- Which markets do Isolde and Emanuel target respectively? How do their respective business/revenue models align with their markets?
Isolde is the head of Siiquent, which is a DNA-sequencing start-up. Emanuel is the head of Teomik, which is a provider of research equipment. Siiquent sells to hospitals and labs and provides supplies that are needed for making gene-based diagnoses, while Teomik sells research equipment directly to research labs that conduct studies. The case study uses the analogy of razors and razor blades. Teomik’s business/revenue model is analogous to “selling razors” because they focus on selling machines, while Siiquent’s business/revenue model is analogous to “selling razor blades” because they sell the consumable supplies that hospitals and labs need. Both of these business/revenue models align with their markets because they fit what the customers need.
- 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 pro of “imposing the structure of a single revenue model” rather than “letting [the company] continue on its flexible way” is that the company will have an agreed upon way of the revenue model which makes efforts surrounding marketing, understanding user needs, understanding competitors with similar revenue models much easier. The company will be able to focus on one area and focus on doing well in that area. However, a con of a single revenue model is that the company will be less flexible when adapting to different scenarios. If it happens that the market changes in a way that is disadvantageous to one type of revenue model, the company will have more options if they are more flexible with its business model. These two approaches each have pros and cons and could be better suited in different scenarios. For example, having a flexible revenue model can be more advantageous in a nascent market, while a single revenue model may offer an advantage when competing with incumbents in a well-established market.
- 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?
If I were a PM assigned to mediate this interaction between department heads, I would scaffold the discussion by making sure that each side’s view is fully understood by the other side before making any key decisions. I would do this by taking steps to understand each of the divisions, how they measure success, their values, and how they conduct business, and bring these findings up with the other division in a discussion. I would try to find areas of agreement between the two divisions. Overall, I would mediate discussion by putting the values of each of the divisions at the forefront, even when compromises must be made. Having a clear vision of the goals of each division will help ensure a fair merging process.
