Demonstrating a Magnetic Work Environment: Results of a Nurse Mentoring Study on Predictors of Mentoring Benefits

Saturday, 29 October 2011

Aris Eliades, PhD, RN, CNS
Considine Research Institute, Akron Children's Hospital, Akron, OH
Louise D. Jakubik, PhD, RN-BC
Nurse Builders, Nurse Builders, Philadelphia, PA
Meghan Weese, MSN, RN, CPN
Nursing Administration, Akron Children's Hospital, Akron, OH
Carrie Gavriloff, MSN, RN, Ed
Nursing Education, Akron Children's Hospital, Akron, OH

Learning Objective 1: Examine the predictors of mentoring benefits among staff nurse protégés

Learning Objective 2: Describe the background, purpose, design, methods and results of a research study on mentoring benefits

Background/Purpose: Mentoring characteristics promote satisfaction and are valuable to nurse protégés. A need exists to explore benefits experienced by nurse protégés engaged in mentoring relationships. This descriptive, correlational study expands previous nursing research (Jakubik, 2007) by examining if quality, quantity, type of mentoring, and length of employment predict mentoring benefits as perceived by staff nurse protégés.

Methods: A convenience sample from a Magnet-designated, pediatric hospital in midwestern United States completed a demographic questionnaire and two valid and reliable instruments: Quality of Mentoring Questionnaire and Jakubik Mentoring Benefits Questionnaire.

Findings:  The hypothesis was accepted. Linear combination of quantity, quality and type of mentoring and length of employment predicts mentoring benefits better than any one factor alone.  Hypothesis testing by stepwise multiple regression analysis revealed an overall R = .63 with mentoring quality and length of employment entering the equation to explain 39.69% of the variance in the outcome variable mentoring benefits (p < .01).  Mentoring quality was significant, explaining 37.21% of variance in mentoring benefits (r = .61, p < .001).  The predictor variable length of employment was a small, but significant predictor of mentoring benefits, explaining 4.41% of the variance in mentoring benefits (r = .21, p < .006).  Neither quantity nor type of mentoring relationship was significantly related to mentoring benefits.

Implications: Length of employment predicted the outcome variable mentoring benefits and added to the explained variance in mentoring benefits explained by mentoring quality. Findings suggest high-quality mentoring relationships may have a role in nurses’ longevity in an organization. The concept of nurse mentoring and experiences of staff nurse protégés demonstrate Magnet model components of Transformational Leadership; Structural Empowerment; Exemplary Professional Practice; New Knowledge, Innovations, and Improvements; and Empirical Quality Outcomes. Future research examining the role mentoring benefits has on predictors of retention and length of employment is needed.