The concept of mentorship originates in Greek mythology. During this time, Odysseus, the king of Ithaca who fought in the Trojan wars, placed Mentor in charge of his son Telemachus while he was away from home. Mentor was to see to Telemachus’s education and the development of his identity into adulthood (St-Jean & Audet 2012:122; Terblanché 2011:55). Odysseus was gone for 20 years, during which Telemachus matured into a wise and confident man under the guidance of Mentor (Rombeau 2010:89). Since then, the term ‘mentor’ has been used over time to demonstrate a characteristic of a trusted advisor, friend and teacher (Gentry, Weber & Sadri 2008:241; Rombeau 2010:89). Therefore, mentoring is defined as a relationship between two parties, where one of these passes on knowledge about a specific subject to the other party (Cline 2011:36).

Mentoring is about making a difference in the effective development of managers to nurture them and make them future leaders (Freedman 2009:171), which is important considering the high failure rate among small businesses. Durbin (2016:78) states that one of the benefits of mentoring is that it develops people and encourages them to be successful. That is, people are able to meet a range of competing demands because mentoring provides an opportunity for mentees to build confidence in dealing with challenges by developing new skills and expertise (Ayinde 2011:7). As such, mentoring of managers helps to create and refine knowledge of the competitive environment, thereby assisting them to use such knowledge in making effective strategic decisions (Offstein et al. 2011:77).

Rankhumise and Lehobye (2012:5601) assert that small business owner–managers often do not come from the field of business. Therefore, business mentoring is essential because it allows for the transfer of business skills that may not have otherwise been acquired (Allen et al. 2009:1117). At the same time, mentoring could provide owner–managers with opportunities that focus on developing managerial and entrepreneurial skills (Botha & Esterhuyzen 2012). As such, owner–managers would be able to learn management skills through action, with the support of a person with extensive business experience (Cline 2011:35).

Owner–managers need to have someone who can challenge their thinking and encourage them to explore alternative perspectives on how they do things in order to improve the survival of their businesses. Therefore, given the important role of mentoring in developing people, owner–managers should be able to perform at an improved level by engaging in mentoring programmes (Oluwatoyin 2011:169). Furthermore, when small businesses engage in mentoring, potential skills of owner–managers can be developed to enhance the performance of these businesses (Cline 2011:36). Lastly, mentoring can be extended to maximising the competitiveness of businesses (Oluwatoyin 2011:178; Zoogah 2013:30) and continuing growth through succession planning as part of mentoring (Fajana & Gbajumo-Sheriff 2011:425). In doing so, potential future leaders of small businesses can be prepared for a smooth transition from one generation of owner–managers to the next in order to ensure continuity and survival of these businesses.

In the context of South Africa, some individuals go into business because of the high unemployment rate facing the country, yet they do not acquire proper skills to operate a business (Rankhumise & Lehobye 2012:5601). As mentioned earlier, this is even more true in the case of black-owned small businesses because of the historically disadvantaged background of the black population in South Africa (Miles 2013:4), where some start businesses as a way out of poverty (Nyazema 2013:64). Black-owned businesses also often experience a lack of business management skills because of limited education and training opportunities for the owner–managers, in comparison to small business owner–managers from other racial groups (Nkosi et al. 2013:2). Many black people in South Africa were either employed in the public sector or unemployed before the democratic transition that took place in South Africa in 1994 (Ndedi 2013:197). This implies that the black community was often not involved in entrepreneurial activities and therefore was not offered the opportunity to develop their business management skills. This is why black business empowerment is one of the priorities of the South African government to promote equality in South African communities (Horwitz & Jain 2011:298).

