Opens in a new tab

Breaking news

Volkswagen’s Cost-Cutting Plan Faces Scrutiny As Traditional Methods Clash with Bold Promises

Volkswagen’s recent cost-cutting agreement, hailed as crucial for its survival amidst increasing competition and declining demand, leans heavily on the company’s longstanding tradition of collaboration between management and workers. However, this approach has sparked concerns among investors about the company’s ability to meet its ambitious targets, including reducing capacity and cutting 35,000 jobs.

The deal, which was reached just before Christmas, aims to tackle the company’s challenges, with workers and unions now engaging in discussions at factories across Germany to clarify the details. According to company sources, each plant will be given its cost-reduction target, with mixed teams of managers and labor representatives working together to devise strategies that enhance productivity. These targets will be reviewed quarterly, and if any interim milestones are missed, new negotiations may be necessary.

This method aligns with Volkswagen’s history of compromise and cooperation, but it also raises questions about its effectiveness in driving the required changes. The model avoids a top-down restructuring approach that might have been more decisive but could have led to unrest or strikes.

Investors have been left underwhelmed by the deal, with Volkswagen shares trading below the levels seen in October, before a sharp decline in quarterly profits. Analysts like Patrick Hummel from UBS believe the market needs to see concrete plans for long-term profitability, with a focus on how the cost-cutting measures will impact the company’s bottom line in the next two years.

Capacity Reductions And Plant Closures Remain Uncertain

As the deal progresses, questions persist about how Volkswagen will reduce its workforce and production capacity. Unions have been informed that the company is considering closing three to four plants, though Volkswagen has declined to confirm specific closures. The final agreement does include the closure of two factories: one in Dresden by 2025, and another in Osnabrueck by 2027. However, both sites may be repurposed for alternative uses, with potential new investors involved.

The company’s Zwickau plant, which produces electric vehicles, will lose one production line but will receive investment in a new recycling facility, which is set to begin operations in 2027. These new investments, however, are contingent on meeting cost-cutting goals, as Volkswagen’s finance chief Arno Antlitz made clear in recent comments to investors.

The company has also identified capacity reductions at its Wolfsburg headquarters, where two production lines will be cut. While Volkswagen has stated that the deal will result in savings of €15 billion over the “medium term,” investors remain uncertain about how this approach compares to the more direct route of plant closures.

Job Cuts Remain A Major Challenge

Another pressing concern is how Volkswagen will achieve its target of shedding 35,000 jobs. While the company previously promised to cut 30,000 jobs in 2016, its workforce size has remained largely stable due to new hires in other areas. The current plan to meet the target relies on not replacing retiring employees and offering voluntary early or partial retirement options. A clause in the deal guarantees jobs until 2030, a concession won by unions after Volkswagen canceled a previous job guarantee agreement in September.

Despite the uncertainties surrounding the cost-cutting plan, some analysts believe that Volkswagen’s CEO, Oliver Blume, has done well in navigating the complexities of dealing with unions and local politicians, who have significant influence over the company’s decisions. Moritz Kronenberger, portfolio manager at Union Investment, notes that although the deal may appear underwhelming, it represents deeper cuts than many had anticipated.

Blume’s leadership is under scrutiny. As Kronenberger points out, “Blume remains the right CEO, but the company’s cost structure must look very different in two years. Volkswagen needs to prove it’s ready for the future and can continue to produce attractive products.” For now, Blume’s ambitious promises have left him both vulnerable and accountable as Volkswagen seeks to secure its future in a rapidly changing industry.

Cybersecurity Is No Longer Enough As Corporate Threats Expand

Cyber threats are becoming harder to separate from wider risks facing businesses, their leaders and employees. A European Commission-backed survey cited by Euronews found that three in four employees had encountered suspicious emails, messages or links at work. Nearly four in 10 reported phishing attempts or redirection to fake websites designed to steal data or gain unauthorised access. Others had encountered attempts to obtain personal information, deploy malware or steal passwords.

For businesses, however, digital attacks are only part of a much broader security challenge. Organisations must increasingly prepare for threats that span online activity, internal misconduct and physical harm.

