, the beneﬁts Of informal mentoring programs are lucid: researchers have
concluded that employees with informal mentors tend to have higher levels of upward
mobility and advance at a faster pace than their non-mentored counterparts (Clutterbuck
& Ragins, 2002; Ragins & Cotton, 1999). More speciﬁcally, among diverse employees
(i.e. women and persons of color) informal mentorship has been viewed as a necessary
tool for advancement in the workplace. For example, in a national study, approximately
91% of the 461 top ranking female executives surveyed had one or more informal

mentoring relationships during their careers; participants highlighted mentoring as an

22

important factor in their ability to break through the glass ceiling (Ragins, Townsend &
Mattis, 1998).

The nature of the mentoring relationship stems from the communication styles,
needs, and personality of the parties involved. AS shown in Figure 1, hierarchies still
exist in informal mentoring relationships. Nevertheless, as the name indicates, it is less

formal thus providing direction, support, and insight (Debolt, 1992).

 

Formal Mentoring Communication Path

Mentor

 

Protégé

Hierarchy of status exists and communication is
formal

Informal Mentoring Communication Path

Mentor

 

Protégé

Hierarchy of status exists but the communication
is less formal

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Directional Patterns of Formal and Informal Mentoring Communication Paths

As discussed, formal and informal mentoring programs are unique in nature.
Among other areas, similarities and differences exist in the structure, purpose and
duration of the relationships (Ragins, Cotton & Miller, 2000). Informal mentoring usually
occurs spontaneously while formal relationships are structured by organizations. The

amount of studies focusing on formal mentoring has increased. Empirical studies on

23

informal mentoring, however, are more prevalent within the research literature (Ragins,
Cotton & Miller).
Functions of Mentoring

Mentoring relationships have been shown to provide two distinct functions for the
prote’gé: career functions and psychosocial functions. These functions were initially
deﬁned by Kram (1985) and have been extensively explored by and supported by
researchers (Allen & Eby, 2007; Chao, Walz & Gardner, 1992; Ragins & Cotton, 1997;
Scandura, 1998). Further, these two functions have been the subject of subsequent
measurement and validation work (Noe, 1988). Studies exploring the dimensionality of
mentoring provide support for the existence of career and psychosocial functions.

Career functions are directly related to assisting the prote’gé with career
advancement. These functions include providing a protégé with opportunities for
increased exposure and visibility within an organization, sponsorship, coaching and
challenging assignments (Chao, 1997). Psychosocial functions, however, focus more on
the personal aspects of the protége’ that inﬂuence the protégé’s self image and
competence. Mentors providing psychosocial functions usually have an emotional bond
with the protégé and provide role modeling, counseling, friendship and conﬁrmation.
According to Paglis, Green and Bauer (2006), psychosocial functions “contribute to the
protégé’s sense of competence, conﬁdence, and effectiveness in his or her role” (p.457).
Several researchers have since explored these two distinct functions and have found other
factors to describe mentoring functions (e. g. role modeling). Career and psychosocial
functions, however, continue to be the two most widely studied functions of mentoring

relationships.

24

Although different in nature, both functions can be beneﬁcial to protégés. “Kram
(1985) suggests that the greater the number of functions provided by the mentor, the
more beneﬁcial the relationship will be to the protégé” (Noe, 1988, p. 459). In support of
this, Chao (1997) highlighted three seminal research studies that examined relationships
between mentoring ﬁmctions and outcomes. First, Scandura (1992) examined the
relationship between functions of mentoring and career mobility. Findings suggest that
among participants, vocational (career) and social support (psychosocial) functions were
positively related to promotions and salary. Secondly, the relationship between Kram’s
mentoring functions and career outcomes was examined. Among the engineers and
managers that participated in the study, the researchers found “a signiﬁcant canonical
correlation between the two functions and job/career satisfaction, socialization, and
salary” (Chao, 1997, p.17). Furthermore, a strong relationship was found between career-
related functions and outcomes of intrinsic job satisfaction. Lastly, in a study on British
employees during their sixth month of employment, researchers measured the two
mentoring functions (Orpen, 1995). Career functions and the outcome measures (i.e.
promotion and salary growth) were signiﬁcantly correlated. However, the correlations
between personal (psychosocial) mentoring functions and outcomes were not signiﬁcant.

As stated, career functions (e. g. coaching, exposure, visibility, protection,
challenging assignments) are geared more toward an organization and the individual’s
career. Psychosocial functions are focused more on the personal aspects such as the
emotional bond between a mentor and prote’gé. Research ﬁndings support signiﬁcant
relationships between functions of mentoring and employee outcomes. Subsequently,

organizational rewards for protégés who receive career-related mentoring functions tend

25

to be higher. These rewards can be interpreted as beneﬁts of mentoring. Chao (1997)
reported that “psychosocial and career-related functions can be viewed as ﬁrst-level
outcomes of mentorships” (p. 18). It was suggested that these two functions of mentoring
can inﬂuence employees to experience other beneﬁcial organizational outcomes.
Conﬁdence, effectiveness and competence are Often enhanced by participation in
mentoring relationships that function to meet the career and psychosocial needs of the
protégés.

Beneﬁts of Mentoring

Participation in mentoring relationships is a unique experience. As discussed,
there has been extensive research regarding the functions provided by mentors and
variations in the purpose and extent of both informal and formal mentoring programs
within organizations. Mentoring relationships are powerful and can be beneﬁcial for the
mentors and protége’s as well as organizations. TO reap the beneﬁts of being involved in
mentoring relationships, it is essential that participants devote time, provide experience
and learn to trust. The incentive for infusing these factors in the relationship is the
possibility for a lasting bond between the parties involved and a beneﬁcial experience for
the protégé and mentor.

The initial motivation for investigating the mentoring process within vocational
settings surfaced because of the popular belief that support and nurture are related to
positive employee outcomes. These potential beneﬁts can be classiﬁed into two broad
categories: objective career outcomes (e. g. compensation and promotion) and subjective
outcomes (e. g. career success, job satisfaction and career motivation). Researchers have

found positive relationships between mentoring and promotion (Fegenson, 1989; Lyness

26

& Thompson, 2000), job satisfaction (Baugh, Lankau & Scandura, 1996), and overall
commitment to an organization (Scandura, 1997). Further, involvement in mentoring
relationships can included beneﬁts such as increased promotions for employees, higher
salaries, greater inﬂuence, increased opportunities and increased satisfaction (Allen et al.
2004; Chao, Walz, & Gardner, 1992; Scandura, 1992). With the potential beneﬁts of
mentoring relationships for protégés, organizations often encourage employers to seek
out a mentor. According to Douglas and McCauley (1999) there has also been an increase
in organizational advising of individuals to engage in mentoring relationships between
organizational members (i.e. employers at the same company).

In a study conducted in the late 19705, approximately 1,200 prominent men and
women executives were surveyed to determine factors contributing to their success at an
international management consulting ﬁrm (Roche, 1979). Of those surveyed, two-thirds
reported having had a mentor. Researchers found that “executives who have had a mentor
earned more money at a younger age, ...are happier with their progress, and derive
greater pleasure from their work” (p.15). This trend of success among prote’gés,
Speciﬁcally women employees, has also been found in related research (Burke, McKeen
& McKenna, 1994; Evans & Cokley, 2008).

Organizations can also beneﬁt from employee involvement in mentoring
relationships. Research suggests that mentoring can assist in the socialization and
acculturation Of employees (Hunt & Michael, 1983; Kram, 1983). For example,
productivity and increased teamwork are Often boosted by mentor-protege
relationships (Murray, 2001). Mentoring, whether formal or informal, has the

potential of improving business knowledge and work place relationships. Protégés

27

who are highly committed to their organization and coworkers are also less likely
to leave their current job. Therefore, one of the greatest beneﬁts of mentoring is
its possible impact on reducing employee turnover. The growth and development
that occurs within formal and informal relationships can provide organizations
with leadership talent; this leadership comes both from the mentor and the
protégé. Improvement within the organization occurs at various levels, thus
making the organizational culture better and stronger. For example, the Ofﬁce Of
Vocational Rehabilitation (OVR) in Kentucky has a formal mentoring program,
and feedback from participants suggests that the program has helped to increase
leadership succession and counselor knowledge. This leadership development and
increased knowledge can aid in creating a positive working relationship between
the counselor and consumer, thus increasing the opportunities for increased
customer satisfaction and successful employment outcomes. This underscores that
employees as well as the organization and consumers can beneﬁt from mentoring
in state vocational rehabilitation agencies. Done correctly, mentoring can be an
effective, motivating tool for staff members and the organization as a whole.
Involvement in an effective mentoring relationship creates the Opportunity for
lessons to be learned. Ultimately, when initiated appropriately, all participants
walk away from the experience with a different level of understanding and insight
than when the relationship began.
Differentiating Mentoring from Supervision
According to Hebert and Trusty (2006), clinical supervision within the ﬁeld Of

rehabilitation is a critical undertaking “designed to assess, intervene, and improve

28

professional competence of counselors” (p. 66). Furthermore, clinical supervision assists
in developing more competent rehabilitation counselors to better serve consumers in
achieving successful rehabilitation outcomes. As highlighted by Herbet (2004) and
Stebnicki (1998), the focus of supervision is to enhance the critical thinking skills,
psychosocial involvement, and case conceptualization as related to disability issues. In
relation to other ﬁelds, clinical supervision within rehabilitation counseling is distinctly
different. For example, supervisors within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling may
monitor interactions between the counselor and employers to better offer ideas for
successful partnerships as well as provide feedback on how to address the service needs
of consumers.

Effective clinical supervision is important because it assists in the development of
competent and skilled rehabilitation counselors. It also has an impact on the turnover rate,
work dissatisfaction, and counselor stress and self-doubt. With the potential for positive
and negative factors, Holloway (1997) stressed that supervision is also an “inﬂuential
component of counselor skill development” (Bernard & Goodyear, 1998, p.159).

In comparison to supervision, mentoring is “associated with recycling of power
within workplace relationships” (Darwin, 2000, p.203). Protége’s often prefer powerful
individuals within the organization to serve as mentors (Darwin, 2000). Further, mentors
Often hold power until the prote'gé has developed the skills to be more independent.
During this period of growth and one’s strive toward independence, mentors provide a
glimpse and modeling of what it means to have power; this removes some of the mystery
for prote'gés (Darwin, 2000). This recycling of power is founded on the theory that

mentoring is a “power-dependent, hierarchical activity, which initiates the protégé and

29

renews the mentor” (p. 203). In supervision, however, there may never be a shift or
consideration Of a need for a shift in this dynamic of power.

Mentoring of a subordinate can be beneﬁcial for all stakeholders. Due to the
dynamics of the relationships and potential for Signiﬁcant career impact, it is
understandable that conﬂict exists within the mentoring paradigm. More Speciﬁcally,
protégés may be operating from a frame of reference where they expect a certain level of
loyalty. This is often above and beyond what might exist if the relationship was
predicated solely on positional power. Positional power can create a disconnect when it is
used to direct actions. In some cases, the supervisor’s responsibility is to assess the job
performance of supervisees and not manage the individual’s career. A mentor’s
relationship with a protégé, of course, is not at all involved with performance assessment.
Further, Allen, Poteet, Russell, and Dobbins (1997) suggests that mentors are usually
categorized as individuals who are “. . .more experienced, who support, train, ‘teach the
ropes to’ or sponsor others as they pursue their career goals. Although [the] boss,
manager, and/or supervisor can be a mentor, a mentor does not have to involve a day-to-
day formal supervisory relationship” (p9).

Despite these differences, mentoring and supervision are Often used
interchangeably. These relationships are far from being exclusive of one another and, in
many aspects, can be complementary (Johnson, 2007). Further, the differences between
mentoring and supervision can be unclear and confusing to employees and organizations.
Mentoring relationships Often expand outside the place of employment whereas
supervision is often a relationship that occurs during normal work hours (Mill, Francis,

Bonner, 2005). Mentoring provides a “concerted emphasis on support, encouragement,

30

advocacy and connection” (p.260). According to Bernard and Goodyear (2004),
supervision usually includes a speciﬁc mandate for evaluation and gatekeeping.
Supervision relationships include varied roles such as expert, coach, role model and
evaluator. In addition, supervisory relationships always include a component that focuses
speciﬁcally on the quality Of care being provided to the consumer something that may be
missing from mentoring relationships. Both mentoring and supervision are based on
developing a strong sense Of reciprocity and responsibility. Table 2 provides information
on the similarities and differences that Often exist between the contexts, time, reporting,

level of commitment and outcomes of mentoring compared to supervisory relationships.

31

Table 2

Characteristics of Mentoring and Supervisory Relationships

 

 

Characteristics Mentoring Supervision
Context Often occur outside the Often occur within the work
immediate work environment setting, but away from the
immediate work area
Time Time-frame (speciﬁed or Time-frame with a
non-speciﬁed) with a progression of relationship
progression of relationship phases
phases
Relationship Conﬁdential discussions; Conﬁdential discussions;
Reporting minimal, if any , reporting minimal reporting on
on the relationship status; no relationship status; guiding
formal ethical principles ethical principles
Level of Varied levels Of High level of commitment;
Commitment commitment; may require a usually conducted within
time commitment outside of working hours; may require
the work setting a time commitment outside
of the work setting
Outcomes Broader outcomes; include Improved clinical practice;

improved clinical practice,
psychosocial development,
career progression and
personal achievement

Retention

independence

Since the passage Of the 1992 amendments to the Rehabilitation Act Of 1973, the

recruitment and retention of qualiﬁed vocational rehabilitation counselors has been a

major focal point of researchers within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. This

important act required that state vocational rehabilitation agencies establish standards for

service delivery personnel. These standards had to be in line with the national and state

32

approved standards as well as recognized licensing and certiﬁcation boards (Dew, Alan
& Tomlinson, 2008). With the changes in the American workforce, it has not been an
easy task to retain qualiﬁed workers. After polling 281 fast growth ﬁrms in 2006,
approximately 20% reported that “the single most important challenge of the year was
ﬁnding and retaining qualiﬁed employees” (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). As shown,
this critical issue is present in the general American workforce, but is of most importance
within the state VR counseling agencies because of the increased shortage of VR
counselors and issues in recruiting qualiﬁed rehabilitation counselors. These issues have
become of utmost important within many state vocational rehabilitation agencies.
Several themes have been identiﬁed as issues related to retention within state VR
counseling agencies (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). One factor related to the retention,
both within the state VR system and general workforce, is generational differences
among employees (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson). The sociology of workplace generations
has signiﬁcantly impacted the retention rates Of state VR agencies. According to Strauss
and Howe (1991), generational membership occurs when individuals have a common
cultural experience. With the vast diversity Of these groups, it is vital that all generations
be considered separate entities, with deference paid to the differences that make each
unique. Careful consideration and strategic planning to address issues related to the
generational differences that exist within state agencies is vital to addressing the issue of
retention. Understanding the unique needs of the various generations (e. g. levels of
autonomy, opportunities for advancement, pay, support) are a few factors that will aid in
this process. Regardless of the current generational milieu, state agencies should develop

and implement programs to ensure that these needs are understood and addressed

33

appropriately actively developing key competencies. By doing so, it can assist in
improving factors related to retention including job satisfaction and career motivation.

With shifts in the organizational structure and needs of state vocational
rehabilitation counselors, state VR agencies must have strategic plans of action to retain
existing staff. Much is known about state vocational rehabilitation counselors and
strategies to retain them. Mitus (2006) emphasized that there is strong evidence linking
socialization in the workplace and commitment. Speciﬁcally, orienting employees to a
new work environment or changes within an organization is important. It is vital that this
socialization process be related to the goals of employees as well as the organization.

Retention and the relationship that exist between levels of career motivation and
job satisfaction are not present in the rehabilitation literature. This study assists in
developing a line of research in this area. This study provides concrete ﬁndings that will
add to training and retention programs that are currently in place at state VR agencies.

Turnover

Any movement of individuals in and out of an organization can be considered
turnover (Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis & Hurley, 2008). This deﬁnition,
however, has evolved from early deﬁnitions that referred to the phenomena of employees
voluntarily resigning from a position or quitting a job (Mobley, 1997). According to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, turnover is deﬁned as the separation of an employee from an
establishment. This separation may be classiﬁed as voluntary, involuntary, or other
(Armstrong et al., 2008) Turnover is caused by circumstances that are “within control of
the employee and those that are not within control” (e. g. death, layoff, termination due to

lack of performance) (Armstrong et al., 2008, p.23). Patterns of high job turnover,

34

burnout and low levels of job satisfaction are Often shown in studies exploring the
recruitment and retention issues within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. More
speciﬁcally, per rehabilitation facility, the cost related to personnel turnover is $164, 908
per year (Barrett, Riggar, Flowers, Crimando & Bailey, 1997). Coupled with this cost,
ensuring that qualiﬁed rehabilitation counselors are available to serve the increased
number of consumers accessing vocational rehabilitation counseling services is a major
concern. This issue Of turnover is distressing and needs to be addressed using diverse
methods.

An employee’s intention to leave his or her current position is a good predictor of
actual turnover (Layne, Hohenshil & Singh, 2004; Armstrong et al., 2008). Speciﬁcally,
this intention to leave often occurs before the decision to leave is voiced by an employee
(Mobley, 1977; Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis & Hurley, 2008).
Characteristics of workplace or position (i.e. management, policies/procedures, job
satisfaction/dissatisfaction) and individual characteristics (i.e. commitment, coping,
stress) may inﬂuence an employee’s voluntary decision to remain or leave. Researchers
found that roles experienced by rehabilitation counselors are important when explaining
turnover. Lack of advancement can also lead to increased intention to leave one’s current
position (Layne, Hohenshil & Singh).

