Mentoring and Job Search Behaviors: A Moderated Mediation Model of Job Search Self-Efficacy

Abstract

Limited research exists around how to effectively enhance the job search behaviors and self-efficacy of job seekers during the job search process. In the current study, we investigated whether mentoring functions (i.e., career and psychosocial functions) are related to job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Moreover, we tested the interactive effects of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors. Two-wave panel data were collected from 164 college students in China to test our hypotheses. The results indicated that psychosocial mentoring was related to job search behaviors both directly and indirectly through job search self-efficacy. In addition, our results revealed that the interactive effects of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy and on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy were stronger when career and psychosocial mentoring were high. The implications of the study’s findings and directions for future research are offered.

Keywords

career mentoring psychosocial mentoring job search self-efficacy job search behavior self-regulation

The job search, which refers to the time and intensity in gathering labor market information to pursue employment opportunities (Wanberg, Glomb, Song, & Sorenson, 2005), has gained considerable attention in the literature (e.g., Liu, Wang, Liao, & Shi, 2014; Song, Wanberg, Niu, & Xie, 2006). Given employment is related to financial and mental health (e.g., decreased depression, decreased anxiety, and increased self-esteem; Paul & Moser, 2009), the job search proves important for individuals. Generally, job search behaviors are related to future employment opportunities, job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and organizational commitment (Saks & Ashforth, 2002), ultimately impacting an individual’s subsequent well-being, career development, and career success (e.g., Moynihan, Roehling, LePine, & Boswell, 2003).

The recent growth in unfavorable economic conditions globally has made the job search a common experience for many (Manroop & Richardson, 2016). Especially, graduating college students report higher levels of unemployment than other populations (e.g., the job seekers who are incumbents) due to poor career planning, limited time, and effort invested in the job search (Brown, Cober, Kane, Levy, & Shalhoop, 2006; Renn, Steinbauer, Taylor, & Detwiler, 2014). Therefore, the examination of how to develop effective job search interventions (e.g., stress management and skill training) to help college students increase the success of the job search (e.g., receiving job offers) is important (e.g., Vuori, Price, Mutanen, & Malmberg-Heimonen, 2005; Wanberg, Zhang, & Diehn, 2010).

Despite growing research around job search interventions, gaps remain (e.g., Liu, Huang, & Wang, 2014). First, although recent research reveals how social support, such as family members and close friends, can play a role in enhancing job seekers’ self-efficacy to remain in the job search process (e.g., Manroop & Richardson, 2016; Sheu et al., 2010), there is relatively little research investigating whether mentor support, namely, career and psychosocial mentoring, could positively influence the job search (Renn et al., 2014). Second, despite the different types of job search interventions that have been investigated, most interventions focus on limited outcomes such as the improvement of job search skills and job search behaviors (Saks, 2006; Vuori et al., 2005). As such, inadequate understanding remains of how these interventions can impact job seekers’ psychological capacities (e.g., self-efficacy) which are critical for engaging in job search behaviors, such as preparing a resume and gathering job information (Wanberg, Zhu, & van Hooft, 2010). Third, most mentoring research has examined the additive effects of mentoring functions rather than the multiplicative effects of mentoring functions on mentoring outcomes (e.g., Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, & Lima, 2004). Thus, there is limited understanding of the interaction between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring for protégé behaviors.

The aim of the present research is to gain insight into how mentoring could serve as a unique intervention in enhancing the job search behaviors and job search self-efficacy of job seekers during the job search process. In line with self-regulatory theory (e.g., Kanfer, Wanberg, & Kantrowitz, 2001; Wanberg et al., 2005), we expect a positive relationship between mentoring (career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring) and job search behaviors. Additionally, we test the multiplicative effect of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors. More specifically, we explore the interactive effect of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring directly on job search self-efficacy and indirectly on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Overall, we propose a moderated mediation model for our hypotheses (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

The hypothesized moderated mediation model.

Self-Regulatory Theory and the Job Search

In the literature, the job search process is often examined through the self-regulatory theoretical perspective (e.g., Kanfer et al., 2001; Liu, Wang et al., 2014; Wanberg et al., 2005). By definition, self-regulation involves a cognitive system that guides human beliefs, thoughts, and emotions to achieve a goal by presenting regulators and motivators of behavior (Bandura, 2012). Accordingly, the job search can be viewed as a self-regulatory process that entails the committing of intentional and purposive actions to achieve the goal of obtaining employment (Kanfer et al., 2001; van Hooft, Wanberg, & van Hoye, 2013; Wanberg et al., 2005).

According to this theory, the self-regulation process is dynamic, as resources and motivation both tend to vary in amount, affecting the intensity and duration of self-regulation efforts. As the job search changes in direction and effort over time, effective self-regulation becomes paramount. Changes in the job search can be expected especially when individuals receive information from the external environment. For instance, receiving news of job denials or obtaining numerous callbacks could influence a job seeker’s emotional stability and self-confidence (Boswell, Zimmerman, & Swider, 2012; Wanberg et al., 2005). Thus, continual self-regulation would be needed to exercise control over cognition and behaviors to ensure successful attainment of one’s goals (Boswell et al., 2012; Kanfer et al., 2001; Liu, Wang et al., 2014).

