There is a recurring tragedy in the history of family businesses: the first generation builds the empire, the second expands it, and the next generation—insulated by absolute privilege but devoid of the sharp instincts that forged the dynasty—slowly dismantle it, sometimes under the guise of “modernisation.”

John Elkann, the chosen grandson and designated heir of the legendary FIAT patriarch Gianni Agnelli, is increasingly becoming the textbook definition of this generational decline. Entrusted with one of Europe’s most formidable industrial and cultural legacies, Elkann has consistently demonstrated a lack of corporate vision and true leadership acumen. His management style relies on passive asset liquidation and an almost naive belief that deep-seated structural issues can be solved with “magically” rather than through decisive executive direction.

To the casual observer looking strictly at the balance sheets of Exor (the family’s holding company), Elkann’s tenure might seem stable. But a closer look reveals a systematic retreat from the very businesses that gave the Agnelli family its historic teeth. Under Elkann, the strategy has not been to build, but to divest, dissolve, and exit.

Nowhere is this lack of industrial grit more evident than in the fate of FIAT. For decades, the automotive giant was fiercely protected and brilliantly maneuvered, reaching its modern zenith under the legendary CEO Sergio Marchionne. Marchionne was the true visionary—the outsider who engineered the miraculous turnaround of both Fiat and Chrysler, dragging them back from the brink of bankruptcy through sheer force of will and strategic brilliance.

Significantly, as long as Marchionne was alive, Fiat remained an aggressively independent, dominant force anchored by Italian industrial pride. It was only after Marchionne’s untimely passing in July 2018 that Elkann, left without his shield and master strategist, hurried to dilute the family footprint. Within a year of Marchionne’s death, Elkann initiated the moves that merged FCA into the sprawling, multi-national web of Stellantis. While economically pragmatic on paper, it effectively signaled the end of the family’s singular industrial identity—a move Marchionne had spent his life delaying by demanding a position of strength.

More recently, Elkann completed the total dismantling of the family’s historic footprint in the media landscape. Following a series of sell-offs, Exor finalised the sale of the prominent GEDI media group—including the prestigious daily La Repubblica—to international buyers. The National Federation of the Italian Press (FNSI) scathingly noted that Elkann had presided over “the largest transfer of newspaper titles ever seen in Italy,” leaving behind what journalists openly called “rubble.”

Nowhere is Elkann’s preference for passive luxury over raw leadership more clear than at Ferrari, where he serves as Executive Chairman. Under his stewardship, Maranello has successfully been pivoted into a high-margin luxury lifestyle brand, expanding heavily into fashion, apparel, and premium experiences. On a luxury goods spreadsheet, it is a triumph.
But on the asphalt—where the soul of Ferrari actually lives—Elkann’s detached corporate style has yielded a painful drought. In 2025, the Scuderia endured a highly disappointing F1 season, failing to win a single grand prix and slipping down to fourth in the constructors’ standings. Rather than addressing the deeper engineering and structural crises paralyzing the team, Elkann has frequently adopted a hands-off, hands-clean approach.When frustrations boiled over and drivers Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc openly aired complaints about the uncompetitive car, Elkann’s public response was telling of his hands-off executive style. Rather than restructuring the technical departments or offering a concrete path forward, he issued a detached, corporate edict to the media, telling his drivers that they “need to focus on driving and talk less.” It was a classic deflection—blaming the operators on the ground while the ship itself is structurally mismanaged from the top.

If Ferrari represents a slow competitive drift, his handling of Juventus Football Club is a glaring display of active structural stagnation. For over a century, the Bianconeri stood as a fiercely guarded symbol of Agnelli pride. Yet, following the turbulent exit of his cousin Andrea Agnelli, Elkann’s direct stewardship has plunged the club into a state of severe internal dysfunction.The club has just endured a highly disappointing campaign, stumbling to a 6th-place finish and missing out on the massive revenues of Europe’s top tier. But the true indictment of Elkann’s leadership is not the scoreboard; it is the chaotic corporate dysfunction rotting the club from the top down.Currently, Juventus is paralyzlsed by a severe internal cold war between two major figures:

Juventus CEO Damien Comolli, is a data-driven executive who favors a strict, algorithmic “Moneyball” recruitment strategy. On the other hand, Luciano Spalletti, a traditionalist tactician who relies on human intuition, rigid dressing-room hierarchy, and specific profile demands (such as the striker he requested in winter but was denied).
The two men hold diametrically opposed philosophies on recruitment, culture, and footballing philosophy.

In a nutshell, the two, do not see eye to eye on anything. In any functional, high-stakes corporate environment, a true leader steps in, evaluates which philosophy aligns with the long-term strategy of the institution, backs one, and decisively removes the other to restore operational alignment.
Instead, true to his passive nature, Elkann has rejected another corporate revolution. Reports out of Turin reveal that Elkann is actively forcing a compromise, mandating that Comolli and Spalletti simply “find a way to coexist.” He is treating a fundamental clash of corporate identity as a minor interpersonal tiff that can be cured by a forced handshake.

True leadership is the courage to make a definitive choice, accepting that you will alienate one side to save the whole. Forcing two fundamentally incompatible executives to work together doesn’t create chemistry—it creates gridlock.

Elkann’s handling of matters exposes the core flaw of his entire leadership philosophy. He consistently mistakes diplomatic mediation for governance. By trying to keep everyone happy—clinging to a manager he recently renewed while simultaneously refusing to fire a failing executive because he dislikes the optics of constant turnover—he chooses the path of least resistance.

Corporate chemistry does not happen like magic. It is engineered by design, driven by leaders who establish a singular, uncompromising vision and clear the path of anyone who obstructs it. By refusing to choose a direction, Elkann has ensured that his institutions remain trapped in a toxic loop of split authority, where factions pull the brand in opposite directions.
John Elkann remains the classic example of the next-generation heir: highly polished, financially insulated, and entirely incapable of the courageous, visionary decision-making required to lead. As he continues to oversee the dilution of his family’s historical assets, his handling of Ferrari and Juventus serves as a public warning: when an empire falls into the hands of a custodian rather than a commander, stagnation is the only inevitable result.