Amongst other factors, retirement is an important factor in the turnover rate of
rehabilitation counselors. Chan (2003) reported that a signiﬁcant amount of counselor
(45%) and supervisor (80%) replacement would be due to retirement. Further, data on the
chronological age of the current rehabilitation workforce suggested that about 15% of

state vocational rehabilitation counselors will be expected to retire over the next ﬁve

35

years. Data also suggested that 25% of the counselors will be leaving their position with
state agencies for reasons other than retirement. Again, salary, lack of autonomy in the
decision making process and amount of time with clients were a few of the major reasons
that accounted for why these counselors left or were planning to leave their positions.
These ﬁndings are consistent with previous recruitment and retention research studies
(Chan, 2003). Keeping a strong workforce can assist in improving the vocational
rehabilitation system. Such a workforce “directly affects the ability to deliver
comprehensive services to individuals with disabilities” (Armstrong, Hawley, Lewis,
Blankenship & Pugsley, 2008, p.42).
Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction has been a popular construct within the literature. Within the
organizational and industrial psychology research, job satisfaction studies date back to
the 1920’s (Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis, & Hurley, 2008; Balzer, Kilm,
Smith, Irwin, Bachiochi, Robie, Sinar, & Parra, 2000). Researchers have often described
job satisfaction as how content an individual is with his or her particular job. According
to Locke (1969), job satisfaction is regarded as a state of pleasure gained from applying
one’s distinct values to a job. Spector (1997) suggests that job satisfaction “can be
considered as a global feeling about the job or as a related constellation of attitudes about
various aspects or facets of the job” (p.2). It is primarily viewed as a construct that
describes how pleased an individual is with his or her job. All types Of factors can
inﬂuence level Of job satisfaction. These factors include but are not limited to level of pay

and beneﬁts, quality of working conditions, social relationships, and the overall job itself.

36

Job satisfaction is often considered a bidimensional element comprised of both
intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Herzberg, Mausner, Peterson, & Capwell, 1957; Andrew,
Faubion, & Palmer, 2002) where intrinsic factors (e. g. work itself, recognition,
achievement) have been categorized as “motivators” or satisﬁers while extrinsic factors
(e.g. working conditions, coworkers, compensation) have been considered as
“dissatisﬁers”. Increased satisfaction occurs when positive extrinsic factors are present.
The same is true when positive intrinsic factors exist for the employee. Research related
to job satisfaction is present in a diverse sector of ﬁelds. Nevertheless, job satisfaction
associated with state vocational rehabilitation counselors emerged from various ﬁelds
including vocational rehabilitation, marketing, management, occupational health, and
human resources (Andrew, Faubion & Palmer, 2002). Several researchers have suggested
that job satisfaction is negatively correlated with turnover but not to a degree where a
predictive model can be created (Mobley, 1982; Mobley, Griffeth, Hand, & Meglino,
1979)

In reference to rehabilitation counselor satisfaction and intrinsic and extrinsic job
factors, a signiﬁcant amount of research has been conducted regarding the relation
between the two areas (e. g. Szymanski & Parker, 1995; Wright & Terrian, 1987). Citing
an earlier study, Andrew, Faubion, and Palmer (2002), discovered that “. . .an
approximately equal number Of intrinsic and extrinsic factors identiﬁed with aspects of
the job that were considered ‘good’ by rehabilitation workers. Extrinsic factors, on the
other hand, accounted for most of the aspects of the job that were considered ‘bad’.

Wright and Terrian associated Herzberg's extrinsic factors with Maslow's lower-order

37

needs. Until these lower—order needs are met, higher-order needs, as reﬂected in intrinsic
factors, cannot be met” (p. 224).

Job satisfaction is an important area of study because Of the changing
demographics within American society. Approximately 20 to 30 percent of absenteeism
or turnover is related to job satisfaction (Faubion, Palmer, Andrew, 2001). In a study by
Wright and Terrian (1987), participants reported that reasons including intention to quit
and attempts to change jobs were negatively correlated with job satisfaction. The study
indicated that rehabilitation practitioners expressed higher job satisfaction in relation to
the intrinsic aspects of their jobs. Rehabilitation counselors also appear to endorse that
the most satisfying facet of their job was assisting their consumers in improving their
quality of life through a diversity of means (Garske, 1999). Alternatively, counselors that
have expressed dissatisfaction attributed their dissatisfaction to the bureaucracies and
restrictions within their agencies, extensive amounts of paperwork, and with working
conditions (Garske, 1999).

People spend a great deal of their lives at work. Gaining an understanding of
components involved in job satisfaction is relevant to improving the well-being Of
today’s workers. A central reason for investigating job satisfaction levels may increase
productivity and reduce the rate of attrition among state vocational rehabilitation
counselors.

Job satisfaction depends on the diverse characteristics of workers. For example,
not all workers desire jobs for personal fulﬁllment but rather acquire satisfaction through
ﬁnancial gain. Thus, satisfaction is often viewed as a function of the relationship

between the work environment and the individual’s needs (Lofquist & Dawis, 1969;

38

Osipow & Fitzgerald, 1996). It represents the employee’s assessment of the degree to
which the work environment fulﬁlls intrinsic. More speciﬁcally, this level of job
satisfaction is directly related to the Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA). The TWA
suggests that work is the interface between an employee and a speciﬁc work
environment. This interaction has requirements Of each other. For example, vocational
rehabilitation agencies may require that counselors have a certain percentage Of
successful closures/outcomes per quarter. Further, the rehabilitation counselors may
expect a certain level of autonomy and support as they work toward completing job
requirements. The adj ustrnent requires a balance between the tasks to be performed and
employee skills to perform the tasks. Further, if an employee is able to discover a ﬁt
between the work environment and his or her personality, job satisfaction leading to job
tenure occurs. Two major indicators of work adjustment are the organization’s
satisfaction with the employee and the amount of employee’s satisfaction with the work
environment or organization. Again, satisfaction is important because it is a critical factor
to why an employee may choose to remain employed with an agency or why the agency
decides to retain the individual.

Historically, gender has been analyzed to identify differences in relation to
perceived job satisfaction. In a study conducted by Haynes (1983), the differences in job
satisfaction between male and female administrators was Observed in a large human
service agency. Men reported more job satisfaction than women in the area of working
conditions and relationships with colleagues and supervisors. Women, however, reported
equal or higher levels Of job satisfaction in the area of general organizational components

(e. g. work, pay, potential for growth). Researchers suggest that past and present-day

39

societal expectations have an impact on job satisfaction among women workers (Andrew,
Faubion, & Palmer, 2002; Osipow & Fitzgerld, 1996). Factors such as stabilizing work
and home Obligations may cause more stress for women than what is experienced by their
male counterparts. Therefore, experiences of job satisfaction may be relatively different
for female workers during their tenure at an organization. This ﬁnding may be, in part,
due to different expectations of mentoring relationships in the workforce and the impact
mentoring has on job satisfaction.
Job Satisfaction and Mentoring

AS discussed, job satisfaction among rehabilitation counselors is considered
important because of the relationship it has with turnover. Several researchers have
explored the job satisfaction of rehabilitation counselors in relation to elements such as
work motivation, job performance and self-reported perception (Faubion, Andrew, &
Palmer, 2001; Szymanski & Parker, 1995, Wilkinson & Wagner, 1993). Rehabilitation
counselors appear to be generally satisﬁed with their work. For example, Garske (1999)
reported that approximately 86.2% of the rehabilitation counselors from Ohio involved in
the study was satisﬁed or very satisﬁed with their work. Decreasing levels of turnover
have been linked to providing support (e. g. mentoring) within the workplace. This
support helps to create a level of satisfaction (i.e. intrinsic and extrinsic) with the job. As
with other factors, however, it is difﬁcult to generalize the importance of mentoring on
the job satisfaction of workers. Nonetheless, mentoring and job satisfaction has been
discussed in the research literature (Chao, 1992; Fagenson, 1989). Cuesta and Bloom
(1998) examined whether past mentoring experiences affect the job satisfaction of nurses.

Their ﬁndings suggest that mentored nurses in management positions have higher levels

40

of job satisfaction than their non-mentored counterparts. Career functions Of the
mentoring relationship were also Shown to be more important to the participants than
psychosocial functions. In a variety of ﬁelds, researchers have found a signiﬁcant
correlation between job satisfaction and the overall quality of the mentoring relationship
(Kammeyer-Mueller & Judge, 2008; Mobley, Jaret, Marsh & Lim, 1994).

Research literature on the relationship between mentoring and job satisfaction in
the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling is nonexistent. AS discussed, past research has
looked speciﬁcally at job satisfaction and its relationship to counselor motivation and
decision to leave or remain employed with a state agency (Szymanski & Parker, 1995;
Wright & Tenian, 1987). This study Opens a line of research addressing issues of
retention and turnover as they relate to mentoring and its impact on the job satisfaction of
state vocational rehabilitation counselors.

Career Motivation

Motivation is often utilized to provide an explanation for behaviors and decisions
that cannot be explained by skill alone. London (1983) suggests that “motivation is
concerned with the direction, arousal, amplitude, and persistence Of an individual’s
behavior” (p. 620). In reference to the world of work, career motivation “applies
motivation theory to understanding career plans, behaviors and decisions” (London,
1983, p. 55). Career motivation can be narrow because the construct may not take into
account individual characteristics and decisions relevant to one’s career. It is often
referred to as motivation to do a current job. London (1983) deﬁned this construct as a
multidimensional element consisting of three key domains: career insight, career

resilience and career identity. The domains can be simpliﬁed by understanding the

41

relationship that exists between career insight, career resilience and career identity and
trait-factor theories. Holland, for example, suggest that decisions related to career are
inﬂuenced by the capacity to cope and deal with workplace barriers, need for reassurance
from others and vocational identity (Holland, 1985). The three central domains have been
tested and used in strong, empirical research (Day & Allen, 2004; London, 1983; London
& Noe, 1997). However, London’s three central domains should not be regarded as the
complete representation Of career motivation (London & Noe, 1997).

Career insight is being able to develop clear and concrete career goals while being
realistic about the direction of one’s career, strengths, and weakness (Day & Allen, 2004;
London, 1983). Further, it has been described as “the extent to which the person has
realistic perceptions of him or herself and the organization and relates these perceptions
to career goals” (London, 1983, p.621). Having a ﬁrm understanding Of one’s own
strengths and weaknesses (i.e. self knowledge) is an essential part of career insight.
Employees with a strong foundation of career insight can establish “clearer career goals
and [again] know[s] one’s strengths and weaknesses” (London & Noe, 1997).
Conceptually, career insight relates to Super’s (1963, 1957) vocational self-concept
crystallization.

Career resilience is having the skill to adapt to changing circumstances. It
includes having characteristics such a positive belief in oneself and risk taking. It is
considered to be the foundational element of career motivation (Day & Allen, 2004). As
stated by London (1983), career resilience is “resistance to career disruption in a less than
optimal environment” (p.621). An employee’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances

is a critical part of career resilience. It assists employees in accepting job and

42

organizational changes, looking forward to working with new and different people,
having self-conﬁdence and being willing to take risks. Further, career resilience is often
linked to personality characteristics of employees. It originates from the concepts of self-
efﬁcacy (Bandura, 1977), hardiness (Kobasa, Maddi & Kahn, 1982), and motivation Of
achievement (McClelland, 1985). Researchers have related career resilience to maturity.
“Individuals who are high in career maturity make career decisions in a way that
demonstrates involvement, decisiveness, independence , task orientation and willingness
to compromise between needs and reality” (Priyabhashini & Krishnan, 2005, p. 484). In
relation to satisfaction, work adjustment depends on the level of interaction between an
individual’s abilities and requirements and between reinforcers and needs. However,
career resilience depends on perseverance, ﬂexibility and reactiveness to workplace
situations and cultures (Priyabhashini & Krishnan, 2005).

Career identity is the degree to which people deﬁne themselves by their work and
by the organization for which they work (Day & Allen, 2004). It involves the degree to
which they immerse themselves in activities related to their job and the organization,
work hard, view themselves as a professional or technical expert and express pride in
their employer. It has also been tied to employee work and organizational commitment.

In motivational terms, career identity is the direction of motivation; insight is the
energizing or arousal component of motivation that encourages involvement in career
planning and career decisions; and career resilience is the maintenance or persistence
component (Noe, Noe & Bachhuber, 1990).

Researchers in the business and psychology discipline have played an intricate

part in investigating the role Of motivation and its impact on the workplace and

43

employees. Others have suggested that motivation is a major cause for career-related
decisions and the relationship between mentoring and career motivation (Colarelli &
Bishop, 1990; Day & Allen, 2004). The overview of the motivation research highlights
that there has been and continues to be an interest in and need for research regarding
career motivation. However, there is a signiﬁcant gap in the literature on research Of
career motivation within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. Speciﬁcally, there is
paucity of literature that examines career motivation and issues related to mentoring and
retention levels. With the focus on motivation taking ﬂight over the last 18 years
(Triandis, 2004), there is a level of understanding of the absence in rehabilitation
literature. Discussion was therefore limited to the introduction of career motivation as it
relates to mentorship and retention levels within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling.
Career motivation is an indispensable component for individuals as they move forward in
their career. Motivation can be that driving force to aid in overcoming problems that may
have previously been in one’s way.

Several ideas have been generated on how to-successfully develop, support and
enhance career motivation (Day & Allen, 2004; London, 1990). To increase career
motivation employees should be presented with constructive and positive reinforcement
for high-quality performance, provided chances for goal-attainment and receive support
for personal and professional skill development (Day & Allen, 2004). One barrier of
explaining levels of motivation is that it is a construct that is difﬁcult to measure in an
Obj ective manner. Research and personal experiences may provide examples of people
who are highly motivated (e. g. Bill Gates, Barack Obarna). However, what factors

indicate that such individuals are more motivated than some else (e. g. coffee shop owner,

44

social worker)? There is no universal measure for motivation. It varies from population to
population and is impacted by societal and ethical inﬂuences (Maslow, 1987). Maslow
stated that “human beings have an innate tendency to move toward levels of health,
creativity, and self-fulﬁllment” (p. xxxv) as he studied motivation along with how
individuals maneuver through their hierarchy Of needs. Achieving a desired level Of self-
actualization can lead people to the highest levels of efﬁciency (Maslow, 1987). With
struggles and challenges that may occur along the way, people Often are reluctant to risk
what they have for their desires and goals; this is particularly the case when it comes to
an individual’s job or career (Armstrong, Hawley, Lewis, Blankenship & Pugsley, 2008).
Career Motivation and Mentoring

In the literature, terms are Often used interchangeably when explaining and
exploring concepts. This rings true with career motivation. More speciﬁcally, career
commitment is often used in substitution for career motivation (Day & Allen, 2004). As
such, any comprehensive literature review of career motivation should include literature
related to career commitment. In a study by Colarelli and Bishop (1990), personal and
situational correlates of career commitment were studied. The researchers found that of
the factors examined “having a mentor was the most robust correlate” (Day & Allen,
2004, p. 73). Further, it was proposed that mentoring increases career commitment by
three distinct means. First, mentors may illustrate rewards that can be accomplished if
one remains employed within a certain organization or career area. Second, “mentoring
facilitates self-defectiveness, career involvement, career success, and positive attitudes
toward prote’gé career” (p. 73). Third, the mentoring relationship and career commitment

are centered on the needs and aspirations of individuals thus creating an Opportunity for

45

assisting in the development of career commitment or motivation (Day and Allen;
Colarelli & Bishop, 1990).

Using in-depth interviews and decision making exercises, London and Bray
(1984) examined career motivation and found that levels Of career motivation were
higher when the situation provided support for the career development of employees. An
example of such supports would be offering a fast track advancement program or
mentoring programs for staff members (London, 1993). Further, studies have shown that
all three elements of career motivation (i.e. career insight, resilience, and identity) were
“positively related to work salience and motivating job characteristics” (London, 1993, p.
57). The relationship between an employee’s career plans and level of managerial support
(e. g. feedback, encouragement, challenging) were highly related to career insight and
resilience. This would suggest that support from employers and staff (i.e. mentoring) is
associated with career motivation.

In a 2004 study by Day and Allen, it was hypothesized that career motivation was
increased because of involvement in mentoring relationships. After surveying 125
employees, the researchers concluded that “mentored individuals did report higher level
Of career motivation than those who had not been mentored” (p.85). Studies have focused
on counselor motivation (e. g. Szymanski & Parker, 1995) with in the ﬁeld of
rehabilitation counseling. However, literature addressing the relationship between
mentoring and career motivation are nonexistent in the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling.
As shown, this line of research is present in other ﬁelds. This study allows for
interdisciplinary comparisons concerning the relationship between mentoring and career

motivation within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling and other ﬁelds.

46

Summary

Mentoring is not a new area of focus within the American workforce. The
functions and types of mentoring have been researched extensively. Research ﬁndings
have been used to assist employees in a variety of areas. Researchers suggest that
organizations are encouraging employees to become more involved in mentoring
relationships. This is due to the increased research on mentoring as well as the perceived
and known beneﬁts of the mentoring process. As noted, these beneﬁts exist for all
stakeholders including protégés, mentors and organizations. In reference to mentoring
and supervision, similarities exist between the two types of relationships. However, it is
important that distinctions be made between the two within state vocational rehabilitation
agencies. This will help to establish a greater understanding within the literature and
among state vocational rehabilitation professionals of what it means to be involved in a
mentoring relationship versus a supervisory relationship.

As discussed, retention and turnover within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling
are a major concern. Understanding the differences in levels of career motivation and job
satisfaction that exist between mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation counselors will
aid in addressing this issue. Mentoring has become more widely recognized as a tool for
increasing retention within the workplace. However, within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation
counseling this speciﬁc line of research has not been explored. This study addresses these
issues and other gaps in the literature. Therefore, the need and purpose Of the study is

supported by the extensive literature review present in this chapter.