The Linkage Between Mentoring Functions and the Job Search

According to self-regulation theory, an abundance of psychological resources ensures adequacy in regulating oneself, whereas the absence of such resources compromises one’s ability to engage in self-regulation. In the job search process, individuals who inspire the job seeker to believe in themselves and to persevere through difficulties could prevent the depletion of self-regulatory resources that could result from threats from the environment. Evidence shows receiving support from merely a significant other relates to positive job search behaviors (Kanfer et al., 2001). Thus, self-regulatory resources could be replenished in the job search process as a result of the encouragement provided by others, namely mentors.

Mentoring involves the development of a relationship between a more experienced individual (the mentor) who provides guidance and support to a less experienced individual (the protégé; Kram, 1985). Vitally enhancing protégés’ personal and career development (Baugh & Sullivan, 2005; Kram, 1985), mentoring is related to favorable behavioral, motivational, and attitudinal outcomes (e.g., career success, career satisfaction, and resilience; Allen et al., 2004; Kao, Rogers, Spitzmueller, Lin, & Lin, 2014). Within the job search context, the mentoring relationship may serve as an external resource that sustains the self-regulation of the job seeker (Kao et al., 2014). Receipt of mentoring enables the job seeker to control their psychological and emotional states to successfully reach cognized goals. This is why supporting evidence shows that job seekers who are working with counselors report feeling more competent to persist in the job search (Liu et al., 2014).

Broadly speaking, mentoring can include two forms: career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring (Kram, 1985). Career mentoring enhances protégés’ career advancement through providing sponsorship, coaching, exposure and visibility, protection, and challenging assignments, while psychosocial mentoring includes the mentoring behaviors of role modeling, acceptance and confirmation, counseling, and friendship (Kram, 1985). Across both forms, mentoring has been found to predict protégés’ objective (e.g., promotions and pay) and subjective (e.g., career satisfaction and self-esteem) career success (Allen et al., 2004; Spurk & Abele, 2014; Tenenbaum, Crosby, & Gliner, 2001).

Meta-analytic evidence from the job search literature reveals that self-regulated job search behaviors are often influenced by external resources (e.g., social support; Kanfer et al., 2001). In light of such evidence, we offer that both career and psychosocial mentoring functions could positively impact job seekers’ behavior in the job search process. With career mentoring support, job seekers could receive guidance on how to improve their cognitive strategies to perform specific job search behaviors (Eby et al., 2013; Rhodes, Spencer, Keller, Liang, & Noam, 2006). Mentors with psychosocial mentoring may be able to provide emotional support for protégés to openly discuss their career concerns (Shen & Kram, 2011). In sum, in line with self-regulation theory (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, & Tice, 1998), both psychosocial and career mentoring functions could facilitate the self-regulatory process of the job search. Thus, we propose that:

Hypothesis 1: The mentoring functions of (a) career mentoring and (b) psychosocial mentoring will be positively associated with job search behaviors.

Mentoring, Job Search Self-Efficacy, and Job Search Behaviors

The job search process can be frustrating when individuals encounter rejections or experience limited progress over short or long periods of time. As anticipation of achieving a goal is key to effective self-regulation, self-efficacy, a belief in one’s capability to attain a goal (Bandura & Adams, 1977; Judge & Bono, 2001), is likely a key mechanism for sustaining motivation in the dynamic job search process (Day & Allen, 2004; Fort, Jacquet, & Leroy, 2011; Zikic & Saks, 2009). Bandura (2012) argues that goal motivation and goal attainment entails a complex interaction of self-evaluation, self-monitoring, and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is core to activities of self-evaluation, the assessment of how effectively one is executing behaviors necessary for goal attainment. More importantly, it is central to self-monitoring—giving attention to one’s emotions, attitudes, and resources—exercising vigilance over urges to abandon focus on one’s goal. Thus, self-efficacy reduces vulnerability to being influenced by negative information from the environment, which is probably why self-efficacy is linked to persevering in the face of obstacles (Bandura & Locke, 2003).

Thus, we expect a linkage between mentoring functions and job search self-efficacy, which refers to individuals’ confidence in their capacity to successfully complete the job search (Saks, 2006). Bandura (2012) suggests that people can develop their sense of self-efficacy through social persuasion—reassurance provided by others that they have the necessary capabilities to complete a task. In line with self-regulation theory, social support in the forms of career and psychosocial mentoring can increase job seekers’ motivation to manage their emotions, thinking, and behaviors. As a consequence, job search self-efficacy, which enables a person to feel confident in dealing with a certain task, influencing self-regulatory behaviors in specific situations (Day & Allen, 2004; Pinquart, Juang, & Silbereisen, 2003) will be affected by mentoring. Thus, we expect job search self-efficacy to influence job search behaviors.

Hypothesis 2: The mentoring functions of (a) career mentoring and (b) psychosocial mentoring will be positively associated with job search self-efficacy.

Hypothesis 3: Job search self-efficacy will be positively associated with job search behaviors.

