CASE STUDY:

DIANA’S DISAPPOINTMENT: THE PROMOTION STUMBLING BLOCK

Diana Gillen had an uneasy feeling of apprehension as she arrived at the Cobb Street Grille corporate
offices. Today she was meeting with her supervisor, Julie Spencer, and regional director, Tom Miner, to
learn the outcome of her promotion interview for the district manager position. Diana had been
employed by this casual dining restaurant chain for 12 years and had worked her way up from waitress
to general manager. Based on her track record, she was the obvious choice for the promotion; and her
friends assured her that the interview process was merely a formality. Diana was still anxious, though,
and feared that the news might not be positive. She knew she was more than qualified for the job, but
that didn’t guarantee anything these days.
Nine months ago, when Diana interviewed for the last district manager opening, she thought her
selection for the job was inevitable. She was shocked when that didn’t happen. Diana was so upset
about not getting promoted then that she initially decided not to apply for the current opening. She
eventually changed her mind—after all, the company had just named her “restaurant manager of the
year” and trusted her with managing their flagship location. Diana thought her chances had to be really
good this time.
A multi-unit management position was a desirable move up for any general manager and was a goal to
which Diana had aspired since she began working in the industry. When she had not been promoted the
last time, Julie, her supervisor, explained that her people skills needed to improve. But Diana knew that
explanation had little to do with why she hadn’t gotten the job—the real reason was corporate politics.
She heard that the person they hired was some superstar from the outside—a district manager from
another restaurant company who supposedly had strong multi-unit management experience and a
proven track record of developing restaurant managers. Despite what she was told, she was convinced
that Tom, her regional manager, had been unduly pressured to hire this person, who had been referred
by the CEO.
The decision to hire the outsider may have impressed the CEO, but it enraged Diana. With her successful
track record as a store manager for the Cobb Street Grille, she was much more capable, in her opinion,
of overseeing multiple units than someone who was new to the operation. Besides, district managers
had always been promoted internally from among the store managers, and she was unofficially
designated as the next one to move up to a district position. Tom had hired the outside candidate as a
political maneuver to put himself in a good light with management, even though it meant overlooking a
loyal employee like her in the process. Diana had no patience with people who made business decisions
for the wrong reasons. She worked very hard to avoid politics—and it especially irritated her when the
political actions of others negatively impacted her.
Diana was ready to be a district manager nine months ago, and she thought she was even more qualified
today—provided the decision was based on performance. She ran a tight ship, managing her restaurant
completely by the book. She meticulously adhered to policies and procedures and rigorously controlled
expenses. Her sales were growing, in spite of new competition in the market, and she received relatively
few customer complaints. The only number that was a little out of line was the higher turnover among
her staff.
Diana was not too concerned about the increasing number of terminations, however; there was a
perfectly logical explanation for this. It was because she had high standards for both herself and her
employees. Any employee who delivered less than 110 percent at all times would be better off finding a
job somewhere else. Diana didn’t think she should bend the rules for anyone, for whatever reason. A
few months ago, for example, she had to fire three otherwise good employees who decided to try a new
customer service tactic—a so-called innovation they dreamed up—rather than complying with the
established process. As the general manager, it was her responsibility to make sure that the restaurant
was managed strictly in accordance with the operations manual, and she could not allow deviations. This
by-the-book approach to managing had served her well for many years. It got her promoted in the past,
and she was not about to jinx that now. Losing a few employees now and then—particularly those who
had difficulty following the rules— was simply the cost of doing business.
During a recent store visit Julie suggested that Diana might try creating a friendlier work environment
because she seemed aloof and interacted with employees somewhat mechanically. Julie even told her
that she overheard employees refer to Diana as the “ice maiden” behind her back. Diana was surprised
that Julie brought this up because her boss rarely criticized her. They had an unspoken agreement:
Because Diana was so technically competent and always met her financial targets, Julie didn’t need to
