ASAP reflection papers (3) based on 5 articles each - Human Resource Management

10.1177/1523422305279688 ARTICLE Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005 Bierema and Hill / VIR TUAL MENTORING

Virtual Mentoring and HRD

Laura L. Bierema Janette R. Hill

The problem and the solution. The purpose of this article is to explore virtual mentoring and discuss its implications for human resource development (HRD) as an individual and career development inter vention. The authors recognize vir tual mentoring as an alternative to traditional mentoring that is eas- ier to manage, less costly, unconstrained by geography or time, faster, and more egalitarian than traditional mentoring. This article defines, compares, and contrasts traditional and virtual mentoring. It discusses the benefits and challenges of using computer-mediated communication for mentoring purposes. It concludes with a discussion of how human resource develop- ment professionals can facilitate virtual mentoring in the global knowledge age. Key implications for HRD include using virtual mentoring as a lifelong education tool, educating mentors and protégés, supporting a multicultural workforce, and building knowledge.

Keywords: virtual mentoring; human resource development; online mentoring; computer mediated communication

Navigating a career involves riding the waves of the knowledge age, keep- ing up with the swift tides of technological change, weathering organization volatility, and steering through an increasingly complex and global environ- ment. Mentoring can function as a career development life preserver crucial to advancement. The late 20th century saw the rise of the free agent, or indi- viduals who commit to careers and relationships with colleagues rather than entrust loyalty to an organization, making mentors more important than ever. Mentoring is an important aspect of career development, and there is evidence that individuals who receive mentoring advance farther, make higher salaries, and are more satisfied than those who do not (Dreher & Cox, 1996). Kerka (1998) observed that during the 1990s interest in mentoring rose with increased downsizing, restructuring, teamwork, diversity, and individual responsibility for career development. Globalization has also

Advances in Developing Human Resources Vol. 7, No. 4 November 2005 556-568 DOI: 10.1177/1523422305279688 Copyright 2005 Sage Publications

created more opportunities to reach across the globe, and individuals change jobs more frequently and have less loyalty to organizations. Yet, tra- ditional, face-to-face mentoring relationships are not always practical in a knowledge society where communication is instantaneous, computer medi- ated, and global. This condition has fueled the rise of virtual mentoring or e-mentoring.

The Internet is being used as a mentoring venue where virtual mentoring has become increasingly useful as a knowledge age alternative to the tradi- tional mentoring relationships (Bierema & Merriam, 2002). The Internet provides a forum for multiple types and forms of communication, and both professional and personal relationships have been formed using this medium. Internet technology provides several mentoring options, often between par- ties that would not otherwise know each other if not for technology’s ability to reach across borders and erode barriers that exist in traditional mentoring programs.

The purpose of this article is to explore virtual mentoring and discuss the implications for human resource development (HRD) as an individual and career development intervention. The article will begin by defining mentoring and virtual mentoring, noting similarities and contrasts. Next it will explore the benefits and challenges associated with virtual mentoring. The article will conclude with recommendations for using virtual mentoring as an HRD intervention in an increasingly technology-based, knowledge society.1

Mentoring Defined The original Mentor, the mythical mentor from Homer’s Odyssey, was

described as “Half-human, half-God; half-male, half-female; believable yet unreachable. . . . Wisdom personified; A paradoxical union of both goal and path.” Mentor’s charge in the epic was Odysseus’s son, Telemakhos. Men- tors have existed throughout history in the form of a wiser, older person whose job is to guide the protégé’s or mentee’s development. More recently, mentoring has been used to enhance academic, career, and personal development.

Bierema and Merriam (2003) concluded from the volumes of mentoring literature that the definition and functions of mentors vary widely, the effec- tiveness of formal mentoring programs is mixed, and certain factors can be identified that enhance the potential for a successful mentoring experience. In fact, there is very little agreement in the literature as to what is and what is not mentoring (Jacobi, 1991; Merriam, 1983; Murrell, Crosby, & Ely, 1999). Mentoring falls into the broader category of developmental relation- ships that range from one-time career sponsorship (i.e., recommending an individual for a developmental task or promotion) to full-blown mentoring that involves a committed, long-term, mutually beneficial relationship. This range of developmental relationships parallels Zey’s (1984) classification

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 557

of a mentor as someone “who oversees the career and development of another person, usually a junior, through teaching, counseling, providing psychological support, protecting, and at times promoting or sponsoring” (Zey, 1984, p. 7).

