Ford Motor Company

Ford invented the modern assembly line - and spent a century learning its limitations. From 1900-1970, Ford exemplified industrial centralization: Taylorist management, hierarchical command-and-control, massive inventories. The Ford-style manufacturing approach meant storing large reserves to buffer against uncertainty, creating high metabolic overhead. It worked when markets were stable and competition was limited.

But when the fitness landscape shifted, Ford's architecture became a liability. Toyota's Just-In-Time system operated with a fraction of Ford's inventory costs. When Ford attempted international expansion, the company offered to acquire Nissan for $6 billion in 1999 - a full absorption into Ford's hierarchy. Nissan rejected the offer in favor of Renault's coalition structure ($5.4 billion for 36.8% stake with retained autonomy), demonstrating that identity preservation matters more than maximizing capital in partnerships.

Ford has since adapted through selective mutualism. The company partnered with Henkel on adhesive co-development for aluminum-intensive vehicles like the F-150, where adhesives work alongside rivets. And when the EV transition proved less certain than predicted, Ford scaled back targets by 2024 as growth slowed - validating Toyota's bet-hedging approach over pure-play commitment. The lesson: pioneering an architecture doesn't guarantee permanent advantage. The company that invented the assembly line survived by learning when to centralize, when to partner, and when to hedge bets rather than commit fully.