The Mediating Role of Job Search Self-Efficacy

Day and Allen (2004) found that mentoring benefited an individuals’ career success through increasing career self-efficacy. Research also has revealed the mediating functionality of self-efficacy on the relationship between support provided by significant others and positive outcome expectations (Lent et al., 2001; Lent, Lopez, Lopez, & Sheu, 2008). Thus, in light of these findings, we anticipate that mentoring functions would have an indirect effect on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Perceived lower self-efficacy in job search decreases job seekers’ participation in job search (van Hooft, Born, Taris, Flier, & Blonk, 2004). However, with the reception of career and psychosocial support, job seekers can increase their self-efficacy in the job search, displaying higher regulation of job search behaviors. As such, receiving external support (i.e., mentoring) might enhance self-efficacy beliefs in job search, which may increase positive investments in job seeking (Lent et al., 2001). More specifically, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 4: The mentoring functions of (a) career mentoring and (b) psychosocial mentoring will be indirectly related to job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy.

The Interactive Effect of Career Mentoring and Psychosocial Mentoring

According to self-regulation theory, the job search process requires exerting self-control over emotional reactions associated with uncertainty and disappointment during the job search to prevent depletions of resources over time (Wanberg et al., 2005). Consequently, enhanced psychosocial mentoring, which would foster the sharing of personal feelings, problems, and concerns in the job search process (Shen & Kram, 2011), may strengthen protégés’ behavioral changes in the job search process. Psychosocial mentoring would play an important role in ensuring effective self-regulation and resilience (Day & Allen, 2004; Kao et al., 2014). Career mentoring, in combination with high psychosocial mentoring, would strengthen job seekers’ (e.g., students) career planning and job search activities (Eby et al., 2013). Due to the different nature of these two mentoring forms, job seekers who clarify their future career goals (i.e., career mentoring) and receive strong emotional support and encouragement (i.e., psychosocial mentoring) will likely have high self-confidence in maintaining appropriate job search behaviors.

Accordingly, we explore the interactive effect of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search outcomes. For example, mentors with psychosocial mentoring support will enable high job search self-efficacy, and this effect becomes more pronounced when mentors are also willing to provide career mentoring. Moreover, when protégés perceive a low level of career mentoring, low psychosocial mentoring might be less likely to impact job search self-efficacy. In sum, the interaction between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring for job search self-efficacy directly and on job search behaviors indirectly (through job search self-efficacy) will be significant. Thus, we hypothesize that:

Hypothesis 5: The interactive effect between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring directly on job search self-efficacy will be significant, such that the effect will be stronger when both career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are high compared to when both career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are low.

Hypothesis 6: The interactive effect between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring indirectly on job search behaviors (through job search self-efficacy) will be significant, such that the effect will be stronger when both career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are high compared to when both career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are low.

Method

Participants and Procedure

In this study, an online questionnaire was completed by college students who were in their last semester before graduation and involved in a job search intervention program. Students were paired with mentors/professors based on students’ majors (e.g., a student who has a major in psychology was mentored by a professor of Department of Psychology). Those mentors were on average 43 years old and had on average 6 years of work experience. The professors at the universities of China served as liaisons to assist with data collection at two points in time. The survey at Time 1 (1 month after the job search program started) included measures of career mentoring, psychosocial mentoring, and job search self-efficacy. Time 2 data were collected 3 months after the Time 1 survey was administered to measure participators’ job search behaviors and collect demographic information. We reminded those who responded to the Time 1 survey to complete follow-up surveys through e-mail and mobile messaging. A total of 164 participants (retention rate = 65%) had identifiable matches with the data collected at Time 1. Participants were 79.27% female and 20.73% male. The age ranges were as follows: 60.98% between 18 and 25 years old, and 39.02% were between 26 and 30 years old.

Measures

All measures used in this study were developed in English and translated into Chinese following Brislin’s (1980) recommended translation–back translation procedures to ensure equivalence in meaning. Specifically, first, one of the authors translated the survey items into Chinese and then an independent bilingual scholar evaluated the survey items for clarity or to identify any ambiguity. Second, the bilingual scholar translated the Chinese items back into English and evaluated whether the meaning of items is still consistent with the original English items. Lastly, we conducted a pretest of the items with a set of graduate students who completed the scale to ensure consistency regarding the meaning of all items.

Mentoring functions

Mentoring functions were measured using the 6-item scale of the Mentoring Functions Questionnaire (MFQ-9; Castro & Scandura, 2004). MFQ-9 has been found to have acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and measurement equivalence across United States and Taiwan samples (Hu, Baranik, & Wu, 2014; Hu, Pellegrini, & Scandura, 2011; Kao et al., 2014). Previous research demonstrated that MFQ-9 reported moderately high reliability (α = .88) for college student samples, and this scale was positively correlated with career self-efficacy and career planning, demonstrating adequate criterion-related validity (Renn et al., 2014). Students evaluated levels of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring received from assigned mentors in their departments. Particularly, career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring were individually measured with 3 items. A sample item for career mentoring was, “My mentor takes a personal interest in my career.” A sample item for psychosocial mentoring was, “I share personal problems with my mentor.” Each item was assessed using a 5-point scale of ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The internal consistency of these subscales as represented by Cronbach’s α for mentoring functions were .89 and .83, respectively.

Job search self-efficacy

Job search self-efficacy was measured using a 9-item scale developed by Wanberg, Zhang, and Diehn (2010). Additionally, the scale was used and further validated (i.e., it was positively correlated with career confidence, career adaptability, career control, and career concern) in a Chinese context (e.g., Guan et al., 2013). Respondents were asked to indicate their confidence levels in searching for a job with example items such as “How confident do you feel about being able to do a good job of writing a good resume” and “How confident do you feel about being able to do a good job of presenting yourself well in an interview.” Each item was assessed using a 7-point scale of ranging from 1 (very disagree) to 7 (very agree). The internal consistency of the scale as represented by Cronbach’s α was .87.