47

Chapter III
Methodology

This study was designed to research the impact that mentoring has on factors
related to turnover and retention levels among rehabilitation counselors employed within
state vocational rehabilitation agencies. Among other areas, this study examined whether
there were differences in levels Of career motivation and job satisfaction among state
mentored and non-mentored vocational rehabilitation counselors. This study also
examined the differences in. mentoring functions (e. g. psychosocial and career) received
by VR counselors involved in formal or informal mentoring relationships relative to
speciﬁc demographic characteristics. The relationship between functions of mentoring
received by VR counselors and levels of career motivation and job satisfaction was also
explored. Lastly, this study examined how involvement in a mentoring relationship
impacts a VR counselor’s decision to leave or remain employed within state vocational
rehabilitation agencies. Factors other than mentoring that impact a counselor’s decisions
to leave or remain were also identiﬁed. The objective of the present study is to begin to
bridge the gap in existing literature by examining career motivation and job satisfaction
as mediators of the relationship between mentoring and retention among state VR
counselors.
Quantitative Questions

1. Among mentored (formal or informal) and non-mentored state vocational

rehabilitation counselors, what differences exist in their levels of career

motivation and job satisfaction?

48

2. Are there differences in the functions of mentoring received by vocational
rehabilitation counselors relative to speciﬁc demographic characteristics (i.e.
gender, racial/ethnic background, agency, type of mentoring relationship, years in
position, and time Spent with mentor).

3. Are speciﬁc demographic characteristics (i.e. race, gender, years in position,
caseload and agency) of state vocational rehabilitation counselors associated with
the provision Of mentoring?

4. What is the relationship between ﬁmctions of mentoring received by vocational
rehabilitation counselors and levels of career motivation and job satisfaction?

5. How does involvement in mentoring relationships impact vocational
rehabilitation counselor decisions to leave or remain employed within state

vocational rehabilitation agencies?

Qualitative Question

6. What factors other than mentoring inﬂuence vocational rehabilitation counselor
decisions to leave or remain employed within state vocational rehabilitation

agencies?

Research Design

This nonexperimental, exploratory study used a mixed-method approach.

Research investigation or lines of inquiry that incorporates one or more quantitative and

qualitative techniques for data collection and analysis is considered mixed method

research (Creswell, 2003; Vitale, Armenakis & Feild, 2008). The use of quantitative

methods is appropriate when examining speciﬁc factors that have been identiﬁed in

49

research literature or when studying a speciﬁc theory (Creswell, 2003). Being that
speciﬁc variables have been identiﬁed through the comprehensive literature related to
mentoring, job satisfaction, career motivation and retention, the use of a survey will be
suitable for the study.

The use of an Open-ended question assisted in gathering qualitative information
from vocational rehabilitation counselors free from boundaries that Often exist in a
structured quantitative instrument. Conversely, the design allowed for information to be
Obtained related to set constructs (i.e. turnover, retention). With a study of this nature,
qualitative survey responses provide information about the experiences and perspectives
of the counselors to better explain or clarify quantitative ﬁndings (Vitale, Armenakis &
Feild, 2008). Thus attaching an open-ended question to a quantitative survey has an
advantage of high external validity and is statistically supported (V itale, Armenakis &
Feild).
Participants

The sample population for the study included rehabilitation counselors that are
currently employed within the Ofﬁce of Vocational Rehabilitation in Kentucky and the
Illinois Department Of Vocational Rehabilitation. Illinois does not have a formal
mentoring program but rehabilitation counselors may be receiving informal mentoring.
However, Kentucky has a formal mentoring program. This state-wide mentoring program
is speciﬁc to rehabilitation counselors and was developed to address areas including
retention levels, skill development and leadership succession. During the development of
the study, data was not available on the number of protégés participating in the study.

However, approximately twenty mentors participate in the program across the state.

50

These mentors assist new counselors in learning the competencies required to succeed on
the job and in the development of relationships with novice counselor that will involve
trust, dedication and friendship. Further, this program encourages mentors to use teaching
methods and talking points to assist in personal development as well as professional
growth regarding areas such as caseload management, guidance/counseling and IPE/Plan
Development.

The sample population also represents a diverse population of rehabilitation
counselors with varied experiences. Access to potential participants was achieved
through communication with training directors of the two state VR agencies. The
researcher had access to all state VR counselors employed within the agencies.

The target sample size for the study was 120 participants to provide adequate
power for signiﬁcance testing. The ﬁnal sample of this study consisted of 123
rehabilitation counselors employed within the Kentucky and Illinois State Vocational
Rehabilitation systems. Of the 123 participants, 51.2% (n = 63) were from the state of
Illinois with the remaining 48.8% (n = 60) from Kentucky. Tables 3 and 4 provide
participant demographic and professional characteristics as well as information regarding
mentoring status.

Overall, participants’ ages ranged from 24 to 66, with a mean age Of 44 years Old.
The majority of the participant sample consisted of females (65%). The majority of the
participants reported Caucasian as their racial/ethnic background (n = 97; 79.5%).
Followed by African American/Black participants which made up the second largest
group (n = 15; 12.3%). Approximately 85% (n = 105) of the participants reported having

a Master’s Degree. Further, participating rehabilitation counselors reported having

51

received their degree in a variety of academic disciplines including Rehabilitation
Counseling (49.2%) and Other Counseling Specialty (24.6%). Approximately 34.1% (n =
42) Of the participants reported that they were a Certiﬁed Rehabilitation Counselor
(CRC).

The rehabilitation counselors (N = 123) reported a range of professional
experience during their time Of employment within the state vocational rehabilitation
system. The largest percentage of the participants (29.5%) reported having more than 15
years of experience, with 23% indicating that they had 6-10 years, 17.2% had three to
ﬁve years, 14.8% had one to two years, and 9.8% had eleven to ﬁfteen years of
experience. Participants with less than one year of experience (n = 7; 5.7%) made up the
smallest proportion. In terms of salary, 49.2% reported earning $48, 000 or more a year.
Across both states, the largest proportion of participants (56.6%) reported having a
caseload of more than 130.

Of the 123 participants, 18.7% (n = 23) reported currently being involved in a
mentoring relationship. Approximately 53% Of these individual reported being involved
in formal mentoring relationships. Formal mentoring relationships were reported as being
developed and implemented by the State Agency system (n = 9) or District Ofﬁce (n = 4).
A signiﬁcant proportion of participants (69.9%) involved in mentoring relationships
reported spending 1-6 hours a week with their mentor. Participants involved in a
mentoring relationship reported ages ranging from 24 to 66, with a mean age of 40.91.
Mean age of the rehabilitation counselors’ mentors was 44.80 with ages ranging from 25-
70 years old. Over half the mentored rehabilitation counselors (52.2%; n = 12) reported

being involved in one mentoring relationship while 30.4% (n = 7) reported being in two

52

and the remaining 17.4% (n = 4) in three relationships. There was an equal distribution Of

mentored participants from the two state agencies (Kentucky = 11; Illinois = 12). Table 5

provides demographic characteristics of participants reporting being involved in a

mentoring relationship.

Table 3

Demographic Characteristics of Participants W=123)

 

 

Variable N Valid %
Agency 60 48.8%
Kentucky 63 5 1 .2%
Illinois
Gender
Female 80 65.0%
Male 43 35.0%
Race/Ethnicity
Aﬁican American 15 12.3%
Asian American 1 .8%
Caucasian 97 79.5%
Latino(a) 8 6.6%
Other 1 .8%
Degree
Bachelors 1 8 14.6%
Masters 105 85.4%
Degree Area
Rehabilitation Counseling 60 49.2%
Psychology 1 0 8.2%
Social Work 6 4.9%
Other Counseling Specialty 30 24.6
(e.g. Guidance and Counseling, Mental Health)
Other Rehabilitation Specialty 3 2.5%
(e.g. Voc. Evaluation, Job Placement, Rehab
Services) 13 10.7
Other

 

Note: The N’s do not sum to 123 due to missing data.
Age: 24 to 66; M = 44 years Old

53

Table 4

Demographic Characteristics of Participants (N = 123)

 

 

Variable N Valid %

Credentials 42 34.1%
CRC 81 65.9%
No CRC

Years in Position
Less than 1 year 7 5.7%
1-2 years 18 14.8%
3-5 years 21 17.2%
6-10 years 28 23.0%
11-15 years 12 9.8%
Over 15 years 36 29.5%

Caseload
<20 cases 1 .8%
21—20 cases 3 2.5%
41-75 cases 7 5.7%
76-100 cases 23 18.9%
101-130 cases 19 15.6%
>130 cases 69 56.6%

Salary
$24 to $29,999 6 5.0%
$30 to $35,999 13 10.8%
$36 to $41,999 27 22.5%
$42 to $47,999 15 12.5%
$48 or more 59 49.2%

Mentoring Status
Mentored 23 1 8.7%
Non-Mentored 1 00 8 1 .3%

 

Note: The N’s do not sum to 123 due to missing data.

54

Table 5

Demographic Characteristics of Mentored Participants (N = 23 )

 

 

Variable N Valid %
Agency
Kentucky 1 1 47.8%
Illinois 12 52.2%
Credentials
CRC 5 21 .7%
No CRC 18 78.3%
Years in Position
Less than 1 year 5 21.7%
1-2 years 5 21 .7%
3-5 years 3 17.0%
6-10 years 5 21 .7%
11-15 years 0 0.0%
Over 15 years 5 21.7%

 

55

Table 6

Demographic Characteristics of Mentored Participants (N = 23 )

 

 

Variable N Valid %
Caseload 2 8.7%
21-20 cases 3 13.0%
41-75 cases 4 17.4%
76-100 cases 2 8.7%
101-130 cases 12 52.2%
>130 cases
Salary
$24 to $29,999 3 13.0%
$30 to $35,999 6 26.1%
$36 to $41,999 1 4.3%
$42 to $47,999 1 4.3%
$48 or more 12 52.2%
Type Of Mentoring Relationships
Formal 12 52.2%
Informal l 1 47.8%
Time Spent With Mentor
Less than 1 hour 3 13.0%
1-3 8 34.8%
4-6 hours 8 34.8%
10 or more hours 4 17.4%
Number of Mentors
One 12 52.2%
Two 7 30.4%
Three 4 17.4%
Gender Of Mentor
Female 14 60.9%
Male 9 39.1%
Racial/Ethnic Background of Mentor
African American 5 21 .7%
Caucasian 1 5 65.2%
Latino(a) 1 4.3%
Other 1 4.3%
Unknown 1 4.3%

 

56

Instrumentation
Mentoring Functions

Noe’s (1988) Mentoring Roles Instrument (MRI) (Appendix A) was used to
assess the mentoring functions received by participants involved in mentoring
relationships. Respondents who may have had more than one mentor were instructed to
respond in regards to their most inﬂuential mentor. The MRI consists Of 21-items that
include 14 psychosocial items (e. g. “My mentor has conveyed empathy for the concerns
and feelings that I have discussed with him/her”) and seven career-related items (e. g.
“Mentor has encouraged me to try new ways of behaving in my job”). The 5-point Likert-
type scale measures the extent Of the relationship with a range of response categories
(“from a very slight extent” [1] “to a very large extent” [5]). Internal reliability estimates
for the career mentoring subscale range from .79 to .93 and .84 to .94 for psychosocial
mentoring functions. Noe (1988) provided initial factor analysis for the two-factor
structure.

Some conceptual uncertainty exists regarding whether some of the career
development items are loaded on the psychosocial factor functions. On the contrary,
Chao et al. (1992) examined Noe’s (1988) scale and similar reliability coefﬁcients were
found.

Career Motivation

To assess levels of career motivation, Day and Allen’s (2004) Career Motivation
Scale (Appendix B) was used in the research study. To embody the construct described in
London’s (1983) theory of career motivation, the instrument was constructed from
original measures developed by Noe, Noe and Bachhuber (1990) and London (1993).

Noe et al’s instrument focuses primarily on behaviors while London’s instrument

57

highlights attitudes and feelings related to work and career aspects. According to
researchers, the two scales both measure the same construct (London & Noe, 1997; &
Allen, 2004). In particular, high convergent validity has been found between the
instruments. To further explore the “desire of upward mobility” found in London’s
(1983) theory, the measure includes two additional statements. During the developing
stages Of Allen’s (2004) Career Motivation scale, it was reviewed by a content expert and
used in a pilot study to access content adequacy. This empirical approach has been used
and endorsed by other researchers (Wolf, London, Casey, & Pufaul, 1995). Alpha
coefﬁcient for the scale is .84.
Job Satisfaction

To assess job satisfaction levels among mentored and non-mentored participants,
the abridged Job Descriptive Index (aJDI) (Appendix C) was used. The aJDI is a short
form version of the Job Descriptive Index (J D1). The J D1 is a premier and most widely
used instrument for measuring job satisfaction (Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis
& Hurley, 2008). The use of the scale in research regarding the job satisfaction levels of
rehabilitation counselors is scarce. However, two research studies (i.e. Armstrong,
Hawley, Lewis, Blankenship & Pugsley, 2008; Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis
& Hurley, 2008) have utilized the aJDI in research related to rehabilitation professionals
within the last two years. As noted, the JDI is extensively used in the ﬁelds of industrial
and organizational psychology. Developed in 2000, the aJDI creates less Of an
“administrative scoring burden” than the original JDI. This facet scale contains ﬁve
subscales (i. e. Work on Present Job, Present pay, Opportunities for Promotion,

Supervision, and People at Work) of job satisfaction. Each of the subscales includes

58

phrases that describe each subscale for a total Of 25 items. Respondents will indicate if
each item does or does not describe their work situation; the response format is “Yes,”
“No,” or a “?” if respondents are unsure. Weighted values are assigned to the yes, no, and
unsure responses for each subscale to calculate scores (Armstrong et al., 2008). Scores
range from 0-54 on the AJDI with 54 signifying the highest satisfaction. Measurement
properties Of the “J DI found that content, criterion-related, and convergent validity are
well established (e. g. correlates as expected with turnover, and other job satisfaction
measures”. Internal consistency for the aJDI is above .70 for all subscales. A list of ﬁnite
instructions and SPSS scoring code was available for the aJDI.
Turnover and Mentoring

Participants were asked to rate their likelihood of leaving their current position
within the next ﬁve years. TO assess how important vocational rehabilitation counselors
perceive mentoring to be in their decision to leave or remain employed within state
vocational rehabilitation agencies, participants were asked to respond to a series Of
questions regarding their perception of mentoring relationships on their decision to leave
or remain employed (Appendix D). Participants were asked to rate both areas using a 5-
pOint Likert scale. These questions for the study were developed by the researcher.
Factors Impacting Decision to Leave or Remain

Participants were asked to provide reasons to why they may choose to leave or not
leave their current position over the next ﬁve years. This data was gathered using an

Open-ended question (Appendix E).

59

Questionnaires
A demographic questionnaire was used to gather information on the
characteristics of the research participants (Appendix F). Information gathered included:
(a) demographic characteristics commonly collected in research (e. g., age, race), (b)
professional characteristics (e. g. certiﬁcation status, number Of years Of service), (c)
protége' status (e. g. currently involved in a mentoring relationship, number of mentors),
((1) type and length of mentoring relationship, and (e) characteristics Of mentor.
Data Collection

Participants were selected for the proposed study by using a convenience
sampling method. Further, a web-based survey was chosen to facilitate ease of survey
access for participants and permit the manipulation of survey instrument conditions. A
copy of the proposal for the study was submitted to and approved by Kentucky and
Illinois Departments of Vocational Rehabilitation. Response letters and emails indicating
both agencies willingness to participate were received. The data were collected via an
anonymous web-based survey. This is the most appropriate method because all
rehabilitation counselors employed with the state agencies utilize electronic mail and
have individual e-mail addresses. All participants had access to computers and the _
intemet. With increased daily usage of technology in the workplace, having participants
complete the survey online helped reduce participant completion times. According to
timestamps, participants appeared to complete the web-based survey during their daily
computer usage at work. Responses by participants were conﬁdential. The survey
included an introduction with information about the study and an electronic consent form

(Appendix G).

60

Subsequent to Obtaining approval from the dissertation committee and
university’s Social Institutional Review Board, an initial email was sent to each state’s
administrator in the program and planning department within the Ofﬁce of Vocational
Rehabilitation in Kentucky and Illinois Department of Vocational Rehabilitation. The
emails included an explanation of the study and a link to the web-based survey site. The
administrators then forwarded the invitation to participate to all rehabilitation counselors
employed within the state agencies. Several follow-up emails were sent to the
administrators to be forwarded thus inviting more individuals to participate in the study.
The follow-up emails included a thank you statement for those counselors who already
participated and a repeat request for others to participate in the study.

Data Analysis

As mentioned, the study included both qualitative and quantitative methods of
data collection. Descriptive statistics for all participants were computed. Standard
deviations, means, median, and totals (N) were also provided and displayed in tables in
subsequent chapters. Frequencies and percentages are also provided to comprehensively
describe the participants in the study.

Quantitative Data

The quantitative data analysis for the study was conducted by using the SPSS
statistical package. The researcher used this survey software package to convert data
submitted via the web into a SPSS dataset. To ensure that data from the web-based
survey tool was accurate, a visual review of a sample of the surveys was conducted by
the researcher. An alpha level Of .05 was used for all statistical tests. Within social

sciences this level of signiﬁcance is frequently used by researchers.

61

The following data analysis procedures will be used to address the research

questions for the proposed study.
Research Question One

To explore differences that may exist in levels of career motivation and job
satisfaction among mentored (formal or informal) and non-mentored state vocational
rehabilitation counselors, the mean scores and standard deviations from the Career
Motivation Scale (CMS) and Abridged Job Descriptive Index (aJDI) were calculated.
Further, a series of independent t-tests were conducted to explore mean differences. For
the CMS, a total score was computed. Scores can range from 0 to 105. Further a total
score (range 0 to 35) was computed for each of the three domains (i.e. Insight, Resilience,
Identity). In reference to the 5-point Likert scale responses, a priori criterion level of
23.00 was used to suggest a level of importance within the speciﬁc domains of the CMS.

In reference to the aJDI, a total score was also calculated for each participant
within the ﬁve subscales. For the statistical analysis, scores were converted into
dichotomous variables to signify levels of satisfaction within each of the subscales. High
levels of satisfaction within the subscales is indicated by mean scores 228. Low levels of
satisfaction are represented by mean scores <28.

