Abstract
Financial advisors in fintech-enabled, client-centric environments often lead without formal authority while navigating intense targets, regulation, and constant change. This study develops and evaluates an evidence-informed executive mentoring model designed to boost engagement and sustainable high performance. Using a documentary, exploratory approach, and survey insights from practitioners, we identify the mentoring mechanisms most strongly linked to emotional regulation, resilience, communication, client acquisition, and retention. We translate these findings into a practical, phased framework that firms can implement to accelerate capability building and reduce disengagement in modern advisory settings.
Keywords
Introduction
Job satisfaction and organizational engagement remain persistent challenges across professional contexts worldwide. In practice, engagement is not only a “climate” issue, it is a performance variable that shapes energy, persistence, learning, and the capacity to sustain results over time (Schaufeli et al., 2002). Across modern organizations, low trust in leadership, limited career prospects, and the pressures of digital transformation increasingly affect employee motivation, productivity, and wellbeing, reinforcing the need for human development strategies that foster sustainable engagement and high performance in complex, fast-changing work environments.
Among the practices that have shown promise in addressing these challenges, executive mentoring stands out because it goes beyond knowledge transfer and builds a developmental relationship anchored in inspiration, trust, and mutual growth. Seminal and applied perspectives suggest that mentoring can strengthen individual capabilities while also aligning personal goals with organizational priorities, supporting a stronger sense of purpose and belonging (Goldsmith, 2007; Ragins & Kram, 2007). When structured and well-governed, mentoring becomes a practical learning mechanism, supporting reflection, feedback, and experience-based knowledge transfer within real performance contexts (Clutterbuck, 2004; Garvey & Stokes, 2022).
Although coaching and mentoring are frequently used interchangeably in organizations, the literature distinguishes them by emphasis and relational configuration. Coaching tends to be more goal- and skill-targeted, often focusing on short-cycle performance improvements, while mentoring typically integrates career functions (e.g., guidance, exposure, and role modeling) with psychosocial functions (e.g., confidence, identity development, and emotional support) that strengthen long-term professional maturity and sustained performance (Clutterbuck, 2004; Ragins & Kram, 2007). These distinctions matter in roles where success depends on consistent behavioral execution under uncertainty, because mentoring can directly support self-efficacy and self-regulation, capabilities linked to persistence and adaptive performance (Bandura, 1977), and can reinforce emotional intelligence competencies that stabilize interpersonal impact (Goleman, 2000).
This is particularly relevant in the global financial industry, where financial advisors play a central role in mediating between clients and institutions while frequently operating in decentralized structures and performance-driven cultures. Advisory work combines relationship-based influence, technical decision support, and continuous reputational exposure, often under high competition and constant adaptation to technological and regulatory change. The accelerated growth of fintech ecosystems and increased technology investment in financial services have reshaped client expectations and intensified the need for trust-building, clear communication, and consistent execution (Araújo, 2018; Lima et al., 2023). In this context, performance outcomes (e.g., productivity discipline, client acquisition, and retention) depend heavily on behavioral and psychological capabilities, communication quality, emotional containment during volatility, and influence without formal authority, suggesting that executive mentoring may function as a human-centered lever for capability building and performance stability.
Against this backdrop, the present study addresses the following research question: How can executive mentoring contribute to enhancing engagement and performance among financial advisors working in client-centric and fintech-enabled environments? To answer this question, the study adopts a documentary and exploratory design with an integrative perspective, combining literature-based analysis with applied evidence to examine executive mentoring as a development model for engagement and performance acceleration in this underexplored professional segment.
The remainder of the article is structured as follows: the second section reviews the literature on executive mentoring mechanisms relevant to engagement and sustained high performance, with emphasis on advisory contexts shaped by fintech pressures. The third section describes the study design and procedures. The fourth section presents findings, followed by the fifth section discussing implications for financial institutions and advisory leaders, and the sixth section concluding with limitations and directions for further research.