Job search behaviors

Job search behaviors were assessed using a 12-item scale developed by Blau (1994). Participants were asked to indicate how much time they spend on various job search activities across a period of 3 months such as “Read the help wanted/classified ads in a newspaper, journal, online or professional association,” “Sent our resumes to a potential employer,” and “Talked with friends or relatives about possible job leads.” Each item was assessed using a 5-point scale that ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very frequently: at least 10 times). The internal consistency of the scale as represented by Cronbach’s α was .88 which is consistent with estimates from a study based on a sample of Chinese college students, by Liu, Wang et al., 2014, which reported high reliability (α = .89) and acceptable validity (i.e., it was positively correlated with the number of job offers) for this scale.

Analytic Strategy

We averaged all responses for each measure to perform a series of analyses. Particularly, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for our proposed four variables to evaluate the distinctiveness of those four measures. Moreover, due to self-report data collected, we conducted CFA to examine the common method variance (CMV) for our measures. Moreover, the main effects (Hypotheses 1–3), the indirect effect (Hypothesis 4), and the moderation effect (Hypothesis 5) were tested using hierarchical regression analyses. The independent variables (mentoring functions including career and psychosocial mentoring) were entered in the first step, followed by job search self-efficacy in the second step, and the interaction of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring in the last step. A bootstrapping approach suggested by MacKinnon, Lockwood, and Williams (2004) was also used to estimate the indirect effect and conditional indirect effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy to avoid power problems introduced by asymmetric and nonnormal sampling distributions of indirect effects (Preacher & Hayes, 2004).

Results

CFA and CMV

We conducted a CFA to test the discriminant validity of variables before testing the hypotheses. Specifically, we compared the proposed four-factor model to the 2 three-factor model, two-factor model, and one-factor model to decide which model displays a better fit for hypothesis testing. The CFA results indicated that the proposed four-factor model (career mentoring, psychosocial mentoring, job search self-efficacy, and job search behaviors) showed adequate model fit, χ²(318) = 544.28; CFI = .89, GFI = .81, SRMR = .06, RMSEA = .07, and demonstrated a better fit for the data than other models. Specifically, the four-factor model displayed a significantly better fit to the data than a three-factor model in which we combined the following highly correlated variables into one factor: career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring, Δχ²(3) = 35.71, p < .001; CFI = .87; GFI = .80; SRMR = .07; RMSEA = .07; another three-factor model in which job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors were grouped into one factor, Δχ²(3) = 416.75, p < .001; CFI = .69; GFI = .59; SRMR = .12; RMSEA = .11; a two-factor model in which career mentoring, psychosocial mentoring, and job search self-efficacy were grouped into one factor, Δχ²(5) = 449.98, p < .001; CFI = .69; GFI = .61; SRMR = .11; RMSEA = .11; and a one-factor model, Δχ²(6) = 872.27, p < .001; CFI = .46; GFI = .48; SRMR = .14; RMSEA = .14. Overall, results indicated that the four-factor model had significantly better fit than did the other models. Thus, with confidence in the quality of our measures, we proceeded to use these four measures as proposed for testing our hypotheses.

In addition, we addressed the issue of CMV by CFA model comparisons which revealed that the four-factor model fit significantly better than the one-factor model, Δχ²(6) = 872.27, p < .001, indicating that there was no significant CMV issue according to Harman’s one-factor test (Chang, van Witteloostuijn, & Eden, 2010). Overall, these results demonstrated that the psychometric properties of the measures used in this study were statistically adequate.

Hypotheses Testing

The means, standard deviations, reliability estimates, and correlations for all variables are presented in Table 1. The correlations for the variables tested in our hypotheses were fairly medium sized and significant; thus, the issue of restricted range was not a concern in the current study (Thumin, 1993).

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Among Variables.

Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
1. Gender	1.79	.41	—
2. Age	1.41	.54	−.12	—
3. Career mentoring	3.49	.92	−.14	.41**	.89
4. Psychosocial mentoring	3.37	.86	−.18*	.40**	.73***	.83
5. Job search self-efficacy	3.47	.57	−.11	.32**	.38***	.39***	.87
6. Job search behaviors	3.09	.66	−.19	.19*	.21**	.26**	.35***	.88

Note. Cronbach’s α is in boldface along the diagonal of the table.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

We proposed in Hypothesis 1a and 1b that career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring, respectively, would be positively associated with job search behaviors. As shown in Table 2, psychosocial mentoring was significantly related to job search behaviors (B = .17, SE = .09, p = .04); however, career mentoring was not significantly related to job search behaviors (B = .04, SE = .08, p = .66). Thus, Hypotheses 1 is partially supported.

Table 2.

Hierarchical Regression Modeling Estimates for the Relationships Between Career Mentoring, Psychosocial Mentoring, Job Search Self-efficacy, and Job Search Behaviors.

