The data collection process was explorative and proceeded through five phases: (1) analysis of the available secondary data about mentoring practices in multinational companies in Russia; (2) a pilot face-to-face interview with an expert who works as a human resource and TM manager for a multinational company at a local office in Russia; the aim of this interview was to verify the questionnaire’s structure and content and formulate sharper and more precise research questions; (3) selection of respondents through coordinators of mentoring programs for Saint Petersburg State University and Moscow State University; (4) semi-structured in-depth interviews with respondents; and (5) one additional interview with an expert and professional coach who specializes in internal corporate mentoring in order to get an informed view of the research results and clarify possible inconsistencies in the analysis.

The 21 interviews (one interview with one mentor) conducted during the data collection phase provided a solid basis for analysis (Bekele & Ago, 2022). The respondents were recommended by coordinators of mentoring programs at Saint Petersburg State University or Moscow State University; the main selection criterion was their participation in the programs. The selected mentors were to be working for a multinational company in Russia, mentoring at least two students and have mentorship experience of at least three years. During this stage, we sought to achieve an in-depth understanding of the mentoring phenomenon. The interview guide comprised the following sections: (1) background information; (2) mentoring experience; (3) internal corporate mentoring; (4) talent management processes and practices; (5) peculiarities of the mentoring communication between students and successfully employed alums; (6) external mentoring as a talent attraction tool. Respondents could leave appropriate comments and recommendations to improve their ideas and share any additional thoughts on the issue. The open-ended questions were complemented with multiple-choice and ranking-type questions.

This five-phase research process allowed us to gather and evaluate various kinds of empirical evidence from several sources, which enabled data triangulation to guarantee the reliability of conclusions (Elo et al., 2014). The triangulation was possible thanks to sufficient numbers of informants at different phases of data collection, identical interview questions and crosschecked information throughout the research process. For research purposes, the respondents were numbered from 1 to 21 to assure anonymity and confidentiality. Data saturation was reached after interviewing respondent #18; the inferred themes comprised value, content, process, voluntary basis, recognition, challenges, emotions, selection of mentee and selection of mentor.

Data analysis began with content analysis aiming to categorize and structure the data under the theme headings that represented the focal points of this research and correlated with research questions. Each category of data was coded to enable comparisons between responses (Petty et al., 2012; Won & Choi, 2017). First, we formulated two themes, value (1) and components (2), and then components were cascaded and identified as content (2.1), process (2.2), voluntary basis (2.3), recognition (2.4), challenges (2.5), emotions (2.6), selection of mentee (2.7) and selection of mentor (2.8.) as the second level sub-themes.

The verification strategy used in this study is in agreement with Elo et al., and Morse et al., who maintain that validity and reliability of results could be ensured by appropriate sample and methodological coherence (Elo et al., 2014; Morse et al., 2002). Sampling sufficiency can be evidenced by saturation and replication. By definition, replication in categories is ensured by saturating data; replication verifies and guarantees comprehension and completeness of the research (Morse et al., 2002). We analyzed participants’ responses using content analysis and distinguished the most pronounced themes related to talent mentoring. In other words, we used an analytical replication technique to determine what constituted talent mentoring according to the obtained case evidence. This technique enabled generalized conclusions (Tsang, 2014). The analysis is based on the assumption that when a finding is detected in more than one case, its generalizability is strengthened (Petty et al., 2012). After completing this stage, the data from the final expert interview and secondary sources were integrated to verify the accuracy of the analysis and validity of the conclusions. Talent mentoring outcomes (value) and components emerged from the data in the course of interview and literature analysis. A selected sample of the respondents’ answers is presented with verbatim quotations to ensure the trustworthiness of the results (Elo et al., 2014). Some of the themes intersect or fully coincide with the sub-themes, showing that even when different aspects of a topic were discussed, the same important issues arose. This proves that triangulation was achieved in the study.

Today, multinational organizations focus on attracting and developing high-potential young graduates. Respondents #7, 11, 15, 18, and 20 said that there could be exceptions to this approach in cases when a company needs to fill senior positions or positions that require particular knowledge of the industry it works in. The most popular tools for attracting high-potential graduates are various development programs such as leadership development or rotational management trainee programs. As respondent #4 emphasized:

“The quality of skills and knowledge a young graduate possesses is essential in the era of talent scarcity. Case competitions and business games help us quickly detect students with the required skills and attract them.”

