Oliver Blume had run both Volkswagen Group and Porsche AG simultaneously since September 2022, a dual role that institutional investors and market analysts increasingly argued was untenable for two companies of that scale. VW’s supervisory board resolved that tension in October 2025, handing Porsche’s day-to-day leadership to Dr. Michael Leiters, a former McLaren CEO and Ferrari CTO with more than 13 years of prior Porsche experience, effective January 1, 2026 — while simultaneously extending Blume’s own contract as sole Volkswagen Group CEO for a new five-year term running through the end of 2030. The arrangement was framed as a resolution to years of investor skepticism about whether one executive could genuinely lead both an ultra-luxury sports car maker and the sprawling, multi-brand Volkswagen Group at once.
A Group Profit Collapse Greets the New Arrangement
Blume’s newly singular focus arrived alongside brutal 2025 financial results: Volkswagen Group’s annual operating profit fell more than 50% to €8.9 billion, driven by a combination of U.S. tariffs, currency effects, and the costs of Porsche’s own strategic realignment — the same pressures that had made the dual-CEO arrangement look increasingly strained in the first place. Porsche itself, under its restructuring, has been absorbing significant charges as it recalibrates its product strategy in response to what Blume has described as fundamental shifts in its two most important markets, the United States and China.
Halving the Lineup, Shrinking Capacity
The scale of Blume’s response became clear by July 2026. Volkswagen management announced plans to gradually cut its model lineup by up to half over the coming years and reduce overall production capacity to roughly nine million vehicles annually, down from a pre-pandemic target of 12 million — a direct acknowledgment that Volkswagen had built far more manufacturing capacity than current global demand, particularly in Europe, can support.
The First German Plant Closures in 87 Years?
What followed was the most consequential labor story in Volkswagen’s modern history: reports emerged of a restructuring plan involving as many as 100,000 job cuts — double the 50,000 previously announced — and the closure of four German plants, including facilities in Hanover, Zwickau, and Emden, plus Audi’s Neckarsulm site. Any such closures would be the first in Volkswagen’s 87-year history operating in Germany, a milestone with deep symbolic weight in a country where Volkswagen’s factories have long been treated as close to untouchable. German labor officials accused Blume of stoking fear among the workforce once the details became public. Blume himself pushed back directly in mid-July 2026, telling Bild am Sonntag that “there are more intelligent solutions than closing plants,” and pointing to a 20% average improvement in German factory costs achieved the previous year as evidence that further gains were possible without shutting facilities outright.
A CEO Betting His Simplified Mandate Can Solve What the Dual Role Couldn’t
The timing is difficult to separate from Blume’s own leadership story: having just been freed from managing Porsche day-to-day specifically so he could concentrate fully on Volkswagen Group’s problems, Blume is now confronting the most serious restructuring decision of his tenure, one that will test whether a sharper focus on one company is enough to navigate a crisis this large without the very outcome — German plant closures — that would represent VW management’s starkest possible break with the company’s own history.
What This Means for Philippine Founders
Volkswagen’s overcapacity problem — a company that built toward 12 million vehicles of annual demand now planning for nine million — is a useful cautionary data point for any Philippine manufacturing or logistics founder scaling infrastructure ahead of confirmed demand, since even one of the world’s largest automakers is now paying a painful multi-year price for having built capacity around growth projections that didn’t fully materialize. Blume’s public preference for cost discipline and efficiency gains over outright plant closures, even under severe financial pressure, is also worth studying for local founders facing their own difficult scaling decisions: it’s a real example of a major company choosing to fight for incremental operational improvement before resorting to the most disruptive option available, rather than treating closure or mass layoffs as the automatic first response to a downturn.
Share this article