Of the many skills that small business owner–managers need in order to operate their businesses efficiently and effectively, those that are commonly suggested are: technical, marketing, financial and human resource skills (Bezuidenhout & Nenungwi 2012; Mutanda, De Beer & Myers 2014; Nkosi et al. 2013; Thwala & Mvubu 2008). Even though skills development is needed for small businesses, it should be noted that the skills needed differ across industries (McFarland & McConnell 2012:104; Nkosi et al. 2013:2) and become more specialised as a business grows (McFarland & McConnell 2012:104). For example, small businesses consist of industries such as technology, manufacturing and agricultural industries [Small Enterprise Development Agency (SEDA) 2012:88], which means that skills gaps across these industries may differ. As such, it is important that the skills development programmes for small businesses are tailored to meet the specific needs of the various industries in the small business sector (Bezuidenhout & Nenungwi 2012:11659).

The literature across multiple disciplines has revealed numerous conditions commonly found in an effective mentoring programme. These include conditions necessary to enhance the personal interaction between mentors and mentees during the mentoring process (see Distelberg & Schwarz 2015:193), as well as the conditions that are necessary to facilitate mentoring processes (Botma & Roets 2013:37). As this study focuses on non-relational conditions of mentoring, these refer to those conditions which do not impact the personal relationship of the mentor and mentee, but rather impact the mentoring process itself.

Botma and Roets (2013:37) as well as Distelberg and Schwarz (2015:195) assert that having resources available for the mentoring process is essential for effective mentoring. These resources might be related to the necessary infrastructure as well as financial resources needed for mentoring to take place. Examples of infrastructure include the location at which the business is situated, roads, water supplies, electricity supply, communication networks and technology (Battisti et al. 2013:74; Mbonyane & Ladzani 2011:553; Modiba, Kotzé & Eloff 2012:123; Olawale & Garwe 2010:731). The lack of these infrastructural facilities might hinder effective mentoring, and is therefore a challenge that inhibits the growth prospects of small businesses (Olawale & Garwe 2010:732; Ongori & Migiro 2010:97). In their study on satellite networks, Tang et al. (2014) found that technology facilities through the use of satellite are essential to achieve effective mentoring. The discussion above shows that appropriate infrastructure is important for effective mentoring to occur. The financial stability of mentoring institutions during mentoring processes is another important aspect relating to the effectiveness of mentoring programmes (Botma & Roets 2013:37). This includes the ability of mentees to pay for fees and materials necessary for mentoring services (Distelberg & Sorenson 2009:71).

Determining the length and frequency of mentoring sessions, as well as developing a clear system on how mentors and mentees are matched is advised for effective mentoring (Slack et al. 2013:3). The study of Copeland and Calhoun (2014:40) confirms that mentoring sessions that are clearly designed have an impact on the effectiveness of mentoring processes. These authors explain that mentoring sessions should include scheduled meetings with specific topics.

As can be deduced from the literature review, numerous non-relational conditions are necessary to ensure effective mentoring. Therefore, in an attempt to enhance effective mentoring of black small business owner–managers, the following research questions are presented:

What are the non-relational conditions necessary to ensure effective mentoring of black small business owner–managers, based on the experiences of mentors, mentees and board members or managers?

What guidelines and recommendations on non-relational conditions can be put forward to help mentoring institutions, as well as other stakeholders, to achieve effective mentoring of black small business owner–managers?

This study aimed to identify potential participants from all those black small business owner–managers in South Africa who have participated or are currently participating in a mentoring programme.

Specifically, purposive convenience and criterion sampling (Collis & Hussey 2014:132; Struwig & Stead 2015:127–130) were used to select the sample for the study. From a database developed by the SEDA, the researchers identified institutions providing mentoring to small businesses. In total, four institutions were willing to participate in the study and supply their mentees’ details. These institutions were contacted via email and telephone, and requested to provide contact details of black small business owner–managers who have participated in or who are currently participating in a mentoring programme. After the selection of the mentees, representing different industries, a group of mentors (linked to the identified mentees) and finally a group of board members or managers (based on willingness) were selected.

In total, 21 people linked to the mentoring institutions participated in this study: 12 mentees, 6 mentors and 3 board members or managers.

