A farmer may have inherited the farm from his father and worked hard to leave it to his son. In this worldview, the farm exists first and foremost to provide a living for the family and must be maintained at all costs. This focus differs strongly from that of an internet entrepreneur, who builds a company from scratch, grows it as large as possible, and then sells it to cash out, signal success, and move on to the next opportunity. Yet another approach can be seen in the case of Yvon Chouinard, founder of Patagonia, who chose to give away his shares in the company to a foundation so the business could continue to serve its purpose, with its profits used to protect the world’s ecosystem.

Spiral Dynamics offers a helpful framework for understanding the deeper drives of people and why they act the way they do. When applied to organizations, it helps identify distinct approaches to running them, each rooted in a particular worldview. As societies have evolved from less complex to more complex over the course of history, our values, ways of making sense of the world, and forms of organization have evolved as well. With each developmental step, leadership styles and the enterprise or organization’s underlying purpose change. This evolutionary perspective explains why approaches to leadership succession, exit, and ownership transfer differ so fundamentally.

While the current Spiral Dynamics model distinguishes eight value systems, six of these are particularly relevant for understanding organizational leadership, succession, and ownership transition. In the sections that follow, we will explore these six systems in the order in which they historically emerged. As will become clear, each step reflects an increase in social and organizational complexity, and with it a different understanding of what it means to own, lead, and ultimately pass on a business.

Please note that although we describe the six approaches as distinct value systems, in practice, people and organizations almost always express a combination of them. Individuals are not “the colors” themselves, as people might identify with personality traits. Rather, these value systems describe patterns of culture and meaning that express themselves through us. They can shift over the course of our lives and may also change when we move into different social, organizational, or cultural contexts.

Purple – Kinship and Continuity

A Purple-oriented business exists primarily to protect the family or close-knit community it serves. The organization is an extension of kinship, tradition, and shared history. Purpose is not defined in abstract strategy but in belonging, loyalty, and continuity across generations. Leadership is paternal or maternal in nature. Leaders act as caretakers, safeguarding traditions, mediating relationships, and maintaining social cohesion. Authority comes from seniority and relational trust rather than formal position.

Succession is typically hereditary or relational, with leadership passing to family members or trusted insiders who are seen as “one of us.” Competence is important, but loyalty and fit with tradition matter more. When leaders step back or pass the business on, their focus is on preserving the family legacy, protecting relationships, and ensuring the group remains intact. Selling to outsiders is often resisted, as it threatens identity and continuity. Letting go is emotionally charged and tied to fears of losing a sense of belonging and meaning.

The farmer passing on the farm to his son that we described earlier is an example of this. While this type of succession has been common throughout history, in our modern Western societies, it is no longer the dominant way of passing on ownership. As personal choice has become paramount, many children choose a different occupation from their parents.

We do see larger corporations like Walmart staying under family control. While professional managers run the day-to-day business, the Walton family retains the power to make strategic decisions. This is often done through financial structures in which the family has more voting rights than shares in the company, for instance, as in the case of Heineken, which has maintained control over the company for over 150 years.

Red – Power and Control

A Red-driven business exists to assert strength, dominance, and personal will. The purpose is to dominate, project power, and create a reputation that commands respect or fear. Organizations often grow through bold action, risk-taking, and forceful decision-making. Leadership is charismatic and authoritarian. Leaders thrive on challenges, decisive moves, and personal visibility. Rules are flexible, and success depends on who can act fastest and strongest.

Succession in Red systems is mostly conflict-driven. Leadership transfer may involve power struggles, buy-outs, or the strongest contender taking control. There is little patience for gradual or consensual processes. When leaders step back, sell, or exit, their focus is on securing their power, wealth, and creating a legacy. They may cash out aggressively or retain influence behind the scenes. Letting go is difficult unless it results in clear personal gain or recognition. Stability after succession depends heavily on whether a new strong figure emerges quickly.

