Model of communication effectiveness
in the mentoring process
EWA ROLLNIK-SADOWSKA, EWA GLIŃSKA, URSZULA RYCIUK
Faculty of Engineering Management
Bialystok University of Technology
Wiejska 45 A, 15-351 Bialystok
POLAND
Abstract: In this paper the authors analyse the conditions of effective communication in the mentoring process.
In the literature on the subject effective business communication is considered as a key to planning, leading,
organizing and controlling the resources of organizations to achieve their objectives. Still, communication
models in the mentoring network have not been of interest to researchers yet. The aim of this study was to
identify the factors that influence the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring process. The authors
created a theoretical model of communication in the mentoring process which became a basis for primary
research conducted among 103 mentors and 119 mentees in Poland. It occurred that the factors influencing the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring process are similar in both groups. Next, the authors
incorporated the Exploratory Factor Analysis and Cronbach’s alpha reliability test of different factors influencing
the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring process. The results proved that all the developed scales
demonstrated reliability above the recommended threshold. The final stage involved developing a regression
model which allowed to identify the factors influencing the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process. Those factors are: non-verbal channels and tools of communication, written and oral channels and
tools of communication as well as social engagement in the mentoring process.
Key-Words: communication, communication model, effectiveness, mentoring process, mentors, mentees
Received: June 19, 2021. Revised: November 15, 2021. Accepted: December 30, 2021. Published: January 3, 2022.
1 Introduction
Effective business communication is a key to
planning, leading, organizing and controlling the
resources of organizations with an aim to achieve
their objectives [1, 2]. Communication effectiveness
is analysed from very diverse angles and within
different contexts in various literature sources [3].
The performance of an organization depends on
successful communication inside this organization at
various levels and outside it in relation to business
partners, government agencies and customers [4, 5,
6]. Only when organizations are fully aware of the
principles of effective communication, will they be
able to accomplish their goals and enhance their
performance [7].
Communication means the process of transferring
information and understanding between different
departments and people within an organization. It
includes various modes and media involved in
communication interchanges [8]. Communication is
not only about the interchange of messages;
nowadays communication is more about sharing
ideas and feelings as well as the willingness to
participate in interactions [9]. It serves two essential
functions in every organization – disseminating
information needed by employees to get things done
and building trust and commitment [10]. Effective
communication minimizing strikes and lockouts,
enhances intra-organizational relationships [11] and
interorganizational relationships [12].
The communication process is considered
successful if the receiver understands the message as
intended by the sender. However, this situation is not
always achieved due to various reasons, including
incorrect encoding and decoding of the message,
interfering messages and an incorrect choice of the
communication channel [8, 13].
The literature on the subject offers many
examples of research on barriers and obstacles
affecting communication effectiveness [8, 14, 15].
Barriers to communication lead to
miscommunication and cause problems in the course
of this process, some of them being defensive
reactions, cutting off further communication,
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
1
Volume 19, 2022
diminished chances to identify options and the
resulting confusion or misunderstanding [8].
Barriers to communication can be external to
participants, intrapersonal and interpersonal [14].
External barriers include among others:
organizational structure and available technology.
Intrapersonal barriers make such up issues as:
personality, level of knowledge and emotional state.
Interpersonal obstacles include the credibility of the
sender as perceived by the receiver. Other
communication barriers can be associated with the
choice of the channel (matching the medium to
message goals) and a lack of feedback (the sender
relies on feedback to judge the success of
communication) [14].
Recently, there has been a marked increase in the
interest in mentoring among academics and business
leaders. This is evidenced by the number of articles
on this subject, as well as the number of mentoring
programs implemented in organizations [23], [38].
Mentoring was defined as a dyadic relationship
between the mentor and the mentee. However, the
definition of mentoring has evolved. Nowadays,
mentoring usually includes a network of developers
who provides support to a protégé [23]. A key
element of mentoring is communication and the
effective communication is a condition of the
effective mentoring process [22]. The effectiveness
of communication means that the goals set for the
communication interaction are fulfilled [39].
The literature proves that researchers have not
given enough attention to effectiveness of
communication issues in the mentoring network yet.