Research Question Two

TO address research question two, a series of independent-sample t-tests were
conducted to determine whether differences existed in the functions of mentoring
received vocational rehabilitation counselors relative speciﬁc demographic
characteristics. Mean scores and standard deviations for the variables were also

commuted and reported.

62

Research Question Three
A logistic regression model was used to test whether gender, race, age, caseload,
years in current position, and agency increases the likelihood of involvement in a
mentoring relationship. Variables in the model were recoded to ensure proper
development of the model. Speciﬁcally, several of the categories were combined tO
increase the cell size for analysis. Univariate analyses were then conducted to describe
response patterns as well to independently explore each of the variables included in the
model. Indicator variables were then created using the 0, 1 coding method. Frequency
and distribution of the variables included in the model were also calculated and reported.
Research Question Four
To address research question four, a correlational analysis was conducted to
explore the relationship between functions of mentoring received by vocational
rehabilitation counselors and levels of career motivation and job satisfaction. This
analysis was used to test for the level of signiﬁcance, direction (i.e. positive or negative)
and magnitude of the relationship between speciﬁc variables.
Research Question Five
The ﬁfth research question addressed how involvement in mentoring relationships
impacts vocational rehabilitation counselors’ decision to leave or remain employed
within state vocational rehabilitation agencies. Further, a series of independent t-tests
and cross-tabulations were used by the researcher. A Pearson’s product correlation was
also computed to ﬁrrther address the relationship between mentoring and intent to leave
or remain employed. Descriptive statistic, mean scores and standard deviations were also

computed and reported.

63

Qualitative Data

Content analysis was used to interpret the responses to the Open-ended question.
The researcher reviewed all participant responses using a constant comparison method
(Krippendorf, 2004). Using guidelines for analyzing qualitative data, a comprehensive
content method was used to analyze the data and sort the information into meaningful
categories. First, broad themes were identiﬁed from participants’ responses to the Open-
ended question regarding factors impacting their decision to leave or remain employed
within their current position. Categories represent the broad themes identiﬁed by the
participant responses. The themes were reﬁned until a complete set of themes were
developed for analysis. The results of the analysis were ﬁnite categories that identiﬁed
themes indicative of individual themes with little contamination from tangential
responses. The participant responses were coded for further analysis.

Summary

To address the research questions of the study, a web-based survey was used.
Participants (N = 123) were rehabilitation counselors currently employed within the state
vocational rehabilitations systems in Kentucky and Illinois. The survey consisted of a
variety of response formats including Likert-scaled and an open-ended question. Time
and costs associated with the research study was reduced due to the utilization Of a web—
based survey. SPSS was the main statistical package used for the analysis. Data analysis
consisted of statistical tests including logistic regression, independent t-test, and
correlational methods to address the speciﬁc research questions. Descriptive statistics

(e. g. means and standard deviations) were provided and displayed in tables and ﬁgures.

64

Chapter IV
Results

This chapter provides a comprehensive review of the quantitative results of this
investigation. Emergent themes Of the qualitative data will also be provided in this
chapter. Extensive comparison of the quantitative and qualitative results will be fully
addressed in the ﬁnal chapter rather than in the results section; this is a common method
of practice in mixed methods research. As discussed, this study infuses both qualitative
and quantitative research methods in order to thoroughly integrate and synthesize the
ﬁndings. TO increase power and account for the small sample size Of participants that
self-identiﬁed as being involved in either formal (N = 12) or informal (N = 11) mentoring
relationships, the two categories for types Of mentoring (i.e. formal and informal) were
combined into one mentored group for analysis. This grouping will be further discussed
in the limitations section of Chapter 5.
Differences in Career Motivation and Job Satisfaction

Differences in levels of career motivation and job satisfaction among mentored
(formal or informal) and non-mentored state vocational rehabilitation counselors were
explored. As discussed, the Career Motivation Scale (CMS) includes 21 items that focus
primarily on behaviors, attitudes and feelings related to work and career aspects. These
survey items are separated into three distinct domain areas: Insight, Resilience, and
Identity. All ﬁve sub-scales of the aJDI contain ﬁve items that measure perceptions Of

satisfaction related to facets Of one’s job.

65

Career Motivation

An overall career motivation score and a total score for each domain areas was
calculated for all participants. Cronbach’s alpha coefﬁcient calculated for the instrument
was .89 indicating a high internal consistency for the items included in this survey. This
coefﬁcient is similar to levels found in previous studies that utilized the CMS (Day &
Allen, 2004). Mentored participants rated 20 of the 21 domain items above the criterion
level OfZ3.00. The average overall score on the CMS was (M = 79.35; SD = 12.85)
suggesting that mentored participants are moderately tO highly motivated with their
career .Non-mentored participants rated 19 of the 21 items above the level of 23.00. The
overall mean score (M = 76.91; SD = 12.43) suggests that this group is also motivated
with their career. This difference was tested using an independent t-test, and was found
non signiﬁcant, t(118) =. 797, p = .427.

The ﬁrst domain area, Insight (Table 7) included seven items related to one’s
ability to develop clear and concrete career goals while being realistic about the
directions of one’s career. The overall average for the rehabilitation counselors in
mentoring relationships was 26.10 (SD = 5.85) indicating moderate to high levels Of
career motivation. Mentored participants (N = 20) reported all seven items above the
23.00 criterion. The average mean scores for non-mentored rehabilitation counselors was
(M = 25.82; SD = 5.14). Among this group (N = 100), respondents rated six of the seven
items as moderate to completely motivated. Independent samples t-test results indicate
that there was no signiﬁcant difference in Insight among mentored and non-mentored
rehabilitation counselors, t(118) = .217, p = .844 . Coefﬁcient alpha for this domain was

.82.

66

The second domain area, Resilience (Table 8), includes seven items related to
having the skills to adapt to changing circumstances within the workplace. Counselors in
mentoring relationships had a mean score of 28.55 (SD = 3.23). Non-mentored
rehabilitation counselor had an average score of 26.71 (SD = 3.79). Both groups rated all
seven items as greater than or equal to 3.00. Independent t-test results indicate that there
was a signiﬁcant difference in resilience scores among mentored and non-mentored
rehabilitation counselors, t(118) = 2.03, p = .045. This signiﬁcance was achieved at the
.05 level. Cronbach’s alpha coefﬁcient for this domain was .786 indicating a good level
of internal consistency.

The third domain area, Identity (Table 9), includes seven items that focus on the
degree that people deﬁne themselves by their work and the organization for which they
work. The mean score for mentored rehabilitation counselors was 24.70 (SD = 6.22). For
non-mentored participants the average was approximately 24.38 (SD = 5.49). Both
groups rated a signiﬁcant proportion of the items above the _>_3.00 criterion (Mentored, N
= 6; Non-mentored, N = 5). Mean score difference was tested using an independent
groups t-test, and was found nonsigniﬁcant, t(118) = .233, p = .816. These data fail to
support differences in Identity scores among mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation

counselors. Cronbach’s alpha for this domain was .803.

67

Table 7 - Insight Domain: Career Motivation

Means and Standard Deviations

 

Mentored Non-Mentored

 

Insight Domain Items M SD M SD

 

l. I have a speciﬁc plan for achieving my career goal. 3.70 1.22 3.60 1.19
2. l have changed or revised my career goals based on 3.15 1.23 2.74 1.30
new information I have received regarding my
situation or myself.

3. I have sought job assignments that will help me 3.55 1.05 3.44 1.18

obtain my career goal.

4. I have clear career goals. 3.85 1.27 3.75 1.13
5. I have realistic career goals. 4.05 1.05 4.04 .98
6. I know my strengths (what I can do well). 4.05 .94 4.23 .68
7. I am aware of my weaknesses (the thing I am not 3.75 1.12 4.02 .86
good at).

 

 

68

Table 8 - Resilience Domain: Career Motivation

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

 

Mentored Non-Mentored
Resilience Domain Items M SD M SD
8. I am able to adapt to changing circumstances. 4.15 .81 4.18 .66
9. I am willing to take risks. 3.70 1.13 3.48 .82
10. I welcome job and organizational changes. 3,70 1,08 3,38 .93

l l. I can adequately handle work problems that come 4,00 .65 396 .65
my way.
12. I believe other peOple when they tell me that 1 4,40 .50 3,91 .84

have done a good job.

13. I have designed better ways of doing my 4.30 .57 3.81 .83
work.
14. I have outlined ways of accomplishing jobs 4.30 .73 4.0 .83

without waiting on my boss.

 

 

69

Table 9 - Identity: Career Motivation

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

 

Mentored Non-Mentored
Identity Domain Items M SD M SD
15. I am very involved in myjob 4,50 .51 4,28 _68
16. I see myself as a professional and/or technical 3,80 .95 4.18 .82
expert.
l7. I spend free time on activities that will help my 3.25 1.37 2.95 1.10
job.

18. I have taken courses toward a job-related degree. 3.25 1.62 3.59 1.43
19. I stay abreast of developments in my line work. 3.70 .86 3.60 1.02
20. I have volunteered for important assignments with 3.30 1.45 3.23 1.31
the intent of helping to further my advancement
possibilities.

21. I have requested to be considered for 2.90 1.62 2.55 1.52

promotions.

 

 

70

Job Satisfaction

As mentioned, overall scores for each domain Of the aJDI were converted into
dichotomous variables for analysis. Scores at or above 28 indicate high levels of job
satisfaction while those with mean scores below 28 specify that respondents have low
levels of job satisfaction. Means and standard deviations for each of the subscales are
discussed below and provided in Table 10.

The ﬁrst subscale, Work on Present Job, assessed the respondents’ satisfaction
with the current work that they do within the state VR agency. The average score for
mentored rehabilitation counselors (n=21) was 49.53 (SD=10.75) indicating high levels
of work satisfaction. Non-mentored rehabilitation counselors (n=98) also reported high
levels of satisfaction across the ﬁve domains (M = 50.18; SD = 9.09). Conbrach’s alpha
coefﬁcient calculated for this subscale was .795 indiCating a high level of internal
consistency. The independent t-test result indicates that there was no signiﬁcant
difference in satisfaction scores in Work on Present Job among mentored and non-
mentored rehabilitation counselors, t(1 17) = .437, p = .663. That is, the average work
satisfaction rating of mentored counselors was not signiﬁcantly different from that of
non-mentored counselors.

The second subscale, Present Pay, assessed the respondents’ satisfaction with
their present pay in the areas of whether the income received from their current position
as a rehabilitation counselor was ‘adequate for normal expense’, ‘fair’, ‘insecure’, ‘well-
paid’ and ‘underpaid’. Mentored rehabilitation counselors reported satisfaction with

present pay mean scores (M = 30.86; SD = 14.95) that were not signiﬁcantly different

71

than their non-mentored counterparts (M = 29.17; SD = 16.26) as determined by an
independent t-test t(117) = -.286, p = .775.

The third subscale, Opportunities for Promotion, assessed how participants
perceived their satisfaction levels with promotion within the state vocational
rehabilitation system. Cronbach’s alpha calculated for this subscale of the aJDI was .820
indicating high levels of internal consistency. Non-mentored counselors reported levels
of satisfaction in relations to Opportunities for promotion scores (n = 20; M = 29.24; SD =
16.21) that were not signiﬁcantly different than their mentored peers (n = 98; M = 25.01;
SD = 19.17) as determined by independent t-test, t(116) = -.957, p = .340).

Supervision is a vital part of the organizational culture of the state vocational
rehabilitation system. The fourth subscale focused participants’ perception of level of
satisfaction with the supervisor and kind of supervision received on the job. Cronbach’s
alpha coefﬁcient calculated for this subscale was .769. Mentored counselors reported
mean scores (M = 45.36; SD = 10.14) slightly different than scores (M = 40.44; SD =
16.46) reported by counselors not currently in a mentoring relationship. Independent t-
test results indicate that there was no signiﬁcant difference in satisfaction with
supervision scores, t(116) = 1.748, p = .088 .

The ﬁnal scale, People at Work, presented some Of the highest satisfaction scores
for respondents. Participants were prompted to think of the majority of people that they
work with and describe these people in terms of whether they are perceived to be
‘Boring’, ‘Helpful’, ‘Responsible’, ‘Intelligent’ and ‘Lazy’. Cronbach’s alpha coefﬁcient
calculated for this subscale was .752 indicating a moderate level of internal consistency.

Non-mentored participants reported lower mean scores (M = 47.39; SD =1 1.61) for

72

satisfaction with their mentored counterparts (M = 50.04; SD = 6.90). However, an

independent t-test indicated no signiﬁcant difference in satisfaction with people at work

scores between the groups, t(116) = . 984, p = .327.

Table 10 - Job Satisfaction Subscales

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

 

Mentored Non-Mentored
Job Satisfaction Subscales N M SD N M SD
Work On Present Job 21 49.53 10.75 98 50.18 9.09
Present Pay 21 30.86 14.95 98 29.17 16.26
Opportunities for Promotion 20 25.01 19.17 98 29.24 17.72
Supervision 20 45.36 10.14 98 40.44 16.46
People at Work 20 50.04 6.90 98 47.39 11.61

 

 

*5 items per scale

** Response Format: Yes, No or Unsure

Functions of Mentoring Relative to Demographic Differences

The second research question explores whether there are differences in the

functions of mentoring received by vocational rehabilitation counselors (N = 21) relative

to speciﬁc demographics characteristics (i.e. gender, agency, racial/ethnic background,

caseload, time Spent with mentor, type of mentoring, years in position). Differences were

73

assessed across the Career and Psychosocial functions of mentoring received by
rehabilitation counselors.
Gender

'To assess whether differences existed among the various demographic groupings,
several analysis were conducted. TO assess gender’s inﬂuence on the functions of
mentoring received by the rehabilitation counselors, independent-samples t-tests were
conducted. In reference to career functions, the mean score for females was 26.20 (SD =
7.35) while males averaged a score Of 25.36 (SD = 5.43). Independent t-test results
indicate no signiﬁcant difference, t(19) = .299, p = .768, in career functions scores
relevant to gender.

As for psychosocial functions, mean scores for males (M = 57.3; SD = 9.14) and
females (M = 57.54; SD = 4.37) were relatively similar. No signiﬁcant differences were
found in the scores between these groups.

Race

Due to the relatively small and unbalanced sample size of participants in
racial/ethnic groups other than Caucasian, the race category was transformed to create a
dichotomous variable that contained two groups, Caucasian and Non-Caucasian. An
independent t-test was executed to assess the inﬂuence of race on the career functions Of
mentoring of rehabilitation counselors. The mean score for Caucasian participants was
25.71 (SD = 6.84) while their non-Caucasian counterparts reported a slight higher mean
score of 26.00 (SD = 3.36). However, there not a signiﬁcant difference in scores at the
.05 level, two-tailed. The 95% conﬁdence interval for the difference between group

means for Caucasian and Non-Caucasian rehabilitation counselors was -7.18 to 7.76.

74

In terms Of psychosocial functions, Caucasian participants (M = 57.94; SD = 7.52)
presented slightly higher mean scores than their Non-Caucasian counterparts (M = 55.25;
SD = 2.22). Independent t-test results indicate that this difference were not signiﬁcant at
the .05 level.

Agency

Rehabilitation counselors working within the Kentucky Vocational Rehabilitation
System reported higher psychosocial and career functions than those employed within the
state of Illinois. Independent t-test results indicate that there were Signiﬁcant mean
differences in the levels Of psychosocial functions of mentoring received by rehabilitation
counselors employed within the two states, t(19) = 2.20, p = .040. That is, the average
rating Of counselors employed within the state of Kentucky (M = 60.60; SD = 6.3) was
signiﬁcantly different from that of those employed within the state of Illinois (M = 57.55;
SD = 4.3 7). No signiﬁcant difference was found in relation to career related ﬁrnctions of
mentoring, t(19) = .645, p = .577. Thus, the mean scores of Illinois counselors (M =
24.91; SD = 6.74) was not signiﬁcantly different than those of Kentucky’s rehabilitation
counselors (M = 26.70; SD = 5.88).

Type of Mentoring Relationship

As shown in Table 11, mentored participants reported being involved either
formal or informal relationships. Counselors in formal relationships (n = 11) reported
receiving higher levels of psychosocial functions Of mentoring than those participating in
informal relationships (n = 10). Although there was a small difference, those involved in
formal relationships also reported receiving higher levels of career related functions.

Independent t-test results indicated that differences in psychosocial and career functions

75

of mentors mean scores were not signiﬁcantly different between those involved in formal

or informal mentoring.

Table 11 - Variation in Functions Of Mentoring Relative to Type of Mentoring

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

Psychosocial Career
(N = 21) (N = 21)
Type of Mentoring Relationship Mean SD Mean SD
Formal (N = 11) 60.09 6.14 26.09 6.46
Informal (N = 10) 54.50 6.69 25.40 6.36

 

 

 

Years in Position
Descriptive statistics were run to explore the mean differences that exist in levels
of career and psychosocial functions relative to years on current position within the state
vocational rehabilitation system (Table 12). Rehabilitation counselors with 3-5 years or
Over 15 years of experience reported the highest mean scores for both psychosocial and
career related functions of mentoring. The lowest scores for both areas if function was
seen among those employed for 6-10 years.
Time Spent with Mentor
In order to explore differences in mean scores relative to counselors’ reported
time spent with mentor, descriptive statistics were also computed (Table 13).
Psychosocial functions mean scores were relatively similar. However, counselors

spending ‘4-6 hours’ or ’10 or more hours’ with their mentor reported the highest scores.

76

Counselors spending ‘ 1-3 hours’ reported the lowest mean scores. Career functions

means scores among counselors spending four or more hours were also highest.

However, those counselors spending less than 1 hour reported the lowest mean scores.