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews. These interviews enabled the researchers to gain an in-depth understanding of non-relational conditions required for effective mentoring of black small business owner–managers. Using semi-structured interviews other related topics may emerge during the conversation, while at the same time the pre-formulated questions provide focus and a measure of consistency to the discussion (Myers 2013:125). In this study, all interviews were conducted in English and were captured on an audio tape recorder to be transcribed verbatim. Interview questions included, but were not limited to, the following:

How often do mentors meet with mentees?

According to Clutterbuck and Abbott (2012:74) as well as McKevitt and Marshall (2015:264), little is known about the conditions necessary for mentoring programmes for small business owner–managers, and therefore of black small business owner–managers. As such, a combination of deductive and inductive coding methods was adopted for this study. This study is based on gaining greater insight into non-relational conditions required for effective mentoring of black small business owner–managers. Therefore, it is focused on reading data to develop themes and sub-themes (inductive codes). Themes and sub-themes from the literature (deductive codes) were also considered. Thus, inductive codes were used as a starting point to identify themes and sub-themes in the data. Thereafter the themes and sub-themes that were similar to the literature were merged and adopted in this study.

The coding framework that was adopted in this study is the Tesch’s model, as described in a study by De Vos et al. (2002:340–341). Following the Tesch’s model in this study, the transcripts were first read for each group of participants. This enabled the researchers to identify words and phrases that were common to each group. While trying to understand the information contained in the transcripts, thoughts and ideas were written down as they came to mind. The topics that were common from these transcripts were categorised together and placed next to the relevant words or phrases in the transcripts. A further analysis was made on these words and phrases to discover any underlying themes and sub-themes to simplify the coding process. To enable a preliminary analysis themes and sub-themes were grouped into relevant categories for comparison of differences in the perceptions and experiences across the three groups of participants.

A combination of content and constant comparative analysis was used to analyse the data. Content analysis was performed to find meaning of the transcribed interviews (Stam 2008:26), while constant comparative analysis was used to identify similarities and differences among the three groups of participants (Shi 2008:158). The variations across the three groups of participants provided an understanding of non-relational conditions that are necessary to ensure effective mentoring of black-owned small businesses in South Africa.

Trustworthiness is a concept that assesses the issue of rigour of qualitative research (Elo et al. 2014:2). According to Struwig and Stead (2015:137) four concepts are important in qualitative research to ensure trustworthiness, namely credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability.

Credibility of the findings (Struwig & Stead 2015:137) was ensured by receiving participants’ feedback on the data collected. This was done to confirm that the information recorded was accurate and correct. Dependability of this study (Collis & Hussey 2014:172) was ensured as the researchers constructed a thorough and well documented methodology section. In addition, proper documentation of all the important information pertaining to this study was done which included the interview schedule, interview transcripts and other secondary data for future reference. To enhance confirmability in this study (Collis & Hussey 2014:172), all interviews were audio taped and transcribed to ensure that the responses were recorded correctly. After this, these records were archived to be available should the findings of this study be challenged. Concerns regarding transferability (Elo et al. 2014:2) were addressed by comparing the empirical findings of this study with previous research on mentoring in other contexts.

Ethics approval (H14-BES-BMa-067) was obtained by the researchers from the academic institution at which this study was conducted. Participants were briefed on the reason and format of the interviews by means of a short introduction. They were further given the opportunity to decline participation in the study. Lastly, the participants were assured that the information they provided would be treated with the strictest confidentiality.

Accessibility of the mentoring location was noted as important for effective mentoring. In particular, mentor and mentee participants highlighted accessibility of the mentoring location as significant, noting that the location of the places providing mentoring to small business owner–managers was not easily accessible. Mentors reported that ‘the centre is away from, [laughter] from civilisation’ (Mentor 4, female, 36) which explains ‘a decrease in attendance’ (Mentor 4, female, 36) during mentoring sessions. In addition, mentors explained that the ‘roads are not well’ (Mentor 2, male, 55) and that ‘some of them [mentees] have to depend on transport [public transport]’ (Mentor 6, male, 74). Therefore, ‘they are not always on time’ (Mentor 6, male, 74). Similarly, mentees reported that ‘the place [mentoring location] is very much awkward’ (Mentee 4, male, 37) and that it is a challenge for them to ‘reach this place’ (Mentee 4, male, 37) perhaps because the mentoring location is ‘quite a distance out’ (Mentee 12, female, 30).