	Job Search Behaviors				Job Search Self-Efficacy
	Model 1		Model 2		Model 1		Model 2
Variable	Estimate	SE	Estimate	SE	Estimate	SE	Estimate	SE
Main/indirect effect
Career mentoring	.04	.08	−.004	.08	.12	.07	.09	.07
Psychosocial mentoring	.17*	.09	.12	.08	.17*	.07	.18*	.07
Job search self-efficacy			.33***	.09
Interaction effect
CM × PM							.11*	.05
R ²	.07		.18		.17		.20
ΔR ²			.11				.03

Note. N = 164.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

In Hypothesis 2a and 2b, we expected that career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring, respectively, would be positively associated with job search self-efficacy. As shown in Table 2, career mentoring was not significantly related to job search self-efficacy (B = .12, SE = .07, p = .07), not supporting Hypothesis 2a. However, psychosocial mentoring was significantly related to job search self-efficacy (B = .17, SE = .07, p = .02). Therefore, Hypotheses 2 was partially supported by these results.

As predicted by Hypothesis 3, job search self-efficacy was positively related to job search behaviors (B = .33, SE = .09, p < .001; see Table 2). Hypothesis 4 posited that mentoring functions would be related to job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Because the relationship between career mentoring and job search self-efficacy (Hypothesis 2a) was nonsignificant, Hypothesis 4a was not supported. Moreover, Hypothesis 4b presented that the indirect relationship between psychosocial mentoring and job search behaviors via job search self-efficacy would be significant. Results indicated that the relationship between psychosocial mentoring and job search behavior became weaker and nonsignificant (B = .12, SE = .08, p = .16) after controlling for job search self-efficacy as a mediator, which provides evidence of full mediation. In addition, the bootstrapping results further indicated that the indirect effect was significant (estimate = .10, 95% CI [.02, .23]). Thus, Hypotheses 4b was supported.

Hypothesis 5 proposed that there would be an interactive effect of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy, such that the effect on job search self-efficacy would be stronger when perceived career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are high compared to when perceived career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring are low. As shown in Table 2, the interaction between psychosocial mentoring and career mentoring was significant (B = .11, SE = .05, p = .03). The results of a simple slope test indicated that the relationship between psychosocial mentoring and job search self-efficacy was stronger when career mentoring was high (t = 3.23, p < .01) compared to when career mentoring was low (t = 0.99, p = .32; see Figure 2). Thus, Hypothesis 5 was supported.

Figure 2.

Interaction between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy.

To examine the moderated mediation effect proposed in Hypothesis 6, we used the procedure developed by Preacher, Rucker, and Hayes (2007). When career mentoring was high, the indirect effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy was stronger (estimate = .09, 95% CI [.02, .19]), compared to when career mentoring was low (estimate = .03, 95% CI [−.04, .10]). Accordingly, Hypothesis 6 was supported.

Supplementary Analysis

For examining Hypotheses 5 and 6, we set career mentoring as a moderator which might influence the effect of psychosocial mentoring on career outcomes. One concern when interpreting the results of the current study is whether an alternative moderator of mentoring functions (i.e., psychosocial mentoring) may influence our proposed hypotheses (i.e., Hypotheses 5 and 6). Due to a significant interaction between career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy, the result was consistent with our hypotheses (B = .11, SE = .05, p = .04), although we used psychosocial mentoring as a moderator. We followed the same procedure (MacKinnon, Lockwood, & Williams 2004; Preacher & Hayes, 2004) to test whether psychosocial mentoring can moderate the indirect effect of career mentoring on job search behavior through job search self-efficacy. The results showed that when psychosocial mentoring was high, the indirect effect of career mentoring on job search behavior through job search self-efficacy was significant (estimate = .07, 95% CI [.02, .14]). In contrast, none of the 95% CI pertaining to the indirect effect through job search self-efficacy was significant when psychosocial mentoring was low (estimate = <.001, 95% CI [−.08, .06]). Therefore, when we tested either career mentoring or psychosocial mentoring as a moderator, both Hypotheses 5 and 6 were supported. Accordingly, our results support that the combination of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring possesses a multiplicative effect on job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors.

Discussion

Research has provided important insights into job search behaviors among unemployed individuals because of its association with securing successful employment (Saks, 2006; Wanberg et al., 2005). However, there has not been a thorough understanding of the relationship between mentoring functions and job search behaviors (Renn et al., 2014). For instance, the field has had limited knowledge of whether and how mentoring is related to college students’ job search behaviors. Thus, the present study sought to expand understanding of the relationship between mentoring functions and job search behaviors. Our findings are consistent with research on job search and self-regulatory theory (Kanfer et al., 2001; Wanberg et al., 2005). First, we found that psychosocial mentoring was positively related to job search self-efficacy, which is supported by the findings of Day and Allen (2004), which demonstrated that mentoring serves as an important indicator of a task-specific self-efficacy. In addition, in line with previous research regarding the effect of self-efficacy on job search behavior (Carlier, Schuring, Lenthe, & Burdorf, 2014), our results revealed that job search self-efficacy is positively related to job search behaviors. Moreover, we found that reported self-efficacy in the job search serves as the mechanism linking between psychosocial mentoring and job search behaviors. Finally, in support of our hypothesized moderated mediation model, our results also demonstrated the multiplicative effects of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search efficacy and on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Specifically, both effects were stronger when the reception of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring was high than when the reception of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring was low.