Table 12 - Variation in Functions Of Mentoring Relative tO Years in Position

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

 

Psychosocial
<N=21> (N=21)
Years in Position Mean SD Mean SD
Less than 1 year 58.20 5.45 27.20 7.19
1-2 Years 56.40 5.55 23.40 3.21
3-5 Years 62.33 7.09 29.67 4.73
6-10 Years 51.25 9.64 21.00 8.98
Over 15 Years 60.25 4.34 28.75 3.59

 

77

Table 13 - Variations in Functions of Mentoring Relative to Time Spent with Mentor

Means and Standard Deviations

 

 

 

Psychosocial Career
(N = 21) (N = 21)
Time Spent with Mentor Mean SD Mean SD
Less than 1 hour 58.00 6.08 22.33 4.04
1-3 Hours 55.75 9.65 25.00 7.96
4-6 Hours 58.67 4.97 27.00 5.73
7-9 Hours - - - -
10 or More Hours 58.50 4.35 28.00 4.97

 

Descriptive Variables and Mentoring

A logistic regression model (Tables 14 and 15) was used to estimate the factors
which inﬂuence likelihood to participate in a mentoring relationship as a protégé. The
dependent variable measures counselor likelihood to participate in a mentoring 7
relationship. Those coded as I participate in mentoring relationships and O speciﬁes those
not currently involved in formal or informal mentoring. The independent variables used
in the model were racial/ethnic background, gender, size, agency afﬁliation, years in
position, age and caseload size. Results from the model indicate that years in current
position (i.e. 211 years) were found to be a signiﬁcant factor in predicting likelihood of

involvement in mentoring relationships. Speciﬁcally, rehabilitation counselors with

78

eleven or more years Of experience are less likely to participate in a mentoring
relationship compared to those in the reference category with 1-2 years in current
position. All other variables were found to be nonsigniﬁcant. The Nagelkerke R2 l is .181
indicating that nearly 20% Of the variance is explained. The Omnibus Test of Model
Coefﬁcients indicated that Chi-square Si gniﬁcance level was not statistically signiﬁcant
at the .05 level (critical value 14.19; df = 10). This could be due to the inequality in
sample size of mentored and non-mentored participants.

Relationship Between Functions of Mentoring and Career Motivation and Job
Satisfaction

A correlation matrix was developed among the variables (i.e. functions Of
mentoring, career motivation, and job satisfaction) and is shown in Table 16.
Speciﬁcally, a Pearson correlation addressed the relationship between psychosocial (M =
57.43; SD = 6.87) and career (M = 25.76; SD = 6.26) functions of mentoring relationship
and career motivation and job satisfaction. Several correlations were signiﬁcant at the .01
and .05 levels.

The correlation between psychosocial functions and the career motivation domain
Insight was found to be Signiﬁcant r = .462, p = .047. Further, psychosocial functions and
satisfaction with supervision (r = .603, p = .008) and people at work (r = .641, p = .004)
were also found to be positively related.

Positive relationships were found between career-related functions Of mentoring
and several facets Of career motivation and job satisfaction. Speciﬁcally, the correlation
between this function of mentoring and ‘Insight’ (r = .608, p = .006) were found to be

signiﬁcant. Positive relationship were also found between career functions of mentoring

 

' The Nagelkerke R2 statistic is a value similar to the variance in multiple regressions (Norusis, 1997).

79

and ‘Work’ (r = .585, p = .009) and ‘PeOple at Work’ (r = .481, p = .043) job satisfaction

domains.

Table 14 - Distribution of Variables: Logistic Regression

Frequency and Percentage

 

 

 

Variable Frequency Percentage
Gender

Female 80 65.0%

Male 43 35.0%
Racial/Ethnic

Caucasian 97 79.5%

Non-Caucasian 25 20.5%
Caseload

< 75 cases 11 9.0%

76-100 cases 23 18.9%

101-130 cases 19 15.6%

2130 cases 69 56.6%
Years in Position

<= 2 years 25 20.5%

3-5 years 21 17.2%

6-10 years 28 23.0%

211 years 48 39.3%
Agency

Kentucky 60 48.8%

Illinois 63 51.2%
Age 119 24-66 (range)

 

80

Table 15 - Final Model for Binary Logistic Regression (N = 123)

 

 

B SE Wald df Sig. Exp(B)

Step1(a)
Gender -.857 .538 2.537 1 .111 .424
Racial/Ethnic -.486 .696 .488 l .485 .615
Age -.012 .029 .183 1 .669 .988
Caseload

76-100 cases -.984 .881 1.248 1 .264 .374

101-130 cases -1.241 1.044 1.412 1 .235 .289

2130 cases -.742 .800 .860 1 .354 .476
Years in Position

3-5 years -1.192 .794 2.253 1 .133 .304

6-10 years -1.034 .769 1.837 1 .175 .356

211 years -1.672 .829 4.074 1 .044 .188
Agency .364 .63 5 .329 1 .566 1.439
Constant 1.249 1.342 .866 1 .352 3.489

 

Note: Reference categories for the models included: a) Males, (b) Caucasian, (c) 575
cases, ((1) 1-2 years in position, and (e) Kentucky.

81

._o>o_ mc. 05 an “50$:me mm noun—8.80 ...
._o>o_ S. 05 8 385:»? mm 8:22.50 .1.

 

 

- IE. 2. as. room. 42.- 03.- so; Ea. tze. malice/s 28892

- N2. o3- at. :3. N2. 2:. we. :89 maraoﬁaasms
Electoﬁoi

- a2. 5:. me. .38. N2. 2:. 8m. ceaseseaaoa

.. 48.- 8a.- 48.- m8. Soc 8s- $152585 .5

- .. _ 8. a _. tam. the. 3. war no. E85 8 E53 a

- :48. £3. ANN. 48.- EOIEEQEH

- imam. as”. mm. Eur 85:5m .4

- :80. new. 23%? .m

- *mco. mcouogm SBmU .N

22855 EGOmonoxmm A

S a e m 4 m N sﬁﬁ>

 

880m souowmmnmm n2. was :ougaoE $030 £3» wccoacoz mo mcouocsm

has: Essence - 2 2E

82

Involvement in Mentoring Relationships and Intent to Leave

Research question ﬁve explores how involvement in mentoring relationship
impacts vocational rehabilitation counselors’ decision tO leave or remain employed
within state vocational agencies. Of the 123 participants, 95.12% (H = 117) responded tO
the survey item regarding intent to leave (i.e. What is the likelihood that you will leave
your current position within the next 5 years?) AS shown in Table 17, the overall mean
score for all participant responses to this survey item was 3.39 (SD = 1.33) which
indicates that the majority of participants reported that they are unsure or believe that
they will not leave their current position as a rehabilitation counselor. Among mentored
participants (n = 20), the mean score was 3.50 (SD = 1.19). Non-mentored participants (n
= 97), however, reported lower mean scores (M = 3.37; SD = 1.37). This difference
suggests that mentored rehabilitation counselors maybe are less likely to leave their
current job in the next 5 years. An independent t-test, however, indicates that there was
no signiﬁcant difference in intent to leave mean scores between mentored and non-
mentored rehabilitation counselors, t(115) = .391, p = .697.

In reference to how important participants perceived mentoring relationships to be
in their decision to leave or remain employed within the state vocational rehabilitation
system, there were differences in the mean scores among mentored and non-mentored
participants (Table 18). Mentored participants (n=20) reported a mean score of 3.4
(SD=1.35) while their non-mentored counterparts (n = 95) had an average score of 2.61
(SD = 1.25) on the 5-point Likert scale. An independent t-test result indicated that there
was a signiﬁcant difference in mean scores between mentored and non-mentored

rehabilitation counselors, t(113) = 2.533, p = .013. This signiﬁcance was achieved at the

83

.05 level. Therefore, mentored rehabilitation counselors perceived mentoring to be
moderately to highly important while non-mentored counselors expressed that mentoring

relationships were not as important in their decision to leave or remain employed with the

state VR system.

Table 17 — Intent to Leave

 

 

 

 

 

Mentored Non-Mentored All Participants
(M= 3.50; SD=1.2) (M=3.37; SD=1.3) (M=3.39 ; SD=1.3)
# % # % # %
within within within
groups
group groups
Deﬁnitely will leave 0 0.0% 10 10.3% 10 8.5%
Probably will leave 6 30.0% 21 21.6% 23 23.1%
Unsure 3 15.0% 17 17.5% 20 17.1%
Probably will not 6 30.0% 21 21.6% 27 23.1%
leave
Deﬁnitely will not 5 25.0% 28 28.9% 33 28.2%
leave
Item: What is the likelihood that you will leave your current position within the next 5
years?

N’s for groups: Mentored = 20; Non-Mentored =97; All Participants =117

84

Table 18 - Importance of Mentoring

 

Mentored
(M= 3.4; SD=1.35)

Non-Mentored
(M=2.6; SD=1.25)

All Participants
(M=2.75 ; SD=1.3)

 

Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Undecided

Agree

Strongly Agree

#

4

6

% within

group

5.0%

30.0%

15.0%

20.0%

30.0%

 

# % within
groups
22 23.2%
26 27.4%
21 22.1%
19 20.0%
7 7.4%

 

# % within
groups
23 20.0%
32 27.8%
24 20.9%
23 20.0%
13 1 1.3%

Item: Mentoring relationships are important in my decision to leave or remain employed
within the state vocational rehabilitation system.
N’s for groups: Mentored = 20; Non-Mentored = 95; All Participants = 115

A Pearson’s product correlation was computed to further address the relationship

between counselor decision to leave or remain employed within their current position and

importance of mentoring in such a decision (Table 19). A signiﬁcant positive

relationship, r = .236, p<.05, was found.

85

Table 19 — Correlation Matrix

Importance Of Mentoring and Decision to Leave or Remain With State Agency

 

 

Importance of Decision to Leave
Mentoring or Remain
Employed
Importance of Pearson Correlation 1 .236*
Mentoring
Sig. (2-tailed) . .011
N 115 115
Decision to Leave Pearson Correlation 236* 1
or Remain
Employed Sig. (2-tailed) .01 l
N 115 117

 

 

*Correlation is signiﬁcant at the .05 level (2-tailed).

Qualitative Data Analysis

The open-ended qualitative research question was designed to gain insight into
why rehabilitation counselors may or may not leave their current positions. The question
was explored via open-ended text responses on the on-line survey. This open-ended item
was primarily developed and implemented to address research questions ﬁve and six. As
discussed, 109 of the 123 participants (88.6%) provided responses to the open-ended
question on the online survey. Text transcripts of the open ended responses were
reviewed and coded to identify the themes. Tables 20 and 21 provide descriptive data on

the results of the qualitative theme analysis.

86

 

 

.xcmd gene $0.» $02 ..\&.E $0.3 $6.8 .xcmdm c2858
-aoZ
o\oo.o Ax56 {OWE £53 9&6 Roma $0.; $08 @8852
owﬁcoeom
@326
5:55
{Ach ﬁend $2: $0.2 six: $92 $0.8 $0.3 owﬁcoaom
=BO>O
m a. : t 2 am em 3 55:3;
283m Scoﬁoo§>w< x83
50 Haemaom binoom 8m EoEcoEEm 3.355on Smocom
“Pam Ema—mm £8. hasten—Q0 x83 \ozgoEm use than EoEoEom

 

vocab—mam EmEom no 0234 3 57.609 magmas: 288m

882:. 338%...0 “cowbﬁm I cm 2an

87

 

9:34

 

88

“oz—=3
$o.o $o.o $2: $m.: $w.m_ $Ném $m.om $o.wm 385on
0234
872:3
$o.o $o.o $0.3 $0.2 $:N $5; $5.3 $o.w 39305
$m.mm $o.mm $~d $m.mm $2: $m.v $5.? $o.m_ 0533.
384
E?
mm.mm $o.om $ma $m.mm $o.mm $o.o $m.m_ $o.mm 33305
38:
EB
$m.mm $o.mm $o.o $w.: $o.o $o.o $od $o.om ESE—mom
x53
5352
SO magnum bgoom waoﬁoo§>w< EoEBrEm can mamocom
“Pam Ecoﬁoﬁazgm 92. com bmgtomao x83 oﬁwxoﬁm 28 hi Eoﬁoaom

 

“$84 3 ESE use 882:. 038::30 Eowuoﬁm I _N 2an

Chapter V
Discussion

Prior to this study, research on career motivation and job satisfaction as mediators
of the relationship between mentoring and retention among rehabilitation counselors had
not been conducted within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. A major goal of this
dissertation was to bridge this gap by exploring the differences in levels of career
motivation and job satisfaction among VR counselors that may or may not be involved in
mentoring relationships. This dissertation examined mentoring functions experienced by
rehabilitation counselors relative to speciﬁc characteristics and how involvement in such
relationships may impact a counselor’s decision to leave or remain employed within their
current position. The researcher’s ﬁndings and interpretations contribute to the literature
by also highlighting factors other than mentoring that may impact a counselor’s decision
to leave or remain employed within state agencies.

This chapter will ﬁrst provide interpretations and analysis of the ﬁndings in terms
of each research question associated with the study. Conclusions for each of the research
questions are drawn based on the synthesis and evaluation of the current research and in
consideration of ﬁndings from previous studies. Secondly, implications for the ﬁeld of
rehabilitation counseling will be addressed. Finally, recommendations for future research,
as well as limitations Of the study will be discussed. Qualitative ﬁndings will also be
integrated throughout the discussion.

Career Motivation
Both mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation counselors reported having

moderate to high levels of motivation on the Career Motivation Scale (CMS). According

89

to independent t-tests results, differences in overall CMS scores were found to be
nonsigniﬁcant. However, within the speciﬁc domain areas there were signiﬁcant
differences in mean scores among mentored and non-mentored participants. Speciﬁcally,
protégés reported signiﬁcantly different career resilience scores than non-mentored
rehabilitation counselors. Literature supports the ﬁndings that protégés tend to have more
positive beliefs about the work that they do and tend to be more willing to take risks (Day
& Allen, 2004). Further, over 40% of the protégés involved in the current study reported
having six or more years of experience; this suggests an elevated level of career maturity.
Priyabhashini and Krishman (2005) reported that career resilience is related to career
maturity. Career maturity helps workers make decisions that demonstrate independence,
decisiveness, and willingness to compromise between needs and reality. With some Of the
present-day issues related to the economy within our society, rehabilitation counselors,
like other workers, may be experiencing increased uncertainty in the stability and future
of their present jobs (Green, 2005). The ﬁnding that mentored rehabilitation counselors
demonstrated a statistically higher level of resilience is noteworthy. This is beneﬁcial to
the counselors as well as the consumers they serve and organizations for which they are
employed. Rehabilitation counselors, especially those in mentoring relationships, are
indicating that they can be resilient during a period when work-related disruptions and
uncertainty are elevated. This could be indicative Of the impact Of mentoring On levels of
resilience among rehabilitation counselors.

In reference to the individual survey items, responses by the participants on the
CMS indicated moderate to high levels of motivation. Mentored participants’ responses

met or exceed the criterion established for importance on 20 of the 21 items. Non-

90

mentored participants, however, reported that 19 of the items were important. Further,
mentored participants consistently reported higher mean scores on the majority of the 21
survey items. The lowest career motivation scores among all participants were found in
relation to career identity. As discussed in Chapter 2, career identity is the degree to
which employees deﬁne themselves by their occupation and by the organization for
which they are employed. According to Patterson (2009), in the 19603, counselors were
the leaders in accreditation and certiﬁcation among professions. During this period,
rehabilitation counselors were connected to legislation, were active advocates for people
with disabilities, and worked primary for the state-federal program. Identity issues among
rehabilitation counselors have Since increased. Shifts in perspectives regarding such
issues as where rehabilitation counselors should be employed and the debate regarding
licensure (Leahy, 2002; Patterson, 2009; Patterson, Szymanski & Parker, 2005) have
ﬁreled the identity conﬂict for most professionals. Discussions regarding whether
rehabilitation counseling is a profession or a specialty has also impacted the professional
identity Of counselors. Therefore, the representation of low scores in the identity domain
scores was not an unexpected outcome because rehabilitation counselors have been
plagued with issues regarding identity for decades.

There has been an increased focus on making rehabilitation counseling a central
component within society (Patterson, 2009). TO achieve this goal, there should be a
concerted effort to increase the perspectives Of professional identity within the
rehabilitation counseling community. This can be achieved by creating professional
environments that provide continuous training, opportunities for growth, and supportive,

quality relationships. As supported by the research literature, the development and

91

implementation of formal mentoring programs that include speciﬁc Objectives that focus
on issues faced by those employed within a particular organization can be beneﬁcial
(Ragins, Cotton & Miller, 2000). Creating mentoring programs with speciﬁc focus areas
within the state VR system could be a major step in better addressing issues related to
professional identity among rehabilitation counselors.

Lastly, career motivation appears to be connected to turnover. The majority of the
qualitative responses of participants (19.7%) that reported moderate to high levels career
motivation indicated that the meaningful work that they currently do as a rehabilitation
counselor was the main factor other than mentoring that impacts their decision to leave or
remain employed within their current position. The next two most important factors were
‘Pay/Beneﬁts’ (18.9%) and ‘Retirement’ (18.9%). The least reported qualitative themes
reported by these participants were ‘Job Security’ (8.2%), ‘Personal and Family Issues’
(3.3%), and ‘Burn Out’ (2.3%).

Job Satisfaction

According to previous studies, rehabilitation counselors generally have high
levels of job satisfaction (Armstrong, Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis & Hurley, 2008).
Overall, rehabilitation counselors in the present study reported moderate to high levels of
satisfaction further supporting previous research. As a side note, non-mentored
participants reported satisfaction on all domains while mentored participant’s satisfaction
levels existed in all areas except for ‘Opportunities for Promotion’. This level of reported
satisfaction was supported by the qualitative responses for mentored participants; some Of
the participants (9.2%) reported ‘Opportunity for Advancement’ as a reason impacting

their decision to leave or remain in their current position over the next ﬁve years.