According to most respondents, many companies face a talent shortage problem. Mentors explain that they see it as a gap in expectations of graduates and companies. The employer expects a young graduate to already possess the required skills and offers an average salary and rather monotonous work. Organizations realize that they need to adjust their packages and offerings to the labor market expectations to remain attractive to talented candidates (Jeske & Olson, 2021). Thus, respondent# 8 said:

“Today’s labor market requires organizations to be more flexible in terms of compensation, the benefits they offer, working conditions and remote work communication. They also need to look for new ways of attracting talents.”

Respondent #21 described potential outcomes of mentoring:

“I suppose that talent mentoring can be a fantastic TA tool. It can increase the loyalty of young graduates because they see that the company recognizes their potential and is ready to invest in their development. Moreover, talent mentoring reduces the workload for recruiters.”

Corporations realize the importance of human capital and are therefore willing to invest in TM practices. Respondent #5 pointed out:

“Companies are ready to assign the task of student mentoring to an employee if they see a clear fit and high potential in a candidate.”

Mentoring as a TA practice can also be seen as the employer branding tool, which increases its value for the company. Mentor #15 said:

“In a competitive business environment, organizations put efforts into building a really good and well-recognized employer brand; mentoring definitely contributes to that as it is based on direct collaboration with universities.”

An external mentoring practice attracts young, high-potential graduates to an organization and is also good for the staff members. Respondents #1,11 and 15 emphasized that the sheer understanding that their organization provided such opportunity for growth and development was valuable. Respondent #19 said:

“Mentoring can increase the loyalty of employees dramatically. When I shared my experience with the student, I reevaluated my daily work, tasks, and responsibilities and understood how much I enjoy what I do and how grateful I am to my employer.”

When a mentee asks for professional advice or evaluation of a project work, this pushes the mentor to expand his knowledge. Respondent #13 said:

“I do not always have ready-made answers for my mentee. Sometimes, I need time to consult with my colleagues. Since I want to help my mentee, I feel motivated to do some research on the topic even if it goes beyond my professional expertise.”

Respondent #11 added to that:

“It is hard to acknowledge, but a couple of times I learned new and unexpected facts about the business environment that the student shared with me based on the results of his project. I just fell in love with the process of mentoring. I not only share my experience, but I also get a lot in return.”

Moreover, mentoring is an excellent tool for employees to improve their leadership and communication skills. As respondent #8 explained:

“I find mentoring an advanced tool for developing senior managers. They get to the position when they think that they know pretty much everything, but in our time that’s become impossible. Mentoring fosters learning in an engaging way.”

Consequently, organizations benefit from a mentoring program in at least two ways: they attract new talent and develop their employees who do the mentoring work. All respondents said they discussed their corporate culture and organizational values and shared what they liked most because mentees were interested in this and asked detailed questions. Respondent #8 said:

“I was surprised that my mentee was so enthusiastic to learn about our corporate culture in the first place but not about the business model or industry. The reasonable explanation for this is that he could read about almost everything on the official website, but culture cannot be described. It should be experienced.”

Respondent #6 spoke about even more benefits of mentoring that can be important for organizations:

“I believe that mentoring favors networking, sharing ideas among employees and building trusting relationships between people, knowledge sharing, developing tailor-made career tracks for mentees.”

Our findings contribute to both mentoring and TM literature. By presenting the external mentoring framework, we conceptualize the different applications for external mentoring (Mullen & Klimaitis, 2021). Our conclusions follow Allen and O’Brien (2006) in broadening the scope of mentoring research beyond internal organizational borders. Mentoring creates a talent pool, and recruiters can start looking for the right candidates among the students involved in mentoring. The paper also explains how organizations can benefit from implementing external mentoring programs.

Second, our results develop the concept of TA and TM by broadening the scope of mechanisms to acquire talents (Schuler et al., 2011; Tarique & Schuler, 2010; Thunnissen et al., 2013). The study identifies the factors that determine success of external mentoring as a TA tool and thus expands the understanding of organizational attractiveness for talented potential employees in today’s business environment. Since TM and TM practices are generally considered important for organizational resilience (Ugboego et al., 2022), external mentoring as a TA and TM tool deserves special attention because it may enhance the resilience of mentors and mentees and therefore the strength of the whole organization. The present paper looks into the nature of this management practice thus enlarging the literature on factors of resilience.

