- Which markets do Isolde and Emanuel target respectively? How do their respective business/revenue models align with their markets?
Isolde sells chemical compounds and test kits, largely to hospitals and labs. Emanuel targets research institutions, such as university research labs, and sells tools for gene-based studies. Compared to other B2B companies, Isolde describes Siiquent as selling the “stuff that the machine uses,” as opposed to the machines themselves in Teomik’s case.
Isolde follows a very loose profit framework of making a lot of money. It does so by providing a source of revenue generation for hospitals and catering toward consumer needs. For example, Siiquent changed to selling test tubes by the bottle after customer feedback.
Emanuel follows a thorough revenue model that accounts for customer demands, internal accounting guidelines, and market competitors. Emanuel notes that the teams flexibility and service support of PhDs allows them to be successful on the market.
- What are the pros and perils of “imposing the structure of a single revenue model” vs. “letting [the company] continue on its flexible way”?
A single revenue model can help streamline operations and communications, both internally and for consumers. The case study notes that the communication post merge is muddled and often confusing to potential customers. A single revenue model yields a more cohesive post-merge integration, and thus, a more coherent instutitional plan of operation.
However, a single revenue structure disgraces one of the biggest strengths of each division: their flexibility. Such flexibility has made them appealing to consumers and adjust to market and consumer demands. Continuing this flexibility would continue rather than try to challenge their successes. The dual model would allow Scherr to meet the needs of different consumers and markets. As Eickhoff notes, however, having a more informed and intentional strategy is necessary to keep the two divisions from being disjoint.
- Pretend that the CEO has decided the department heads must merge their divisions together. As a star PM assigned to mediate this interaction between department heads, how would you scaffold the discussion to ensure a fair merging process?
- Note: you are not asked to find a solution, but to find a viable process for finding a solution!
I would focus on the targeted market, and how a new product process and distribution should respond to that target market. What has been successful, and where are consumers responding well? I would also utilize the opportunity to streamline communications and operations and better adapt to a wider market. I also think that this also poses an opportunity to expand the service component of the product.
