What Every Modern Company Can Learn from Würth.

For more than fifty years, the Würth Group has delivered double-digit growth selling screws, fasteners, and related installation materials. The secret is deciphered Wachsen wie Würth (Grow like Würth) by Bernd Venohr, I finally got the chance to read and apply it.

Its performance is not luck. It is the result of a highly disciplined management system built over decades, one that treats organizational tensions not as problems but as sources of energy.

Instead of choosing between two extremes or compromising in the middle, Würth deliberately does both. This ability to balance contradictions in a productive way drives clarity, speed, and profitable growth. Below is an overview of 5 key takeways behind this performance and why they matter for any modern company that wants to grow faster and become more adaptive.

Five Key Takeaways from Würth’s Operating Model

1. Mastery of dilemma thinking “Doing Both”

As described in 21st Leaders for the 21st Century by Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner, highly successful business leaders apply a “both-and” leadership style, reconciling dilemmas rather than choosing sides. Leadership is not authoritarian or participative, nor a weak compromise halfway between the two.

One-sidedness — overemphasizing a single viewpoint — or settling for a compromise is one of the most common mistakes in popular management formulas. It leads to stagnation and ultimately decline.

The most successful entrepreneurs deliberately seek out tension fields, because these tensions create energy in the organization. They turn opposites into complements, dilemmas into innovation.

Reinhold Würth understands this deeply. His entire management system is built around reconciling five key tensions (see further below), allowing the organization to be both disciplined and entrepreneurial at the same time. Yes. This “both-and” mindset is not a theoretical idea. It is the engine behind fifty years of double-digit growth.

2. A System Refined Over Decades

Würth’s excellence is not cultural magic. It is the product of fifty years of disciplined refinement across culture, strategy, structures, processes, and systems, all working together as one operating model.

3. Radical Decentralisation with Identical Units and a Linked Target System

The company is built from many small, independently operating units that all follow the same planning logic and management rhythm. This creates speed, ownership, comparability, and accountability. Each unit operates like a mini-company, with its own business plan directly linked to long-term group ambitions. Each individual sales person, in term, also plans and executes his/her own plan. This cascaded target system turns strategy into daily action and creates clarity on what must be achieved, by whom, and by when.

4. Radical Transparency for Self-Control

Monthly reporting covers finances, customers, employees, process quality, acquisition quality, productivity, sales, and supply chain. This level of transparency enables self-control, not inspection.

5. Growth Beyond Market Rates

Würth is not driven by market growth percentages. It is driven by territory acquisition potential, disciplined expansion of customer relationships, and continuous penetration of local markets.

The Five Dilemmas That Power Würth’s Success

Centralization vs. decentralization

Frontline responsibility enabled through central measures. Entrepreneurial ownership happens in small, independent units: “Strict decentralization with small units is the most important leadership principle. ” Certain foundations are centralized to ensure consistency, such as the Policies and Procedures Handbook and a global ERP backbone.

Entrepreneurial freedom vs. control

Freedom for high performers through strong control for low performers. Early experiences with poorly run territories led to a tight system of daily reporting and performance tracking. High performers enjoy autonomy. Those who struggle see their freedom reduced. This keeps the organization dynamic, accountable, and fast.

Profit vs. growth

Growth and profitability reinforce each other. Without one, the other becomes dangerous. Würth puts it simply: “Profit without growth is deadly,” and “growth without profit is deadly.”

Vision vs. hard number orientation

Reinhold Würth pairs bold ambition with uncompromising numerical discipline. As a visionary “whole-hearted expansionist,” he motivates and inspires: “The successful businessman differs from the average colleague through the ability to build visions, to think the unthinkable.” At the same time, he insists on rigorous financial control:“Numbers are among the most important things for me. If there is anyone in this company who looks at the numbers, it’s me.”

Overview vs. detail

He constantly moves between the strategic “top floor” and the operational front line to stay grounded: “I knew how my leadership decisions landed with the people, how they affected their daily work, how my employees felt during implementation.” This sensitivity is paired with disciplined long-term planning, including a structured ten-year process introduced in the 1970s.

Würth’s Management System Overview

This shows how Würth integrates culture, strategy, structures, processes, and systems into one coherent philosophy. Every unit operates within the same logic. Every leader works within the same rhythm.

There are three coherent layers:

1. The culture with its values and leadership principles is the foundation.

2. The strategy clearly laying out the ways to grow and it's unique organization as source of competetive advantage.

3. The structures, processes and systems anchoring the culture and strategy.
   

It's not about copying the system, but rather, diligently building a system over time that works given your company's context, guided by values and principles.

