Abstract
Mentorship programs are found in academia, workplaces, and professional organizations. Mentoring involves the provision of guidance, knowledge, opportunities, and support by an experienced person (the mentor) for an inexperienced person (the mentee). The purpose of this study was to evaluate a mentorship program run by the Nelson Mandela Chamber of Business. The study used an online survey to collect data from mentors and mentees. Mentors were asked to rate their ability to mentor. The findings indicate that the mentees found the program more valuable than the mentors. Psychological support and career support were the main benefits.
Introduction
Mentoring is widely recognized as an agile workplace learning mechanism because of the changing, complex, and challenging nature of the world of work (Davey et al., 2020). In essence, mentoring occurs when an individual with greater experience provides advice and guidance to a less experienced individual (Oyesanya et al., 2025). Steinmann (2017) defines mentoring as a continuous relationship between the mentor (often the experienced individual) and the mentee (usually the less experienced individual). The crucial factors of success are the involvement and enthusiasm of two people, one of whom may shape the opinions and ideas of the other (Latukha et al., 2025).
It involves the mentor sharing knowledge, skills, and experiences to equip the mentee to reach their optimum potential and is an important activity that helps people who are novices in any field to be able to become successful experts (Sotello Viernes Turner & Gonzalez, 2023). Templeton et al. (2025) describe mentoring as investing in others. The purpose of this study is to deepen knowledge of how mentorship programs can be used to assist members of the community, affiliated to the Nelson Mandela Bay Business Chamber, in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, to achieve their goals under the guidance of mentors.
Background
Internationally, mentorship is primarily used in professional education and training, or as a means to support new employees in their introduction to the labor market (Arnesson & Albinsson, 2017). This concept has been adopted in many sectors, as is evident in the study under review. Russian multinational organizations use external mentoring as a talent attraction tool (Latukha et al., 2025). Part of the core definition of mentorship is the description of the two parties, the mentor and the mentee. The mentee is seen as an actively knowledge-seeking person, who alone is responsible for her/his learning. It is the mentee's needs, interests, and questions that steer the reflecting and analysing talk (Arnesson & Albinsson, 2017). Latukha et al. (2025) advocate that the critical components for a successful mentorship program are voluntary participation, nonmonetary recognition, and long-term trust-based relationships between mentors and mentees. Trust is crucial for mentor/mentee relationships (Hansen et al., 2025).
Mentoring is a powerful system that helps people develop and add value to their personal and professional abilities regardless of their field of work (Ongek, 2016). The prefix “men” translates to “of the mind” or “one who thinks” (Cassling et al., 2022). It has transformed over centuries to become a one-to-one model, where the mentor promotes change in the mentee (Garvey, 2017).
Problem Statement
The Nelson Mandela Business Chamber in South Africa launched a mentorship program in 2021, aligned with its goal of empowering and growing Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises (SMEs). The program was officially launched in 2022, consisting of 20 mentees who were accepted from a pool of applicants from member businesses (NMB, 2025). Forty mentors were initially identified, representing business leaders from different economic sectors and backgrounds across the Metro. The mentoring process runs for 3 months, with the key focus on providing tailored one-on-one sessions with mentees.
An extract from the Chamber LinkedIn page reads as follows:
Do you want to advance in your career or improve your business? Are you moving from one position to another or hoping to establish a strong presence in the market your company operates in? Our mentorship programme can help you achieve these goals. The Mentorship Network is dedicated to supporting and empowering professionals and businesses in Nelson Mandela Bay. We connect mentees with skilled mentors who offer guidance in business and career development, strengthen skills, share opportunities, transfer knowledge, and help plan for future success. Mentorship Programme Benefits: - Free access to an experienced and expert mentor; - Business and career guidance; - Opportunity sharing and knowledge transfer; - Developing business and career SMART goals; - Attracting and retaining business and professionals in Nelson Mandela Bay.
Research Objectives
The main objective (ROM) of this study was to evaluate the NMB Mentorship program.