In our modern society, few businesses are run purely from a Red values perspective. However, we can observe red-value power struggles in organizations like drug cartels, where competitors may attack their opponents if the boss falls ill or passes away, exploiting this weakness to take control. Another example is the Russian oligarchy, where a few powerful men around Putin became rich by acquiring state-owned companies from the old Soviet Union. These privileges can be given or taken away in a wink, as was the case with Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who lost his business after criticizing Putin for being corrupt.  Charges were made up to jail him, and his company was sold off and partially taken over by the Russian state.

We also see examples of red-power struggles in family-owned large multinationals, where succession becomes a fight between heirs. The story of Gucci is a typical example of this; the fight between heirs eventually led to the family losing the company (see the movie ‘House of Gucci’).

Blue – Order and Legitimacy

A Blue-oriented organization exists to provide stability, reliability, and moral order. Purpose is defined through mission, rules, and clearly articulated standards of “how things should be done.” The organization serves a larger system, such as society, a profession, or an institution. Leadership focuses on upholding structure, fairness, and continuity. Leaders derive authority from role, expertise, and adherence to formal procedures.

Succession in Blue systems is planned, documented, and procedural. Roles, responsibilities, and leadership criteria are clearly defined, often supported by governance bodies or formal approval processes. Loyalty and proven service weigh heavily. When leaders prepare to step down, sell, or hand over the organization, their primary concern is orderly transition and institutional stability. They aim to protect the organization from chaos or moral decline. Personal ambition is subordinated to duty. A “good succession” maintains standards, avoids disruption, and ensures continuity of rules and values.

Many of our governmental institutions that have formed over the last centuries are traditional Blue values-driven. The succession of the pope in the Catholic Church is also a Blue values-driven event, with clear procedures to find the best pope for the institution. Private organizations with a strong blue culture view succession as a way to ensure the business’s continued success and may have strict protocols that focus on which leader will best serve the business’s future. Candidates are prepared for such positions over a long period. An example of this is the succession at Toyota in 2023. Koji Sato took over from Akio Toyoda, who was the grandson of Toyota’s founder. Sato started working with Toyota right after earning his engineering degree and was one of the designers of the Toyota Prius. Toyoda felt a new CEO was needed who understood electric vehicles better than he did, focusing on the company’s long-term needs. While Toyoda himself was related to the founder, we see in this example also that the company has moved on from purple succession. Sato’s loyalty was rewarded while maintaining the Blue values’ stability.

While blue institutions have clear procedures for succession, the transfer of ownership is generally not an issue, as most of those organizations are publicly owned. We have, however, seen many of these institutions privatized over the last few decades; in such cases, democratic governments create a transparent process focused on maximizing the state’s profits. This can be seen as a more Orange values-driven event.

After the former Soviet Union collapsed, we also saw the privatization of government institutions, but in these cases, it was more Red values-driven. As mentioned before, a small group of powerful individuals bought them at low prices to maximize personal gain. Such opportunities were favors that Putin or other powerful leaders handed out to loyalists, and they used them to keep demanding loyalty. This was a Red values process focused on personal power rather than Blue values.

Orange – Performance and Growth

An Orange-driven business exists to achieve success, innovation, and measurable results. Purpose is expressed in growth, market position, profitability, and shareholder value. The organization is a vehicle for ambition and progress, for the people who work, but primarily for the owners. Leadership focuses on strategy, performance, and results. Leaders are entrepreneurs or executives who value competition, strategic thinking, and success.

Succession is treated as a strategic process. Potential successors are assessed based on capability, track record, and future potential. External candidates are considered just as readily as internal ones. When leaders step back, sell, or pass the business on, their focus is on maximizing value and securing future growth. Selling the company can be a success marker in itself. Emotional attachment is secondary to results. A good successor is someone who can outperform the previous generation and take the organization to the next level.

An example of an Orange values-driven succession was Bill Gates stepping down as Microsoft’s CEO and handing the role to Steve Ballmer in 2000. While Ballmer was an insider and had worked for Microsoft since the early 1980s, this was a clear shift from the founder’s focus on innovation and technology to Ballmer’s focus on business economics. Ballmer had been successful at Microsoft by increasing revenue and delivering measurable results.

