Publications
Publications
- October 2016
- HBS Case Collection
Supercell
By: William R. Kerr, Benjamin F. Jones and Alexis Brownell
Abstract
Supercell is a young Finnish smartphone game company with an unusual team structure and company philosophy. It is already one of Finland’s most valuable companies, and despite being only six years old, it has put up some impressive numbers: as of 2016, it has released only four games for global audiences, but each one has made it to the top (or almost to the top) of the most-downloaded and most-revenue-generated app charts; it has recorded multi-million daily revenues and around a hundred million daily users; it has nearly 200 employees in its Helsinki headquarters and support offices around the world; and now, thanks to an acquisition by Chinese Internet/entertainment company Tencent, Supercell has a valuation of $10.2 billion, making it Europe’s first “decacorn” (a start-up with a $10 billion or greater value). Supercell’s success is due in part to its unconventional company structure and attitudes towards game development and management in general. The development unit at Supercell revolves around the concept of a “cell,” a small team consisting of anywhere from two to a dozen (or more) people who work together to make a game. Cells are highly independent and control all the decision-making for their game, including when/whether a game should be cancelled. The case allows discussion of important concepts like what conditions aid an effective team dynamic, how an entrepreneurial company can scale in size while retaining the “power of small,” how companies can create value through focus and being willing to terminate underperforming projects, and the implications of global markets and extreme valuations for what a company must achieve.
Keywords
Supercell; Finland; Video Games; Firm Structure; Startups; Games, Gaming, and Gambling; Groups and Teams; Video Game Industry; Finland
Citation
Kerr, William R., Benjamin F. Jones, and Alexis Brownell. "Supercell." Harvard Business School Case 817-052, October 2016.