The secondary objectives were: RO1: To determine the factors that affect a successful mentorship program. RO2: To determine the mentors’ personal opinion of their mentoring skills. RO3: To determine the perceptions of the mentoring program from mentors’ and mentees’ perspectives. RO4: To provide advice on improvements to the NMB Mentorship program.
This article proceeds as follows. The literature review is followed by the research methodology, which is then followed by ethics clearance, results, and findings, managerial implications and then the article concludes with possibilities for future research and the limitations of this study.
Literature Review
Mentoring has traditionally been defined as a method of professional and personal developments where a person with expertise in a particular field or area of research (the mentor) advises and guides someone (the mentee) in that particular area or on specific skills (Reeves, 2023). It is a developmental experience intended to increase the willingness to learn and establish credibility while building positive relationships through networking (Shuler et al., 2021). Programs tend to increase personnel retention and career satisfaction, accelerate the development of leadership and reduce the learning curve in response to today's more demanding, competitive, and global markets (Dominquez & Hager, 2013). The American Psychological Association (2006) defined a mentor as an expert who can help develop the function of a mentee.
Mentoring programs have succeeded in increasing career satisfaction, accelerating leadership development, and fast-tracking learning (Haberer et al., 2025). The process involves the mentor sharing knowledge, skills and experiences and guidance to equip the mentee to reach their optimum potential (Rubbi Nuna et al., 2023). Farkas et al. (2019) demonstrated that the implementation of mentorship programs can effectively facilitate professional development and increase career satisfaction. Although mentorship programs are most common in organizations and in academia, the principles have been applied in community environments, as is the case with the Nelson Mandela Bay Business Chamber. The program gives mentors an opportunity to pay it forward. Mentorship programs are therefore increasingly being implemented in a wide variety of fields by organizations, academic institutes, businesses, and governments (Treasure et al., 2022).
Relationships based on trust are important in mentorship programs. Relationships are regarded as the verbal and nonverbal behavior between the interacting individuals and are seen as continuous interactions that occur over time (Rubbi Nuna et al., 2023). The relationship is a social partnership involving an “interpersonal exchange influenced by both the mentor and mentee perceptions of each other” (Pfund et al., 2016, p. 240), occurring formally or informally (Rinfret et al., 2023). Mentoring has the ability to furnish personalized, holistic, timely, and appropriate support, which cultivates deep and trusting mentoring relationships between mentee and mentor (Venktararmana et al., 2023).
Hansford and Ehrich (2006) highlight both positive and negative outcomes of mentoring. The positives include support, sharing ideas, and professional development and reflection. The negatives include the lack of time and a mismatch between the mentor and the mentee. In addition to the benefits for mentees, mentors may also broaden their knowledge and get inspiration when they contribute energy and time to help mentees (Xu et al., 2021). Personal learning is a key benefit that mentors gain from mentoring.
Mentorship can vary in structure and function, and frequent re-evaluation is necessary to ensure that the relationship continues to be effective and supportive (Shuler et al., 2021). Treasure et al. (2022) offers the following advice for mentorship programs:
Define the program scope and mission; Develop the organizational structure of the program once the outcomes have been defined; Plan activities to support program goals; Recruit mentees with success in mind; Develop mentor support that goes beyond simple recruitment; Develop mentor–mentee matching strategies regularly; Ensure communication processes are in place; and Monitor and evaluate.
Mentor Experience and Training
Mentorship programs can be beneficial for both the mentor and the mentee; however, mentors may struggle with how to build their mentorship skills and navigate challenges with mentees over time or how to conclude the relationship (Hill et al., 2022). Gandhi and Johnson (2016) advocate that a “Mentor the Mentors” program should be run frequently. The program should include best practices on the tools and techniques of mentoring, which, according to their study, included effective communication, aligning expectations, assessing understanding, fostering independence, addressing diversity, and promoting development.
Mentor–mentee pairings need to be critically assessed prior to the matching to promote positive outcomes.
