Siiquent and Teomik Market Analysis:
As the head of Siiquent, Isolde targeted hospitals and big diagnostic labs for gene-based diagnosis and DNA-sequencing. In a similar market, as the head of Teomik, Emanuel targeted research labs and universities for research machines and equipment. Siiquent’s business model aligns with its respective market as it ensures a steady stream of revenue, despite whether the customer is using their machine or not. As Isolde explains, Siiquent sells its machines for a low cost and prioritizes selling the more expensive and profitable products that the machines use. Given the price of medical machinery, hospitals, and labs often keep their machinery for a long time before discarding or upgrading. As such, it makes sense that Siiquent would sell the items that these machines use, as hospitals have to continue purchasing them. On the other hand, Teomik’s business model also makes sense for its respective business model as research labs and universities will often have to purchase multiple machines to train researchers and students. As such, by focusing on selling the machines, Emanuel’s company makes a large profit.
Revenue Models:
By imposing the structure of a single revenue model, the company may become more streamlined and have a more cohesive long-term vision. It would also help to shape the team dynamic and company culture as a more rigid and defined space. However, it may also lack the versatility and flexibility that is afforded to it through the dual revenue model. Similarly, the flexible revenue model may contribute to a more dynamic culture that encourages seeking new, unconventional ideas.
PM Mediation:
As a PM assigned to mediate this interaction between department heads, I would ensure a fair merging process by hiring a 3rd party to externally determine which method is safer and produces a more steady, cost-effective source of revenue. After collecting the data, I would provide the research to the appropriate parties and use it as the basis for future conversations to discuss the company’s future trajectory. This way, the merging process is fair and unbiased, founded upon hard data but ultimately decided through careful deliberation. However, if I were to unilaterally impose one of the revenue models upon the merged company, I would prefer to use the flexible model given that it allows more versatility in profit and responding to unforeseen obstacles.