Formal mentoring programs can be found in business and industry and in all levels of education. A number of factors needs to be present for effective mentoring (see Hansman, 2002a, for more detail). First, mentoring works best when it evolves naturally and there is chemistry and mutuality in the relationship. Mentoring relationships must be built out of mutual respect, trust, comfort, and confidentiality between the mentor and protégé. Second, both the mentor and protégé must share a commitment to the relationship and expectations for the mentoring. Third, the mentoring needs priority treatment in spite of time constraints. Although the necessity for ongoing communication would seem apparent, several barriers such as time, work responsibilities, geographic distance, and lack of trust can diminish if not halt the mentoring.

Mentoring may happen with a board of advisors and multiple mentors both inside and outside the organization who have a wide range of expertise. Mentoring serves both instrumental and psychosocial functions (Kram & Isabella, 1985). Instrumental functions relate to career enhancement through coaching, career advice, feedback, training, information, and sponsorship. Psychosocial functions relate to interpersonal enhancement and include interpersonal skills, work skills, stress reduction, dialogue, self-reflection, and role modeling.

Not all individuals desiring a mentor can find one. This predicament is particularly problematic for women and people of color in organizations (Hansman, 1998; Murrell et al., 1999). Individuals have found creative alternatives to traditional mentoring such as peer mentoring, mentoring cir- cles, professional groups (Knouse, 2001), and networking (Bierema, in press).

Virtual Mentoring Defined Virtual mentoring is known by a number of terms, including e-mentoring,

computer-mediated mentoring, tele-mentoring, e-mail mentoring, Internet mentoring, online mentoring, cybermentoring, and virtual mentoring (Perren, 2003). For the purposes of this article, these terms will be used inter- changeably. Telementoring has been defined as “use of email or computer conferencing systems to support a mentoring relationship when a face-to-face relationship would be impractical” (O’Neill, Wagner, & Gomez, 1996, p. 39). Boyle Single and Muller (2001) further described e-mentoring as a computer-mediated relationship between a senior individual who is the mentor with a lesser skilled protégé with the goal of developing the protégé

558 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005

in a way that helps him or her succeed. They defined e-mentoring as “the merger of mentoring with electronic communications [that] links mentors with protégés independent of geography or scheduling constraints” (p. 107). They distinguished structured e-mentoring as occurring in a formal- ized program environment where training and coaching is made available for mentors and the outcomes are evaluated. Bierema and Merriam (2002) defined e-mentoring as “a computer mediated, mutually beneficial relation- ship between a mentor and a protégé that provides learning, advising, encouraging, promoting, and modeling, that is often boundaryless, egalitar- ian, and qualitatively different than traditional face-to-face mentoring” (p. 214).

Boyle Single and Muller (2001) observed that electronic mentoring pro- grams have created a revolution in mentoring and provide unparalleled opportunities for mentoring. The affordances of virtual mentoring can be quite distinct from traditional face-to-face mentoring. For example, virtual mentoring is not place dependent. The mentor and protégé can literally be around the world from each other. Furthermore, virtual mentoring relation- ships can be struck up and nurtured using many technical mediums, includ- ing e-mail, electronic mailing lists, chat groups, intranets, and computer conferencing. In addition to a choice of tools, another potential affordance of virtual mentoring is time independence. Mentors and protégés can literally leave messages for each other at any time when asynchronous technologies are used.

E-mentoring is qualitatively different from traditional mentoring in that it can be asynchronous and proximity between the mentor and protégé is not an issue. The asynchronous form of virtual mentoring enables more flexibil- ity than face-to-face mentoring although it lacks nonverbal communication and is lower in social presence. E-mentoring has the potential to foster a more deliberative, reflective, and thoughtful exchange. Given its text-based nature, it yields a written record of the mentoring process. Finally, e-mentoring is easier to manage than face-to-face programs, and it is easier to coordinate matches without reliance on travel or meetings. These factors make it less costly and more attractive than traditional mentoring programs. E-mentoring is also thought to be more egalitarian than traditional mentoring because it has the potential to make mentoring available to individuals such as women and people of color who might otherwise have difficulty finding a mentor.