Pryce and Dean (2025) refer to this as attunement, which can be developed through training. The relational competency of the mentor is as important as their subject expertise. The mentor's wisdom and sound advice are only as good as their ability to communicate empathy, respect, and compassion with their mentee (Mask, 2023). Maynard- Patrick and Baugh (2019) suggest that it is important to determine the level of investment mentors are willing to make in their mentee and to customize the mentoring pair's needs (Goshen et al., 2022). Mentoring has been found to benefit mentees. Benefits for mentors include increased self-reflection on practice, increased collaboration, mutual learning, and personal growth (Thornton & Beutal, 2024).
Successful Mentoring Program Factors
It provides an opportunity for mentees to “fast-track” learning through the influence and assistance of a mentor (Choi et al., 2018). The following five factors were identified by the work done by Nuis et al. (2023) and University of Wisconsin-Madison (2025).
Psychological and Sociological Support
Psychosocial support is one of the most important types of support, according to Nuis et al. (2023). It focuses on the relationship that needs to be built between the mentor and the mentee. Offering psychological and emotional support helps the mentee to deal with anxiety and stress and feelings of self-doubt (Koukounaras-Liagkis et al., 2024). The main factors in this support are trust, empathy, similarity, and availability. Trust is an important factor in determining whether the relationship will be positive or negative (Erdem & Aytemur, 2008). Mutual trust is important because emotional and psychological safety allows mentors and mentees to focus their energy on learning and productivity rather than self-protection (Thurman et al., 2024).
The match between the mentor and the mentee is crucial as the mentee has to trust the mentor's advice (Felten et al., 2023). Mentors need to show a genuine interest in the mentee on a personal level because it will make the relationship stronger and create a platform for a holistic understanding of each other (Thurman et al., 2024). Mentoring is both a career and psychosocial process, as it involves professional development and emotional support (Goodsett, 2021). Being empathetic plays a strong role in the mentor's ability to offer support for their mentees. The best measure of empathy is how efforts are experienced by the receiver, the mentee (Spencer, 2025).
Emotional Support
The ongoing emotional and social needs of mentees need to be considered. This is a more relational aspect of mentoring and occurs at an interpersonal level (Dahlberg & Byars-Winston, 2019). A key component of emotional support is empathy, which is a foundational human trait that enables meaningful connections with other people (Spencer, 2025). Empathy involves knowledge of how things are emotionally for the other person, which is not the same thing as knowledge of the other person's emotions (Stout, 2020). Kiadarbandsari (2023) advocates that mentor relationships assist with emotional regulation, which is defined as foundational support to manage links between situations and emotional responses. Emotional support is offered by the mentor. Mentoring is both a career-related and psychosocial process—it involves both professional development and emotional support (Goodsett, 2021).
Autonomy Support
Autonomy is an individual's freedom to make choices (Davis & McQuillin, 2022). In a mentoring relationship, the mentor can influence autonomy development but needs to be aware of timing and possible manipulation. The mentor should support mentees on the road to autonomous development by guiding and possibly being a devil's advocate (Suldo et al., 2021).
Networking Support
Networking is crucial as it enables access to resources, which could benefit personal and professional growth. Building a supportive network is one of the most valuable things for a professional (Waite, 2023). Networks consist of actors who build relationships with one another and those relationships create overall social structures (Gamper, 2022). Social network theory emphasizes the importance of social relations, which increases professional visibility and access to human, information, and other resources (Syracuse University, 2020). Mentors often have valuable networking connections, which give the mentees an opportunity to meet and collaborate with people who could be influential in their progress (Geesa et al., 2022).
An important principle in network research is reciprocity. Reciprocity assumes that people expect a gift or action to be returned or balanced. In the context of mentoring, Maynard-Patrick and Baugh (2019) introduce a new construct, felt obligation. They propose that individuals who have participated in a mentorship program as a mentee will feel obligated to provide high-quality experiences for mentees with them as mentors.
Career Support
Mentoring programs are popular because they encourage positive professional outcomes for the mentee and deter negative outcomes (Goodsett, 2021). Mentors focus on supporting and encouraging the professional and personal development of the mentee (Maynard-Patrick & Baugh, 2019). The quality of the mentor–mentee relationship can influence job satisfaction and career progression. It should provide support that builds confidence that, combined with personal motivation, can lead to positive changes in behavior (Van Rooyen et al., 2021).