In exploring the direct effect of mentoring functions on career outcomes, although we expected that career mentoring would be related to job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors, both relationships were not significant. It might be possible that psychosocial mentoring (acceptance and confirmation, counseling, encouragement, and friendship), compared to career mentoring, is more important for individuals with limited job experience (e.g., students) when they are seeking jobs. Individuals who are fairly new to the job search process in general may experience higher levels of frustration and stress during the job search process than those who are further in their careers (Liu, Wang et al., 2014). Findings by Kao, Rogers, Spitzmueller, Lin, and Lin (2014) suggest that psychosocial mentoring is associated with resilience which refers to an ability to cope successfully in the context of significant challenge and adversity. Hence, one significant function of psychosocial mentoring is to increase protégés’ ability to cope in the job search which may provide a plausible situational explanation of why psychosocial mentoring is associated with job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors.

Theoretical Implications

As prior research has probed into the importance of job search behaviors on employment outcomes for the dynamic job search context (Kanfer et al., 2001), our findings offer a significant theoretical contribution by connecting job search interventions (i.e., mentoring; Liu, Wang et al., 2014) to the self-regulatory model. First, by building upon previous studies, we examined how mentoring is related to protégés’ job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. While Renn, Steinbauer, Taylor, and Detwiler (2014) was the first to apply mentoring to the job search context in investigating the relationship between career mentoring and job search behaviors, their work mainly focused on understanding the effect of career mentoring on individuals’ negative job search behaviors (e.g., procrastination). In contrast, our study supports that the mentoring relationship could impact protégés’ positive job search behaviors. Stemming from self-regulatory theory, our findings suggest that psychosocial mentoring is an important external resource during the dynamic job search process for enhancing individuals’ self-efficacy beliefs and, in turn, improving positive self-regulation of job search behaviors.

In addition to that, our study is the first to carefully portray the multiplicative effect of mentoring functions. Our findings provide empirical evidence that career mentoring serves a moderating role in strengthening the effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors. Advancing current knowledge within the field by highlighting the interactive effect of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring, our study found that career mentoring not only strengthens the direct effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors, but it can also intensify the indirect effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors via job search self-efficacy. This finding suggests that protégés who experience great sponsorship and coaching from their mentors would be more likely to reap the advantages of psychosocial support, elevating their job search self-efficacy and job search behaviors. Consequently, our study could be considered the first attempt to underscore the importance of taking different mentoring functions into account in the job search literature. Particularly, our findings support the importance of career mentoring which may enhance the mentor’s supply of emotional support on the protégé behaviors through elevating career-related self-efficacy, expanding previous work (Allen et al., 2004; Eby et al., 2013).

Considering the reasoning above, our study emphasizes the valuable link between mentoring and job search behaviors. We provide a theoretical model that incorporates mentoring constructs and the self-regulatory approach which illustrates how mentoring as a job search intervention can affect individuals’ job search behaviors (Boswell et al., 2012; Eby et al., 2013). Thus, to thoroughly examine the employment outcomes, the current research model would be useful for future research.

Practical Implications

Given the vital role of mentoring in the job search, how organizations can engineer interventions to improve job search behaviors in organizations merits important consideration. Job search interventions are often offered by organizations to assist individuals who are seeking for full-time employment but have difficulties such as not knowing how to write a resume (Liu et al., 2014). Given our findings regarding the indirect effect of psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy, we believe that mentoring support in the job search process can enhance the protégés’ motivation and positive attitudes (Ghosh & Reio, 2013). Thus, the use of mentoring programs by organizations as part of job search interventions would be valuable. Research has shown that career-based social support and perceived confidence through students’ participation in a career guidance program interact to enhance students’ career development (Diegelman & Subich, 2001; Turner & Lapan, 2002). It is important for career centers in universities, government agencies, and other organizations to encourage staff and faculty to take a supportive role in helping students prepare for the job search. By serving as a mentor, staff or faculty can build a close relationship with their protégés (i.e., students), effectively influencing their preparation for the job search. As such, by counseling and guiding students to prepare for job search, with activities including interview skills and writing a resume, mentors can enhance protégées’ confidence in regulating oneself to attain an anticipated goal. In addition, our research highlights the importance of the interactive effect of multiple mentoring functions, thus strengthening protégés’ self-efficacy to the job search. Hence, we suggest that faculty serving as mentors should accept requisite career-related knowledge/skill training and counseling training to ensure one’s ability to provide both career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring.

Limitations and Future Research

Notwithstanding the contributions of the current study being addressed above, we recognize the limitations of our findings, and we would like to highlight the possibilities that these limitations present for future research. First, our study did not examine the effect of the mentor’s gender on the mentoring relationship. Research reveals that male mentors might be less likely to provide psychosocial mentoring compared to female mentors, although both male and female mentors provide equal amounts of practical career-related guidance (Tenenbaum et al., 2001). Additional work offers that the mentoring relationship which is initiated by male mentors rather than by female mentors may result in differences in career mentoring (Scandura & Williams, 2001). Thus, to address these concerns, future research should focus on examining how the relationship among career mentoring, psychosocial mentoring, job search self-efficacy, and job search behavior might be influenced by the mentor’s gender.