An exception is the works on communication in
online mentoring [23], [40], [41], [42]. The paper
contributes to fill in that loophole as it aims to
identify factors influencing the effectiveness of
communication in the mentoring process. The
authors created a theoretical model of
communication in the mentoring process which
became a basis for primary research conducted
among 103 mentors and 119 mentees in Poland.
Next, the authors incorporated the Exploratory Factor
Analysis (EFA) and Cronbach's alpha reliability test
of different factors influencing the effectiveness of
communication in the mentoring process.
2 Communication in mentoring
Communication is defined as a mechanism of mutual
relations which lies at the core of establishing
contacts as well as a set of all means and methods for
transferring information in order to affect the
behaviour of people [15].
The most common context of business and
professional relationships is interpersonal
communication which is defined as an interaction in
which one person sends a message to another with the
use of a specific communication channel [16].
Interpersonal communication skills are obviously a
key to success in business [8].
Success in business depends on one’s ability to
communicate effectively, wherein effective
communication combines verbal and non-verbal
forms [8]. Verbal communication includes oral and
written communication between people. It involves
the use of words in speaking, writing, reading and
listening [17, 8]. Visual and electronic channels of
communication can complete the oral and written
ones [18].
Any form of communication that does not
specifically use words is considered non-verbal [19].
Kudesia and Elfenbein [19] list components of non-
verbal communication from relevant literature. This
list includes: appearance, movement, facial
expressions, vocal behaviour, distance, touch and
time.
Non-verbal “language” takes on a lot of
important forms, such as: posture, manner of dress,
accessories, gestures, eye contact, facial expressions,
smile, voice intonation, laughter, eye contact, eye
signs and movement, distance between
communicators, touch, clap, dance and physiological
reactions – sweating palms and/or forehead, paleness,
at times acute facial and neck redness and other ones
[20]. In a great variety of situations, communicators
can achieve their purpose more easily by improving
the accuracy and effectiveness of their non-verbal
communication [21].
Communication models in the mentoring
network have not drawn the attention of researchers
yet. Mentoring can be defined as a strategy aimed at
developing individuals, both in professional and
personal aspects [22]. A mentor is a network
participant who provides instrumental, psychosocial,
and/or role-modelling support to a mentee on an
ongoing basis [23]. In general, researchers have
found that informal mentoring relationships based on
a frequent contact are better than formal
relationships, and having any mentor is usually better
than not having one at all. Unfortunately, there are a
number of barriers that prevent would-be mentees
from finding a mentor. These obstructive factors
include a lack of available mentors in a given
industry, profession or echelon, increasing demands
placed on would-be mentors, lack of similarity in the
attitude or demography, and organizational or
geographical boundaries [24, 25]. One way to
overcome these constraints is to participate in
mentoring through a variety of communication
options. Communication is a very important element
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
2
Volume 19, 2022
of mentoring and effective communication is
considered as a hallmark of an effective mentoring
relationship [22].
The model of communication in mentoring
should not only include proper communication
channels and tools but, principally, create an
appropriate content and consider social engagement
levels.
The communication channel is characterized as a
technical component of the communication process
that allows to transmit information from sender to
receiver (and vice versa). This kind of channel covers
all means of message creation and acceptance (i.e.
signs, language, body language, codes, technical
devices, etc.) [43].
Stelzle and Noennig [26] distinguish five levels
of social engagement:
information – informing the public,
supporting the understanding of the problem
and suggesting solutions;
consultation – including giving public
feedback to the analysis and decisions;
involvement – cooperating with the public in
the course of the process and giving feedback
on how the decision was influenced by
public;
collaboration – working together with the
public on every aspect and including public
advice and recommendations in the decision-
making process to the maximum possible
extent;
empowerment – putting the final decision in
the hands of the public.
In the mentoring process the first three levels of
social engagement are important – information,
consultation and involvement. The fourth level –
collaboration – is understood by the authors of the
concept as an element of social participation and – in
the mentoring process – it comes down to the co-
decision of a mentor and a mentee in terms of the
mentee’s personal and professional development.