Mentorship Program Success
It can be challenging to establish and maintain a quality relationship in mentoring programs. Mentoring relationships can develop informally, through intentional or coincidental networking or social gatherings, or they can be created and maintained as part of a mentoring program (Ward et al., 2020). The fit between mentor and mentee must be carefully considered for the program to be successful (Nuis et al., 2023). The driving force of any successful mentorship program is the quality of the relationship between the mentor and the mentee—compatibility is key (IESE Business School, 2022).
They offer the following points for successful mentorship programs:
Find the right match: In order to do this, you need to determine the mentee's goals together with the skills, capabilities, and commitment that prospective mentors can provide. Make expectations clear: Mentorship is a two-way process, so both parties need to clarify their expectations. Offer sufficient training and support: Failure to provide adequate resources and support is one of the big reasons mentorship programs fail. Be specific: The overall goal of the mentorship program must be clear.
Good mentoring should be facilitative, developmental, and positive experiences. In order to achieve this outcome, time, discourse, mutual respect, and willingness to support the relationships are essential (Hill et al., 2022). The objective of a mentoring program is to meet the needs of a mentee; however, the mentor often benefits as well. Social Exchange Theory explains this behavior as a mutually contingent process, where the exchange is voluntary and motivated by the reward of paying it forward (Eriksson, 2022). The reason is that most individuals have a desire for affiliation and acceptance from others, and a positive mentoring relationship can meet that need for both parties (Goodsett, 2021). Mentor characteristics contribute to the quality of the natural mentoring relationship (Van Dam et al., 2018). There can be negative outcomes, specifically for the mentor. These include the time investment and exposure to criticism if the mentorship is not successful (Maynard-Patrick & Baugh, 2019).
Figure 1 indicates the conceptual model with the five independent factors, mentioned above and the dependent factor, Mentorship program success.
Conceptual model.
Academic Theory
Nuis et al. (2023) advocate that the measurement of effectiveness of mentoring programs has been problematic because they are not validated or grounded in theory. Dominquez and Hager's (2013) systematic literature review identified three primary theoretical frameworks: developmental, learning, and social, as indicated in Table 1.
Theoretical Frameworks for Mentoring.
The above-mentioned theories indicate the complexity of mentoring. The context and the participants must be considered, as no single mentoring model applies to all individuals and institutions (Dominquez & Hager, 2013).
Research Methodology
This study followed a quantitative methodological paradigm with a positivistic philosophical framework. QuestionPro was used to formulate a well-structured, closed-ended questionnaire and used to capture the data. The information will include demographics, followed by their opinions regarding the independent factors and the dependent factor. The mentoring program runs twice a year. The mentors and the mentees for last year's programs and the first cohort for 2025 were surveyed. Sixty responses were received, 32 mentors and 28 mentees. The questionnaire included the same factors but was worded differently for the mentors and the mentees. For example, “My mentee trusts me,” versus “I trust my mentor,” and “I link my mentee with opportunities” versus “My mentor links me with opportunities.” In addition, a section was included to determine the mentors’ perceptions of their own mentoring skills.
Sampling and Data Analysis
The sampling strategy was purposive. Purposeful sampling is a sampling technique that researchers use to recruit participants who can provide in-depth and detailed information about the phenomenon under investigation. The Business Chamber distributed an email to mentors and mentees, inviting them to participate in the study. The CEO of the Chamber gave her approval for this study.
The quantitative data from the survey were statistically analyzed by the university's Statistical Consultant, using Statistica. The statistical techniques used included descriptive statistics, Pearson Product-Moment Correlations, the chi-square hypothesis test, and the Mann–Whitney U test. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were used to measure the internal consistency reliability of the Likert scale statements for the independent factors and the dependent factor.