Literature Review
This literature review is structured around two complementary strands. The first strand examines executive mentoring as a developmental practice associated with engagement, learning, self-efficacy, emotional intelligence, communication, and sustained high performance. The second strand situates these mentoring mechanisms within the financial advisory and fintech-enabled context, where professionals are required to combine technical expertise with client relationship management, resilience, adaptive execution, and influence without formal authority. Bringing these two strands together provides the theoretical foundation for analyzing executive mentoring as a strategy to strengthen engagement and performance among financial advisors.
Executive Mentoring: Definitions, Configurations, and Role in Capability Building
Executive mentoring is broadly understood as a developmental relationship in which a more experienced professional supports another's growth through reflection, feedback, and the transfer of contextual knowledge that accelerates learning and career development (Clutterbuck, 2004; Ragins & Kram, 2007). Within organizational practice, mentoring can be informal or formal and may vary in duration and intensity. Contemporary approaches also include “spot mentoring,” short, focused interactions aimed at specific challenges, whose practicality makes it attractive in fast-paced environments, while also presenting limitations such as reduced depth and continuity (Leite et al., 2024).
Although coaching and mentoring often overlap in organizations, the literature distinguishes them by their typical scope and relationship dynamics: coaching tends to be more goal-driven and performance-contract oriented, while mentoring commonly blends career functions (e.g., exposure, sponsorship, and role modeling) with psychosocial functions (e.g., confidence, identity, and emotional support) (Calvosa et al., 2021; Ragins & Kram, 2007). Evidence suggests that the effectiveness of mentoring relationships is associated with factors such as relationship quality, learning orientation, and alignment between mentor–mentee expectations (Allen & Eby, 2003; Juer et al., 2009). In corporate settings, mentoring is also discussed as a tool to influence development and performance through structured people practices, strengthening learning and progression when implemented with clarity and governance (Belo & Accioly, 2015; Carvalho, 2015). From an organizational learning perspective, mentoring can be positioned as a mechanism that supports individual and collective learning by enabling experience sharing, feedback loops, and knowledge transfer embedded in the work context (Souza-Silva, 2007). This framing is particularly relevant in roles where performance depends on consistent execution, behavioral discipline, and decision making under pressure.
Mentoring Mechanisms Linked to Engagement, Learning, and Performance Behavior
Work engagement is commonly assessed as a positive, fulfilling work-related state characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption, and is often examined alongside burnout risk and sustained performance (Schaufeli et al., 2002). Mentoring can contribute to engagement by strengthening perceived competence and developmental clarity, particularly when it supports goal setting, feedback, and reflective sensemaking of performance demands (Clutterbuck, 2004; Garvey & Stokes, 2022).
A central mechanism in performance development is self-efficacy, belief in one's capability to execute behaviors required to produce outcomes, which is associated with persistence, learning, and adaptive performance (Bandura, 1977). Mentoring can reinforce self-efficacy through guided mastery reflection, modeling, and feedback on real scenarios, helping professionals maintain execution consistency in complex client and organizational contexts (Garvey & Stokes, 2022). Leadership behavior also matters because the leader's role is repeatedly associated with creating conditions for performance, shaping priorities, reinforcing norms, and influencing motivation and results (Bianchi et al., 2017; Bunn & Fumagalli, 2016). Executive mentoring can operate as a developmental lever for leaders and high-stakes individual contributors by sharpening interpersonal impact and managerial behaviors (Goldsmith, 2007), improving influence capacity beyond formal authority structures (McGregor, 2006). In addition, communication competence is highlighted as critical in executive development interventions; executive coaching and mentoring contexts often emphasize conversational clarity, feedback quality, and relationship management skills (Ragins & Kram, 2007).
Given that advisory performance depends heavily on interpersonal and behavioral execution, these mechanisms (engagement, self-efficacy, leadership behaviors, and communication competence) are theoretically aligned with measurable performance routines, pipeline discipline, negotiation quality, and client relationship stability.