The importance of accessibility of mentoring resources for effective mentoring was highlighted across the three groups of participants. Mentors indicated that to some extent, they could not provide mentoring because mentees ‘don’t even have access to emails’ (Mentor 4, female, 36). One mentor was quoted saying: ‘I think [name of institution withheld] did not provide a huge amount of resources … to them, it was a Mickey Mouse thing. It ran on the side-line … it’s not important to them – it’s low on the agenda’ (Mentor 3, male, 66). Mentors further stated that the computers which mentees should be using at the institutions ‘are not working, they are not operating’ (Mentor 1, male, 22). One mentee pointed out that mentoring ‘resources’ should be provided to ensure success during the mentoring process. He said: ‘If you teach someone … you teach me bookkeeping – yes, it’s good, but there’s a resource that you have to provide me so that I can cope’ (Mentee 5, male, 55). One board member or manager mentioned that it had come to the institution’s attention that some mentees did not have access to the facilities necessary for mentoring because ‘you find that they don’t respond to emails because they have to go to an internet café to open the emails’ (Board member or manager 1, female, 28).

Mentee and board member or manager participants indicated that mentoring sessions are conducted in group settings as there are too few mentors to facilitate individual mentoring. Mentees mentioned that they ‘attend as a group … don’t have enough people or mentors in the centre’ (Mentee 4, male, 37), and that in most cases ‘you can’t see your mentor because they are booked for the whole day’ (Mentee 3, male, 24). In some cases, the board members or managers also assisted in the mentoring sessions when not enough mentors were available. One board member or manager acknowledged this, pointing out that increasing the capacity of mentors is costly because ‘nobody wants to mentor for free’ (Board member or manager 2, male, 42). Another board member or manager emphasised the limited capacity by stating that ‘we’re using one external and then myself’ (Board member or manager 3, male, 51).

The significance of financial support during a mentoring process was acknowledged by one mentor and board member or manager. One mentor reported that a lack of funds was hindering the effectiveness of the development support they provide to small businesses. This mentor revealed that they could not provide mentees with enough training and advice ‘due to obviously funding issues … there has to be funds for it’ (Mentor 4, female, 36). Interestingly, mentees did not comment on the importance of financial support for the success of mentoring processes. Rather, they emphasised that mentoring institutions ‘should be more assisting with day-to-day running of companies [their own businesses]’ (Mentee 3, male, 24) and that mentoring institutions should provide mentees with capital because ‘it’s not easy to build your capital’ (Mentee 8, male, 41). Mentees also indicated that ‘access to finance is the biggest thing [challenge]’ (Mentee 7, male, 25) and that even for the little money that is available to small businesses it is yet another challenge ‘to get a hold of those opportunities’ (Mentee 10, female, 40). The board members or managers emphasised that there was insufficient funding available to ensure the effective mentoring of small businesses. For example, the board members or managers explained that ‘there’s always challenges. … For instance, it’s the amount of funding that’s made available … the amount of grand funding [is insufficient]’ (Board member or manager 2, male, 42). These participants further indicated that mentees ‘don’t have the money to pay the internet café’ (Board member or manager 1, female, 28) in order to access emails.

The mentor and mentee participants were of the view that the development support available to small businesses through mentoring programmes should be known to the public in order to have successful mentoring programmes. One mentor noted that he does not ‘know of any state organisation that’s promoting it [mentoring]’ (Mentor 3, male, 66). The Another mentor also revealed that even though she lives close by to the institution, she ‘was not even aware of [mentoring institution], I think publicise more of this information’ (Mentor 4, female, 36). Similarly, some of the mentees stated that ‘this programme [mentoring programme] must be made known to the people’ (Mentee 9, male, 54) and that ‘the government should find other ways … spread the word [about mentoring institutions]’ (Mentee 12, female, 30). These mentees even cited a few examples that they have ‘never heard about it [mentoring institutions] on TV, I’ve never come across it in a newspaper’ (Mentee 12, female, 30).