Third, our study has found that one of the key reasons for talent shortages is the gap in the expectations of graduates and companies. Employers need to explore new TA tools that will help them attract and manage the so-called millennials who differ from the previous generations of workers (e.g., Chenkovich & Cates, 2016; Durocher et al., 2016; Tsai, 2017). We explain the benefits of external mentoring, expanding the previous research into the issue (Eby et al., 2008; Ghosh, 2014; Kao et al., 2014; Lapointe & Vandenberghe, 2017; Mitchell et al., 2015; Parise & Forret, 2008; Zhang et al., 2023).

Fourth, the paper proves that mentor and mentee selection are important elements of the talent mentoring process. This is in agreement with Jyoti and Sharma (2017), who emphasized the importance of making the right decisions in selection process. Organizations should carefully choose the best applicants who are willing and have the capabilities to deliver value. Mentoring is more beneficial for the mentee; therefore, they are expected to be responsible for the success of the interaction and its intensity. These align with Jyoti and Sharma’s (2017) idea of self-efficacy. Moreover, the selection of mentees can be fitted into Meyers and Van Woerkom’s (2014) framework as a tool for exclusive or inclusive approach. Mentoring with exclusive approach refers to choosing a talented, high-performing student as a mentee and then developing this student with a view to subsequent retention (Kamoche & Leigh, 2022). In contrast, according the inclusive approach to mentoring, any individual can take up the mentee role because the inclusive theory states that everyone is talented (Kaliannan et al., 2023). The mentor’s main task is to identify mentee’s talent, develop it, and find its appropriate application.

Although all respondents agree that mentoring is a powerful TA tool, organizations do not widely use it for talent development, even internally; the respondents see it as a missed opportunity. By investigating mentoring as a TA tool, we show how to drive TA and employee development through business mentoring programs and highlight the critical points on which HRM and TM professionals should focus when starting an external mentoring program. The paper provides new perspectives for managers in their understanding of TA practices by showing them additional mechanisms of TA related to mentoring. As a result, firms may reconsider the role of mentoring as a development tool for employees within a company, giving it a new value in achieving attraction goals.

However, certain risks have to be considered before starting an external mentoring program, as well as peculiarities related to the company profile and the industry in which it operates. Respondents agreed that such a program cannot be a universal solution to the problems related to attracting talented graduates. As respondent#9 said:

“Such practices will be widely popular among, for instance, IT, audit, engineering, and healthcare firms. Generally speaking, this tool will be the most beneficial for companies that hire from particular universities and require specific skills that are not taught during lectures.”

Finally, the implications of our findings may extend beyond Russia. The other BRICS countries and emerging economies are also facing talent shortages and have to grapple with the need to attract and retain high-potential individuals to support their rapid economic growth. China, for instance, is at a critical stage of economic transformation and upgrading, with an increasing demand for high-quality and innovative talents. Some Chinese companies have realized the importance of cooperation with universities in jointly cultivating talent. An example is Huawei, a famous Chinese company, that promotes cooperation with universities through the platform of the Information Communication Technology (ICT) Academy. By introducing Huawei’s advanced ICT technologies and integrating them with the talent development goals and industry job competency requirements, Huawei aims to cultivate composite talents with cross-disciplinary capabilities. The findings of this study should assist in designing suitable external mentoring programs in line with the industry characteristics and talent needs.

Limitations of this research are determined by a relatively small sample size (n=21). Future studies could include a larger and more diverse sample to enhance the generalizability of the findings. We also suggest that the framework be tested in a longitudinal study to find out the long-term effect of mentoring.

Our studies rely on self-reported data from interviews, which may be subject to biases. Future research could benefit from multiple data sources, including observational data or surveys, to mitigate the potential biases.

We argue that external mentoring as a new TA tool may foster mentors’ and mentees’ resilience and ultimately organizational resilience. The future studies should empirically test such relationships; the results may assist companies in tackling talent shortages in an increasingly turbulent environment.

The study is based on empirical evidence obtained from companies operating in Russia. This evidence naturally has certain cultural, economic, and educational peculiarities and our findings may not be directly applicable to other countries. Future research may explore the application of external mentoring in other BRICS countries to further validate its effectiveness and adaptability. It would be useful to explore the possibilities of tailoring the external mentoring to the unique cultural, economic, and educational contexts of India, China, Brazil, and South Africa.

Researchers could also explore the potential role of the collaboration between multinational corporations and universities in different countries in preventing the outflow of domestic talent and attracting international talent to the BRICS countries. International cooperation should take into account, among other things, differences in educational systems, labor markets, and cultural norms. An in-depth analysis of these complex factors may promote the two-way flow of talent, not only to prevent the outflow of domestic talent but also to attract international talent, thereby enhancing the global competitiveness of companies and countries.