E-mentoring is becoming available in a number of arenas, with educa- tional institutions leading the way in the use of e-mentoring programs in both K-12 and higher education settings. E-mentoring crosses boundaries of race, class, and gender by targeting marginalized groups in society such as minorities, low-income students, and young girls and women. Formal e-mentoring programs electronically link students and teachers with tutors, experts, and/or databases (Anonymous, 1995; Harris, 1996; O’Neill et al.,

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 559

1996). For example, a national program called MentorNet (MentorNet, 2005) helps female students majoring in science, engineering, and mathe- matics gain mentoring through e-mail.

This section has defined, compared, and contrasted traditional mentoring and virtual mentoring. The next section identifies the benefits and chal- lenges associated with computer-mediated mentoring.

Benefits and Challenges of Virtual Mentoring Virtual mentoring in the workplace has been used in a variety of contexts,

ranging from nursing to financial corporations to continuing professional development for teachers. Although many have reported very successful mentoring relationships, there are challenges associated with the mentoring process. Benefits and challenges associated with virtual mentoring will be discussed in the following sections (see Table 1 for a summary).

Benefits of Virtual Mentoring

There are several benefits associated with virtual mentoring. Perhaps one of the most obvious is that virtual mentoring can occur anytime and any- place (Kirk & Olinger, 2003). The reduction in time and/or place (i.e., geo- graphical) constraints offers several advantages. As pointed out by Guy (2002), a protégé may have a question in the late hours of the evening. Rather than waiting to ask the question next time there is a meeting with a mentor, the protégé can send e-mail or post the question to a bulletin board. The technology enables the mentor to then respond to the question when convenient for him or her.

Closely associated with the anytime/anyplace benefit is the idea that vir- tual mentoring makes continued professional development more readily available and in some instances, viable (Boyd & Jackson, 2004). Continu- ous professional development via virtual mentoring can also enable “peak performance” regardless of the stage of one’s career (Sevilla & Wells, 1999).

There are several skills that have been identified as being enhanced in tra- ditional face-to-face mentoring relationships that also seem to benefit from virtual mentoring. Enhanced writing skills is one area of skill development often identified in the literature (R. Brown & Dexter, 2002; Fodeman, 2002; Haas, Tully, & Blair, 2002). The written nature of the mentoring enables this skill to develop. Rea (2001) also reported that overall communication skills are increased through virtual mentoring. As the communication is primarily written, it becomes even more important to be conscious of what is said and how it might be interpreted. Finally, teamwork can also be enhanced through virtual mentoring (Fodeman, 2002). The time and place independ-

560 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005

ence is one way that teamwork may be enhanced. This affords yet another way to enhance teamwork: ability to involve others who might not have been involved previously (e.g., one team member might be in the United States while another may be in Australia and yet another in Tunisia).

Increased availability of mentors to protégés is another benefit associ- ated with virtual mentoring. Online technologies enable connections between mentors and protégés regardless of race, gender, physical ability, or other personal variables. This increased equalitarianism helps to break down the walls around sociocultural constraints, increasing access for all involved in the mentoring process (Hansman, 2002b; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002).

Virtual mentoring also holds the potential to redefine mentor from a tra- ditionally older, wiser advisor to someone who can provide help in a context where age and/or experience may not be immediately obvious to the protégé. This is a benefit in that someone younger may have more experi- ence in a particular area but may be discounted because of his or her age. Furthermore, virtual mentoring can also enhance the knowledge base of the mentor, or more knowledgeable other (Vygotsky, 1978). In describing their mentor-protégé relationship, Johnson-Bailey and Cervero (2002) pointed out it was (and continues to be) challenging at times to know who is learning from whom. Rather than the “knowing” being a one-way process, the men-

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 561

TABLE 1: Benefits and Challenges in Virtual Mentoring

Benefits Challenges

Anytime/anyplace mentoring (Guy, 2002; Kirk & Olinger, 2003)

