Valve Case Study

Should Valve create a hardware platform? why or why not?

Valve should create hardware for their systems. Based on the case study, it seems that a lot of people at Valve want to try it out as it aligns with their M.O. as being able to independently move with the future. Valve’s strength is their software use, but something that holds them back is their reliance on other companies hardware. So, the creation of their own hardware would seem to carry only positives.

How would you mitigate the culture impacts?

I would make a department for hardware. It would be important to have people that work in-between and understand both hardware and software so the two departments can work fluidly in unison.

What might be difficult about this is adding a hardware department to a company that is all about software. It is important to note that the decision to add a hardware department takes away funding that could’ve gone toward software. However, I believe this challenge would give Valve’s culture the opportunity to grow and improve with diversity. And more eyes and other viewpoints leads to better development of products.

If not, how would you sustain a competitive position while ignoring that huge part of the market?

Valve is successful because they DON’T compete with hardware and console companies. Their software lives outside of that and isn’t meant to compete. It’s just supposed to be a library for games. So they don’t compete against hardware, they compete alongside hardware. So I think to improve their software they should ask themselves: “What else can hardware not do?” Or when looking at the software side of these console and hardware companies: “How can we improve on their software or be their first software option?” I think those are the 2 driving questions that will allow for Valve to stay on top.