92

Although no statistically Signiﬁcant differences were Observed in the overall mean
scores for each domain of the aJDI among participants, protégés scores tended to be
higher than their non-mentored counterparts. Historically, job satisfaction levels for
mentored workers are often higher than scores Of non-mentored workers (Cuesta &
Bloom, 1998; Fergenson, 1989). Factors including demographic characteristics (e. g.
years in position, age), current societal issues (e. g. economy, job security), or the quality
of the mentoring relationship may be connected to why average scores were lower for
mentored rehabilitation counselors in some areas (i.e. Opportunity for Promotion and
Work on Job). In particular, researchers have found a signiﬁcant correlation between job
satisfaction and the overall quality of mentoring relationships (Kammeyer-Mueller &
Judge’ 2008). Given the limited sample of mentored participants and type of data
gathered, more extensive research may provide statistically signiﬁcant support for the
beneﬁts of mentoring in these areas.

Psychosocial Functions of Mentoring

Prote'gés reported signiﬁcantly different mean scores in psychosocial functions of
mentoring relative to agency type. Signiﬁcant differences may be due to a number of
reasons including the organizational differences relative to the structure and culture of the
two state agencies involved in the study. As discussed, The Ofﬁce Of Vocational
Rehabilitation in Kentucky has a formal mentoring program and employs fewer
rehabilitation counselors than the Illinois system. Protégés employed within the state of
Kentucky may have had more in-depth education and training regarding the process and

value Of mentoring thus impacting their perceptions of the psychosocial functions during

93

interactions with their mentor. Due to the lack Of a formal mentoring program in Illinois,
there were some obvious differences in the psychosocial functions mean scores.

Nonsigniﬁcant differences in the mean scores according to gender, race, and type
of mentoring were found in the psychosocial domain of the Noe’s Mentoring Functions
Scale. Female (M= 57.54; SD = 4.37) and male protégés (M= 57.30; SD = 9.14)
reported similar perceptions of the level of psychosocial functions received during
interactions with mentors. Although research suggests that positive outcomes for male
protégés are generally higher, females Often receive higher levels of psychosocial
functions than males (Eby, Allen, Evans, Ng & DuBois, 2008). Lastly, psychosocial
functions of mentoring scores for protégés involved in informal relationships were lower
than those in formal relationships. Previous research would suggest that those in informal
relationships perceive themselves to receive more psychosocial aspects of mentoring
(Chao, Walz & Gardner, 1992, Clutterbuck & Ragins, 2002; Ragins & Cotton, 1999).
The reasons for the difference in the current study are unknown and should be explored
with future studies.
Career Functions of Mentoring

NO signiﬁcant differences in career function mean scores relative to gender, race,
type of mentoring and agency were found. Minority rehabilitation counselors reported
having received higher levels of career-related functions of mentoring than their White
counterparts. This was not expected to be an outcome of the present study because White
protégés are often more likely to receive higher levels of career-related guidance and
support in mentoring relationships than protégés from other racial and ethnic

backgrounds (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz & Lima, 2004).

94

Rehabilitation counselors involved in formal mentoring relationships reported
higher mean scores on career-related functions of mentoring. Previous research supports
the ﬁndings that protégés in formal mentoring relationships are receiving more career-
related functions than non-mentored counselors. As for agency type and career function
of mentoring, protégés employed within the state of Kentucky reported lower mean
scores than those employed in Illinois. Higher scores for participants from Kentucky
were expected. However, a larger percentage of protégés from Illinois reported being
involved in formal mentoring relationships thus making the likelihood of having received
more career related support and guidance from their mentors higher.

Predictors of Involvement in Mentoring Relationships

The likelihood of an employee’s involvement in mentoring can depend on a wide-
range of factors including personal needs, gender, age, and current position within an
organization (Darwin, 2000; Doughery, Turban & Haggard, 2007). Previous studies have
explored such factors to gather in-depth information regarding to what extent these and
other variables predict involvement in mentoring. The current study included a model
based on previous research literature and characteristics of the participants involved in
the study. The model included gender, age, agency, years in current position and. race as
possible predictors. As discussed in the previous chapter, results indicated that years in
current position was a strong predictor of the likelihood Of a rehabilitation counselor
engaging in a mentoring relationship. Findings suggest that those with eleven or more
years are less likely to be involved in a mentoring relationship than counselors with 1-2
years of experience. All other variables included in the regression model were found to

be nonsigniﬁcant.

95

The signiﬁcant outcome of the logistic regression may be due to several reasons
not fully determined by the current study. However, it is hypothesized that the promotion
process within the state vocational rehabilitation system may be related to this outcome.
During this period, rehabilitation may be transitioning to supervisory or advanced
positions. Therefore, these individuals may be involved in mentoring relationships but as
mentors rather than protégés. Offering opportunities to engage in mentoring as protégés
at this level can however be essential to professional development and job satisfaction
(Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008).. Further, promotion can be a delightful yet stressful
and challenging period for workers. Mentoring relationships could be a piece to the
puzzle used to make the transition smoother. Therefore, continued focus on this group of
counselors is necessary. It is imperative, however, that mentoring models are also
incorporated into training and continuous education programs for novice counselors.

Mentoring has been used to recruit new professions into the state vocational
rehabilitation system (Phillips-Pointer, 2006). Further, there is strong evidence linking
socialization and effective commitment (Mitus, 2006). Developing and implementing a
model that infuses the principles of mentoring related to agency goals and values is
essential. Rehabilitation counselor education programs and state agencies can collaborate
to introduce the model to students. Continuous use and improvement Of existing models
including counselors at all levels could be an inﬂuential factor in keeping rehabilitation
counselors employed within the vocational rehabilitation system.

Functions of Mentoring and Career Motivation
A correlational analysis was used to address the relationship between mentoring

functions (i.e. psychosocial and career) and overall and domain CMS scores for mentored

96

participants. Day and Allen (2004) suggest that having mentors who provide quality
psychosocial and career-related guidance facilitates career involvement, successful
outcomes, and positive attitudes. When protégés are presented with constructive
feedback, positive reinforcement and support for work-related performance can increase
career insight (Day & Allen; London & Brag, 1984). As expected, outcomes of the study
support existing literature by indicating a signiﬁcant relationship between functions of
mentoring and career motivation (Day & Allen, 2004). As career functions of mentoring
scores increased so did the overall career motivation scores of the counselors. This was
speciﬁcally noted with the CMS domain regarding career insight. Qualitative responses
supported these ﬁndings. Several participants with high levels Of career motivation
suggested in their responses that they received positive support and feedback regarding
work-related performance. For example, one participant stated that “I choose to remain in
this position because I am motivated. It is interesting and rewarding. I receive praise for
my work and commitment. I know that I am doing a good job and it helps when my
supervisor lets me know.”
Functions of Mentoring and Job Satisfaction

Rehabilitation counselors involved in mentoring relationships reported high levels
of job satisfaction and functions of mentoring received from mentors. As expected, there
was a statistically signiﬁcant relationship between protége' job satisfaction levels and
ﬁrnctions of mentoring. This suggests that if rehabilitation counselors are involved in
relationships where they are receiving quality psychosocial and career related assistance

from mentors they will be satisﬁed with their job. As noted in Chapter 4, positive

97

relationships were also noticed between rehabilitation counselors’ satisfaction with
supervision, people at work, and overall work related duties.
Turnover

Turnover is a critical issue within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling and must
be addressed using diverse methods. A good predictor of actual turnover is an employee’s
intention to leave his or current position (Layne, Hohenshil & Singh, 2004, Armstrong,
Hawley, Blankenship, Lewis & Hurley, 2008). A narrow majority of all rehabilitation
counselors (51.2%) involved in the study reported that they probably or deﬁnitely will
not leave their current position over the next ﬁve years. Further, protégés (n = 20) in the
study reported that over the next ﬁve years they are less likely to leave their current
position than those rehabilitation counselors not being mentored (M = 3.50; SD = 1.19).
As highlighted by the emergent themes of the study, the reasons for why the
rehabilitation counselors may or may not leave vary. Included in Tables 22 and 23 are
responses from participants who reported the likelihood Of leaving or staying.

Protégés perceived mentoring to be an important factor in their decision to leave
or remain employed within the state VR system. This is important information because it
demonstrates that protégés recognize the impact Of involvement in mentoring
relationShips and believe that participating in mentoring can be inﬂuential. However,
protégés also identiﬁed factors other than mentoring (e. g. retirement, work environment
and lack of opportunity for advancement) that may impact their decision to leave or
remain employed within the state VR system. Samples of protégés’ responses are
included in Table 24. These results indicate that mentoring can be an important piece of

the puzzle if infused into the organizational structure of state agencies. However, it is

98

imperative that other areas Of concern similar to those identiﬁed by participants in the
study are addressed in order for the relationships to have a substantial impact on turnover

among rehabilitation counselors.

Table 22 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Likely to Leave

Factors Impacting Decision tO Leave or Remain

 

Sample Responses

 

I am burned out. Health suffered from demands and treatment from former supervisor.
I have been here a long time and have built up in the retirement system.

If I was to choose to leave my current position it would be due to one co-worker
creating a negative work environment and having control over the supervisor.

If my salary does not increase that may be a cause to leave the current position. I have
not received a raise or any awards since 2004.

More opportunity to be respected as a very knowledgeable professional

Leave to look for more autonomy to do my job

Retirement

Recent over-punitive attitude of administration makes me want to leave but I can’t
ﬁnancially afford to do so. I can’t afford to ﬁnd another job with my degree that pays
close to what I now make.

Change in job for a nine month position to better maintain my family.

Income. The adjoining state pays more for the same job and smaller caseloads, as well
as the federal government.

The uncertainty and stress Of the state budget/ﬁnancial situation is certainly causing me
to consider other Options, which I would not otherwise entertain

 

99

Table 23 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Not Likely to Leave

Factors Impacting Decision to Leave or Remain

 

Sample Responses

 

I am invested in rehab, like my job and feel good about the accomplishments of my
consumers.

I am staying in this position until I retire.
I like assisting people with disabilities, plus the paperwork is minimal.

I would probably leave due to not having a mentor or not being tolerated for taking time
to learn the job well. People seem to be doing things on their own.

It is something that I can do and I have a disability. It would be very difﬁcult to replace
this job. I have had good mentoring.

It is the perfect job for me and my skills.
It’s never dull, always something different and unique each passing day.
Promotion could cause me tO leave.

The income pays well compared to other kind[s] of employment opportunities. Good
beneﬁts, annual increases, etc. and ﬁts well with my education.

Voc rehab is a passion; we do good work to help individuals improve their lives. I value
the people I work with, the services we provide, and the environment in which I get to
work.

 

100

Table 24 - Sample Qualitative Responses: Protégés

Factors Impacting Decision to Leave or Remain

 

Sample Responses

 

Job security and health beneﬁts, ﬂexible work schedule.

Have been in vocational counseling 26+ years. Want to retire and do something else,
like writing or consulting.

I would get paid more in the private sector. I’ve been trying for 3 years to be
upgraded/promoted. Some employees who have the same credentials I do get paid
much more than I do and are hired in making more money.

Pay grade; have a masters degree but was hired in at a grade 12. Unfair hire/personnel
system; others I work with do not have Master’s but are grade 13. Will leave if this is
not resolved in a timely manner.

Promotion could cause me to leave.

Only if I build enough momentum to take my credentials and move on to a different
career, I would like to work with Public Schools as a Counselor or Social Worker at the
Elementary level.

Retirement.

If not fulﬁlled in my job.

 

Emergent Themes

As shown throughout the chapter, participants in the study reported several
relevant factors impacting whether they may choose to leave or remain employed with
the state vocational rehabilitation system over the next ﬁve years. Several emergent
themes were identiﬁed following analysis of the responses. Further, the perceptions of the

participants were relevant in further interpreting and understanding research questions

101

addressed in the study. The emergent themes (Table 25) identiﬁed in the current study
were supported by previous research on turnover and intent to leave in the rehabilitation
counseling literature (Dew, Alan & Tomlinson, 2008). The three major reasons impacting
these decisions were ‘Retirement’, ‘Pay and Beneﬁts’, and ‘Enjoyable and Meaningful
Work”. These ﬁndings were not unexpected. However, burn out among rehabilitation
counselors was reported as one of the least signiﬁcant themes. In previous research this
theme was more likely to be identiﬁed as a major reason for turnover. This may be due to
the nature of the study or concerns regarding self-disclosure among participants. The

reasons for this ﬁnding should be further explored in future studies.

Table 25 - Emergent Qualitative Themes

Reasons Participants May or May Not Leave Current Position

 

 

Theme Percentage
Retirement 22.9%

Pay and Beneﬁts 22.0%
Enjoyable and Meaninng Work 22.0%
Work Environment 17.4%
Opportunity of Advancement 15.6%

Job Security 10.1%
Family and Personal Reasons 3.7%
Burnout 2.8%

 

102

Limitations

Logistical issues with the overall response rate presented limitations for the study.
Speciﬁcally, the sample of mentored participants was smaller than preferred and
restricted the power needed to Obtain signiﬁcant results. Further, the response rate among
mentored participants did not yield a signiﬁcant amount of variance. This contributed to
the limited levels of analysis that could be conducted regarding differences among
mentored and non-mentored participants. This also limited the assumptions that could be
made about the impact of mentoring on the career motivation, job satisfaction and
retention levels among rehabilitation counselors in the study. The participants were asked
if they were currently in a mentoring relationship as a protége'; following up with
questions about past relationships and allowing participants to use those relationships as
the reference for completing the survey may have helped to increase the sample size of
mentored participants.

The sample of vocational rehabilitation counselors employed within the Kentucky
and Illinois State Rehabilitation systems were samples of convenience. The sample Of
rehabilitation counselors in the study was small as compared to the entire population of
rehabilitation counselors working in state vocational rehabilitation agencies across the
United States. Therefore, this limits the ability to generalize the results of the study across
all rehabilitation counselors. Further, some individuals may have considered themselves
to be rehabilitation counselors but may be in other positions such as District Manager or
Supervisor. By not accounting for this in the overall design, some potential participants

were excluded due to issues related to professional title.

103

The study also used a self-report methodology. An underlying assumption exists
to level of validity that can be assumed. It was assumed that rehabilitation counselors had
a clear understanding Of mentoring based on their own personal and professional
experiences and from the deﬁnition provided in the online survey. However, there is no
way to conﬁrm that there was a concrete understanding of the concept.

The grouping of certain variables (i.e. types of mentoring and racial/ethnic
background) was also a limitation of the study. It limited the depth of information and
analysis. Further, the quantitative survey did not allow for the opportunity to pursue lines
of questioning that emerged as a result of the research itself. The design and procedures
of the research did not allow the researcher to determine causality between mentoring and
turnover, job satisfaction and career motivation. Replication of this study should include
diverse methods of data collection to account for this limitation.

Lastly, this was the ﬁrst study within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling to
explore career motivation and job satisfaction as mediators of the relationship between
mentoring and retention among state VR counselors. Therefore, the researcher was
unable to compare ﬁndings to previous research conducted on rehabilitation counselors
employed within the state vocational rehabilitation system. Generalizability of results
should be established through future research.

Implications

The results Of the exploratory study appear to have potential implications for the
ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. This investigation takes a step towards discovering the
levels of job satisfaction and career motivation among vocational rehabilitation

counselors involved in mentoring relationships and their non-mentored counterparts. The

104

results of this study could be used to facilitate discussion about the impact of mentoring.
Findings could also initiate steps to explore in further detail why certain factors are
impacting a counselor’s decision to leave or remain employed within a state VR agency
and how mentoring relationships can serve as a tool to increase retention levels. As
evidenced in the study, rehabilitation counselors are motivated and satisﬁed with their
current careers and the work that they do. Perhaps the greatest implications of the study
are for state vocational rehabilitation agencies and the counselors employed within these
agencies.
Implications for State Vocational Rehabilitation Agencies

Incorporating mentoring and the principles of such relationships into the
organizational structure of the state vocational rehabilitation system may involve some
Obstacles. Nevertheless, the present study suggests that mentoring is related to important
facets of the career motivation and job satisfaction of rehabilitation counselors. These
facets of working are highly related to turnover and retention levels among workers.
Therefore, attempting to strategically incorporate mentoring into the organizational
structure and daily operations of state agencies would be a springboard in addressing
some of the major issues plaguing the state vocational system. This invaluable training
tool and support mechanism could be helpful to the counselors as well as the
organization. If infused into the culture, mentoring programs should be designed,
structured and implemented in a manner that allows for counselors’ personal and
professional concerns to be addressed. Mentoring can only be a piece of the puzzle used
to address issues related to retention. As shown in the study, many rehabilitation

counselors perceive that other factors impact their decision to leave or remain employed

105

within state agencies. Continuous exploration of these factors could be achieved through
diverse methods of mentoring.

Each state agency has a unique culture of its Own. Development of a general
model of mentoring for the state vocational rehabilitation system will be an important
ﬁrst step. However, speciﬁc modules concerning the focus of the mentoring relationships
will be necessary for each agency and individual mentoring relationships. In this quest to
increase retention levels and decrease turnover, it is important to have mechanisms in
place to “help de-emphasize or completely eliminate adversities” speciﬁc to the work
environment and duties of rehabilitation counselors (F eist-Price, 1994, p. 1 6). Mentoring
could be an avenue to reaching this goal within the state vocational rehabilitation system.

Succession planning could also be a method of addressing the turnover issues
within the state vocational rehabilitation system. As indicated by the current study, a
signiﬁcant amount of rehabilitation counselors reported retirement as a major reason why
they may leave their current position over the next ﬁve years. There will be a shortage of
qualiﬁed rehabilitation counselors to ﬁll these positions. Succession plans take this issue
into account. These plans will assist in ensuring that qualiﬁed and competent
rehabilitation counselors are available to ﬁll these positions once vacant. Succession
plans require that employees with years of experience and competence monitor those
with less years of experience over an extended period of time while providing guidance
and periodical feedback related to performance. The incorporation of mentoring into
succession plans could better assist in making this process a successful and meaningful
one for both the organizational and counselors. This process would also include the

mentoring of novice counselors by those with a certain amount of experience and

106

leadership within the rehabilitation system. Further, mentoring could also be used to
address issues related to lack of advancement Opportunities described by counselors as a
major reason impacting their career motivation, job satisfaction and intent to leave.
Implications for Rehabilitation Counselors

Access to educational information about the mentoring process and rationale for
its incorporation into the state vocational rehabilitation system will have major
implications for rehabilitation counselors. However, tO have the desired impact on
retention and succession planning, several interventions must be considered. For
example, training sessions on the mentoring process should be infused into orientation
and continuous education training to better educate the counselors about the concept of
mentoring. This training will provide the counselors with foundational knowledge
concerning the types, functions, and beneﬁts of mentoring. Training in mentoring will
also allow for feedback that can ultimately be used in the development of formal
programs. Rehabilitation counselors must also gain an understanding of the differences
and similarities in mentoring and supervisory relationships. Far too often, changes occur
within the state vocational rehabilitation system without the inclusion Of the rehabilitation
counselors. It is imperative that they are thoroughly involved in the process of developing
and implementing mentoring programs. Achieving this goal can begin by educating the
counselors and Obtaining information regarding their perspectives of the mentoring
process.