Technology (cost, access) (Fodeman, 2002; Guy, 2002; Hansman, 2002c)

Continued professional development enabling peak performance (Boyd & Jackson, 2004; Hansman, 2002d; Sevilla & Wells, 1999)

Online communication skills (Guy, 2002)

Skill development (writing, teamwork, communication) (R. Brown & Dexter, 2002; Fodeman, 2002; Haas, Tully, Blair, 2002)

Privacy (Hansman, 2002c; Kirk & Olinger, 2003)

Cross-cultural connections (Hansman, 2002b; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002)

Training (B. L. Brown, 2001; O’Neill & Harris, 2004; Smink, 1999)

Continuous learning for all (Hansman, 2002c; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002)

Match (Hansman, 2002b; Hansman, 2002c; Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002)

Learning communities (Duff, 2000; Muller, 2000; Riel & Fulton, 2001)

Sustaining the relationship (B. L. Brown, 2001; Hansman, 2002c)

tor and the protégé have the ability to learn from each other (Hansman, 2002b).

Whereas the mentor-protégé relationship is traditionally a one-to-one relationship (or one to a small group), the process of virtual mentoring can help extend the notion of a learning community into the workplace. Increased access and ease associated with virtual mentoring can make the process one that is more easily engaged by many, thus reinforcing the learning for all (Duff, 2000; Muller, 2000; Riel & Fulton, 2001).

Challenges of Virtual Mentoring

Clearly there are many benefits and opportunities associated with virtual mentoring. However, the process is not without its challenges. For instance, the very use of online technologies for mentoring presents several chal- lenges. Cost is one issue often discussed in the literature. Fodeman (2002) and Hansman (2002a) described several cost-associated challenges, includ- ing monetary as well as time. A careful analysis of the benefits and costs for virtual mentoring in a specific context should be undertaken before the process is enabled.

Another technology issue is related to access. Many have described the potential for increased access to mentors/protégés with online technologies. However, comfort with the technology both as a tool and as a cognitive medium is important. As Guy (2002) pointed out, the digital divide contin- ues to be very much a part of workplace environments. Furthermore, access is not limited to physical access. Intellectual access (Hill, Wiley, Han, & Nelson, 2003) can also be a challenge with using online technologies; that is, some may not have the information literacy skills that will enable suc- cessful involvement in e-mentoring. This challenge needs to be considered when implementing a virtual mentoring process.

Online communication skills is another area of challenge for virtual mentoring. As indicated by many researchers reporting about studies related to online learning, use of online tools can hamper communication with greater potential for misunderstanding and just simply miscommunication (see e.g., Hill, 2002). Guy (2002) proposed that this is also possible with vir- tual mentoring, encouraging careful training in online communication skills prior to the establishment of the mentor- protégé relationship.

Privacy—or lack thereof—is another significant challenge with online mentoring. Unlike face-to-face mentoring, where the interactions simply “disappear” after they occur (unless tape recorded), virtual mentoring via e-mail or bulletin boards can be and often are by default recorded and cap- tured in “public record” (Kirk & Olinger, 2003). Mentors and protégés need to be fully aware of this fact and need to be trained on how best to use the

562 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005

tools to get the support they need while reducing the risks (Hansman, 2002a).

Training is a much bigger challenge associated with many aspects of the mentoring process. Several have written guides to help facilitate the pro- cess, including Smink in 1999 and more recently B. L. Brown in 2001. Recent research is bringing into question some of the assumptions tradition- ally associated with mentoring (e.g., parental role of the mentor to the protégé) and encouraging a more inclusive approach to the process, one in which both the mentor and protégé benefit by learning from each other. O’Neill and Harris’s (2004) work in this area is particularly promising as we look ahead to the growth of the virtual mentoring process.

Creating a virtual match and building a relationship based on trust can also be difficult. Certainly, these issues were also challenges with face-to-face mentoring (see e.g., Johnson-Bailey & Cervero, 2002). However, they appear to be even more significant for virtual mentoring. Hansman (2002a) indicated that finding ways to ensure that the match is appropriate and work- ing actively to build trust are vital for virtual mentoring.

