E. A. ENSHER
Copyright © 2013 SciRes. CN
(deJanasz, Ensher, & Heun, 2008)[7].
Overall, e-mentoring is advantageous for all profes-
sionals as it provides an additional context that enables
protégés to leverage the positive effects of multiple
mentors that are crucial to career success (Higgins &
Kram, 2001)[8]. Due to the advantages of e-mentoring,
there has been a rapid growth in these types of programs
with businesses such as Triple Creek and Mentium pro-
viding platforms and support to companies such as KPM G
who sponsor e-mentoring (An & Lipscomb, 2010))[9].
One of the greatest challenges that mentoring program
ad- ministrators face is the need to effectively recruit and
match mentors and protégés (Headlam-Wells, Gosland,
& Craig, 2005)[10]. The purpose of this research is to
better understand the importance of the impact of com-
puter- mediated communication (CMC) on individuals’
will- ing ness to e ngage in me ntoring, which has i mplica-
tions for matching and recruiting mentors and protégés.
3. Theoretical Framework: Social Presence
Social presence is the level in which social cues (e.g.,
tone of voice) are present in an interaction (Short, Wil-
liams, & Christie, 1976)[11]. Face-to-face communica-
tion is considered the highest form of social presence and
pro- vides a baseline for measurement (Harms, 2005)[12].
The high degree of social presence associated with
face-to- face communication lies in the media richness of
face- to -face interaction. Media richness describes the
degree to which a medium can convey intended mean-
ings of communication. In face-to-face communication,
senders and recipients have not only the words but tone
of voice, facial and body language to assist in under-
stand i ng t he me ani n g o f the m e ssa ge . E a ch fo r m o f CM C
is associated with different levels of social presence (Ar-
baugh, 2000)[13]; (Murphy, 2011)[14]. For example,
Wang & Newlin (2001)[15] found that synchronous
technologies such as c hat rooms provide a higher degree
of social presence than asynchronous technologies. Feris,
Gimeno, Pinazo, et al. (2002)[16] found that individuals
that engage in chat room interaction do so in order to
maximize their social inter- action. In addition, their
study found that users of chat rooms perceived no dif-
ference in social presence be- tween face-to-face interac-
tion or chat room interaction which bodes well for high
social pre sence forms of CMC as a proxy for face-to-face
communication. Furthermore, Murphy (2011)[14] found
that blended mentoring in which e-mail plus talking on
the phone or meeting in person increased the overall sa-
tisfaction o f the mentor ing rela- tio nships. Therefor e, the
following research propositions are suggested: Research
Propositio n 1: Mentors will be more willing to en gage in
e-mentoring when higher presence forms of CMC are
incorporated into interac- tions. Research Proposition 2:
Mentors will be more sat- isfied with e-mentoring rela-
tionships when higher pres- ence forms of CMC are in-
corporated into interactio ns.
4. Discussions and Implications
E-mentoring as a form of e-learning is rich in possibilities,
however much remains to be known regarding attracting
and retaining mentors to participate in these types of
relationships. Preliminary research indicates that mentor -
ing program designers would be well advised to assess
mentors comfort level with various low and high social
presence forms of CMC. Technical training on various
forms of hig h er presence forms of CMC could be provided
to increase mentors’ comfort level. Also, individuals en-
gaged in e-mentoring would be well advised to incorporate
high social p r e sence forms of CMC into their intera c tions
with their mentor in order to attain a higher level of
satisfactio n with the relationship .
In sum, e-learning program designers would be well
advised to explore how differences across generations
impact CMC prior experience and comfort level. Reverse
mentoring programs, in which senior executives are
paired with younger entry level employees to learn about
social media (Ensher & Murphy, 2005)[2] could be a tool
used to overcome the CMC usage divide. In addition, as
users become more comfortable with various forms of
CMC, e-mentoring programs can offer a hybrid approach
to mentoring program design in which various high and
low social presence contexts are incorporated throughout
the programs. The millennial generation has different
needs and expectation not only for how they learn, but
also for how like to receive mentoring (Meister & Wil-
lyerd, 2010)[17]. Therefore, using social presence as a
conceptual framework to design blended e-mentoring
that provides high and low social presence forms of
CMC hold s muc h pro mise.
REFERENCES
[1] D. Clutterbuck, “Coaching the team at work,” United
Kingdom: Intercultura l Press, 2007.
[2] E. A. Ensher and Murphy, “Power Mentoring: How Suc-
cessful M ento rs and Prot égés Make the M ost out of Their
Relationships,” Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California,
2005.
[3] E. A. Ensher and S. E. Murphy, “E-mentoring: Next
Generation Research Strategies and Suggestions. In B.R.
RAGINS, & K.E. KRAM (Eds.),” The handbook of
mentoring at work: Theory, Research and Practice,2007.
[4] Y. Farbey, “The Global Growth of E-learning,”2013,
Available Online at:
http://thestartupmagazine.co.uk/index.php/global-growth-
e-learning/
[5] E. A. Ensher, C. Heun and A. Blanchard, “Online Men-
toring and Computer-mediated Communication: New Di-
rections in Research,” Journal of Vocational Behavior,