Emanuel, Teomik’s head, targeted research labs and universities and adressed their needs for gene-based studies by focusing on selling machines. Isolde, Siiquent’s head, addressed the needs of hospitals and diagnostic labs by focusing on selling compounds and test kits (razor blade model). Emanuel and Isolde both successfully reacted to the market and their respective customers’ needs. They also both offered other services (i.e., customized training, workflow optimization) and were not making money from their extensive customer service.
The pro of imposing the structure of a single revenue model is consistency. However, choosing a single revenue model may prevent the company from exploring optimal revenue approaches when the market shifts. This may cause change management issues as both Emmanuel and Isolde have leveraged this flexible approach in the past. Continuing the flexible approach would enable the company to respond to changes in the market or customer needs. However, this causes confusion and inconsistency in sales messaging, which can lead to more internal issues.
As a PM, I would meet with Emmanuel and Isolde individually first. This will provide an opportunity for me to understand their values, priorities, and goals. After this, I would mediate a conversation between Emmanuel and Isolde by kicking off with asking them to share their values and must-haves & nice-to-haves. I would then help them identify the common values that they share. After identifying common ground, I would initiate a brainstorming session wherein all three of us will think about the shared future of the company and how the merger should be executed. During this brainstorming session, I hope to implement a filtering and voting system to organize and prioritize ideas. These ideas would then be converged and synthesized—hopefully, with the buy-in from both Emanuel and Isolde.