Finally, finding ways to sustain the relationship is another challenge associated with virtual mentoring (B. L. Brown, 2001; Hansman, 2002a). As with face-to-face mentoring, ongoing contact is important not just in the beginning but throughout the mentoring process. There are additional chal- lenges with virtual mentoring in sustaining the contact. The e-mail message or bulletin board posting can be more easily ignored than someone standing in the doorway. Finding techniques and incentives for continuing the men- tor-protégé dialogue are important.

Facilitating Virtual Mentoring E-mentoring is not identical to traditional mentoring when it comes to

establishing and maintaining a relationship. HRD professionals need to take several issues into consideration when developing virtual mentoring pro- grams. These include viewing mentoring as a lifelong career development tool, training and developing mentors and protégés, managing the process, supporting a multicultural workforce, and building knowledge.

Virtual mentoring is increasingly viewed by many as an important aspect of e-learning and lifelong education in organizations and invested in accord- ingly (Hansman, 2002a). Learning is becoming progressively more virtual in our high-technology, globalizing knowledge society. Virtual mentoring holds great promise for a low-cost, high-impact career development tool that spans the globe and provides access to the diverse workplace.

Organizations embarking on a virtual mentoring program need to edu- cate both mentors and protégés about the process and provide a structure that supports the relationship. Acknowledging that there is much upfront

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 563

work to do is a key concern for HRD when implementing formal e-mentoring programs. Algiere Kasprisin, Boyle Single, Single, and Muller (2003) used a control group experimental design to randomly assign half the study group to a condition where interactive online training to be an e-mentor was pro- vided. Undergraduate e-mentors in the MentorNet program completed a series of case study tutorials. The other group was assigned to a condition where the training was optional. The mandatory training group exchanged e-mail more frequently with their e-mentors, causing the authors to indicate that outcomes were improved with the training.

Training should certainly be considered in implementing virtual mentoring, but HRD professionals should not overlook more systemic and structural factors that may impact e-mentoring such as the culture, the structure of and support for the program, and opportunities for the e-mentoring to have an impact on protégés’ careers. In another study, Salmon (2000) proposed an internationally known five-stage e-mentoring mentoring model (Hawkridge, 2003). Stage 1 is concerned with access to the mentor and motivation to par- ticipate. Stage 2 focuses on fostering online socialization, followed by information exchange in Stage 3. Stage 4 consists of knowledge construc- tion where ideas are formulated, shared, and modified. Finally, Stage 5 is development where the protégé may challenge the mentor as he or she tests new knowledge.

Although there may be other models, Salmon’s (2000) appears to be a mentoring model that has been used successfully by others. Furthermore, this model suggests a progression leading up to development, although an erroneous assumption about mentoring is that development begins simulta- neously with the initiation of the relationship. Organizations need to respect this developmental process and provide structure to support it.

Steps also need to be taken to manage the virtual mentoring process and ensure the viability and longevity of such relationships. Developing rela- tionships can be challenging in any situation, but the challenges seem to increase with virtual relationship development. Purcell (2004) offered advice for making e-mentoring more effective by initially developing the mentoring relationship in person or by telephone to lay a strong foundation. The mentor and protégé should discuss roles and expectations for the rela- tionship. As the e-mentoring ensues, both parties must ensure that commu- nication obstacles are identified and eliminated. Both the mentor and protégé must assume mutual responsibility for the success of the relation- ship, and the protégé must be willing to commit to reflective practice and personal growth. In a study of online mentoring between students and teach- ers and subject matter experts (Harris, 1996), for example, differing expec- tations with regard to turnaround time and frequency of interaction was the major problem in the program’s success.

564 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005

Virtual mentoring has the potential to better support a multicultural workforce by providing access to mentoring that might otherwise not exist for women, people of color, and other minorities. It has been suggested that e-mentoring minimizes the unequal relationship and feelings of intimida- tion or discomfort characterized by new mentoring relationships (Algiere Kasprisin et al., 2003). “E-mentoring leverages the connective benefits of the Internet to provide mentoring opportunities where they would not other- wise exist, and to facilitate the development of relationships among people of different status” (Algiere Kasprisin et al., 2003, p. 69).