There are three sub-themes that were reported by mentees as important relating to the practical arrangements for the mentoring process. The sub-themes are mentor–mentee matching, the scheduling of meetings and the structure of mentoring sessions.

Regarding mentor–mentee matching, it was noted that all mentee participants in this study engaged in a mentoring programme that ‘was organised’ (Mentee 6, male, 35) by the institutions. As such, the mentor-mentee process was structured by these institutions to address the needs of the mentees’ businesses. However, these participants had contradictory views when asked about mentor–mentee matching preferences. Most of the mentees reported that they ‘would prefer to choose the mentor myself’ (Mentee 9, male, 54). Some of the reasons cited by mentees were as follows: ‘I don’t think my present mentor is really quite fine for the kind of work I’m doing’ (Mentee 9, male, 54); ‘I want somebody who can in a way, you know, guide me in the way I understand it’ (Mentee 2, male, 52); ‘I’ve got some expectations that I don’t think anybody can just deliver’ (Mentee 11, male, 49). Only two mentees indicated that they preferred the mentor to be ‘organised’ for them. They explained that ‘if they [mentoring institutions] assess me, then they will choose somebody who is going to help me so much’ (Mentee 6, male, 35).

Another aspect concerning the practical arrangements for mentoring processes is the scheduling of meetings. According to the participants, mentoring meetings are scheduled differently depending on the preference of the institution involved. Some of the participants indicated that the meetings were scheduled ‘once a week’ (Mentor 2, male, 55), ‘twice a week’ (Board member or manager 3, male, 51), ‘every month’ (Mentee 7, male, 25), while others stated that they ‘don’t have a date’ (Mentee 8, male, 41). In some cases the participants indicated that ‘the requirement [for a meeting] is always on the mentee … the requirement on the programme was that they [mentees] had to set up the meeting’ (Mentor 3, male, 66).

Still relating to the practical arrangements for mentoring processes, the structure of mentoring sessions is regarded to be important during the mentoring process. It was noted that mentoring sessions across the institutions that participated in this study were conducted ‘in a group’ (Mentee 4, male, 37). However, varied preferences were reported by mentees: some mentees indicated that they ‘prefer one-on-one’ (Mentee 4, male, 37) mentoring sessions, reasons being that their businesses are in ‘different type of industries’ (Mentee 4, male, 37) and that ‘in group, sometimes he [mentor] can’t reach us all’ (Mentee 5, male, 55). Others indicated a preference for a group setting ‘so that … when other people … ask some questions, then I can also gain’ (Mentee 2, male, 52). This group of mentees further explained that businesses ‘all go through the same, you go through similar problems’ (Mentee 12, female, 30). Therefore, ‘in a group, you learn more’ (Mentee 12, female, 30), ‘it [group session] just equips you with more information’ (Mentee 12, female, 30). In addition, mentees highlighted the importance of homogeneity during mentoring sessions stating that there are ‘different levels of small businesses’ (Mentee 12, female, 30). For example, ‘there are companies that are still starting out’ (Mentee 3, male, 24) and there are also ‘business already in operation’ (Mentee 12, female, 30) yet ‘we are all put under the same umbrella’ (Mentee 3, male, 24). These mentees suggested that the different levels and phases of businesses should be used as a guide to address the needs of mentees, based on the life cycle stage of their businesses where owner–managers can ‘share’ (Mentee 12, female, 30) and ‘discuss similar problems’ (Mentee 12, female, 30). Another group indicated that they preferred both styles of mentoring because they ‘want to relate’ (Mentee 7, male, 25) to what ‘another entrepreneur is going through’ (Mentee 7, male, 25) and at the same time one-on-one mentoring sessions are ‘more in-depth … you can make it personal about your company’ (Mentee 3, male, 24).