In 1983, Apple hired the outsider John Sculley as its CEO. While Sculley had no experience in the new computer market, he was hired based on his success at PepsiCo, where he led the ‘Pepsi Challenge’, a marketing campaign that helped PepsiCo gain a much larger market share, narrowing the gap with Coca-Cola. At Apple, Scully was also successful, growing the revenue tenfold and making Apple a global brand.

In both examples, we can see that choices are made based on proven competencies, past success, and a commitment to maximizing results for the company.

Our business world is full of examples of companies being bought and taken overs driven by orange values. Many business owners work towards an ‘exit’, the moment they can sell their ownership for a large amount of cash. Another way to monetize business ownership is to make the company public, so its stock can be traded and sold. Well-known examples include Jan Koum, who sold his company WhatsApp to Facebook in 2014, receiving $19 billion in cash and stock, and Marc Zuckerberg, who became wealthy when Facebook went public in 2012.

Such transactions are primarily focused on financial gain for both the seller and the buyer. No or little attention is placed on employee welfare, long-term continuation of employment, or other non-financial purposes.

In the Orange values-driven business world, companies can also be acquired by buying shares on the stock market. Such a transaction can be beneficial to both sides, a typical win-win situation. In other cases, such transactions can be hostile, as was the case with Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter. It started with him secretly buying up shares, then offering to pay a high premium price and putting pressure on the board. Under pressure from shareholders, the board agreed, at which point Musk tried to cancel the deal and, after a legal battle, eventually took over the company. It was clear from this behavior and how he (mis)managed the company after the takeover that his objective was not to optimize profit, but to acquire a platform that serves his political ideas and aspirations. All this seemed Red values-driven, seeking personal power rather than Orange values-driven strategic success.

Some hedge funds buy companies primarily to extract cash quickly, not to build long-term value. They take control of businesses that are undervalued or easy to load with debt, often financing the acquisitions so the companies themselves carry the debt.

After the takeover, valuable assets such as real estate or business units are sold, special dividends or fees are paid out, and costs are sharply cut, often through layoffs or reduced investment. The company may then be broken up and sold in pieces.

From a Spiral Dynamics perspective, while this approach uses constructions created from orange values, is strongly Red values-driven. It focuses on power, control, and quick cash. Speed, dominance, and short-term wins often take precedence over continuity, responsibility, and the organization’s long-term health.

Green – People and Shared Leadership

A Green-oriented business exists to create meaningful work, inclusion, and shared humanitarian values. Purpose centers on people, relationships, and societal contribution. The organization is seen as a community rather than a hierarchy. Leadership emphasizes facilitation, participation, and listening. Leaders focus on culture, trust, and giving voice to all stakeholders.

Succession is approached as a collective and consensual process. Decisions are ideally made together, with attention to fairness and emotional impact. Leadership may be rotated or shared among peers. When leaders step back or pass the organization on, their focus is on protecting relationships, equality, and shared ownership of purpose. Selling the business can be sensitive, especially if it threatens culture or values. Letting go is easier when people feel heard and included. The challenge lies in making clear decisions without drifting into endless dialogue or ambiguity.

Most examples of what can be seen as pure Green values succession are either small organizations, collectives, or non-profit organizations. Green-values-driven NGOs are set up as legal structures that are not privately owned. Succession in leadership focuses on identifying people who can sustain the organization’s purpose and fit the culture. Obviously, they would look for leaders with proven track records, but this would not necessarily be measured in financial results; rather, in reaching objectives that have more to do with social impact. But paramount is that there is a match between the leader and the people she works with.

A good example of a green-values-driven succession is the recent UK-based charity Chance for Childhood, where British CEO Anna-mai Andrews steps down and hands over leadership to Ven Nyamondo, the current chief operations officer in Rwanda. This was part of a long-term strategy, Anna-mai was quoted as saying: ‘It felt disingenuous for me to continue…. Genuinely, I feel like I need to step back. It must be an African leadership for it to be truly authentic to the values of Chance for Childhood.’ The emphasis here is on what aligns with the organization’s values.