As a result of the conducted literature analysis,
the authors adopt the communication model
presented in figure 1. It is based on the
communication model between a small and medium-
sized company and its clients using social media
created by Ungerman and Myslivcová [27]. The
below theoretical model became the core for
developing the primary research tool and the model’s
components constituted the basis for creating a
cafeteria of questions.
The entire model is based on continuous
information circulation. The first stage involves
selecting communication channels and tools by the
mentor.
Content creation constitutes the second part of
the communication model. Ungerman and
Myslivcová [27] in their model emphasize two
factors significant for content creation – a high-
quality message and information content. The
combination of all factors produced “content
creation” subject to quality assessment.
Content quality consists of information veracity,
information clarity, provision of solicited
information only, information completeness regular
updating and speed of response. At the same time,
these attributes constitute a part of the entire model
as well, since these principles apply to the whole
communication process. Therefore, they serve as an
intersection in the model’s centre.
Social engagement constitutes the third part of
the communication model. It basically supplements
the message. At this point, the entire communication
circle forms a closed continuum. However, the
process does not end here. This communication
model does not have a specified beginning either.
Nor does it have an end. If communication is
successful, it leads to the reciprocal contact between
the mentor and the mentee. Such mutual
communication serves as a basis for establishing a
relationship in the mentoring process.
Fig. 1. Theoretical Model of Communication in
Mentoring
Source: elaboration on the basis of [27].
Mentor Mentee
QUALITY OF CONTENT
information veracity
information clarity
provision of solicited
information only
information
completeness
regular updating
speed of response
Content
creation
Communication
channels and
tools
SOCIAL
ENGAGEMENT
Information
Consultation
Involvement
Co-decision
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
3
Volume 19, 2022
It should be underlined that the above presented
model extracts components of communication in
mentoring, but the relationships between those
components are not sufficiently identified.
3 Research Problem Formulation
As it was already mentioned, the communication
model in the mentoring network has not been a
subject of deepened analysis. In the literature, it is
possible to identify theoretical concepts on
communication models between enterprises and
their clients, but not those for the mentor-mentee
relationship. The theoretical model of
communication in mentoring developed by the
authors is based on the concepts of general
communication models or business-consumers
communication models. That is the reason for
conducting the procedure of verifying the
conceptual model and identifying factors which
influence communication effectiveness in
mentoring networks.
The theoretical model of communication in
mentoring developed by the authors consists of
three basic components such us: channels and tools
of communication (oral, written and non-verbal),
content creation (information veracity, information
clarity, provision of solicited information only,
information completeness regular updating and
speed of response) as well as levels of social
engagement in the mentoring process (information,
consultation, involvement and co-decision).
Moreover, communication is considered effective
when the assumed objectives are achieved, meaning
that the content is understood, the message leads to
a specific action, the decision is made about the
issue, the goal of the meeting has been reached, the
goal of the mentoring process has been achieved and
emotional support is gained.
The study was constructed to answer the research
question: What are the factors determining the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process?
The authors implemented the below described
research procedure to answer the research question
and to identify the determinants of the effectiveness
of communication in the mentoring process.
Moreover, the theoretical model of communication in
mentoring has been supplemented with an indication
of the relationship between its components.
4 Method
The article involves exhaustive literature review. The
aim was to identify factors influencing the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process (figure 2). The authors compiled a
questionnaire which was developed on the basis of
literature review (Appendix 1). The research
constructs comprised of a total of 38 items
(observable variables) were divided into six groups
related to:
1. oral channels and tools of communication –
4 items;
2. written channels and tools of communication –
12 items;
3. non-verbal channels and tools of
communication – 6 items;
4. content creation – 6 items;
5. social engagement in the mentoring process – 4
items;
6. effectiveness of communication – 6 items.
For evaluation of each item in the questionnaire a
five-level scale from “very unimportant” (1) to “very
important” (5) was used. The research was conducted
in Poland using the CAWI technique (Computer
Assisted Web Interviews).
