Benefits of mentoring to Australian early career women managers and professionals
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to examine potential benefits from a mentor relationship to women managers and professionals in early career. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 98 women business school graduates using an anonymously completed questionnaire. Respondents identified a more senior individual who had a positive influence in the development of their career, provided descriptive characteristics of this relationship and described its character. Three mentor functions were considered: role model, career development and psychosocial. Findings There were few differences as a function of the gender of the mentor though respondents having female mentors indicated more role modeling and tended to report more psychosocial functions. Respondents reporting more mentor functions also indicated higher levels of job and career satisfaction, more optimistic future career prospects and fewer psychosomatic symptoms. Originality/value Adds to the understanding of mentoring by including psychological well‐being variables as potential mentoring outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it