Source: Wachsen wie Würth, by Bern Venohr

How This Connects to “Built to Adapt”

Würth’s system is one of the clearest examples of what it means to be a company that is truly built to adapt.

• It uses tension as a source of innovation and momentum

• It creates clarity so people can act without waiting

• It decentralizes entrepreneurship while centralizing only what is essential

• It aligns culture, strategy, structure, processes, and systems into one coherent operating model.

• It reinforces ownership through performance, autonomy, and customer proximity

• It moves faster than its market through disciplined expansion of territories and relationships.

This is the essence of Built to Adapt: A company that thrives not by choosing one management philosophy, but by intelligently reconciling opposing forces, creating a system that is both disciplined and entrepreneurial.

Würth shows that adaptability is not chaos. It is structure, clarity, incentives, and trust — all working together to create momentum at every level.

If you want to accelerate growth, increase entrepreneurship, or sharpen execution, Würth offers one of the most instructive models of the past half century.

Instruct AI agents with values to control what is controlling you

Introduction

CEOs of frontier AI companies such as OpenAI, Anthrophic and Heads of AI worldwisde should consider norms and values the AI agents they build will apply to steer behaviour in ways you want.

As autonomous agents will increasingly run parts of your company, much like a growing group of employees without direct leadership involvement, it’s crucial they behave in alignment with the values you believe are best for your company.

While defining norms (what’s good and bad) is essential, embedding clear values (what is perceived as better) is what guides behavior when your agents face conflicting demands. What should your AI do when there’s no single "right" answer, when it has to choose between seemingly conflicting alternatives? For example, a customer service agent might choose a personalized solution for an individual (Individualism) or a group discount (Communitarianism), depending on the customer’s cultural context. These choices matter.

In a recent episode of the Lex Fridman Podcast (#459), the conversation centered on Deep Seek, China, Nvidia, xAI, TSMC, Stargate, and AI Mega Clusters. Beyond the technical advances, what stood out was the looming question of how autonomous these AI models are becoming and what values are being embedded into them.

“As AI becomes more powerful, the question isn’t just what it can do, but what it should do—and who decides that."— Lex Fridman

“This is what people, CEO or leaders of OpenAI and Anthropic talk about—autonomous AI models, which is: you give them a task and they work on it in the background.” — Nathan Lambert

These reflections raise a critical issue: 

As AI agents become more autonomous, how do we ensure they make decisions aligned with our human values, especially when those values differ across cultures?

Autonomous Agents as Culture-Bearers

Imagine autonomous agents acting within your company, not as tools waiting for commands, but as self-directed actors, working much like teams of employees without direct oversight. Just like human teams, these agents will encounter dilemmas. What happens when there is no single “correct” answer? Which path should the AI choose?

To guide these decisions, we need more than rules, we need values.

Enter the Seven Dimensions of Culture developed by Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner. 

This model offers a powerful framework. It's seven dimensions describe how people (and by extension, agents) navigate dilemmas based on their underlying cultural values. Here are the dimensions, plus examples for each. 

1. Universalism vs. Particularism Should the same rules apply to everyone (universalism), or should we adapt based on relationships and context (particularism)? Example: Should an AI procurement agent stick strictly to procurement guidelines, or make an exception for a long-term supplier who’s late due to a natural disaster?

2. Individualism vs. Communitarianism Should decisions prioritize the individual or the group? Example: Should a benefits chatbot recommend individual rewards for performance or group incentives to foster team cohesion?

3. Neutral vs. Affective Should communication remain emotionally neutral, or allow emotional expression? Example: When handling customer complaints, should an agent maintain a calm tone or mirror the customer’s frustration to show empathy?

4. Specific vs. Diffuse Should relationships and tasks remain separate, or be integrated holistically? Example: Should an internal HR agent focus solely on performance metrics or take the employee’s personal situation into account?

5. Achievement vs. Ascription Should status be based on accomplishments, or assigned based on age, title, or education? Example: Should an AI mentor program recommend leadership training to a young high performer or to a senior manager based on tenure?

6. Sequential vs. Synchronic Time Is time linear and task-based, or flexible and parallel? Example: Should a scheduling agent prioritize tasks one after another, or allow overlapping deadlines to match cultural norms?

7. Internal vs. External Control Do we control our environment, or adapt to it? Example: Should an AI sustainability planner set aggressive internal targets regardless of market volatility, or adapt them based on external pressures?

Why this matters

Autonomous agents are already making trade-offs based on implicit values coded into them. If these values are unexamined, or worse, misaligned, they can lead to unpredictable or even damaging outcomes. But if we embed values deliberately, we can shape agents that behave in ways aligned with our intent, culture, and purpose.