The questionnaire was send to mentors who were
qualified for the study in accordance with the adopted
definition, in which the mentor is an experienced
entrepreneur or manager who has accumulated
knowledge in entrepreneurship, who, without
consideration and willingly, devotes his time,
experience and suggestions to help the new
entrepreneur, who is oriented in the business
environment. The mentor listens, asks questions,
challenges the mentee's goals, studies, gives advises,
shares his/her experience and contacts. The mentees
were selected for the study by the mentors
participating in CAWI who passed the questionnaire
to the mentees they work with.
The sample was selected in quota-random way
– it was assumed that the research sample should
include at least 100 mentors and 100 mentees,
having technical or non-technical background and
representing main sectors of Polish economy –
industry, construction, education, agriculture, trade
and TSL. For mentors it was assumed that they
should have in organization position of specialist or
higher. As a result, the survey was carried out
among 222 respondents, of whom 103 were mentors
(46%) and 119 were mentees (54%) (table 1).
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
4
Volume 19, 2022
Fig. 2. Methodology adopted for the study
Source: own study.
The sample size-number of variables ratio is
almost 7:1, which meets the required
recommendations for EFA [29]. Regression analysis
required at least 15 respondents on one predictor
[33] what is also fulfilled.
In the next step the differences in the mentors’ and
the mentees’ responses were analysed using the Non-
parametric Mann-Whitney U test. Next, the EFA and
Cronbach's alpha (λ) reliability test of different
factors influencing the effectiveness of
communication in the mentoring process as well as
the effectiveness itself were subject to elaboration.
At the final stage a regression model was
developed.
Data analysis was based on the IBM SPSS
Statistics 21.0 software.
Tab. 1. The structure of respondents
Source: own study.
5 Results
The research was conducted on a sample of 222
respondents – mentors and mentees. At the first stage
of the analysis the authors had to decide if the
respondents’ answers are the same for those two
groups. In analysing differences of the mentors’ and
the mentees’ responses the non-parametric Mann-
Whitney U test was used.
In almost every case no statistically significant
differences were found in the distribution of the
mentors’ and the mentees’ responses. There was one
exception related to non-verbal communication –
posture and body orientation (U=4811.5, p<0.05). In
all other cases statistic differences were not
significant (p>0.05). Due to the lack of statistically
significant differences in the distribution of the
mentors’ and the mentees’ responses for other items,
an assumption was made that the factors influencing
the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process are similar in both groups.
At the first step, the respondents were asked when
they regard communication in the mentoring process
as effective. The mentees found it comparatively
important when the message leads to a specific
action, the goal of the mentoring process has been
reached, the goal of the meeting has been achieved,
the content is understood and the decision is made
about the issue (table 2). According to the
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
5
Volume 19, 2022
respondents, gaining emotional support is relatively
less important for the effectiveness of
communication (EF) in the mentoring process.
Tab. 2. Effectiveness of communication
Source: own study.
The second part of the questionnaire was related to
32 elements influencing the effectiveness of
communication. To identify the structure of data as
well as reduce the number of variables and
observable variables, the EFA was performed. The
aim of EFA is to obtain a minimum number of factors
that contain the maximum possible amount of
information contained in the original variables used
in the model and with the greatest possible reliability
[28].
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling
(KMO) adequacy was 0.76, indicating a good sample
size – it is bigger than the suggested minimum values
of 0.5 [30] and 0.6 [31] (table 3). Bartlett’s test of
sphericity was significant (χ2 (190) = 2022.93
p < 0.001), which indicates that the variables are
correlated enough for the EFA analysis.
Tab. 3. KMO and Bartlett’s test
Source: own study.
The decision about number of factors which can
be extracted was determined by using the Kaiser rule
(retain only those factors with an eigenvalue larger
than 1) and the Cattell method based on – a scree-plot
analysis. The analysis was performed with Principal
Axis Factoring as an extraction method and Varimax
rotation. In the analysis six factors explaining 53.0%
of total variance were extracted. The items with low
loadings and high loadings on more than one factor
were excluded and EFA was repeated. In the final
solution the items with the factor loading higher than
0.45 were retained what is more than recommended
– 0.40 [32]. For most of the items they are over or
close to 0.6.
The final rotated factor matrix for EFA is
presented in table 4. The use of EFA enabled the
identification of six factors related to the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process, namely:
1. Non-verbal channels and tools of
communication (NW).