The Financial Advisory Context: Fintech Pressures, Complexity, and Performance
Financial advisory and wealth management work occurs within environments shaped by technological investment and the rapid expansion of fintech ecosystems, which alter client expectations, speed of decision cycles, and competitive dynamics (Araújo, 2018; Siqueira et al., 2018). Research on Brazilian financial institutions and fintech contexts highlights how technology investment and fintech growth influence market behavior and the operating models of financial services (Amorim & Araújo, 2019; Araújo, 2018). In parallel, studies examining fintech ecosystems and investor profiles suggest increased access and changing decision behaviors among smaller investors, factors that intensify the advisory need for trust-building, education, and continuous client communication (Lima et al., 2023).
In this setting, performance is not only technical. Advisors must consistently execute behaviors that sustain trust under uncertainty: client discovery, expectation management, emotional containment in market volatility, and compliant influence. Work in financial institutions also points to the need for intentional and creative action to respond to complex pressures, reinforcing the relevance of development strategies that strengthen judgment and adaptive execution (Firmino & Vasconcelos, 2021).
Consequently, executive mentoring is positioned as a human-capital mechanism that can support the behavioral demands of advisory performance, especially where professionals must maintain high standards while adapting to technology-driven change. Emotional intelligence, attention, and self-regulation as performance stabilizers
Emotional intelligence is frequently discussed as a capability that underpins effective leadership and results by supporting self-awareness, emotion regulation, empathy, and social influence, competencies directly linked to client-facing impact and relationship continuity (Goleman, 2000). For advisory roles where trust and emotional containment are central, these competencies can act as performance stabilizers: they protect decision quality and communication consistency during periods of volatility.
Additionally, attention and focus are presented as core elements of professional effectiveness and performance, particularly in high-pressure knowledge work where distraction and cognitive overload can erode execution quality (Goleman, 2013). Executive mentoring can serve as a structured reflective practice that strengthens self-regulation and attentional discipline through guided debriefs and behavioral routines aligned to performance outcomes (Garvey & Stokes, 2022).
Within emerging leadership approaches, neuroleadership perspectives also highlight how understanding cognitive and emotional processes can improve business outcomes, reinforcing the rationale for interventions that develop self-regulation and interpersonal impact (França, 2018; Guarnier & Chimenti, 2023). Combined, these streams support the premise that mentoring can strengthen the psychological skills that sustain performance behaviors over time, from individual development to organizational and client outcomes.
Across mentoring and career development literature, mentoring and coaching are commonly presented as instruments that support competence development and career management, often via structured methods that convert developmental intent into actionable routines (Costa & Brum, 2019; Lago, 2020). In performance-intensive environments, the practical value of mentoring increases when development is translated into consistent behaviors, communication routines, negotiation practices, and execution discipline, rather than remaining at the level of general reflection.
Empirical and applied studies also show mentoring being used as a strategy for professional development within high-performance domains (e.g., sport contexts), supporting the idea that structured mentoring can accelerate skills and stabilize performance under pressure (Rodrigues et al., 2020). Transposed to advisory work, this suggests a plausible pathway from mentoring-driven capability building to client-related outcomes such as stronger relationships, more effective communication, and improved retention behaviors, factors that are fundamental to sustained advisory performance.
Synthesis, Gap, and Study Focus (Research Questions)
While the literature broadly supports mentoring as a development mechanism linked to learning, leadership capability, and psychosocial support (Clutterbuck, 2004; Ragins & Kram, 2007), a practical gap remains in connecting mentoring mechanisms to performance-critical behaviors in financial advisory contexts shaped by fintech pressure and high relationship complexity (Araújo, 2018; Lima et al., 2023). Specifically, fewer applied studies articulate how mentoring translates into engagement-related energy (Schaufeli et al., 2002), self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977), emotional intelligence and self-regulation (Goleman, 2000, 2013), and communication competence (Ragins & Kram, 2007) in ways that matter directly to advisory execution.
To address this gap, this study examines executive mentoring as a strategy for engagement and high performance in financial advisory career development. The research is guided by the following questions:
Methodology
Research Design
This study is applied in nature, with a documentary and exploratory design, adopting an integrative qualitative and quantitative approach. The methodological choice sought to address practical challenges faced by financial professionals in fintech-enabled advisory contexts, consistent with applied research aims focused on diagnosing problems and supporting actionable solutions (Thiollent, 2011).