Finally, virtual mentoring holds the potential to build, capture, and share knowledge in a knowledge society. Creating and disseminating knowledge is a cornerstone of the learning organization, and virtual mentoring offers a practical and inexpensive method of engaging in these activities.

Conclusion Mentoring is a well-established practice in many workplace settings.

Formal systems have been in place in organizations for years, and many pro- fessionals seeking to help others with learning have established informal networks for mentoring. Online technologies have enabled an extension of these practices in new and exciting ways. The prospects for virtual mentoring are bright; however, they are not without obstacles. Continued research is needed if we are to fully understand the potential (and pitfalls) associated with virtual mentoring. Overall, the literature on electronic mentoring reflects only exploratory undertakings into this potentially rich vehicle for career development. Much still needs to be done in ascertaining those aspects of the electronic medium that hinder as well as cultivate a genuine mentoring relationship. It will be important to determine what situations are most appropriate for e-mentoring and how it affects careers on the basis of positionality (e.g., gender, race, sexuality). We also need to learn more about developing virtual mentors and protégés and what benefits exist for organizations sponsoring virtual mentoring programs. We believe the future for virtual mentoring is bright and encourage HRD to assume a leadership role in fostering this development medium.

Note

1. The authors of this article have practiced and found considerable value in e-mentoring. Although we recognize the challenges, we believe there are many ben- efits that are enabled by the process.

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 565

References

Algiere Kasprisin, C., Boyle Single, P., Single, R. M., & Muller, C. B. (2003). Building a better bridge: Testing e-training to improve e-mentoring programmes in higher edu- cation. Mentoring & Tutoring, 11(1), 67-78.

Anonymous. (1995). Electronic mentoring. Futurist, 29(4), 55. Bennett, D. T. (1997). Providing role models online. Electronic Learning, 19(5), 50-51. Bierema, L. L. (in press). Women’s networks: A career development intervention or

impediment? Human Resource Development International. Bierema, L. L., & Merriam, S. (2002). E-mentoring: Using computer mediated commu-

nication to enhance the mentoring process. Innovative Higher Education, 26, 211-227.

Boyd, A. M., & Jackson, M. L. (2004). An effective model for rapid skills acquisition through a simulation-based integrated learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1/2), 1-21.

Boyle Single, P., & Muller, C. B. (2001). When email and mentoring unite: The imple- mentation of a nationwide mentoring program. In L. K. Stromei (Ed.), Creating mentoring and coaching programs (pp. 107-122). Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.

Brown, B. L. (2001). Mentoring and work-based learning. Trends and Issues Alert, 29. Columbus, OH: ERIC.

Brown, R., & Dexter, S. (2002). E-Mentors: Connecting caring adults and kids through e-mail. TechTrends, 46(6), 60-63.

Dreher, G. F., & Cox, T. H. (1996). Race, gender, and opportunity: A study of compensa- tion attainment and the establishment of mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 297-308.

Duff, C. (2000). Online mentoring. Educational Leadership, 58(2), 49-52. Fodeman, D. (2002). Telementoring. Technology & Learning, 23(4), 28, 30. Guy, T. C. (2002). Telementoring: Sharing mentoring relationships in the 21st century. In

C. A. Hansman (Ed.), Critical perspectives on mentoring: Trends and issues (pp. 27-37). Columbus, OH: ERIC.

Haas, A., Tully, C., & Blair, K. (2002). Mentors versus masters: Women’s and girls’ nar- ratives of (re)negotiation in Web-based writing spaces. Computers and Composition, 19, 231-249.

Hansman, C. A. (1998). Mentoring and women’s career development. In L. L. Bierema (Ed.), Women’s career development across the lifespan: Insights and strategies for women, organizations and adult educators (pp. 63-73). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hansman, C. A. (2002a). Mentoring as continuing professional education. Adult Learn- ing, 13(1), 7-8.

Hansman, C. A. (2002b). Diversity and power in mentoring relationships. In C. A. Hansman (Ed.), Critical perspectives on mentoring: Trends and issues (pp. 39-48). Columbus, OH: ERIC.

566 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005

Hansman, C. A. (2002c). Facing forward: Implications for practice and suggestions for future research. In C. A. Hansman (Ed.), Critical perspectives on mentoring: Trends and issues (pp. 49-52). Columbus, OH: ERIC.

