As Isolde put it, she and Emmanuel respectively deal with “Stuff” and “Machines”. Silquent offers “stuff” like compounds and test kits to hospitals, along with robust customer support, while Teomik earned most of their money on the research equipment and materials they sold. While both teams had robust customer support, neither generated revenue from these services. Though the two departments have different approaches to their revenue stream, I found their argument for maintaining their current strategy to be a sound one. Peter, being in the position of a PM/head, might be an expert in management or strategy or some other such field, but he is not an expert in Silquent or Teomik – Isolde and Emmanuel are. I believe that while the experience of the typical method of a single revenue stream is a significant pro, as well as how it might be easier to manage, I also believe that outsiders coming in with their structured solutions sometimes do more harm than good. The model that Isolde and Emmanuel are proposing, continuing the company’s flexible and responsive nature, is based on their experience working in the industry, directly with employees and customers of the product. Their years of experience and success can’t be simply ignored for the conventional solution.
If I was a PM assigned to facilitate this merger, I would scaffold the discussion by first understanding our positions in this company. I want to treat the heads of Silquent and Teomik with respects as the head of their respective departments, and acknowledge both of their needs in this merger. I would also look further than just Isolde and Emmanuel, and try to reach out or get input in some way from employees within the department who will continue to work for it when the merger goes through. If we are all members of the same team, it is important for everyone to feel like their voices are heard. This doesn’t mean we can come up with a perfect compromise that makes everyone happy, but we can at least think about what employees actually want, what customers actually want, and what the heads want to present a clear picture of where everyone stands. With this clear picture, we can have an effective and efficient discussion about how to meet the needs of the company and the people within it as the merger moves forward.