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses were formulated for the study: HI: Psychological support has a positive influence on the Mentorship Programme Success. H2: Emotional support has a positive influence on the Mentorship Programme Success. H3: Autonomy support has a positive influence on the Mentorship Programme Success. H4: Networking support has a positive influence on the Mentorship Programme Success. H5: Career support has a positive influence on the Mentorship Programme Success.
Ethics
Ethics approval was received from NMU RECH Committee with the reference number 1042.
Results and Findings
Sixty-three percent of the mentors were over the age of 45 (Table 2), which indicates that they should have experience and expertise in their field and can share knowledge and offer advice to foster professional development (American Counseling Association, 2012). Sixty-three percent of the mentors were over the age of 45, which indicates that they should have experience and expertise in their field and can share knowledge and offer advice to foster professional development (American Counseling Association, 2012).
Demographic Profile of the Sample (n = 60).
Table 3 indicates the mentors’ evaluation of their own skills. The results in Table 3 indicate that most of the mentors perceive themselves as highly skilled. This is supported by the fact that 76% of the mentors have mentored more than four mentees.
Mentors’ Perceived Skills.
The results from the five-point Likert scale were combined and reduced to three columns for ease of reporting. It is evident that some of the mentors need training in cultural and emotional intelligence. It might be a good idea to set up meetings with the mentors who felt they were highly skilled in the areas of working with people with different backgrounds and cultures as well as dealing with bias and prejudice. Cassling et al. (2022) recommend the development of flexible and transferable mentorship skills and actively seeking a diverse group of mentees, no matter their backgrounds (Table 4 and 5).
Mentors’ Responses Per Factor (n = 32).
Mentees’ Responses Per Factor (n = 28).
The fact that only 59% of the mentor respondents felt that the program delivered on their expectations is a concern. The mentorship program should be mutually beneficial for both the mentor and the mentee. Following the guidelines from IESE Business School (2022) could be a good starting point. Expectations of both mentors and mentees need to be considered, but most importantly, they must align with the overall goal of the mentorship program. Guidelines must be given as well as training if required. A train-the-trainer program is recommended.
The responses from the mentees were generally positive. However, the item “My mentor offers the use of his/her network” has a high disagreement of 36%. A genuine network is a valuable asset and it takes time to build. Hall (2025) proposes that a network is not only about what you can get but also about what you can give. He proposes that networking be reframed as a chance to learn and give. Mentors can assist mentees with access to networks, but cannot be expected to “hand over” their networks to mentees, as they are an asset which has taken time to build. This needs to be included in the mentorship program guidelines. The results in Table 6 indicate a difference in the perceptions of the mentor and the mentee groups. The mentees rate the program higher than the mentors.
Frequency Distribution for Factors by Mentors (n = 32) and Mentees (n = 28).
The correlations between the factors for the mentors and the mentees are presented below. For this analysis, a correlation coefficient r is statistically significant at the 0.05 level for n = 32 if |r| >= .349 and practically significant, regardless of the sample size, if |r| >= .300. Thus significant (both statistically and practically) if |r| >= .349 (Gravetter & Wallnau, 2009). The correlations that are both statistically and practically significant are indicated in red; the other correlations are neither statistically nor practically significant (Table 7).
Pearson Product-Moment Correlations—Factors—Mentors (n = 32).
For the mentee analysis, a correlation coefficient r is statistically significant at the 0.05 level for n = 28 if |r| >= .374 and practically significant, regardless of the sample size, if |r| >= .300. Thus, both statistically and practically significant if |r| >= .374 (Table 8).
Pearson Product-Moment Correlations—Factors—Mentees (n = 28).
Table 7 (mentors) and Table 8 (mentees) indicate that all the correlations were very strong positive correlations, specifically with the dependent factor, Mentorship Program Success (assessment of the program).
Table 9 indicates how the mentors and the mentees felt about the matching. Thirty-eight percent of the mentors felt that the match was not a good one. This is highlighted in the literature, with Treasure et al. (2022) proposing that a matching strategy must be developed and refined with every program, depending on the cohort of mentors and mentees.
Mentor and Mentee Match.