Hansman, C. A. (Ed.). (2002d). Critical perspectives on mentoring: Trends and issues. Columbus, OH: ERIC.

Harris, J., with O’Bryan, E., & Rotenberg, L. (1996). Practical lessons in telementoring. Learning and Leading With Technology, 24(2), 53-57.

Hawkridge, D. (2003). The human in the machine: Reflections on mentoring at the Brit- ish Open University. Mentoring & Tutoring, 11(1), 16-24.

Hill, J. R. (2002). Strategies and techniques for community building in Web-based learn- ing environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), 67-86.

Hill, J. R., Wiley, D., Nelson, L. M., & Han, S. (2003). Exploring research on Internet- based learning: From infrastructure to interactions. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 433 – 460). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Education Research, 61, 505-532.

Johnson-Bailey, J., & Cervero, R. M. (2002). Cross-cultural mentoring as a context for learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 96, 15-26. San Fran- cisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kerka, S. (1998). New perspectives on mentoring. Retrieved January 9, 2005, from http://www.ericdigests.org/1998-3/mentoring.html

Kirk, J. J., & Olinger, J. (2003). From traditional to virtual mentoring. Washington, DC: ERIC.

Knouse, S. (2001). Virtual mentors: Mentoring on the Internet. Journal of Employment Counseling, 38, 162-169.

Kram, K. E., & Isabella, L. A. (1985). Mentoring alternatives: The role of peer relation- ships in career development. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 110-132.

MentorNet. (2005). MentorNet. Retrieved January 10, 2005, from http://www .mentornet.net/

Merriam, S. B. (1983). Mentors and protégés: A critical review of the literature. Adult Education Quarterly, 33, 161-173.

Muller, C. (2000). MentorNet: Using the Internet to develop the next generation of women scientists and engineers. AWIS Magazine, 29(1), 19-23.

Murrell, A. J., Crosby, F. J., & Ely, R. J. (Eds.). (1999). Mentoring dilemmas: Develop- mental relationships within multicultural organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

O’Neill, D. K., & Harris, J. B. (2004). Bridging the perspectives and developmental needs of all participants in curriculum-based telementoring programs. Journal of Research on Technology and Education, 37, 111-128.

O’Neill, D. K., Wagner, R., & Gomez, L. M. (1996). Online mentors: Experimenting in science class. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 39-42.

Bierema and Hill / VIRTUAL MENTORING 567

Perren, L. (2003). The role of e-mentoring in entrepreneurial education and support: A meta-review of academic literature. Education + Training, 45, 517-525.

Purcell, K. (2004). Making e-mentoring more effective. American Journal of Health Sys- tem Pharmacists, 61, 284-286.

Rea, A. (2001). Telementoring: An A+ initiative. Education Canada, 40(4), 28-29. Riel, M., & Fulton, K. (2001). The role of technology in supporting learning communi-

ties. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 518-523. Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London:

Kogan Page. Sevilla, C., & Wells, T. D. (1999). Six ways to foster peak performance. Performance

Improvement, 38, 812. Smink, J. (1999). A training guide for mentors. Clemson, SC: ERIC. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological pro-

cesses. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Zey, M. G. (1984). The mentor connection. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.

Laura L. Bierema, Ed.D., is an associate professor and program coordinator of Adult Education at the University of Georgia. Her primary assignment is with the Human Resource and Organization Development Program. She also supervises doc- toral research and is a member of the Graduate Faculty. She teaches courses in adult learning, organization development and change, human resource development, and group dynamics. She has published numerous articles and book chapters and is the author or co-author of three books.

Janette R. Hill, Ph.D., is an associate professor, University of Georgia, College of Education, Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology. Prior to coming to the University of Georgia, she held academic appointments at the University of Northern Colorado and Georgia State University. Her research inter- ests include community building, resource-based learning, and Web-based learning environments. Her articles have appeared in both research and professional publica- tions including Educational Technology Research and Development and The Internet and Higher Education.

Bierema, L. L., & Hill, J. R. (2005). Virtual mentoring and HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7(4), 556-568..

568 Advances in Developing Human Resources November 2005