give her much input. Diana was happy to be left alone to run her restaurant without needless advice.
At any rate, Diana rarely paid attention to what employees said about her. She wasn’t about to let
something as childish as a silly name cause her to modify a successful management strategy. What’s
more, even though she had recently lost more than the average number of employees due to
“personality differences” or “miscommunications” over her directives, her superiors did not seem to
mind when she consistently delivered strong bottom-line results every month.
As she waited in the conference room for the others, Diana worried that she was not going to get this
promotion. Julie had sounded different in the voicemail message she left to inform her about this
meeting, but Diana couldn’t put her finger on exactly what it was. She would be very angry if she was
passed over again and wondered what excuse they would have this time. Then her mind wandered to
how her employees would respond to her if she did not get the promotion. They all knew how much she
wanted the job, and she cringed at how embarrassed she would be if she didn’t get it. Her eyes began to
mist over at the sheer thought of having to face them if she was not promoted today.
Julie and Tom entered the room then, and the meeting started. They told Diana, as kindly as they could,
that she would not be promoted at this time; one of her colleagues would become the new district
manager. She was incredulous. The individual who got promoted had been with the company only three
years—and Diana had trained her! She tried to comprehend how this happened, but it did not make
sense. Before any further explanation could be offered, she burst into tears and left the room. As she
tried in vain to regain her composure, Diana was overcome with crushing disappointment.
Question 1: Within the framework of the emotional intelligence domains of self-awareness, self-
management, social awareness, and relationship management, discuss the various factors that might
have led to Diana’s failure to be promoted.
The various factors that might have led to Diana’s failure to be promoted. In general, she is lacking of
factors below:
A) Self-awareness:
- Diana has a high self-awareness since she understands she wants to be a District Manager and believes
she is the best candidate for the job. Her values include working hard according the rules that have been
given to her, and she shows her ability to run a restaurant. Her desire to become a district manager is
also clear. She knows exactly what are her strongest points, but ignored the matter weaknesses. Her
strength is that she is able to work independently, but the matter is when she works in team
B) Managing her emotion:
- She can not control her feeling, burnt into tears when she can not be promoted.
- Pay much attention of her staff’s thought about whether she can be promoted => “Her mind wandered
to how her employees would respond to her if she did not get the promotion. They all knew how much
she wanted the job, and she cringed at how embarrassed she would be if she didn’t get it.”
C) Empathy
- She strictly follows the company policy and doesn’t allow her staff any flexibility. She is lacking of
empathy and building strong relationship once she works with teammates => "Any employee who
delivered less than 110 percent at all times would be better off finding a job somewhere else. Diana
didn’t think she should bend the rules for anyone, for whatever reason. A few months ago, for example,
she had to fire three otherwise good employees who decided to try a new customer service tactic—a so-
called innovation they dreamed up—rather than complying with the established process."
D) Social skill:
- She created power distance. As she is too confident and believe herself, so she ignores how to work
well in a team and listen to her colleague => “During a recent store visit Julie suggested that Diana might
try creating a friendlier work environment because she seemed aloof and interacted with
employees somewhat mechanically.” “Diana was happy to be left alone to run her restaurant without
needless advice.”
- Instead of training her staff, she designed to fire someone who not follow her rules => “she had
recently lost more than the average number of employees due to “personality differences” or
“miscommunications” over her directives”

Question 2: What can the company do to help Diana with the promotion?
Solution 1: Shift Diana to another restaurant with a whole new team or a new operated restaurant so
that she can learn to be more flexible when working with people. Diana needs to acknowledge that
working in the restaurant is more about teamwork than individually work.
Solution 2: Employees and managers will be able to communicate openly through workshops, resulting
in a stronger working relationship. The suggestions will ensure that any concerns or issues that
individuals may have are solved before they become a problem.
Solution 3: Give her a position as a manager assistant to the new District manager so that she can learn
directly from “the new star” and be less jealous/disagree with company’s decision.