Note. Chi-square (d.f. = 2, n = 60) = 5.16; p = .075; V = n/a.
An item that has to be addressed is that two mentors had problems with mentees whose personal background differed from theirs. This problem can be alleviated by better mentor/mentee matching or training. Without training, mentors often struggle to understand their roles, while mentees seldom receive guidance on how to engage effectively with their mentors (Haberer et al., 2025). However, the chi-square hypothesis performed to test whether there is an association between the Mentor/Mentee and how they are matched, has a p-value of .075 (p > .05), indicating that there is no statistically significant difference between how mentees and mentors think that the match had a positive or negative impact.
Table 10 lists the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for all the items under the different concepts, which measure the internal consistency reliability of the Likert scale questions of the measuring instrument. The items for the measuring instrument were based on previous work done by Nuis et al. (2023) and the University of Wisconsin-Madison (2025). The coefficients in Table 11 are all greater than 0.7, which indicates that the items on the scales correlate well with each other and that they are considered highly acceptable.
Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient.
Mann–Whitney U Tests.
To determine if there is a statistically significant difference between the rating of the mentees and the mentors within this mentoring program, a Mann–Whitney U test was conducted between the mentors and the mentees (Table 11). The Mann–Whitney U test is a nonparametric statistical technique to determine if there is a significant difference between two independent samples. Mann–Whitney U tests indicated no difference between the mentor and the mentee responses for items relating to the factors, Autonomy Support and Networking Support.
The only factor, namely, Mentors’ Psychological Support, had a statistical difference and a medium practical significance. The chi-square analysis (Table 12) indicated differences between the two groups. The items where the respondents differed are listed in Table 12. The respondents differed on two factors, Psychological support and Emotional support, and the findings for these two factors are presented in Tables 13 and 14.
Chi-Square Analysis Items by Mentor/Mentee (n = 60).
Mentor's Psychological Support.
Note. Chi-square (d.f. = 2, n = 60) = 8.76; p = .013; V = 0.38 (medium).
Mentors’ Career Support.
Note. Chi-square (d.f. = 2, n = 60) = 14.73; p = .001; V = 0.50 (large).
The above three factors in Table 12 are further analyzed and presented in the tables that follow.
Table 13 presents the perceptions of mentors and mentees regarding the psychological support provided by mentors. A total of 60 participants responded, consisting of 32 mentors and 28 mentees. Among the mentors, 22% (n = 7) felt that psychological support was low, 44% (n = 14) indicated moderate support, and 34% (n = 11) perceived the support to be high. In contrast, the mentees reported a different distribution. Only 14% (n = 4) rated psychological support as low, 14% (n = 4) reported moderate support, while a significant 71% (n = 20) experienced the support as high. Overall, combining both groups, 18% (n = 11) perceived low support, 30% (n = 18) perceived it as moderate, and the majority, 52% (n = 31), reported high levels of psychological support from mentors.
A chi-square test revealed a p-value of less than .05, indicating that there is an association between how the mentors and the mentees view the physiological support received in this program. This suggests a possible underestimation by mentors of the positive psychological impact they provide or a difference in expectations or understanding of what constitutes psychological support.
Table 14 outlines the perceptions of mentors and mentees regarding the career support offered by mentors. The responses were gathered from a total of 60 participants, comprising 32 mentors and 28 mentees. Among the mentors, 25% (n = 8) believed that the career support they provided was low, 47% (n = 15) rated it as moderate, and 28% (n = 9) perceived their support as high. In contrast, mentees viewed the career support they received differently. A higher proportion, 36% (n = 10), rated the support as low, only 4% (n = 1) considered it moderate, and a significant 61% (n = 17) perceived it as high.
The chi-square test result shows a p-value of .001, thus a significant difference in how mentors and mentees see the career support by the mentors. It could indicate that mentees either feel well-supported or not supported at all.
