From Individual Development to Organizational Success: The Role of Mentoring Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to thoroughly examine the effects of the “Give a Hand” mentoring program on individual development and their contribution to organizational success. The program was designed to assess how participants progressed in personal satisfaction, psychological and emotional development, communication skills, and social competencies. The research employed qualitative methods, a phenomenological approach, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 36 mentors (from the USA, Turkey, and Canada) in the “Give a Hand” mentoring program. The data obtained were analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings demonstrate that mentoring processes play a significant role in enhancing leadership competencies and strengthening participants’ commitment to achieving organizational goals. The study’s findings provide evidence on how mentoring practices can be used as a functional tool on the path from individual development to organizational success. In conclusion, it is demonstrated that mentoring programs should be systematically addressed, and that adopting approaches tailored to participants’ needs will enhance success at both individual and organizational levels. In this context, mentoring practices are expected to contribute to the literature on the sustainable success of organizations as well as providing an opportunity for individuals to improve themselves. Keywords: Leadership Development, Mentoring Programs, Strategy, Individual Development, Organizational Success
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".