Data Sources and Collection Procedures
The research combined documentary and bibliographic analysis with primary survey data. The documentary stage drew on books, academic articles, and databases such as SciELO, CAPES, Google Scholar, and the Virtual Library (MBA USP/Esalq) to map the state of the art on executive mentoring, engagement, and high performance. Based on this synthesis, a structured online questionnaire was developed to capture participants’ perceptions regarding the contribution of executive mentoring in the investment/advisory sector. Data collection was standardized to preserve confidentiality and support ethical compliance.
Participants
The sample comprised 220 participants, including leaders/managers (n = 74) and financial advisors (n = 146), selected through convenience sampling from an approximate universe of 23,000 active professionals at the time of the study. Priority was given to mid-level and senior advisors with an average of 2 years of experience and Ancord certification, particularly those reporting indicators of career stagnation. All participants provided informed consent in accordance with academic research ethics (Figure 1).
Sample composition. Source: Original research data.
Instruments and Measures
The main instrument was a virtual questionnaire with 12 items. The questions explored perceptions related to trust, collaboration, skill development, engagement, and performance. Variables associated with sustained high performance, such as emotional intelligence, self-management, and resilience, were also considered (Goleman, 2013). Where applicable, optional open-ended prompts captured brief qualitative insights to complement the quantitative measures (Figure 2).
Sample data. Source: Original research data.
Data Analysis Procedures
Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation tests to examine associations between key variables (e.g. interaction frequency, satisfaction levels, and perceived mentoring impact). Qualitative data, when provided through open-ended responses, were examined through coding and thematic categorization to identify recurring mechanisms (e.g. mutual trust, goal clarity, and individualized adaptation). This integrative approach supported a broader interpretation of the phenomenon under investigation (Thiollent, 2011).
Results and Discussion
Overview of Key Findings
Overall, the results suggest that executive mentoring is perceived as a consistent development lever for both leaders/managers and financial advisors (FAs) working in fintech-enabled and digitally mediated financial services. Across the questionnaire responses and qualitative inputs, the most salient perceived outcomes include higher work engagement, improved performance-related behaviors, stronger leadership and management capabilities enacted without formal authority, and increased psychological resources such as resilience, self- management, and emotional intelligence. Participants also reported perceived gains in client-facing effectiveness, including negotiation quality and capacity for client acquisition and retention.
These patterns align with international research framing and mentoring as a mechanism that supports capability building, strategic alignment, and talent development in competitive environments (Clutterbuck, 2004; Garvey & Stokes, 2022; Ragins & Kram, 2007).
Comparison Between Leaders and Financial Advisors
The role-based comparison indicates meaningful differences in how mentoring is perceived and where its value concentrates (Figure 3).
Engagement and productivity by subgroups. Source: Original research data.
Leaders/managers reporting exposure to mentoring tended to describe stronger engagement and performance-related outcomes, suggesting that mentoring supports leadership consolidation, decision-making confidence, and alignment with organizational priorities.
Financial advisors who participated in mentoring likewise reported gains in engagement and productivity, with particularly salient effects in goal clarity, client acquisition routines, negotiation, and relationship management behaviors. In contrast, respondents without formal mentoring exposure reported comparatively lower outcomes across these dimensions, reinforcing the practical case for institutionalizing mentoring rather than relying on informal development dynamics.
Recurrent Qualitative Themes
The thematic analysis identified recurrent patterns that mirror established mentoring literature. First, mutual trust emerged as a foundational mechanism for mentoring effectiveness. Second, participants emphasized the importance of goal clarity and continuous feedback, consistent with the mentoring functions discussed by Ragins and Kram (2007).
Third, respondents highlighted the value of individualized adaptation of mentoring sessions, indicating that relevance to real advisory cases is critical to sustained engagement. Fourth, participants frequently referenced emotional support and strengthened self-efficacy, consistent with self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977).
Collectively, these themes suggest that perceived mentoring value is driven primarily by relationship quality and practical relevance, rather than by the mere duration or frequency of interactions.