Third, although our findings demonstrate that mentoring could be an influential resource in the job search, protégés’ satisfaction with the mentoring relationship may affect the effectiveness of the mentoring received (Eby et al., 2013). Consequently, future research needs to address whether the perceived quality of mentorship received might affect the relationship between mentoring and job search behaviors. Fourth, one limitation is that our research was conducted among a sample of students who were currently looking for their first full-time employment opportunity. Therefore, it is likely that our results may not generalize to those who are seeking for reemployment or are currently employed but searching for a new position. Future research should extend the current model to investigate how the relationship between mentoring and job search activities could differ for other types of job seekers (Wanberg, Basbug, van Hooft, & Samtani, 2012).

Fifth, we found that the relationship between psychosocial mentoring and job search behaviors is explained by job search self-efficacy. However, we did not perform a follow-up with participants to see whether successful employment of job seekers in our study was secured. Thus, potential direction for future studies is to seek to extend the current research in understanding whether the hypothesized model of this study could lead to positive employment outcomes over the long term. Lastly, due to our data collected at two different time points (i.e., a two-wave time-lagged study design), we are cautious to argue the causality of direction for our mediation hypotheses. Preacher (2015) suggested an application of longitudinal research designs, which provide the ability to investigate casual inference and evaluate the stability of effects over time. Therefore, in future research, researchers should adopt a longitudinal research approach which entails repeated measures more than 3 times to test causality in a mediation process (Chan, 1998; Ployhart & Vandenberg, 2010).

Conclusion

In summary, our research has provided important contributions to the literature on job search and mentoring from the self-regulatory perspective. It investigates the indirect effects of career mentoring and psychosocial mentoring on job search behaviors through job search self-efficacy. Our results demonstrate that the relationships of the psychosocial functions with job search self-efficacy and with job search behaviors were strengthened by higher levels of career mentoring. Although we recognize that much progress is needed in this research area, our study yields significant insights into the application of mentoring to the job search process. This research provides a platform for inspiring future studies examining how mentoring as an external resource may lead to successful employment by fostering job seekers’ self-efficacy and job search behaviors.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Allen

T. D.

Eby

L. T.

Poteet

M. L.

Lentz

Lima

(2004). Career benefits associated with mentoring for protégées: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 127–136.

Bandura

(2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of Management, 38, 9–44.

Bandura

Adams

N. E.

(1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1, 287–310.

Bandura

Locke

E. A.

(2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 87–99.

Baugh

G. S.

Sullivan

S. E.

(2005). Mentoring and career development. Career Development International, 10, 425–428.

Baumeister

R. F.

Bratslavsky

Muraven

Tice

D. M.

(1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252–1265.

Blau

(1994). Testing a two-dimensional measure of job search behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making Processes, 59, 288–312.

Boswell

W. R.

Zimmerman

R. D.

Swider

B. W.

(2012). Employee job search toward an understanding of search context and search objectives. Journal of Management, 38, 129–163.

Brislin

R. W.

(1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In Triandis

H. C.

Berry

J. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 389–444). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

10.

Brown

D. J.

Cober

R. T.

Kane

Levy

P. E.

Shalhoop

(2006). Proactive personality and the successful job search: A field investigation with college graduates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 717.

11.

Carlier

Schuring

Lenthe

Burdorf

(2014). Influence of health on job-search behavior and re-employment: The role of job-search cognitions and coping resources. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 24, 670–679.

12.

Castro

S. L.

Scandura

T. A.

(2004). The tale of two measures: Evaluation and comparison of Scandura’s (1992) and Ragins and McFarlin’s (1990) mentoring measures. San Antonio, TX: Southern Management Association Meeting.

13.

Chan

(1998). The conceptualization and analysis of change over time: An integrative approach incorporating longitudinal mean and covariance structures analysis (LMACS) and multiple indicator latent growth modeling (MLGM). Organizational Research Methods, 1, 421–483.

14.

Chang

S. J.

van Witteloostuijn

Eden

(2010). From the editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 178–184.

15.

Day

Allen

T. D.

(2004). The relationship between career motivation and self-efficacy with protégé career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 72–91.

16.

Diegelman

N. M.

Subich

L. M.

(2001). Academic and vocational interests as a function of outcome expectancies in social cognitive career theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 394–405.

17.

Eby

L. T. D. T.

Allen

T. D.

Hoffman

B. J.

Baranik

L. E.

Sauer

J. B.

Baldwin

Evans

S. C.

(2013). An interdisciplinary meta-analysis of the potential antecedents, correlates, and consequences of protégé perceptions of mentoring. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 441–476.

18.

Fort

Jacquet

Leroy

(2011). Self-efficacy, goals, and job search behaviors. Career Development International, 16, 469–481.

19.

Ghosh

Reio

T. G.

(2013). Career benefits associated with mentoring for mentors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 106–116.

20.

Guan

Deng

Sun

Wang

Cai

… Li

(2013). Career adaptability, job search self-efficacy and outcomes: A three-wave investigation among Chinese university graduates. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 561–570.

21.

Baranik

L. E.

T. Y.

(2014). Antidotes to dissimilar mentor-protégé dyads. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85, 219–227.

22.

Pellegrini

E. K.

Scandura

T. A.

(2011). Measurement invariance in mentoring research: A cross-cultural examination across Taiwan and the U.S. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78, 274–282.

23.

Judge

T. A.

Bono

J. E.

(2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—Self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—With job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80–92.

24.

Kanfer

Wanberg

C. R.

Kantrowitz

T. M.

(2001). Job search and employment: A personality–motivational analysis and meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 837–855.

25.