Another example is a small physiotherapy practice I knew, whose owner wanted to retire. The organization’s culture was deeply green, focused on the well-being of both patients and staff. The organization provided the owner with income that was higher than the staff’s, but not by much. It took a long time to find a successor who had the funds to buy out the owner, was satisfied with the income, and fit the organization’s culture. Eventually, one of the staff took over with a buy-out construction, not needing capital to acquire the organization. Green succession often struggles with the underlying orange finances.

Then there are the corporations, started by founders with clear ideals. Whole Foods Market was founded in 1980 by John Mackey, who held the idealistic belief that business could serve more than profit. Mackey promoted health, environmental sustainability, ethical sourcing, and strong employee and community relationships, later articulated as conscious capitalism. For many years, Whole Foods embodied Green values, with decentralized store autonomy, a strong team culture, and a moral narrative around food systems.

By the mid-2010s, market developments challenged this model, and in 2017, Whole Foods was sold to Amazon for $13.7 billion. Mackey stated that Amazon agreed to respect Whole Foods’ culture and mission, and he stayed on as CEO for several years. These assurances, however, were not legally binding. At this point, we can already question the real underlying values that motivated Mackey to make this sale, as Amazon was known for its cutthroat business practices.

Since the acquisition, Whole Foods has increasingly shifted toward an Orange focus: tighter cost control, price reductions, greater standardization, and integration into Amazon’s efficiency- and data-driven systems. While elements of the original ideals remain visible, performance, scale, and competitiveness now dominate. The case shows how Green values often persist symbolically but can’t be maintained under Orange values-driven leadership.

As we have noted before, people and cultures are rarely defined by a single value drive, as demonstrated by the recent takeover of the family-owned Fibrebond company. The owner and CEO, Graham Walker, sold his company to Zekelman Industries, but not before securing that 15% of the proceeds of the sale – $240 million – would be paid out to his employees. Now, we have not interviewed Graham to ask what values were behind this demand, but from reading various articles on this, it seems that, besides a clear Orange values transaction, other values were at stake for Graham. Possibly rooted in a purple bond with his employees or Green values, in which he looked beyond orange success for the well-being of the people in the company.

Yellow – Functionality and Evolution

A Yellow-oriented organization exists to serve its role within a larger, complex system. Purpose is contextual and adaptive, not ideological as with Green values. The organization is designed to respond intelligently to changing life conditions. Leadership focuses on competence, systems thinking, and flexibility. Leaders step in where needed and step back when appropriate, without attachment to status.

Yellow values are new in our society and organization; this value meme is currently in its infancy or at most in puberty. This means that in certain organizations, we see clear signs of different approaches, but much of this is still in its experimental phase. Frederic Laloux studied such organizations and wrote about them in his book ‘Reinventing Organizations’. While his analysis offers great insights into how these organizations are shaped by self-management rather than top-down control, many of the examples in his book are more green/yellow hybrid organizations than pure expressions of yellow.

As yellow is new, we write here what we see emerging now, understanding that as yellow in our organizations and society matures, it will provide us with new and more mature methods for succession and ownership than we can currently observe.

What we see now is that succession in Yellow systems is situational and pragmatic. The key question is not about finances or ideology but “what does this system need now?” Leadership may shift depending on context, phase, or challenge. When leaders step down, sell, or pass on the business, their focus is on the continuity of operations and evolutionary potential, not personal legacy. Ownership and control are secondary to viability. Letting go is relatively easy, as identity is not tied to position. Success is not measured by personal wealth but by whether the organization continues to function well within its wider ecosystem.

In organizations guided by yellow values and emphasizing self-management, the role of a CEO differs fundamentally from that in more orange, performance-driven organizations. A well-known example is Chris Rufer, founder of Morning Star Company in California. Although the company introduced self-management practices in the 1990s and operates without a traditional CEO role, this does not mean that power is entirely absent.