Diversity and Inclusion in Financial Services
The predominance of male participants reflects well-documented gender imbalances in competitive professional sectors (Wajcman, 1998). This reinforces the relevance of mentoring as a structured mechanism to expand access to development, networks, and progression opportunities for women and underrepresented groups in financial services (Ibarra et al., 2013). In this context, mentoring is positioned not only as a performance practice but also as an inclusion lever that can reduce reliance on informal, unequal sponsorship dynamics.
Perceived Impacts and Practical Implications
Participants reported positive perceived impacts across multiple domains, including improved efficiency in client acquisition and retention, stronger adaptability and resilience in dynamic markets, and broader professional sustainability. Some respondents also associated mentoring with improved work–life balance and wellbeing (Figure 4).
Impacts of mentoring. Source: Original research data.
These impacts reinforce the view that mentoring extends beyond technical development, influencing organizational wellbeing and fostering a culture of engagement (Allen & Eby, 2003; Schaufeli et al., 2002).
Managerial Implications (Summary Table)
Discussion
The findings indicate that executive mentoring is perceived as a practical lever to strengthen engagement and stabilize performance-relevant capabilities in financial advisory work. Participants associated mentoring with increased goal clarity, self-efficacy, and behavioral discipline, elements that are central to execution consistency in client-centric roles. These perceptions align with the literature framing engagement as an energy-and-focus state that supports sustained performance (Schaufeli et al., 2002) and with mentoring as a developmental relationship that strengthens capability building through reflection and experience-based learning (Clutterbuck, 2004; Garvey & Stokes, 2022; Ragins & Kram, 2007).
In fintech-enabled advisory contexts, where performance depends heavily on communication quality, emotional regulation during volatility, and influence without formal authority, mentoring appears particularly relevant as a human-centered mechanism for accelerating maturity in interpersonal and self-management skills (Goldsmith, 2007; Goleman, 2000, 2013). At the same time, the results suggest that organizational effectiveness depends on implementation conditions, especially participation levels, mentor preparation, time constraints, and governance. Therefore, mentoring should be treated as a structured people practice integrated with development routines and performance management rather than an informal, ad hoc initiative.
To facilitate practical application, the main results are synthesized in Table 1, organizing perceived benefits, implementation challenges, and priority actions for financial organizations operating in client-centric and fintech-enabled advisory contexts. The table is intended as a decision aid for leaders and HR/People functions seeking to translate mentoring outcomes into repeatable practices and measurable performance routines.
Managerial Implications of Executive Mentoring for Financial Advisors.
Source: Original research data.
Table 1 clarifies the main managerial implications of the study by translating the perceived effects of executive mentoring into four practical areas for financial advisory organizations. First, the engagement and performance dimension shows that mentoring may support motivation, goal clarity, and self-efficacy, which are essential for advisors operating in target-driven environments where disciplined prospecting, client follow up, and consistent execution directly affect results. The challenge of low participation in formal programs indicates that mentoring should be institutionalized rather than left to informal or occasional relationships.
Second, the leadership development dimension highlights the relevance of mentoring for strengthening leadership without formal authority. This is particularly important for financial advisors, who often need to influence clients, peers, and internal stakeholders without occupying formal managerial positions. However, the effectiveness of this process depends on mentor's preparation. Experienced professionals should not only share technical knowledge, but also be equipped to listen, guide, provide feedback, and support development in a structured and ethical way.
Third, the resilience and wellbeing dimension suggests that mentoring can support emotional intelligence, self-regulation, and work–life balance. These capabilities are especially relevant in advisory work, where professionals face market volatility, demanding targets, regulatory pressure, and emotionally sensitive conversations with clients. In this sense, mentoring can provide a reflective space that helps advisors maintain focus, regulate emotional responses, and sustain performance under pressure.
Finally, the diversity and inclusion dimension indicates that mentoring can expand access to development opportunities for women and underrepresented professionals in a male-dominated financial sector. By formalizing mentoring pathways, organizations may reduce dependence on informal sponsorship networks and create clearer opportunities for visibility, progression, and professional growth.