Beyond Cybercrime: A Wider Threat Landscape

Companies, executives and employees face risks from organised criminal groups, hostile state actors, insiders and individual attackers. While some threats involve ransomware, stolen credentials or data breaches, others can escalate into stalking, harassment, kidnapping or violence against senior leaders and their families.

This convergence of digital and physical risks is forcing businesses to rethink security as a broader strategic responsibility rather than a function focused primarily on IT systems.

Insider Threats Carry A Growing Cost

Current and former employees can pose significant risks when they misuse privileged access, steal data or sabotage systems. According to a Ponemon Institute report cited in the original article, the average total cost of insider threat incidents rose by approximately 135% between 2018 and 2025.

North America recorded the highest average annual cost in 2025, at $24 million, while Europe followed at $18.6 million. These figures highlight the financial consequences of internal security failures, which can undermine business continuity, damage reputations and affect earnings.

Executives And Their Families Face Greater Exposure

Security concerns are also becoming more personal. The 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in the United States demonstrated how grievances can escalate into violence against corporate leaders. Europe has experienced similar concerns, including the attempted kidnapping of the daughter of French cryptocurrency executive Pierre Noizat last year.

A survey by the International Security Management Association (ISMA) found that more than half of chief security officers reported that their organisations’ senior executives or family members received up to nine direct threats of harm each year through online, telephone, written or other channels.

Public records, social media and AI-enabled research can make it easier for attackers to gather sensitive information without sophisticated intelligence networks. Family members’ online activity may reveal personal details, while publicly available data can be combined to build a more complete picture of an executive’s life. One study cited in the original article found that home addresses were publicly discoverable in 94% of executive vulnerability assessments.

Economic Uncertainty And Political Division Add To Risk

Traditional threat models are struggling to account for an environment in which the path from grievance to action can be difficult to predict. Economic pressures and political anger can converge, with businesses and their leaders becoming visible targets for wider frustration.

In a survey of more than 2,300 security chiefs across 31 countries, Allied Universal found that 44% expected economic instability to be the leading security hazard in the year ahead. Political polarisation adds another layer of uncertainty: a 2024 Littler report found that 86% of European employers faced at least some difficulty managing divisive political beliefs in the workplace, up from 75% a year earlier.

Corporate announcements, restructuring decisions and executives’ public positions can all become flashpoints in a tense environment.

Threat Assessment Must Become A Boardroom Priority

Responding to these risks requires more than perimeter security. Companies need to identify potential triggers that could provoke strong reactions, from profit warnings and workforce reductions to decisions to halt research funding or public statements on political issues.

Mapping these pressure points requires cooperation between boards and security teams. Rather than treating threat assessment as a purely operational task, organisations need to anticipate how business decisions may affect their exposure and how quickly a situation could escalate.

AI Is Becoming Part Of The Security Response

Artificial intelligence can help security teams identify patterns and respond more quickly. Potential applications include CCTV object recognition, facial recognition, social media monitoring, weapon detection and predictive analysis.

Technology alone, however, cannot address the full range of risks. Cybersecurity remains essential, but it must form part of a broader framework covering insider threats, executive protection, physical security and political volatility.

As Europe marks cybersecurity month, the challenge for business leaders is to recognise how closely these risks are connected. Security is no longer simply a back-office function; it is an increasingly important part of corporate resilience and strategic decision-making.

ISMA, the International Security Management Association, is a global membership organisation for senior chief security officers at multinational companies. Founded in 1983, it has approximately 375 members, including executives from 25 companies in the FTSE 100, DAX and CAC 40, as well as a majority of Fortune 100 companies and 25% of the Fortune 500. Its members include security leaders from MetLife, S&P Global, Sky, Four Seasons, Unilever and Novo Nordisk.Cyber threats are becoming harder to separate from wider risks facing businesses, their leaders and employees. A European Commission-backed survey cited by Euronews found that three in four employees had encountered suspicious emails, messages or links at work. Nearly four in 10 reported phishing attempts or redirection to fake websites designed to steal data or gain unauthorised access. Others had encountered attempts to obtain personal information, deploy malware or steal passwords.