Kao

K. Y.

Rogers

Spitzmueller

Lin

M. T.

Lin

C. H.

(2014). Who should serve as my mentor? The effects of mentor’s gender and supervisory status on resilience in mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85, 191–203.

26.

Kram

K. E.

(1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

27.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Brenner

Chopra

S. B.

Davis

Talleyrand

Suthakaran

(2001). The role of contextual supports and barriers in the choice of math/science educational options: A test of social cognitive hypotheses. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 474–483.

28.

Lent

R. W.

Lopez

A. M.

Lopez

F. G.

Sheu

H. B.

(2008). Social cognitive career theory and the prediction of interests and choice goals in the computing disciplines. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73, 52–62.

29.

Liu

Huang

J. L.

Wang

(2014). Effectiveness of job search interventions: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1009–1041.

30.

Liu

Wang

Liao

Shi

(2014). Self-regulation during job search: The opposing effects of employment self-efficacy and job search behavior self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 1159–1172.

31.

MacKinnon

D. P.

Lockwood

C. M.

Williams

(2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99–128.

32.

Manroop

Richardson

(2016). Job search: A multidisciplinary review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18, 206–227.

33.

Moynihan

L. M.

Roehling

M. V.

LePine

M. A.

Boswell

W. R.

(2003). A longitudinal study of the relationships among job search self-efficacy, job interviews, and employment outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18, 207–233.

34.

Paul

K. I.

Moser

(2009). Unemployment impairs mental health: Meta-analyses. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 264–282.

35.

Pinquart

Juang

L. P.

Silbereisen

R. K.

(2003). Self-efficacy and successful school-to-work transition: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 329–346.

36.

Ployhart

R. E.

Vandenberg

R. J.

(2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36, 94–120.

37.

Preacher

K. J.

(2015). Advances in mediation analysis: A survey and synthesis of new developments. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 825–852.

38.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36, 717–731.

39.

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

Hayes

A. F.

(2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate behavioral research, 42, 185–227.

40.

Renn

R. W.

Steinbauer

Taylor

Detwiler

(2014). School-to-work transition: Mentor career support and student career planning, job search intentions, and self-defeating job search behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85, 422–432.

41.

Rhodes

J. E.

Spencer

Keller

T. E.

Liang

Noam

(2006). A model for the influence of mentoring relationships on youth development. Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 691–707.

42.

Saks

A. M.

(2006). Multiple predictors and criteria of job search success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 400–415.

43.

Saks

A. M.

Ashforth

B. E.

(2002). Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 646–654.

44.

Scandura

T. A.

Williams

E. A.

(2001). An investigation of the moderating effects of gender on the relationships between mentorship initiation and protégé perceptions of mentoring functions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 342–363.

45.

Shen

Kram

K. E.

(2011). Expatriates’ developmental networks: Network diversity, base, and support functions. Career Development International, 16, 528–552.

46.

Sheu

H. B.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Miller

M. J.

Hennessy

K. D.

Duffy

R. D.

(2010). Testing the choice model of social cognitive career theory across Holland themes: A meta-analytic path analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 252–264.

47.

Song

Wanberg

Niu

Xie

(2006). Action–state orientation and the theory of planned behavior: A study of job search in China. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 490–503.

48.

Spurk

Abele

A. E.

(2014). Synchronous and time-lagged effects between occupational self-efficacy and objective and subjective career success: Findings from a four-wave and 9-year longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82, 119–132.

49.

Tenenbaum

H. R.

Crosby

F. J.

Gliner

M. D.

(2001). Mentoring relationships in graduate school. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 326–341.

50.

Thumin

F. J.

(1993). Predictor validity as related to criterion relevance, restriction of range, and ethnicity. The Journal of Psychology, 127, 553–563.

51.

Turner

Lapan

R. T.

(2002). Career self-efficacy and perceptions of parent support in adolescent career development. The Career Development Quarterly, 51, 44–55.

52.

van Hooft

E. A.

Born

M. P.

Taris

T. W.

Flier

H. V. D.

Blonk

R. W.

(2004). Predictors of job search behavior among employed and unemployed people. Personnel Psychology, 57, 25–59.

53.

van Hooft

E. A.

Wanberg

C. R.

van Hoye

(2013). Moving beyond job search quantity: Towards a conceptualization and self-regulatory framework of job search quality. Organizational Psychology Review, 3, 3–40.

54.

Vuori

Price

R. H.

Mutanen

Malmberg-Heimonen

(2005). Effective group training techniques in job-search training. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 261–275.

55.

Wanberg

Basbug

van Hooft

E. A.

Samtani

(2012). Navigating the black hole: Explicating layers of job search context and adaptational responses. Personnel Psychology, 65, 887–926.

56.

Wanberg

C. R.

Glomb

T. M.

Song

Sorenson

(2005). Job-search persistence during unemployment: a 10-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 411–430.

57.

Wanberg

C. R.

Zhang

Diehn

E. W.

(2010). Development of the “getting ready for your next job” inventory for unemployed individuals. Personnel Psychology, 63, 439–478.

58.

Wanberg

C. R.

Zhu

van Hooft

E. A.

(2010). The job search grind: Perceived progress, self-reactions, and self-regulation of search effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 788–807.

59.

Zikic

Saks

A. M.

(2009). Job search and social cognitive theory: The role of career-relevant activities. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 117–127.