Overall, Table 1 shows that executive mentoring should be understood not merely as an individual development intervention, but as a structured managerial practice capable of supporting performance, leadership, wellbeing, and inclusion in fintech-enabled financial advisory organizations.
Theoretical and Practical Contributions
The findings resonate with leadership theories that emphasize distributed influence and engagement, expanding understanding of how executive mentoring operates as a human-centered model in client-centric, fintech-enabled environments.
Theoretical contribution: The study enriches mentoring literature by focusing on a globally relevant yet underexplored segment, financial advisors, connecting socioemotional competencies to high performance. Practical contribution: It demonstrates that formal mentoring programs can serve as strategic tools for engagement, retention, and productivity in digital financial services, while simultaneously promoting diversity and inclusion.
Ethical Considerations
This research was conducted in accordance with ethical research standards. Formal approval by an ethics committee was not required because the study was part of a postgraduate specialization program and involved only voluntary adult participants in professional settings. No sensitive data were collected, and no vulnerable populations were involved. All participants signed informed consent forms, ensuring confidentiality and anonymity (Figure 5).
Characteristics and approaches: manager versus leader. Source: Original research data.
Conclusion
This study indicates that executive mentoring is a relevant and practical development mechanism to strengthen engagement and performance in digitally enabled, client-centric financial environments. Participants associated mentoring with improvements in leadership behaviors, communication, negotiation, resilience, and self-management, capabilities that support consistent execution in advisory roles where results depend on trust, relational influence, and disciplined performance routines.
From a theoretical standpoint, the study contributes by extending mentoring and performance-development scholarship to a professional segment that remains comparatively underexplored: financial advisors operating in fintech-enabled markets. By emphasizing influence and leadership enacted without formal authority, the findings reinforce contemporary views of distributed leadership and highlight mentoring as a mechanism through which behavioral performance systems can be strengthened in decentralized, high-pressure settings.
From a managerial standpoint, the results support executive mentoring as a strategic lever to: (i) strengthen advisory behaviors linked to client acquisition and retention; (ii) increase productivity consistency through clearer goals and self-regulation; (iii) accelerate leadership development among autonomous professionals; (iv) reinforce resilience and wellbeing in performance-driven cultures; and (v) support scalable growth strategies in technology-intensive financial services. This study has limitations. The evidence reflects a specific context and time period, and the sampling strategy may limit generalizability across different advisory markets and organizational models. Future research should therefore test the proposed approach through longitudinal designs, cross-country comparisons, and comparative studies that distinguish mentoring outcomes from adjacent interventions such as coaching, formal leadership programs, and broader talent development systems.
Overall, the findings suggest that when designed with clear structure, boundaries, and governance, executive mentoring functions as a human-centered development practice capable of strengthening both professional capability and organizational performance. Its potential applicability across diverse financial markets positions mentoring as a viable instrument to sustain careers, stabilize advisory performance, and support institutions navigating rapid digital and competitive transformation.
Supplemental Material
sj-pdf-1-ecm-10.1177_17418305261470211 - Supplemental material for Executive Mentoring for Financial Advisors: A Strategy for Engagement and High Performance in Career Development
Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-ecm-10.1177_17418305261470211 for Executive Mentoring for Financial Advisors: A Strategy for Engagement and High Performance in Career Development by Ana Cláudia Campos Pinheiro in International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
Supplemental Material
sj-pdf-2-ecm-10.1177_17418305261470211 - Supplemental material for Executive Mentoring for Financial Advisors: A Strategy for Engagement and High Performance in Career Development
Supplemental material, sj-pdf-2-ecm-10.1177_17418305261470211 for Executive Mentoring for Financial Advisors: A Strategy for Engagement and High Performance in Career Development by Ana Cláudia Campos Pinheiro in International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
Footnotes
Consent to Participate
Participation was voluntary. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and responses were collected and reported anonymously.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Appendix I (Informed Consent Form) and Appendix II (Survey Questionnaire) are provided as Supplemental files.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
