Norhavn in León: Integrating a Mexican Family Firm Without Breaking It
Norhavn, a Danish industrial coatings group, has bought 70% of Química del Bajío, a family-owned manufacturer in León, Mexico with 340 employees and revenue of MXN 1.1 billion. The founder stays as CEO for 24 months under the share purchase agreement and the family retains board seats. Within five months, three of the seven Mexican directors have resigned citing loss of authority; voluntary attrition in the plant has reached 18% against a historical 6%; and 64% of managers answered 'I do not know who decides' in the engagement survey. Danish managers complain that decisions agreed on calls are reopened, and 40% of Mexican managers regularly skip the weekly video meeting with Copenhagen. Only 30% of Mexican managers speak English well. Norhavn's standard toolkit - 360-degree reviews with direct negative feedback, devolved P&L authority, and annual talent ranking - was rolled out in month two. The union contract must be renegotiated in nine months, and the founder is the only person with a working relationship with the union leadership.
1. Diagnose what is actually failing in this integration, and separate cultural difference from operating-model failure.
Read the worked answer
The survey number is the diagnosis. 'I do not know who decides' at 64% is not a motivation problem or a resistance-to-change problem; it is a decision-rights problem. Norhavn rolled out devolved P&L authority in principle while the integration team in Copenhagen continued to approve in practice, so managers were handed accountability without authority. The directors who resigned were the ones with the most to lose from that ambiguity.
Reopened decisions are often risk aversion, not disrespect. In a relationship-based, higher power-distance setting, a manager who was not consulted in the right forum will not challenge a decision in the meeting; they will fail to implement it afterwards. The 40% meeting non-attendance is best read as language capability (only 30% speak English well) plus face-saving avoidance of public exposure, not defiance.
The 360-degree rollout was the accelerant. Direct public negative feedback and forced ranking in a context where criticism is given indirectly and privately reads as humiliation, and it arrived before trust existed.
Prescription: publish a one-page decision-rights matrix in Spanish covering the twenty decisions that actually matter; convert the Copenhagen meeting to a pre-read plus written-input format with simultaneous interpretation; and replace the ranking with a development-review cycle for the first year. Keep 360 feedback, but run it privately, in Spanish, and pilot it with the executive team first.
2. How should Norhavn handle the founder's 24-month CEO term and the union negotiation that falls due in nine months?
Read the worked answer
Sequence the two events deliberately. The union negotiation should happen while the founder is still visibly CEO. He is the only credible counterpart to the union leadership, and if the handover comes first, the incoming CEO inherits a conflict that requires a strike threat to resolve and permanently damages the new leader's standing with the workforce.
Use the 24 months as a transfer, not a countdown. Negotiate an explicit transition charter now: which decisions the founder owns until handover (union relations, key accounts, community), which move immediately (capex approval, financial reporting, HR policy), and which move at month 12 (commercial strategy, plant operations). Publish it, in Spanish, to the director group - the resignations were driven by ambiguity about exactly this.
Do not default to an expatriate successor. The credible internal candidate is a Mexican plant or commercial director with established relationships. A Danish CEO parachuted into León after a union fight would restart the integration clock.
Keep the founder close but not in command. Chairman or chief customer officer with a defined portfolio preserves the relationships that made the acquisition worth doing while removing him from operational veto.
Set triggers. If the union agreement closes early and the decision-rights matrix is working, hand over sooner. If attrition does not fall below 10% by month 15, the plan is not working and the integration mechanics, not the people, need re-examination.