For decades, Rufer has not been involved in the day-to-day operations. He describes his role primarily as the guardian of the self-management principles rather than as an operational leader. Morning Star often presents itself as having “no boss.” At the same time, it is important to recognize that Rufer remains the sole owner of the company and retains authority over capital allocation and major investments. In that sense, while decision-making is largely decentralized, ultimate power is not evenly distributed and remains structurally concentrated at the ownership level. As Rufer continues this role today, the issue of succession and transfer of ownership of the company has not been addressed.

Let’s examine another case. Patagonia was founded by Yvon Chouinard with a mission to build the best product, cause no unnecessary harm, and use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis. We can see a clear yellow purpose here, as the company wants to contribute to solving the current environmental crisis. When it comes to employee welfare, the company seems to have strong Green values too. The company, however, has a more traditional structure and has never explored more yellow concepts such as self-management.

When it came to succession, however, Chouinard saw private ownership as a risk to maintaining the company’s yellow purpose. In 2022, he and his family gave away 100% of their shares rather than selling the company or passing it on to heirs. All voting shares were transferred to the Patagonia Purpose Trust, whose sole task is to protect the company’s mission. All non-voting shares were given to the Holdfast Collective, a nonprofit that receives Patagonia’s profits to fund environmental protection.

This structure is known as Steward Ownership. In steward-owned companies, control is separated from financial gain. Those who govern the company do so as stewards of purpose, not as profit maximizers, and profits are reinvested in the mission rather than extracted by owners. By removing himself entirely as owner, Chouinard ensured that Patagonia’s mission would no longer depend on a founder’s personal choices, but be structurally protected for the long term. This is a great example of yellow values, putting the organization’s purpose first rather than personal gain or glory.

Conclusion

Across the examples discussed, succession and ownership transitions reveal how deeply values shape decisions about power, continuity, and responsibility. Earlier-stage approaches tend to focus on preserving control or optimizing performance, while later-stage, more complex approaches address the structural conditions that allow organizations to endure beyond individual leaders. Cases such as Patagonia demonstrate the emergence of a new approach that puts the organization’s purpose above individual financial or ideological goals.

While reading this, you most likely have personal preferences, but it is important to note that each of these approaches is functional within a cultural context driven by specific values. Understanding these patterns may help leaders, boards, and advisors make succession choices that are both realistic and aligned with the values of the people involved.

References and Sources

• Heineken ownership: https://www.reuters.com/article/business/four-generations-on-heineken-family-wont-loosen-grip-idUSKBN0HA19H
• Gucci family struggle: https://mg.co.za/friday/2022-11-19-the-rise-and-fall-and-rise-of-the-fashion-house-of-gucci/
• Toyota succession: https://toyotatimes.jp/en/newscast/002.html
• Apple hires John Sculley: https://www.cultofmac.com/apple-history/apple-ceo-john-sculley
• Facebook buys WhatsApp: https://www.ft.com/content/44d4fc72-99b2-11e3-b3a2-00144feab7de
• Elon Musk takeover of Twitter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_Twitter_by_Elon_Musk
• Chance for Childhood succession: https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/ceo-of-children-s-charity-steps-down-to-allow-africa-based-leader-to-take-over.html
• Chance for Childhood organization: https://www.chanceforchildhood.org
• Whole Foods acquisition by Amazon (2017): https://media.wholefoodsmarket.com/amazon-to-acquire-whole-foods-market/
• The Amazonification of Whole Foods won’t work:  https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherwalton/2025/11/16/the-amazonification-of-whole-foods-is-doa-for-one-simple-reason/
• Fibrebond sale and employee bonuses: https://people.com/boss-gifts-employees-240m-in-bonuses-after-selling-family-company-11876374
• Morning Star self-management: https://medium.com/dartagnanjournal/self-management-pioneers-series-the-morning-star-company-065cabf76648
• On Steward Ownership: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/09/silver-transition-business-succession-planning/
• Patagonia ownership transition (2022): https://www.patagonia.com/ownership/
• Reinventing organizations: Laloux, F. (2014). Reinventing Organizations. Nelson Parker.
• On Patagonia’s culture: Chouinard, Y. (2006). Let My People Go Surfing. Penguin