1
Running Head: RINALDI CASE ANALYSIS
1. Provide a one-paragraph summary of the key issues as you see them in this case.
Martha Rinaldi, a recent MBA graduate, has been working as an assistant project manager at
Potomac Waters four months. Rinaldi has historically been self-motivated, self-directed and
hardworking. For example, she excelled at sports, helped in the family business, and was able to
successfully complete an MBA program at a top-ten business school. (Hill, 2011, p. 1) When
looking for her first position after graduate school, Rinaldi choose Potomac Waters, over an offer
to join the promotions team at Deep Dive where she had completed a summer internship. While
she had experienced success at Deep Dive, she had concerns about business sustainability,
unknown senior leadership, and the training she would receive. Potomac, however, was an
established national brand and Rinaldi had learned they had a strong history of marketing
excellence; she hoped this would help her gain industry experience and further her career in the
long run. (Hill, 2011, p. 3)
Unfortunately, her career at Potomac got off to a bad start and did not improve over the
ensuing few months. She was working in an environment with no architectural privacy, lack of
physical or acoustic isolation (Zarella, 2017, p.2), and very high visual access and proximity due
to her office being surrounded by glass, allowing everyone to see her work area, and sharing
desk space with a coworker. Her relationship with her coworker, Jamie Vaughan, degraded over
time. There were increasing levels of conflict. Vaughan’s attitude began with apathy and
escalated to disruptive, uncooperative and hostile, cumulating with a yelling match in December.
His behavior with combined with Rinaldi’s poor conflict management skills created a
dysfunctional environment that hindered group performance. (Robbins, 2018, p. 227) Her
manager (Natalie Follet) lacks empathy as a leader for Rinaldi’s role as new employee, she is not
listening to Rinaldi’s frustrations or reading her reactions. Rinaldi expected that the leadership
would be more path-goal oriented, with her manager providing support and resources, based on
her research before joining the organization. (Robbins, 2018, p. 192) This has not been her
experience leading to increasing dissatisfaction.
Rinaldi is not without responsibility for her current situation. At Deep Dive she was
performing work she enjoyed and was well respected, however her insecurity about the market
and her own abilities combined with unknown coworkers prevented her from taking the better
paying more challenging position. (Hill, 2011) Through January she has not found an effective
way to work with Follet or Vaughan. Her inability to resolve the conflict with Vaughan by using
the source of power she does possess, combined with her inability to convey her training needs
to Follet has led to increased tensions. Rinaldi is also hesitant to ask transfer to a department she
may fit in better with and has begun to become more embroiled in office gossip. She has yet to
admit she may have made a mistake choosing Potomac and approach Deep Dive about the
position she was previously offered, that may have been a better fit. (Hill, 2011) If she were to
be brave enough to resign from Potomac and take the position at Deep Dive, I believe she would
be much happier with her career choice. She would get to experience the mastery, autonomy and
purpose (Pink, 2009) she so much enjoyed during her internship. However, this is a riskier
position and despite her skills and young age she is very conservative in her choices.
RINALDI CASE ANALYSIS
2