Lastly, rehabilitation counselors must be provided with solid information for the
rationale of the implementation Of mentoring programs. Sharing the general beneﬁts

associated with mentoring will be helpful. However, providing the rehabilitation

107

counselors with comprehensive information on mentoring and its relationship to current
issues within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling will be essential. Providing
information on the job satisfaction and career motivation of mentored and non-mentored
rehabilitation counselors will further explain the rationale for such supportive
relationships. State agencies should also talk in depth with counselors about their needs
and concerns and discuss how mentoring would assist in helping with these concerns.
Providing comprehensive training and information sessions on the rationale of mentoring
will be an important component of successfully orienting rehabilitation counselors to the
concept of mentoring as well as beginning the process of incorporating such programs
into the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling.
Implications for Research

This is the ﬁrst empirical study of this nature within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation
counseling. The goal was to generate interest in the research area and provide as many
answers to questions as possible. It is hoped that this study will be the beginning of a line
of research that addresses the issues of retention within the ﬁeld regarding counselor
motivation, satisfaction, and involvement in mentoring relationships. Future research
projects that include larger samples of mentored and non-mentored counselors are needed
to support the ﬁndings from the present study. This larger sample might also allow more
in-depth understanding of potential differences in formal and informal mentoring
programs. A more comprehensive study comparing several state agencies with formal
mentoring against those without Should also be studied in the future.

Gaining a more concrete understanding of how rehabilitation counselors deﬁne

and perceive mentoring will also be a practical direction for research. The current

108

research study provided participants with a deﬁnition of mentoring. However, having an
opportunity for rehabilitation counselors to deﬁne the concept would be beneﬁcial in
future research studies. This would allow for interdisciplinary comparisons as well as the
Opportunity for a comprehensive deﬁnition of mentoring within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation
counseling to be developed. Feedback regarding how rehabilitation counselors perceive
mentoring will help researchers to develop more studies relevant to mentoring and its
impact on rehabilitations counselors.

Supervision is an important component that assists in the development of
competent and qualiﬁed rehabilitation counselors. The design and implementation of the
supervisory process within the state vocational rehabilitation system has helped to
enhance the critical thinking skills, psychosocial involvement and case conceptualization
Skills of counselors (Herbert, 2004b; Stebnicki, 1998). Mentoring addresses some of the
same areas as supervision and can assist counselors in their personal and professional
growth. However, distinct differences (e.g. levels of power, mandates for evaluation)
exist between the two types of relationships (Darwin, 2000). Addressing the perceived
differences in supervision and mentoring would also be a great additive to future
research. Information gathered from research of this nature could assist in the orientation
process and training of vocational rehabilitation counselors. Providing counselors with a
solid foundation of knowledge regarding the mentoring process and how it is similar yet
different from the supervisory relationship may increase participation in formal
mentoring programs, general understanding of the mentoring process, and willingness to

seek out mentors to assist with psychosocial and career-related needs.

109

Developing and implementing qualitative research studies related to mentoring
within vocational rehabilitation system will be beneﬁcial. Research designed with a
qualitative methodology could better assist in gathering initial data to develop distinct
research focal points and questions to further examine mentoring within the ﬁeld. Focus
groups or structured interviews would allow for probing by researchers and Opportunities
for mentored and non-mentored rehabilitation counselors to fully share their experiences
of working within the state vocational rehabilitation system as well as their involvement
in supportive relationships such as mentoring. For example, including qualitative
questions allowing rehabilitation to describe their perceptions of the differences and
similarities in mentoring and supervision will help to provide a greater distinction
between the two relationships and offer greater insight for researchers.

Qualitative research will also allow for improved data regarding the factors
impacting career motivation, job satisfaction, and intent to leave among mentored and
non-mentored rehabilitation counselors. Research of this type will also assist in providing
“more holistic and in-depth understanding of mentoring relationships” (Scandura &
Pellergrini, 2007). Within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling, state vocational
rehabilitation agencies would be the optimal starting point for such research.

Lastly, gathering data on the experiences and perceptions of mentors within the
ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling can improve current research in this area. This study
provides a glimpse into who is being mentored and outcomes associated with these
relationships relative to career motivation, job satisfaction, and turnover. Having a body

of literature within the ﬁeld that includes mentors and information regarding their

110

experiences will only improve the knowledge base and understanding about the
mentoring process and its role in state vocational rehabilitation agencies.
Conclusions

The mixed-methods design provided data to better understand the career
motivation and job satisfaction of rehabilitation counselors involved in the study. This
study identiﬁed factors that impact turnover within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling.
As indicated by the study, involvement in mentoring relationships is not the only factor
impacting rehabilitation counselor decisions to leave or remain employed within the state
vocational rehabilitation system. These emergent themes included retirement,
pay/beneﬁts, opportunity of advancement, burnt out, personal/family issues,
enjoyable/meaningful work, job security, and work environment. Findings did, however,
suggest that counselors involved in mentoring relationships are less likely to leave their
current position over the next ﬁve years. Further, protégés had signiﬁcantly different
perceptions regarding the level of importance Of mentoring in making this decision.

Rehabilitation counselors involved in this study also reported that they are
moderately to highly motivated and satisﬁed workers. Moreover, qualitative responses
supported the participants’ perceived levels of motivation and satisfaction. This is critical
because rehabilitation counselors enjoy the work that they are doing with consumers.
However, other issues (e. g. retirement, opportunities for advancement) are ultimately
going to be the deciding factors impacting turnover. Addressing these concerns while
continuing to understand what motivates and keep the counselors satisﬁed will be critical
over the next ﬁve years. The incorporation of mentoring into the state agency system will

be a major step in addressing and tending to these issues. As discussed, the infusion of

111

mentoring into succession planning may perhaps be a method used by state agencies as
well.

In today’s world of work, uncertainty among the American worker is higher than
ever. Involvement in supportive relationships that provide workers with a renewed spirit
and conﬁdence is essential. Principles of rehabilitation counseling promote assisting
consumers holistically. The same principles should exist in how state agencies approach
issues regarding the work experiences of rehabilitation counselors. Whether psychosocial
or career related, there are potential beneﬁts from involvement in mentoring
relationships. Understanding rehabilitation counselor needs and addressing them with
diverse methods is necessary. This level Of involvement can be beneﬁcial to not only the
counselor but also the agency. Further, it is hypothesized that motivated and satisﬁed
counselors that plan on staying in their current position will better serve consumers.
Understanding the nature of this working alliance between mentors and protégés would
also be beneﬁcial in the future. The current study was a beginning to better
understanding the potential impact of mentoring and how to better incorporate mentoring
while continuing to address the concerns of counselors and retention issues within state

vocational rehabilitation agencies.

112

APPENDICES

113

Appendix A: Noe’s Mentoring Role Instrument

5-point Likert Scale Responses
1 = Very Slight Extent

2 = Slight Extent

3 = Neutral

4 = Large Extent

5 = Very Large Extent

 

Psychosocial Functions of Mentoring

 

10.

11.

12.

l3.

l4.

Mentor has shared history of his/her career with you.

Mentor has encouraged you to prepare for advancement.

Mentor has encouraged me to try new ways Of behaving in my job.

I try to imitate the work behavior of my mentor

I agree with my mentor's attitudes and values regarding education

I respect and admire my mentor.

I will try to be like my mentor when I reach a similar position in my career.
My mentor has demonstrated good listening skills in our conversations.
My mentor has discussed my questions or concerns regarding feelings of
competence, commitment to advancement, relationships with peers and

supervisors or work/family conﬂicts.

My mentor has shared personal experiences as an alternative perspective to my
problems.

My mentor has encouraged me to talk Openly about anxiety and fears that detract
from my work.

My mentor has conveyed empathy for the concerns and feelings I have discussed
with him/her.

My mentor kept feelings and doubts I shared with him/her in strict conﬁdence.

My mentor has conveyed feelings of respect for me as an individual.

 

114

 

Career Functions of Mentoring

 

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

Mentor reduced unnecessary risks that could threaten the possibility of receiving a
promotion.

Mentor helped you ﬁnish assignments/tasks or meet deadlines that otherwise
would have been difﬁcult to complete.

Mentor helped you meet new colleagues.

Mentor gave you (or makes you aware of) assignments that increased written and
personal contact with administrators.

Mentor assigned responsibility to you that have increased your contact with
people in the district who may judge your potential for future advancement.

Mentor gave you assignments or tasks in your work that prepare you for an
administrative position.

Mentor gave (or request others to give) you assignments that present opportunities
to learn new skills.

 

115

Appendix B: Day & Allen’s Career Motivation Scale

S-pOint Likert Scale Responses
1 = None or Hardly Any

2 = Some
3 = Moderately
4 = Much

5 = Completely

 

Adapted from London (1993) and Noe et al. (1990)*

 

Career Insight

 

l. I have a speciﬁc plan for achieving my career goal. N

 

2. I have changed or revised my career goals based on new information I have
received regarding my situation or myself. N

 

3. I have sought job assignments that will help me obtain my career goal. N

 

4. I have clear career goals. L

 

5. I have realistic career goals. L

 

6. I know my strengths (what I can do well). L

 

7. I am aware of my weaknesses (the things I am not good at). L

 

Career Resilience

 

1. 1 am able to adapt to changing circumstances. L

 

2. I am willing to take risks. (Outcomes with uncertain outcomes) L

 

3. I welcome job and organizational changes. L

 

4. I can adequately handle work problems that come my way. L

 

5. I believe other people when they tell me that I have done a good job. N

 

6. I have designed better ways Of doing my work. N

 

7. I have outlined ways Of accomplishing jobs without waiting for my boss. N

 

Career Identity

 

l. I am very involved in my job. L

 

2. I see myself as a professional and or technical expert. L

 

3. I spend free time on activities that will help my job. N

 

4. I have taken courses toward a job-related degree. N

 

5. I stay abreast of developments in my line of work. N

 

6. I have volunteered for important assignments with the intent Of helping to
further my advancement possibilities. D

 

 

7. 1 have requested to be considered for promotions. D

 

 

*L, Items from London’s scale; N, Items from Noe’s Scale, D, New Items.

116

Appendix C: Abridged Job Descriptive Index

The Abridged Job Descriptive Index (aJDI) could not be included due to copyright
restrictions.

Please aJDI is available from

J DI Research Group

Bowling Green State University
Department of Psychology
Bowling Green, OH 43403
Phone: (419) 372-8247
jdi_ra@bgnet.bgsu.edu

117

Appendix D: Turnover and Impact of Mentoring Scales

 

Turnover

 

What is the likelihood that you will leave your current position within the next 5 years?
5- point Likert Scale Responses

1 = Deﬁnitely will leave

2 = Probably will leave

3 = Unsure

4 = Probably will not leave
5 = Deﬁnitely will not leave

 

Mentoring

 

Mentoring relationships are important in my decision to leave or remain employed
within the state vocational rehabilitation system.

5-point Likert Scale Responses

1 = Strongly Disagree

2 = Disagree
3 = Undecided
4 = Agree

5 = Strongly Agree

 

118

Appendix E: Qualitative Question

 

Qualitative Question: Open-ended

 

What is the major reason why you may choose to leave or remain employed in your
current position?

 

119

Appendix F: Demographic Questionnaire

For each multiple choice question, 'select/click' on the button next to or below your
response. For Open-ended questions, please type your answer in the box provided.

1. Age

2. Gender
Female

t‘ Male

3. Race/Ethnicity
I" African American
I' Asian American
[— Caucasian
[— .

Latino(a)
'— Native American/Paciﬁc Islander
1"

Other (please _s_pecify)

 

4. Highest Degree Held
t“ Bachelors Degree
F Masters Degree
r PhD
In what area is your highest degree held?

Rehabilitation Counseling

Rehabilitation Psychology

Psychology

Social Work

Other Counseling Specialty (e. g. Guidance and Counseling, Mental Health)

5.
r‘
F
r“
t“
r‘
C Other Rehabilitation Specialty (e. g. Voc. Evaluation, Job Placement, Rehabilitation
Services)
c

Other (please Specify)

 

I

120

6. Current Job Title
F Rehabilitation Counselor
t“ Rehabilitation Assistant
F Rehabilitation Technician
(" .

Supervrsor
1" District Manager
r“ Site Manager
(c

Other (please specify)

 

__

7. Credentials (check all that apply)

1" Certiﬁed Rehabilitation Counselor (CRC)

1" Certiﬁed Case Manager (CCM)

I" Certiﬁed Disability Management Specialists(CDMS)
l'" Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC)

1" Limited Licensed Professional Counselor (LLPC)

l—

r

Other (please specify)

 

8. Years in Position
F Less than 1 year
F 1-2 years
F 3-5 years
(a

6-10 years
F

11-15 years
1‘"

Over 15 years

9. Current Salary
F Less than $24,000
F $24,000 tO $29,999
F $30,000 to $35,999
I“ $36,000 to $41,999
F $42,000 to $47,999
r $48,000 or more

121

10. Size of Caseload
F <20 cases
F 21-40 cases
F 41-75 cases
t‘ 76-100 cases
F 101-130 cases
F >130 cases

11. * Are you currently involved in a mentoring relationship as a protége'?

Note:

Mentoring is deﬁned as "a nurturing process in which a more skilled or more experienced
person, serving as a role model, teaches, sponsors, encourages, counsels, and befriends a
less skilled or less experienced person for the purpose of promoting the latter's
professional and/or personal development" (Anderson and Shannon, 1988, p.40). A
protégé is a less experienced employee who is trained and guided by a more experienced
employee (Healy, 1997).Through this developmental process, Opportunities are provided
by a mentor to a protégé which, in turn, shapes the protégé's psychosocial and career
experiences.

r
Yes

(NO

12. Currently, how many mentoring relationships are you involved in as a protégé?

Considering your most inﬂuential mentor, please answer the following Questions.

13. Is your relationship with your current mentor a formal or informal relationship?

 

Note: "Formal mentoring relationships are developed, structured and endorsed by the
employer and/or organization. Informal mentoring relationships are not managed or
structured by organizations."

Formal

Informal

122

14. If you are involved in a formal mentoring program, who developed, structured and
endorsed the program?
F

Not involved in a formal mentoring relationship
State Agency System
District Ofﬁce

Other (please specify)

”1’13

 

—-—-1

15. How long have you been involved in this mentoring relationship?

 

H

6. On average, how much time do you spend with this mentor per month?

F Less than 1 hour
C 1-3 hours
t“
4-6 hours
a
7-9 hours
t“

10 or more hours

17. Gender of this mentor?

Female

Male

—I
00

. Racial/Ethnic Background Of Mentor? (check all that apply)
African American
Asian American
Caucasian
Hispanic/Latino(a)
Native American/Paciﬁc Islander
Unknown
Other (please specify)

"I—I—I‘T'l'lj

 

_—.—1

19. Approximate age of mentor?

 

123

Appendix G: Survey Introduction and Informed Consent

 

 

Informed Consent Form

Introduction

Research exploring the underlying processes and impact of successful mentorship is
lacking within the ﬁeld of rehabilitation counseling. The purpose of this study is to
contribute to the understanding Of the impact that mentoring has on several factors (e. g.
career motivation and job satisfaction) related to turnover among rehabilitation
counselors employed within state vocational rehabilitation agencies. The Objective of the
present study is to begin to bridge the gap in existing literature by examining career
motivation and job satisfaction as mediators of the relationship between mentoring and
retention among state VR counselors

Procedures

Please complete the survey and the brief demographic questionnaire. Your participation
will require about 15-20 minutes Of your time. At the completion of the survey, you will
be asked to submit your survey to the researcher.

RiskS/Beneﬁts

The risks in this study are minimal. As a result of completing the survey, you may
experience emotional/cognitive reactions related to your personal experiences with
mentoring. As a participant, you may gain insight into the role of mentoring in your
personal and professional development. Further, insight can be gained into what factors
may be inﬂuencing your levels Of career motivation and job satisfaction an employee
working within the state vocational rehabilitation system.

Conﬁdentiality

This web-based survey is anonymous. This means that you can not be identiﬁed by the
information you provide. Your identity can not be revealed in any report produced from
this study. The research records will be stored in a secure, password protected computer
ﬁle in the researcher’s research ofﬁce. Your identity will be protected to the maximum
extent allowable by law.

Voluntary Participation/Withdrawal

Your participation in this study is voluntary. You may decide to or not to participate in
this study. If you do participate, you may freely withdraw from the study at any time
without penalty. You may also refuse to answer any particular questions.

 

124

 

 

 

Questions l

If you have questions about the study, please contact Cozetta D. Shannon, Doctoral I
Candidate in Rehabilitation Counselor Education at Michigan State University, via e-mail
shann050@msu.edu or telephone (517-432-9619) or Timothy Tansey, Ph.D., Assistant |
Professor, Michigan State University, via e-mail ttansey@msu.edu or telephone (517-
432-0273).

In case you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, please
feel free to contact, anonymously if you wish, Judy McMillan, Director, Human Research
Protection Program, Michigan State University, by phone: (517) 355-2180, email:
irb@msu.edu, or regular mail: 202 Olds Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824.

