Isolde’s company Siiquent targets big diagnostic labs and hospitals, selling them- as the article calls- ‘stuff’ for machines- consumables such as chemical and biological compounds and test kits. This revenue model works well for her market, as these institutions are more sensitive to immediate pricing due to having larger budget constraints. By shaving off small amounts off of their unit pricing, Isolde was able to help hospitals and labs see their products as a revenue generator, due to their prices being slightly lower than the reimbursements hospitals receive. Siiquent also worked with their consumers directly to create products that worked exactly to their test case- which was very appreciated by their consumers. Thus, they held strong levels of maintenance support and customer service, folding very well into their niche.
Emanuel’s company Teomilk targeted the research market- selling patent-protected devices to universities and research institutions. They sold the ‘machines’- which worked for them due to the research market’s eagerness to access the highest tech available to them, without many budget concerns due to available funders and grants. They also offered support and guidance with their instruments.
Imposing a single revenue model could help the company standardize processes, bridging the gap between these two sectors. It could simplify management, allowing the two sectors to decrease the amount of individual operation they both had to do and reduce operation costs. However, this single revenue model could alienate one- or both customer bases if the model was a compromise- due to how drastically different both models are. For example, standardizing products would remove one of the core reasons behind why hospitals would adopt Siiquent’s more customizable products.
Going ‘no strategy’ would allow each division to serve their market niches in the way that would best suit their consumers, which would continue to increase overall revenue. However, this process would create inefficiencies, confusion, and a general culture of mismatch between the two sectors, leading to breakdowns in communication, problems with allocating resources, and misalignment of strategy.
As a PM facilitating this merge, I would foster a collaborative process where all teams can get a firm understanding of each other’s markets, revenue models, and niches. I would clarify the risks at play of keeping the model too flexible while reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of each model in terms of the overall company’s goal. We would thus be able to move towards discussing what a more intentional hybrid model of these two sectors might look like- to ensure as many consumers’ needs are met while also consolidating more of the company’s architecture. This would ensure all sides are heard, all company priorities are understood, and the decision can be made with each sectors’ and the overall company’s priorities in mind.