Table 15 reflects mentors’ and mentees’ overall assessment of the program. The data captures responses from 60 participants: 32 mentors and 28 mentees. Mentors’ responses indicated that 31% (n = 10) rated the program as low, 38% (n = 12) rated it as moderate and 31% (n = 10) rated it as high. The mentees’ responses indicated that 18% (n = 5) rated it as low; 14% (n = 4) rated it as moderate and a substantial 68% (n = 19) rated it as high.
General Assessment of the Program.
Note. Chi-square (d.f. = 2, n = 60) = 8.23; p = .016; V = 0.37 (medium).
The result of the chi-square hypothesis test shows a statistically significant (p < .05) result, indicating that mentees and mentors perceive the program differently. With a medium effect size, the association between role and program rating is noteworthy, though not strong. Mentees are significantly more positive, with 68% rating the program highly, compared to only 31% of mentors doing so. This suggests that the program may be delivering greater perceived value or impact to mentees. The main responsibility of the mentor is to provide support on a number of levels (Nuis et al., 2023).
Table 16 above indicates that 25% of the mentors consider the program “Fair,” with the rest as good, very good, or excellent. The mentees, however, considered the program as Good, Very Good, or Excellent (Table 17).
Participants’ Rating of the Overall Mentorship Program.
Mentors’ Rating of the Overall Quality of Their Mentoring (n = 32).
The majority of the mentors (75%) rated their quality of mentoring as Very Good or Excellent (Table 18). Only two hypotheses were finally accepted (Table 18). Hypotheses H1 and H5 were accepted.
Hypotheses Acceptance.
Discussion, Conclusions, and Future Research
Mentoring programs typically require only a willingness to participate; however, specific characteristics of both mentors and mentees should be taken into account. Managers of mentoring programs need to take the following into account: (1) commitment to the relationship, (2) mutual respect between mentor and mentee, (3) mutual trust, and (4) mentor experience and competence (Goodsett, 2021). The matching of mentors to mentees must be a key priority. Effective mentoring includes effective mentor selection and mentor–mentee matching (Maxwell et al., 2024).
The Mann–Whitney U test revealed a statistically significant difference between the two groups (U = 300.0, mentors=32, mentees=28, p = .01; Table 11). The results suggest that the scores of the mentees are significantly different to those of the mentors. This could indicate that the mentees and the mentors do not rate the program the same and that the program requires re-evaluation. Cassling et al. (2022) recommend the development of flexible and transferable mentorship skills and actively seeking a diverse group of mentees, no matter their backgrounds. Organizations must be bold to avoid the tendency to pair like with like and instead create mentor development programs that are multidimensional. IESE (2022) warns that formalized mentorship programs do not always work. Despite the best intentions, mentors, and mentees often end up feeling dissatisfied with the mentorship experience.
Reflection about the relationships both before, during, and after the program by both the mentor and the mentee will contribute to a relevant, robust, growth-oriented relationship that meets the objectives and expectations (Hill et al., 2022). Ongoing feedback and research on the program are essential if the program is to remain relevant. A limitation of the study is the number of responses and the fact that it was limited to only one mentorship program. Haberer et al. (2025) comment that mentorship is often seen as a luxury rather than a necessity and add that the Global South specifically lacks formal mentorship programs, with a scarcity of mentors and too many mentees. The Nelson Mandela Business Chamber in South Africa must be commended for its effort to link mentors and mentees.
This study's first contribution is the recommendations for re-visioning of mentoring as a community endeavor led by the Nelson Mandela Business Chamber in South Africa. Additionally, it adds to the theory of community of practice, which is defined as a group of people, in this case the mentors and the Business Chamber, who share a concern or passion for mentoring and interact regularly to assist mentees by focusing on learning and reflection through practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). Based on the social network theory, this program can enhance the Business Chamber's role of transmitting information and creating a network of businesspeople from different types of businesses in the metro. A structured mentoring program is recommended (Lyons-Warren et al., 2024). The purpose of the mentoring program must be clearly stated and then measured against the outcomes (Nuis et al., 2023). The findings provide practical advice and guidelines on how the program should be improved.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Nelson Mandela Bay Business Chamber in South Africa for allowing this study to take place.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.