In other words: 

"Values are how AI agents resolve dilemmas."

Let’s not wait for AI to “absorb” values by default. Let’s define them clearly, contextually, and globally.

Our call to action

I believe in creating a shared core of values for autonomous agents, with the flexibility to localize where appropriate. If you’re a CEO or Head of AI who cares about making agents more aligned, responsible, and culturally aware, we'd love to hear from you.

We’re currently developing a framework using Trompenaars’ model that organizations can adapt. Reach out, or contact Fons Trompenaars directly if you’d like to help shape how AI agents will behave when you're not in the room.

The Real Reasons Culture Change Fails (and How to Fix Them)

Every major consultancy and leadership book lists the same reasons why culture change fails: 

1. No real leadership commitment or organization-wide involvement despite the usual employee survey.

2. No clear link to performance.

3. Change-makers tripping over the real taboos “fools rush in where angels fear to tread.”

We’ve known these for decades. And yet, culture change programs keep failing.

I’ve tried to change culture myself and failed more than once. 

That experience made me question the usual explanations go searching for the real reasons. I don’t buy the fatalistic view that culture only changes when you replace more than half the management team. There’s more hope than that.

In my search, I found powerful insights in the work of Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner, Gary Hamel, Aaron Dignan, and Peter Scott-Morgan, thinkers who understand the human and systemic mechanics of change. Since you’re busy, I’ve summarized what I believe are their most practical lessons below.

Real Reasons and Fixes

1. It starts with a survey and ends with a report.

Most culture change programs begin with long, sometimes even academically accredited, survey that scans the organization like a full-body check. The result: The “from” and “to”, a long list of “areas for improvement” and a thick PowerPoint deck of recommendations. By the time action begins, energy is gone — and culture has become a program, not a practice.

Believe me, as a Management Consultant I am guilty.

The real opportunity is to teach the organization a new muscle: the continuous learning loop. 

At every level, people should habitually ask: “What stands in the way of me doing my best work?” Then try small experiments to change that practice and remove the barriers that prevent those improvements from spreading.

Do this across the company, using MS Teams, Slack, or other collaboration tools and that’s when culture becomes visible and alive. Employees see impact. Leaders see movement. Culture isn’t something you wait for from the top; it’s something you do, every day.

2. We ignore the tensions that shape behaviour.

Every organization culture runs on social tensions — the push and pull between values that are both right but in conflict. 

Centralization vs. decentralization. 

Rules vs. exceptions. 

Short-term delivery vs. long-term innovation.

Speed vs. safety.

When these tensions go unmanaged, they turn into vicious circles, conflicts: the more one side wins, the more the other side resists. Meetings multiply, trust erodes, progress slows. And yet, those same tensions, when recognized and reconciled, become virtuous circles that drive adaptability and innovation.

True culture work isn’t about eliminating tensions; it’s about learning to reconcile them.

3. We ignore the unwritten rules of the game.

Even when leaders genuinely want change, the system often tells a different story. Strategy, structure, and processes can unintentionally reinforce the very behaviours leaders are trying to change.

Take a consumer goods company that struggled to produce breakthrough innovations. Despite years of consultancy interventions and leadership commitment, the organization remained stuck in short-term incremental projects. When drilled into that specific issue, not “culture” in general, but this pattern, the root cause wasn’t in the people or in the values. It was in the career model.

The key motivator for people was to move up the ladder to secure their family’s future. They got what they want through promotions every 3 years, decided by their direct boss, based on one person’s unit P&L performance. Anyone in a major corporate, sounds familiar, no?  That structure made risk-taking irrational.

The solution wasn’t a new value statement. It was a redesign:

• Career decisions made by cross-functional committees, not just line managers.

• Promotion criteria expanded beyond P&L to include collaboration and cross-unit contribution.

That single change rewired the incentives and with it, the culture.

In Summary

Most culture programs fail because they treat culture as a communication exercise. But culture is not what you say; it’s what your system rewards, what your tensions amplify, and what your people practice every day.

The next generation of culture change will succeed not by adding more slogans or surveys, but by mastering three disciplines:

1. Continuous learning loops.

2. Reconciliation of tensions.

3. Rewiring the system beneath the slogans.

What's next

Capturing these insights we develop the Adaptability Audit™ to uncover the hidden barriers that hold organizations back from real culture change. It helps leadership teams see what’s actually blocking adaptability and speed and what to do about it, before launching another program that treats symptoms instead of causes.