2. Social engagement in the mentoring process
(SE).
3. Electronic (internal) channels and tools of
communication (ECH).
4. Content creation (CON).
5. Written channels and tools of communication
(WCH).
6. Oral channels and tools of communication
(OCH).
Tab. 4. Factor loadings - EFA results
Source: own study.
The first factor explains 23.1% of the variance of
these variables, which confirms a large significance
of non-verbal elements of communication. The next
ones range from 8.7% to 3.4%.
The reliability analysis for each extracted factor
was made using Cronbach’s α (table 5). In all cases
Cronbach’s α is higher than desirable value of 0.60-
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
6
Volume 19, 2022
0.70 [32] and is acceptable especially for social
science research [37].
Tab. 5. Reliability analysis
The authors performed hierarchical regression
analysis, where the dependent variable was
effectiveness in the mentoring process. The factors
obtained as the result of EFA analysis were used as a
predictors in this regression analysis. In table 6
descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations
(SD)) and correlations of all variables are provided.
The Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) test was
performed on each regression. The VIF values are
below 2, so well below accepted 5 [37] or 10 [33]
suggesting that multicollinearity is not a problem.
Before testing the moderating effects, variables were
mean-centred.
In the table 7 the results of regression analysis are
presented. The model I includes all predictors: NW,
SE, ECH, CON, WCH, OCH and control variables:
sex, educational background and working experience
(age was excluded as highly correlated with working
experience). The model II includes interaction
between SE and other variables, The model III adds
interaction between CON and other variables. The
model IV takes into account interaction between
different channels and tools of communication (NW,
ECH, WCH, OCH) and other variables and the
model V is a full model where all the variables and
moderations effects are tested. In the model V two-
way and three-way (relating to channels and tools of
communication) interactions were included.
Source: own study
Tab. 6. Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations) and correlations
Source: own study.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
7
Volume 19, 2022
Tab. 7. Results of hierarchical regression analysis
Source: own study.
All the proposed regression models suited to the
data well (explain more of the variability of the
dependent variable than the arithmetic mean)
(table 8). However, the model IV should be selected
as it accounts for 36% of the variability of the
dependent variable, and it is simpler than the
model V. In the model V ∆R2=0.02 and is not
significant (F(3,193)=1.86; p>0.05).
Tab. 8. Models Summary
Source: own study.
Based on regression coefficients, it can be
concluded that the effectiveness of communication is
determined by: NW (β=0.19, p<0.01), WCH (β=0.15,
p<0.05), SE (β=0.19, p<0.05) and OCH (β=0.15,
p<0.05). The model IV suggests also interactions
between: SE and ECH (β=0.27, p<0.01), CON and
WCH (β=0.17, p<0.05) and WCH and ECH (β=0.18,
p<0.05), which are positively related to EF.
Negatively related to EF are effects of SE and WCH
(β=-0.17, p<0.05), CON and ECH (β=-0.18, p<0.05)
as well as OCH and NW (β=-0.18, p<0.05).
6 Discussion
The paper aims to identify factors influencing the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process. The research indicates that the effectiveness
of communication in the mentoring process is
positively and directly influenced by non-verbal
channels and tools of communication, written and
oral channels and tools of communication as well as
social engagement in the mentoring process. The
influence of the choice of communication channels
on the effectiveness of the communication process
was emphasized also by Sanina et al. [43].
Additionally in our study, interactions between social
engagement, content creation and different channels
and tools of communication are observed.
As in literature researchers have not given enough
attention to models of communication in the
mentoring network yet, the authors adopted the
communication model between a small and medium-
sized company and its clients using social media
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
8
Volume 19, 2022
created by Ungerman and Myslivcová [27].
However, the obtained results differ in terms of the
ones reached by Ungerman and Myslivcová [27],
who also applied factor analysis to identify the
spheres of resulting factors in their communication
model between a small and medium-sized company
and its clients using social media. The factors
identified by Ungerman and Myslivcová were
information quality, communication tools and
contents as well as methods of providing information.
In literature the effectiveness of communication
in the business networks is understood as the
relationship between the given communication goals
and real impacts on business results, i.e., the ratio of
desired and achieved [34]. As a measure of
evaluation of the effectiveness of communication, the
return on investment (ROI) indicator is mainly used
[34, 35].
The vast majority of research on communication
effectiveness concerns marketing communication
[36] and there is a lack of research on the
communication effectiveness in the mentoring
networks.
7 Conclusion
In the described study the authors made an
analysis of the determinants of effectiveness in the
mentoring process. They took into account the
channels and tools of communication, content
creation and levels of social engagement.
The authors contribution beyond alternative
studies is on the one hand to work out the procedure
of evaluation of the effectiveness of communication
and on the other hand to identify factors influencing
the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process.
Concluding the research findings, it can be stated
that one conceptual model of communication in the
mentoring network can be used for both mentors and
mentees.
The authors performed hierarchical regression
analysis, where the dependent variable was the
effectiveness in the mentoring process. As the
predictors in this regression analysis the factors
obtained as the result of EFA analysis were used. The
research results proved that the factors influencing
the effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process are: non-verbal channels and tools of
communication, written and oral channels and tools
of communication as well as social engagement in the
mentoring process.
Moreover, alternative models were tested to
analyse the structure of relationships between the
predictors and the dependent variable. It occurred
that the interactions are noticed what means that the
effectiveness of communication in the mentoring
process is influenced by: social engagement which is
impacted by electronic channels usage; content
creation that is increased by the use of written
channels and tools of communication and written
channels and tools of communication that is higher
when used with electronic channels and tools of
communication. However, the effectiveness of
communication is decreased when: written channels
and tools of communication are used in social
engagement process, when electronic channels and
tools of communication are used in content creation
and when non-verbal communication influences oral
channel usage.
The research results included in this study have
some limitations. They concern the size of the
research sample and the fact that they were conducted
only in Poland. It needs to be highlighted that the
study has an exploratory character. The regression
analysis results indicate that in the model a series of
interactive components had to be created which
complicates the model. Also, for this reason, the
moderating effects analysis was abandoned. The
study does not give the answer about substitutive or
complementary relations between variables. Further
analyses should be conducted to explain the
interaction effects. At the following stages of
research work, it is also planned to perform
quantitative research in other countries. The obtained
research findings for Polish mentoring network can
be the basis for conducting comparative analysis with
other countries. Moreover, the results can be a basis
for further research by using structural equation
modelling. Structural equation modelling requires a
larger research sample but a more detailed model can
be developed to estimate direct and indirect,
moderating and mediating relationships among
variables.
References:
[1] Hynes, G. Managerial communications:
Strategies and applications, New York 2005,
NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
[2] Gramatnikovski, S., Stoilkovska, A. &
Serafimovic, G. Business Communication in
Function of Improving the Organizational
Culture of the Company, UTMS Journal of
Economics 6 (2), (2015). pp. 267–279.
[3] Laužikas, M. & Miliūtė, A. Communication
Efficiency and Effectiveness Within Strategic
Management of Change: insights into Civil
Service Organizations, Journal of Security and
Sustainability Issues, 8 (4) 2019.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
9
Volume 19, 2022
[4] Luthra, A. & Dahiya, K. Organizational
Communication and Management
Effectiveness: An analytical Study at Various
Managerial Levels, International Journal of
Management & Business Studies, 5(3) 2015.
[5] Uka, A. The Communication and Its Influence
on the Effectiveness of the Organization,
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2),
2014, pp. 165-170.
[6] Stacho, Z., Stachová, K., Papula, J., Papulová,
Z. & Kohnová, L. Effective communication in
organisations increases their competitiveness,
Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19 (1),
2019, pp. 391-403.
[7] Réka, K. & Borza, A. Internal and External
Communication within Cultural Organizations,
Management & Marketing Challenges for the
Knowledge Society, 7(4), 2012, pp. 613-630.
[8] Scheming, O. & Mason, R. B. Interpersonal
communication channels used by organizations
in South Africa to communicate with their
German business partners, Corporate
Ownership and Control, 10 (4), 2013, pp. 399-
409.
[9] Petersons, A. & Khalimzoda, I., Communication
models and common basis for multicultural
communication in Latvia, Society. Integration.
Education Proceedings of the International
Scientific Conference. Volume IV, May 27th -
28th, 2016.
[10] Mutuku, C. K. & Mathooko, P. Effects of
organizational communication on employee
motivation: A case study of Nokia Siemens
Networks Kenya, International Academic
Journal of Information Sciences and Project
Management, 1 (3), 2014, pp. 28-62.
[11] Kelvin-Iloafu, L. E. The Role of Effective
Communication in Strategic Management of
Organizations, International Journal of
Humanities and Social Science, 16 (12), 2016,
pp. 93-99.
[12] Szymczak, M., Ryciuk, U., Leończuk, D.,
Piotrowicz, W., Witkowski, K., Nazarko, J.,
Jakuszewicz, J. Key factors for information
integration in the supply chain - measurement,
technology and information characteristics.
Journal of Business Economics and
Management, 19 (5), 2018, pp. 759-776.
[13] Guffey, M. E., Rogin, P. & Rhodes, K. Business
Communication: Process and Product, Nelson
Education, Toronto 2009.
[14] Moore, L H. (2013). Business Communication.
Available online: https://www.e-
booksdirectory.com/details.php?ebook=9033.
[15] Naumovski, V., Dana, L. P., Pesakovic, G. &
Fidanoski, F. Why interpersonal communication
is important in public administration?
Współczesne Problemy Ekonomiczne, 1 (14),
2017, pp. 55-77.
[16] Weiten, W., Lloyd, M.A., Dunn, D.S. &
Hammer, E.Y. Psychology Applied to Modern
Life: Adjustment in the 21st Century, 9th ed.,
Cengage Learning, Belmont, 2008.
[17] Troester, R. & Mester, C.S. Civility in business
and professional communication, Peter Lang,
New York 2007.
[18] Coffelt, T. A., Baker, M. J., & Corey, R. C.
Business communication practices from
employers’ perspectives. Business and
Professional Communication Quarterly, 79,
2016, pp. 300-316.
[19] Kudesia, R. S. & Elfenbein, H. A. Nonverbal
communication in the workplace, in: Hall, J.
Knapp, M. (eds.), Nonverbal Communication,
Mouton de Gruyter, 2013, pp. 805 – 832.
[20] Peleckis, K., Peleckienė, V. & Peleckis, K.
Nonverbal Communication in Business
Negotiations and Business Meetings,
International Letters of Social and Humanistic
Sciences, 62, 2015, pp. 62-72.
[21] Leathers, D. & Eaves, M. H. Successful
Nonverbal Communication. Principle and
Applications, Routledge, London 2016.
[22] Farmer, B. Mentoring Communication, Review
of Communication, Vol. 5, Nos. 2-3, 2005, pp.
138-144.
[23] Ensher E. A., Heun Ch. & Blanchard A., Online
mentoring and computer-mediated
communication: new directions in research,
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 2003, pp.
264-288.
[24] Allen, T. D., Poteet, M. L. & Burroughs, S. M.
The mentors perspective: a qualitative inquiry
and future research agenda, Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 51, 1997, pp. 70–89.
[25] Ragins, B. R. Diversity, power, and mentorship
in organizations: a cultural, structural, and
behavioral perspective, in: Chemers, M. M.
Oskamp, S.& Costanzo M. A. (eds.), Diversity
in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications. 1995, pp. 91–132.
[26] Stelzle, B. & Noennig, J. R. A method for the
Assessment of Public Participation in Urban
Development, Problemy Rozwoju Miast, 61,
2018, pp. 33-40.
[27] Ungerman, O., & Myslivcová, S. Model of
communication usable for small and medium-
sized companies for the consumer
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
10
Volume 19, 2022
communication in social media. E+M Ekonomie
a Management, 17 (1), 2014.
[28] Rossoni, L., Engelbert, R. & Bellegard, N.L.,
Normal science and its tools: Reviewing the
effects of factor analysis in management, Revista
de Administração (RAUSP), 51 (2), 2016, pp.
198-211.
[29] Costello, A. B. & Osborne, J. W., Best practices
in exploratory factor analysis: four recommen-
dations for getting the most from your analysis,
Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation,
10, 2005, pp. 1-9.
[30] Field, A. Discovering statistics using SPSS,
London: SAGE Publications, 2009.
[31] Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. Using
multivariate statistics, Boston: Pearson, 2013.
[32] Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H., Psychometric
Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[33] Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J. &
Wasserman, W., Applied Linear Statistical
Models, WCB McGraw-Hill, New York 1996.
[34] Krizanova, A., Lazaroiu, G., Gajanova, L.,
Kliestikova, J., Nadanyiova, M. &
Moravcikova, D. The Effectiveness of
Marketing Communication and Importance of
Its Evaluation in an Online Environment,
Sustainability, 2019, 11, 7016.
[35] NYAMA. Marketing ROI in the Era of Big
Data. Available online:
https://www.iab.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/05/2012-BRITE-
NYAMA-Marketing-ROI-Study.pdf
[36] Kola, O. & Akinyele, S. T. Evaluation of
Effectiveness of Marketing Communication Mix
Elements in Nigerian Service Sector, Pakistan
Journal of Social Sciences, 7 (2), 2010, pp. 76-
80.
[37] Greene, W.H. Econometric Analysis, New York:
Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008.
[38] Baltov M., Bartkutė-Norkūnienė V.,
Bartuševičienė V., Glińska E., Jecheva V.,
Jodienė R., Kotāne I., Marzano G., Mietule I.,
Mineva K., Murinska S., Pellegrino A., Rollnik-
Sadowska E., Ryciuk U., Zorzi S., Zvaigzne A.,
Communications Skills For Mentors And
Mentees In Entrepreneurship: Theory And
Practice, Bialystok: Bialystok University of
Technology, 2020.
[39] Westmyer, S. A, Di Cioccio R. L. & Rubin R. B.
Appropriateness and effectiveness of
communication channels in competent
interpersonal communication, Journal of
Communication, 48 (3), 1998, pp. 27-48.
[40] Neely, A. R., Cotton, J. & Neely, A. D. E-
mentoring: A model and review of the literature.
AIS Transactions on Human-Computer
Interaction, 9 (3), 2017, pp. 220-242.
[41] Rania, E. I., Amr, E., Hoda, M. H., Open Systems
Science: Digital Transformation and Developing
Business Model toward Smart Farms’ Platform,
International Journal of Circuits, Systems and
Signal Processing, 14, 2020, pp. 1054-1073.
[42] Marzano, G., Pellegrino, A. & Zorzi, S. Mentors
and mentees in the digital era, in: Baltov M. et al.,
Communications Skills For Mentors And
Mentees In Entrepreneurship: Theory And
Practice, Bialystok: Bialystok University of
Technology, 2020.
[43] Sanina, A., Balashov, A., Rubtcova, M., &
Satinsky, D. M. The effectiveness of
communication channels in government and
business communication, Information Polity, 22
(4), 2017, pp. 251-266.
Appendix 1
Communication model elements
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
11
Volume 19, 2022
Social engagement
Information
Consulting
Engagement
Co-decision
Effectiveness of communication
Content is understood
The message leads to a specific action
Decision made about issue
Goal of the meeting has been reached
Goal of the mentoring process has been reached
Emotional support gained
Source: own study.
Contribution of individual authors to
the creation of a scientific article
(ghostwriting policy)
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, carried out the
literature analysis, wrote the introduction, discussion,
conclusions and the theoretical part. Urszula Ryciuk
was responsible for conducting the statistics analysis,
results and conclusions.
Sources of funding for research
presented in a scientific article or
scientific article itself
The research was realized under the project
Development and Introduction of a
Communication Competencies Model for
Enhancing and Maintaining a Business Mentor
Network (DICCMEM) financed by the program
Erasmus+, KA203 – Strategic Partnerships for
higher education.
Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (Attribution 4.0
International , CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.1
Ewa Rollnik-Sadowska, Ewa Glińska, Urszula Ryciuk
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
12
Volume 19, 2022