For businesses, however, digital attacks are only part of a much broader security challenge. Organisations must increasingly prepare for threats that span online activity, internal misconduct and physical harm.

Beyond Cybercrime: A Wider Threat Landscape

Companies, executives and employees face risks from organised criminal groups, hostile state actors, insiders and individual attackers. While some threats involve ransomware, stolen credentials or data breaches, others can escalate into stalking, harassment, kidnapping or violence against senior leaders and their families.

This convergence of digital and physical risks is forcing businesses to rethink security as a broader strategic responsibility rather than a function focused primarily on IT systems.

Insider Threats Carry A Growing Cost

Current and former employees can pose significant risks when they misuse privileged access, steal data or sabotage systems. According to a Ponemon Institute report cited in the original article, the average total cost of insider threat incidents rose by approximately 135% between 2018 and 2025.

North America recorded the highest average annual cost in 2025, at $24 million, while Europe followed at $18.6 million. These figures highlight the financial consequences of internal security failures, which can undermine business continuity, damage reputations and affect earnings.

Executives And Their Families Face Greater Exposure

Security concerns are also becoming more personal. The 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in the United States demonstrated how grievances can escalate into violence against corporate leaders. Europe has experienced similar concerns, including the attempted kidnapping of the daughter of French cryptocurrency executive Pierre Noizat last year.

A survey by the International Security Management Association (ISMA) found that more than half of chief security officers reported that their organisations’ senior executives or family members received up to nine direct threats of harm each year through online, telephone, written or other channels.

Public records, social media and AI-enabled research can make it easier for attackers to gather sensitive information without sophisticated intelligence networks. Family members’ online activity may reveal personal details, while publicly available data can be combined to build a more complete picture of an executive’s life. One study cited in the original article found that home addresses were publicly discoverable in 94% of executive vulnerability assessments.

Economic Uncertainty And Political Division Add To Risk

Traditional threat models are struggling to account for an environment in which the path from grievance to action can be difficult to predict. Economic pressures and political anger can converge, with businesses and their leaders becoming visible targets for wider frustration.

In a survey of more than 2,300 security chiefs across 31 countries, Allied Universal found that 44% expected economic instability to be the leading security hazard in the year ahead. Political polarisation adds another layer of uncertainty: a 2024 Littler report found that 86% of European employers faced at least some difficulty managing divisive political beliefs in the workplace, up from 75% a year earlier.

Corporate announcements, restructuring decisions and executives’ public positions can all become flashpoints in a tense environment.

Threat Assessment Must Become A Boardroom Priority

Responding to these risks requires more than perimeter security. Companies need to identify potential triggers that could provoke strong reactions, from profit warnings and workforce reductions to decisions to halt research funding or public statements on political issues.

Mapping these pressure points requires cooperation between boards and security teams. Rather than treating threat assessment as a purely operational task, organisations need to anticipate how business decisions may affect their exposure and how quickly a situation could escalate.

AI Is Becoming Part Of The Security Response

Artificial intelligence can help security teams identify patterns and respond more quickly. Potential applications include CCTV object recognition, facial recognition, social media monitoring, weapon detection and predictive analysis.

Technology alone, however, cannot address the full range of risks. Cybersecurity remains essential, but it must form part of a broader framework covering insider threats, executive protection, physical security and political volatility.

As Europe marks cybersecurity month, the challenge for business leaders is to recognise how closely these risks are connected. Security is no longer simply a back-office function; it is an increasingly important part of corporate resilience and strategic decision-making.

ISMA, the International Security Management Association, is a global membership organisation for senior chief security officers at multinational companies. Founded in 1983, it has approximately 375 members, including executives from 25 companies in the FTSE 100, DAX and CAC 40, as well as a majority of Fortune 100 companies and 25% of the Fortune 500. Its members include security leaders from MetLife, S&P Global, Sky, Four Seasons, Unilever and Novo Nordisk.

eCredo
The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
Uol
Aretilaw firm

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter