Case Study: Martha Rinaldi: Should She Stay or Should She Go?

CASE STUDY
Martha Rinaldi:
Should She Stay or Should She Go?
Team No.1
Abijith G Anil
Gayathri R
Manoj Prabu S
Rohan Anand
Supriya G
INTRODUCTION
Martha Rinaldi, who is a new employee at her company Potomac Waters, joined the
company to gain valuable experience in the field of marketing. Despite her efforts, her co-
worker at her department Jamie Vaughan and their manager Natalie Follet undermine her
work and does not teach her anything about marketing. Jamie Vaughan is older and has
more work experience than Martha but is short tempered and often gets into vocal fights
with her. Despite her complains about Jamie, their manager Natalie is quick to defend him
as they are in an affair which causes politics at the office.
Introduction: Martha Rinaldi
PERSONAL
▪ Third child in a family of four daughters

▪ Liked sports, enjoys soccer in particular
▪ Helps father in bookkeeping & maintaining website
▪ Computer graduate with intended focus in I.T field
▪ MBA from top-10 business school located in Chicago
▪ During MBA, inspired to switch to marketing
Introduction: Martha Rinaldi
PROFESSIONAL
▪ Completed summer internship at Deep Dive Pizza, regional restaurant chain

headquartered at Chicago
▪ Joined as an assistant product manager in health drink division of Potomac
Waters
▪ At first meeting, her boss, Natalie Follet commented on Generation Y; Good
with technology, rumored to be impatient and demanding
▪ Frustrated of relationships with her boss & co-worker, associate product
manager Jamie Vaughan
▪ Unsuccessful at pleasing her boss, received a negative performance
evaluation
▪ Concerned for future in company, considering calling her previous summer
employer for a job
Introduction: Natalie Follet
PERSONAL
Home Town: New York City, New York
High School: Trinity School, New York City, 1994
College: New York University, New York. Degrees in Art History and Fine Arts, 1998
● Follet left NYU hoping to start a career as an artist, but found little monetary success.
At the age of 26, Natalie took an entry level job as a “design associate” at an
advertising agency in New York.
● Moved from New York to the D.C. area to accompany her husband, who obtained a job
as a lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry in 2003.
Introduction: Natalie Follet
PROFESSIONAL
● Design Associate (2000-2002) and then Special Assistant to the Creative Director (2002-
2003) in an advertising firm in New York.
● Assistant Product Manager (2003-2006), then Associate Product Manager (2006-2008), then
Product Manager (2009) at Potomac Waters.
● Her artistic talent was noticed and she eventually became a Special Assistant to the Creative
Director.
● Washington, D.C., did not have advertising firms as well-established as those in New York,
Follet was relieved to find a job as an Associate Product Manager at a respected company
like Potomac Waters.
Introduction: Jamie Vaughan
PERSONAL
● Home Town: - Chicago, Illinois

● High School: - Lincoln Park High School, 1992
● College University: - Loyola University, Chicago. Degree in
Mathematics, 1996.
● Always adept at numbers and analysis, Jamie Vaughan graduated among
the top of his class in highschool and college.
● His interest in moving away from his home town to explore another
metropolitan area motivated him to look for work in the area of
Washington, D.C.
Introduction: Jamie Vaughan
PROFESSIONAL
● Statistician, Maryland Department of Transportation (1996-2003).

● Statistician, Quality Control, Manufacturing, Potomac Waters (2003-
2006). Associate Product Manager, Potomac Waters (2006-2009).
● He became a statistician at the Maryland Department of Transportation.
Impatient with relatively low salary increases in his government job,
Vaughan found a position at Potomac Waters’ Manufacturing Division.
● He then transferred to the Health Drinks Division as an Associate
Product Manager, skipping the stage of “Assistant Product Manager”
because of his familiarity with the company and his skills with
statistics.
About: Deep Dive Pizza
➢ A regional restaurant chain headquartered in Chicago

➢ Having local notoriety with flashy new products eg. “ pizza of week
➢ Combined strategies of family dining & high end restaurants
➢ Lean and mean organisation
➢ Careful with costs
➢ Attention to customer
About: Potomac Waters
➢
A beverage company with a nationwide presence
➢
3 major divisions: Sports, Health & Carbonated drinks
➢
A job in marketing at Potomac Waters was fast paced & demanding
➢
Reputed company for grooming & training newly hired very well
➢
Potomac was a more stable firm
➢
Rinaldi had to join a recently commenced division of Health Drinks
(more conflicts in making a new division successful)
What is the MESS ?
● Jamie is short tempered and does not treat Martha with respect.
● Martha’s complaints about Jamie were not being addressed.
● The Natalie holds legitimate and reward power over Martha making it hard for her to
go against her when she defends Jamie.
● Martha does not voice her opinions or complaints about her work loudly.
Q1: How did Martha Rinaldi get into this mess?
Potential Reasons
➔
She gave more importance to the brand rather than trusting her
experience with deep dive.
➔
She did not analyse the opportunities that Deep Dive could have offered
➔
She ignored relationship aspect of Deep Dive & relationship with their
employees.
➔
She did not evaluate the negative aspects of her decision properly.
➔
She failed to understand that working in a big firm like Potomac would
have more issues of power and politics for which she must have mentally
prepared beforehand.
Organisational Conflict and Politics
➔
She remained a low priority on Follet’s agenda - politics involved
➔
Vaughan and Follet’s casual attitude towards her
➔
Vaughan viewed MBA’s as a threat and the view is partially shared by Follet who
said that Gen Y is impatient
➔
Was given little recognition of work
➔
Confusing instructions from management regarding what she must do at her job
➔
Rinaldi’s attitude of withholding true feedback
➔
She was quiet at meetings and didn’t give true feedback as she felt if she gave true
feedback it would be ‘impolite’
Other Reasons
❑ Lack of cognitive awareness

❑ Inability to effectively use power/personal influence at the workplace
❑ Failed to apply OB subject knowledge / theory at workplace

❑ Highly Judgmental
❑ Lack of informal networking with other colleagues
❑ Lack of introspection.
Q2 : What could she have done differently?
★ Apart from completing her work, she should have gathered information about
the personality traits of seniors.
★ She should have not reacted assertively and fought with her seniors Jamie
and Natalie.
★ She could have used positive aspects of personal power and influenced her
seniors.
★ She could have been more flexible.
★ She could have exhibited more energy and stamina to multi-task.She could
have communicated more effectively with her peers and seniors and should
have acted accordingly.
Q2 : What could she have done differently?
★ She should have understood the organisational changes in companies like

Potomac where hiring of new MBAs had great political significance.
★ She should have recogonised that Vaughan and Follet did not have a MBA
background and behaved accordingly.
★ Although she was new, she should have spoken up about how her seniors were
giving her insignificant tasks to complete instead of doing analysis and making
reports.
★ She should have discussed her issues with Follet.
★ She should have used a negotiating approach.
Q3 : What should she do now ?
Options Available
❏ Stay at Potomac and work through her differences by being flexible

and has to learn to be extra polite. She could understand her seniors’,
Strengths and weaknesses, Work Pressures & Working style and adapt to it.
❏ Stay at Potomac and request a department transfer. Maybe get to work
with Doug Burman, the popular manager at the office or Julius Bautista,
who was impressed with the work she had done.
❏ Leave Potomac and take up offer from Deep Dive Pizza where she had
worked as an intern before and is comfortable with the work environment.
Stay at Potomac and work through her differences
PROS :
● She could take it up as a learning experience to deal with Power and Politics
in workplace.
● Her interpersonal skills will improve.
● She would get promoted faster than if she switched departments or jobs.
CONS :
● She will continue to experience the same problems daily which could take an
emotional toll on her.
● Negative reviews from her manager could lead to her not getting promotions.
● Her job efficiency would drop down.
Stay at Potomac and request a department transfer
PROS :
● She can work at Potomac peacefully and would not have to deal with Jamie
and Natalie.
● Considering the Financial Crisis at 2008, this job was more stable than the one
offered by Deep Dive Pizza.
● She can use her experience in Potomac to get better jobs in the future as
Potomac has a good reputation.
CONS :
● She might face the same issue in the other department as it is a very large
company.
● She might be branded as a difficult employee.
Leave Potomac and take up offer from Deep Dive Pizza
PROS :
● She is familiar with the organization and the work environment.
● The CEO of Deep Dive Pizza himself showed a personal interest in her and her
work.
● She has the chance to lead a “Special Project”, where she has to report directly to the
VP and get paid more.
● There are opportunities for growth.
CONS :
● Deep Dive Pizza is still an entrepreneurial firm and it’s future dependent on
successful rapid expansion.
● Economic crisis, which probably shift consumer to cut back on eating out leading to
losses for Deep Dive Pizza and pose a threat to her job.
RECOMMENDED SOLUTION
● The choices are entirely subjective, each with its own merits and demerits.
● There is no clear cut answer that is the "best choice."
● If Martha wishes to stay at Potomac in same department, possibly get promoted

faster and is willing to adapt to the challenging environment - select choice 1
● If she wishes to stay at Potomac but in a different department with less pressure but
possibly be branded as a difficult employee - select choice 2
● If she wishes to go to a familiar environment but one that might not have similar job
security as before - select choice 3
Thank You from
TEAM - 1

Case Study: Martha Rinaldi: Should She Stay or Should She Go?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study: Martha Rinaldi: Should She Stay or Should She Go?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study: Martha Rinaldi: Should She Stay or Should She Go?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE STUDY

▪ Third child in a family of four daughters

▪ Completed summer internship at Deep Dive Pizza, regional restaurant chain

● Home Town: - Chicago, Illinois

● Statistician, Maryland Department of Transportation (1996-2003).

➢ A regional restaurant chain headquartered in Chicago

● Martha’s complaints about Jamie were not being addressed.

experience with deep dive.

Organisational Conflict and Politics

❑ Lack of cognitive awareness

❑ Failed to apply OB subject knowledge / theory at workplace

★ She should have understood the organisational changes in companies like

❏ Stay at Potomac and work through her differences by being flexible

● If Martha wishes to stay at Potomac in same department, possibly get promoted

You might also like