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 6 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.

In the 1990s, two entrepreneurs made daring, early entries into mobile telecommunications in Sub-Saharan Africa, both seeing great market opportunities there. One firm, Adesemi, would ultimately go bankrupt. The other firm, Celtel, would ultimately succeed and make its founder, Mo Ibrahim, a star of the global business community. Why the difference in outcome? Emerging markets often present weak rule of law, bringing many challenges to business success-from the demand for bribes to regulatory obstacles, hold-up problems, and even civil war. This case explores strategies that can limit these critical non-market risks in foreign direct investment and entrepreneurship. Students will step into the shoes of both companies by exploring their entry strategies, wrestling with the challenges they faced, and diagnosing the reasons why a shared insight about a new business opportunity turned out to be prescient-and led to extremely different endpoints.