Running a company across five countries is, by default, complicated. Time zones fragment communication, cultural differences shape work styles, and the organizational alignment that comes naturally when a team shares a building requires deliberate effort to maintain at geographic distance. For SPRIBE, the iGaming software company behind Aviator, that complexity is not an accident of growth—it was built into the model. A Forbes Australia feature on founder David Natroshvili‘s leadership evolution offers a detailed look at how the company has approached distributed operations, and why its leadership regards the multi-country footprint as a source of organizational strength rather than a management burden.
The Offices and What They Represent
SPRIBE currently operates from offices in Tbilisi, Kyiv, Warsaw, Tallinn, and the Isle of Man. Each location reflects a different strategic purpose: Tbilisi is the company’s founding base and a hub for core development; Kyiv draws on Ukraine’s deep engineering talent pool; Warsaw provides access to Western European business networks and regulatory expertise; Tallinn sits within the EU’s technology ecosystem; and the Isle of Man carries specific relevance to the company’s regulated gaming licensing structure. Together, they give SPRIBE direct proximity to the markets, talent, and regulatory environments that matter most for a B2B iGaming software company operating globally.
David Natroshvili has described the distributed setup as unambiguously positive, noting that it provides access to global talent and keeps the company close to its markets. “Having people in different time zones and cultures strengthens our products and our ability to serve operators everywhere,” he has said. That perspective positions the geographic spread not as a logistical concession to growth but as a deliberate structural asset—one that the company has organized around rather than managed around.
Decentralization as Organizational Design
The practical consequence of operating across five countries was that SPRIBE had to develop regional autonomy early. Natroshvili could not physically be present across multiple offices, and the time zone gaps made real-time approval loops impractical. Regional teams needed decision-making authority. Product teams needed the freedom to move without waiting for a single sign-off point in Tbilisi.
That necessity accelerated the organizational shift that Natroshvili had already been working toward: moving from centralized founder control to a model where clear objectives and context allow teams to make sound decisions independently. “Clarity beats proximity,” he has said. “If your teams know the goals, the priorities, and the ‘why,’ they’ll stay aligned no matter where they sit. Invest in communication, not micromanagement.” The distributed structure, in other words, forced the company to get good at the things that make decentralized organizations work—explicit goal-setting, strong communication infrastructure, and genuine trust in domain leaders to own their areas.
Culture as the Binding Element
The Forbes Australia piece is direct about one early miscalculation: Natroshvili and his team initially underestimated how much deliberate investment culture-building would require across a distributed workforce. “Just handing out tasks across countries wasn’t enough,” he has acknowledged. “We now invest heavily in team rituals, in-person meetups, and cross-functional projects to ensure people feel part of one SPRIBE, not isolated offices.”
That investment in shared identity across geographically separated teams reflects a challenge that many multi-country software companies encounter after initial expansion. The processes that maintain alignment in a single-location company—informal hallway conversations, spontaneous collaboration, shared daily context—do not transfer automatically to distributed environments. SPRIBE’s response has been to create structured substitutes: regular in-person gatherings that build cross-functional relationships, rituals that reinforce common purpose, and project structures that require collaboration across offices rather than allowing regional silos to develop.
A Case Study in the Model Working
The Forbes Australia profile cites a concrete example of SPRIBE’s distributed model functioning at the level of complexity it was designed for. The Aviator x AC Milan partnership—a high-profile collaboration that required coordination across design, marketing, legal, and commercial functions—was executed across multiple countries and delivered on a global timeline without missing deadlines. That kind of cross-functional, cross-country execution is a meaningful test of whether distributed organizational design is actually working or whether it is holding together through individual effort rather than structural reliability.
For David Natroshvili, the distributed workforce has become one of the arguments he makes most directly to other founders facing similar scale decisions. “Don’t treat distribution as a cost-saving tactic. Treat it as a strength. Build processes for communication and culture from day one, and hire leaders who thrive in remote collaboration. If you create trust and accountability early, a distributed team can outperform even the most centralised office.” That framing—distribution as competitive advantage rather than operational compromise—reflects how completely SPRIBE has reorganized its thinking around a global workforce structure that, for many companies at similar stages, remains a source of friction rather than strength.