If you would like to participate in this study, please click on the arrow below.

 

 

125

REFERENCES

126

References

Allen, T. D., Poteet, M. L., Russell, J. E. A., & Dobbins, G. H. (1997). Factors related to
supervisors’ willingness to mentor others. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 50, l-
22.

Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E. & Lima, L. (2004). Outcomes
associated with protégés: A meta-analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89,
127-136.

Anderson, E. M., & Shannon, A. L. (1988). Toward a conceptualizing Of mentoring.
Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 38-42.

Andrew, J. D., Faubion, C. W., & Palmer, C. D. (2002).The relationship between
counselor satisfaction and job factors in state rehabilitation agencies.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 45, 223-232.

Armstrong, A. J ., Hawley, C. E., Blankenship, G, Lewis, A. N., & Hurley, J. H. (2008).
Certiﬁed rehabilitation counseling personnel: Job satisfaction and intent to quit.
Journal of Rehabilitation Administration, 32(1), 15-32.

Armstrong, A. J ., Hawley, C. E., Lewis, A. N., Blankenship, C., & Pugsley, R. A.
(2008). Relationship between employment setting and job satisfaction among
CRC personnel. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 28(1), 41-51.

Balzer, W. K., Kihm, J. A., Smith, P. C., Irwin, J. L., Bachiochi, P. D., Robie, C., Sinar,
E. F., & Parra, L. (2000). Users’ manual for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI; 1997
version) and the Job in General scales. In J. M. Stanton and C. D. Crossley (Eds),
Electronic resources for the JD] and JIG. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green
State University.

Bandura, A. (1977) Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

Barrett, K., Flowers, C., Crimando, W., & Bailey, T. (1997). The turnover dilemma: A
disease with solutions. The Journal of Rehabilitation, 63(2), 3-17.

Baugh, S. G., Lankau, M. J., & Scandura, T. A. (1996). An investigation of the effects
Of protégé gender on responses to mentoring. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
49, 309—323.

Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (1998). Fundamentals of clinical supervision.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bernard J. M., & Goodyear R. K. (2004). Fundamentals of clinical supervision. London:
Pearson.

127

Bogat, C. A., & Rednar, R. L. (1985). How mentoring affects the professional
development of women in psychology. Professional Psychology, Research and
Practice, 16, 851-859.

Bolton, E. B. (1980). A conceptual analysis of the mentor relationship in the career
development of women. Adult Education, 30(4), 195-207.

Bozeman, B. & Feeney, M. K. (2007). Toward a useful theory of mentoring. A
conceptual analysis and critique. Administration & Society, 39(6), 719-739.

Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job
satisfaction and turnover intentions Of public employees? American Review of
Public Administration, 38(2), 149—66.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, US. Department of Labor, Glossary, Retrieved October 1,
2008 from http://www.bls.gov/bls/glossarv.htm.

Burke, R. J. & McKeen, C. A. (1989). Developing formal mentoring programs in
organizations. Business Quarterly, 53, 69-76.

Burke, R. J ., McKeen, C. A. & McKenna, C. (1994). Beneﬁts of mentoring in
organizations: The mentor’s perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
9(3), 23-32.

Carson, K. D., & Bedeian, A. G. (1994). Career commitment: Construction Of a measure
and examination of its psychometric properties. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
44, 23 7-262.

Chan, T. (2003, October). Recruiting and retaining professional staff in state VR
agencies: Some preliminary findings from the RSA Evaluation Study [draft
report]. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

Chan, T., & Ruedel, K. (2005, July). A national report: The demand for and, the supply
of qualiﬁed state rehabilitation counselors [preliminary report]. Washington, DC:
American Institutes for Research.

Chao, G. (1997). Mentoring phases and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
51(1), 15-28.

Chao, G. T., Walz, P. M., & Gardner, P. O. (1992). Formal and informal mentorships: A
comparison on mentoring functions and contrast with nonmentored counterparts.
Personnel Psychology, 45(3), 619-63 6.

Chung, R., C. Y, Bemak, F., & Talleyrand, R. (2007). Mentoring within the ﬁeld of

counseling: A preliminary study of multicultural perspectives. International
Journal for the Advancement of Counseling, 29, 21-32.

128

Clarke, M. (2004). Reconceptualising mentoring: Reﬂections by an early career
researcher. Issues in Educational Research, 14 (2), 121-143.

Clutterbuck, D. (2004). Making the most of informal mentoring: A positive
climate key. Development and Learning in Organizations, 18(4), 16-17.

Clutterbuck, D., Ragins, B. R. (2002). Mentoring and diversity: An international
perspective. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Colarelli, S. M., & Bishop, R. C. (1990). Career commitment: Functions, correlates and
management. Group and Organizational Studies, 15, 158-176.

Cottone, R. R., & Tarvydas, V. M. (2003). Ethical and professional issues in counseling
(2"d ed). New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cuesta, C., & Bloom, K. (1998). Education exchange mentoring and job satisfaction:
Perceptions of certiﬁed nurse-midwives. Journal of Nurse-Midwifery, 43(2), 111-
116.

Darwin, A. (2000). Critical reﬂections on mentoring in work settings. Adult Education
Quarterly, 50(3), 197-21 1.

Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An
individual-differences model and its application. Minneapolis, MN: University Of
Minnesota Press.

Day, R. & Allen, T. D. (2004). The relationship between career motivation and self-
efﬁcacy with protégé career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 72—
91.

DeBolt, G. P. (1992). Teacher Induction and Mentoring: School-Based
Collaborative Programs. Albany, NY. State University of New York.

Dew, D. W., Alan, G. M., & Tomlinson, P. (Eds). (2008). Recruitment and retention of
vocational rehabilitation counselors (Institute on rehabilitation Issues
Monograph no. 33). Washington, DC. The George Washington University, Center
for Rehabilitation Counseling Research and Education.

Dew, D. W., Diller, J ., & Peters, S. (2005). Recruitment and Retention Practices of the
Public Vocational Rehabilitation Program in RSA ’s Federal Region 111. Retrieved
October, 9, 2008 from http://www.gwu.edu/~rrcep/RICH%20TEXT%20FILES
%20TO%20POST/Recruitment%20Revisions%20SP%20Final%20Version.doc

129

Dougherty, T. W., Turban, D. B., & Haggard, D. L. (2007). Naturally occurring
mentoring relationships involving workplace employees. In T.D. Allen and LT.
Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspective
approach, pp. 139-158. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Douglas, C. A. & McCauley, C. D. (2006). Formal developmental relationships: A
survey Of organizational practices. Human Resource Development Quarterly,
10(3), 203-220.

Eby, L. T., Allen, T. D., Evans, S. C., Ng, T., & DuBois, D. L. (2008). Does mentoring
matter? A multidisciplinary meta-analysis comparing mentored and non-mentored
individuals. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 254—267.

Eby L. T., Rhodes J. E., Allen T. D. (2007). Deﬁnition and evolution of mentoring. In:
Allen TD, Eby LT, eds. The Blackwell Handbook of Mentoring: A Multiple
Perspectives Approach, pp. 7—20. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Evans, G., & Cokley, K. (2008). African American women and the academy: Using
career mentoring to increase research productivity. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 2, 50-57.

Fagenson, E. A. (1989). The mentor advantage: Perceived career/job experiences of
protégés versus non-protégés. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10(4), 209-
320.

Fagenson-Eland, E. A., Marks, M. A., & Amendola, K. L. (1997). Perceptions of
mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 51, 29-42.

Faubion, C. W., Andrew, J. D. & Palmer, C. E. (2001). Rural and urban differences in
counselor satisfaction and extrinsic job factors. The Journal of Rehabilitation,
67(4), 4—12.

Feist-Price, S. (1994). Cross-gender mentoring relationships: Critical issues. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 60, 13-17.

Garske, G. G. (1999). Rehabilitation counselor self-reported levels of job satisfaction,
self-esteem, and attitudes toward persons with disabilities. Journal of Applied

Rehabilitation Counseling, 31, 10-13.

Green, F. (2005). Demanding work: The Paradox of job quality in the aﬂluent economy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Healy, C. C. (1997). An Operational deﬁnition of mentoring. In H. T. Frierson (Ed.),
Diversity in higher education (pp. 9-22). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

130

Herbert, J. T. (2004). Clinical supervision. In T. F. Riggar & D. R. Maki (Eds),
Handbook of rehabilitation counseling (pp. 289—3 04). New York: Springer.

Herbert, J. T. & Trusty, J. (2006). Clinical supervision practices and satisfaction within
the public vocational rehabilitation program. Rehabilitation Counseling
Bulletin, 49, 66-80.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R. D. and Capwell, D. F. (1957). Job attitudes:
Review of research and opinions. Pittsburgh: Psychological Service Of Pittsburgh.

Holland, J. L. (1985). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational
personalities and work environments. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment
Resources.

Holloway, E. L. (1997). Structures for the analysis and teaching Of supervision. In C. E.
Watkins Jr. (Ed.), Handbook of psychotherapy supervision (pp. 249-276). New
York: Wiley.

Hunt, D. & Michael, C. (1983). Mentorship: A career training and development tool.
Academy of Management Review, 8(3) 475-485.

Johnson, W. B. (2007). Transformational supervision: When supervisors mentor.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 259—267.

Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. & Judge, T. A. (2008). A quantitative review of mentoring
research: Test of a model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72, 269-283.

KObasa, S. C., Maddi, S. A. & Kahn, S. (1982). Hardiness and health: A prospective
study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 168-177.

Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management
Journal, 26, 608—625.

Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational
life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foreman and Company.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Contentjanalysis: An introduction to its methodology.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Layne, C. M., Hohenshil, T. H., & Singh, K. (2004). The relationship Of occupational
stress, psychological strain, and coping resources to the turnover intentions of

rehabilitation counselors. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 48(1), 19-20.

Leahy, M. J. (2002). The 60-hour credit requirement: An educational standard whose
time has come. Rehabilitation Education, I 6, 381-386.

131

Leierer, S. J ., Strohmer, D. C., Blackwell, T. L., Thompson, R. C., & Donnay, D. A. C.
(2008). The rehabilitation counselor scale: A new scale for the strong interest
inventory. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 51 , 68—75.

Levinson, D. J ., Darrow, C. N., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H., & McKee, B. (1978).
Seasons of a man ’s life. New York: Ballantine.

Locke, E. A. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 4, 309-336.

Lofquist, L.H., & Dawis, R.V. (1969). Adjustment to work. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts.

London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. The Academy of Management
Review, 8(4), 620-630.

London, M. (1993). Relationships between career motivation, empowerment and support
for career development. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
66, 55—69.

London, M. & Bray, D. W. (1984). Measuring and developing young managers' career
motivation. Journal of Management Development, 3(3), 3-25.

London, M., & Noe, R. (1997). London’s career motivation theory: An update on
measurement and research. Journal of Career Assessment, 5(1), 61—80.

Lyness, K. S. & Thompson, D. E. (2000). Climbing the corporate ladder: DO female and
male executives follow the same route? Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 86-
101.

Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.
McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

McKeen, C. A. & Burke, R. J. (1989). Mentor relationships in organizations: Issues,
strategies, and prospects for Women. Journal of Management Development, 8(6),
33-42.

Mills J. E., Francis K. L., Bonner A. (2005). Mentoring, clinical supervision and
preceptoring: Clarifying the conceptual deﬁnitions for Australian rural nurses. A
review of the literature. Rural and Remote Health 5 (online): 410. Available from:
http://www.rrh.org.au

Mitus, J. S. (2006). Organization socialization from a content perspective and its effect

on the affective commitment of newly hired rehabilitation counselors. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 72(2), 12-20.

132

Mobley, W. H. (1977). Intermediate linkage in the relationship between job satisfaction
and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 237-240.

Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover. Causes, consequences, and control. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.

Mobley, W. H., Griffeth, R. W., & Meglino, B. M. (1979). Review and conceptual
analysis Of the employee turnover process. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 493-522.

Mobley, G. M., Jaret, C., Marsh, K., & Lim, Y. Y. (1994). Mentoring, job satisfaction,
gender, and the legal profession. Sex Roles, 31(2), 79-98.

Murray, M. (2001). Beyond the myths and magic of mentoring. San Francisco, CA:
J ossey-Bass.

Noe, R. A. (1988a). An investigation of the determinants of successful assigned
mentoring relationships. Personnel Psychology, 41, 457—479.

Noe, R. A. (1988b). Women and mentoring: A review and research agenda. Academy of
Management Review, 13, 65—78.

Noe, R. A., Noe, A. W., & Bachhuber, J. (1990). An investigation Of the correlates Of
career motivation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3 7, 340-356.

Norusis, M. J. (1997). SPSS professional statistics 7.5. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.

Orpen, C. (1995). The effects of mentoring on employees’ career success. Journal of
Social Psychology, 135, 667—668.

Paglis, L. L., Green, S. G., & Bauer, T. N. (2006). Does advisor mentoring add value? A
longitudinal study of mentoring and doctoral student outcomes. Research in
Higher Education, 47(4), 451-476.

Patterson, J. (2009). Professional identity and the future Of rehabilitation counseling.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 52, 129-132.

Patterson, J ., Szymanski, E., & Parker, R. (2005). Rehabilitation counseling: The
profession. In R. M. Parker, E. M. Szymanski, & J. B. Patterson (Eds),
Rehabilitation counseling: Basics and beyond (pp. 1—25). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Phillips-Jones, L. (1983). Establishing a formalized mentoring program. Training and
Development Journal, 3 7, 38-42.

Phillips-Pointer, M. (2006). Mentoring rehabilitation leaders in rehabilitation counselor

education programs: A multicultural perspective. Journal of Rehabilitation
Administration, 30(3), 169-178.

133

Priyabhashini, A. & Krishnan, V. R. (2005). Transformational leadership and follower’s
career advancement: Role of Pygmalion effect. Indian Journal of Industrial
Relations, 40(4), 482-499.

Rache, G. R. (1979). Much ado about mentors. Harvard Business Review, 14-31.

Ragins, B. R. (2002). Understanding diversiﬁed mentoring relationships: Deﬁnitions,
challenges and strategies. In D. Clutterbuck and B. Ragins (Eds) Mentoring and
diversity: An international perspective (pp. 23-53). Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.

Ragins, B. R. & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of
men and women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 84(4), 529-550.

Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1991). Easier said than done: Gender differences in
perceived barriers to gaining a mentor. Academy of Management Journal, 34,
93 9-95 1.

Ragins, B. R., Cotton, J. L. & Miller J. S. (2000). Marginal mentoring: The effects of
type of mentor, quality of relationship, and program design on work and career
attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1 177-1 194.

Ragins, B. R., Townsend, B., & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite:
CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of
Management Executive, 12(1), 28—42.

Riggar, T. F. (1985). Stress burnout: An annotated bibliography. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University Press.

Roche, G. R. (1979). Much ado about mentors. Harvard Business Review, 5 7, 14-28.

Roessler, R. T., & Mullins, J. A. (1995). Factors affecting rehabilitation counselor
performance: A social cognitive perspective. Rehabilitation Education, 9, 21-35.

Scandura, T. A. (1998). Dysfunctional mentoring relationships and outcomes. Journal of
Management, 24(3), 449-467.

Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical-investigation.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 169-174.

134

Scandura, T. A. & Pellegrini, E. K. (2007). Workplace mentoring: Theoretical
approaches and methodological issues. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds),
Handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspective approach. Malden, MA :
Blackwell.

Seibert, S. (1999) The effectiveness of facilitated mentoring: A longitudinal quasi-
experiment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 483-502.

Shaw, L. R., Leahy, M. J ., Chan, F. & Catalano, D. (2006). Contemporary issues facing
rehabilitation counseling: A Delphi study Of the perspectives of leaders of the
discipline. Rehabilitation Education, 20(3), 163-178.

Spector, P. E. (1997) Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, cause, and consequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Stebnicki, M. A. (1998). Clinical supervision in rehabilitation counseling.
Rehabilitation Education, 12, 137-159.

Strauss, W., and N. Howe. (1991). Generations. New York: Quill.
Super, D. E. (1963). Career development: Self-concept theory. New York : CEEB.

Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of careers: An introduction to vocational
development. New York: Harper.

Swap, W. C., Leonard, D. A., Shields, M., & Abrams, L. (2001). Using mentoring and
storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Management and
Information Systems, 18 (1), 95-114.

Szymanski, E. M. & Parker, R. M. (1995). Rehabilitation counselor work motivation, job
performance, and job satisfaction: An exploratory study. Journal of Rehabilitation
Administration, 19, 51-64.

Triandis, H. C. (2004). The many dimensions Of culture. Academy of Management
Executive, 18(1), 88-93.

Viranyi, S., Crimando, W., Riggar, T. F., & Schmidt, M. J. (1992). Promoting mentoring
relationships in rehabilitation. Journal of Rehabilitation Administration, 16(2),
40-45.

Vitale, D. C., Armenakis, A. A., & Feild, H. S. (2008). Integrating qualitative and

quantitative methods for organizational diagnosis: Possible priming effects?
Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2, 87-105.

135

Wanberg, C. R., Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D., & Marchese, M. (2006). Mentor and protégé
predictors and outcomes of mentoring in a formal mentoring program. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 69, 410-423.

Whiting, V. R., & de Janasz, S. C. (2004). Mentoring in the 21St century: Using the
intemet to build skills and networks. Journal of Management Education, 3, 275-
293.

Wilkenson, A. D. & Wagner, R. M. (1993). Supervisory leadership styles and state
vocational rehabilitation counselor satisfaction and productivity. Rehabilitation
Counselor Bulletin, 37(1), 15-25. ‘

Wolf, G., London, M., Casey, J., & Pufaul, J. (1995). Career experience and motivation
as predictors of training behaviors and outcomes for displaced engineers. Journal

of Vocational Behavior, 47, 316—331.

Wright, G. N. & Terrian, L. J. (1987). Rehabilitation job satisfaction inventory.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 31(2), 159-176.

136

        

"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11111111155
3 12 9 3 0 3 0 6 3 3

311