Germany needs more production capacity for defense equipment. At the same time, the automotive industry is restructuring plants and cutting jobs. The obvious conclusion, therefore, is that those who produce cars today could be working in the defense industry tomorrow.
This theory is not entirely wrong. However, it is perhaps too simplistic.
This was one of the topics discussed at the event "Defense from the Center: Europe's Strength and the Role of Business," hosted by SThree, Rheinmetall, and the BVBBusinessNetwork at SIGNAL IDUNA PARK on May 21, 2026. More information about the event is available here.
There is no lack of industrial experience.
There are several arguments in favor of the transfer. Few industries are as adept at mass production as the German automotive industry. Employees are familiar with automated systems, demanding quality processes, tightly scheduled production, and complex supply chains. Those who have previously worked in an automotive plant will therefore not be starting from scratch. Existing plants, supplier networks, and industrial collaborations can accelerate the ramp-up. This potential should be strategically utilized.
But the crucial question is not whether a career change is possible in principle. It is: Which skills can be transferred and where are new qualifications needed?
Capacity is not the same as competence
Employees in the defense industry, unlike those in the automotive sector, work with hazardous and explosive materials, sensitive technologies, and safety-critical components. Mistakes have a different scope.
Another factor that can hardly be accelerated is experience. The discussion at the event in May made it clear that some specialized skills only develop over years or even decades. Production halls can be built and machines can be bought. However, the knowledge of how to reliably manufacture, test, and further develop complex systems doesn't appear at the push of a button.
Potential is revealed in the skillset
Whether a former VW employee can work in the defense industry cannot be answered definitively. Some prior experience, such as technical know-how, knowledge of production processes, or documentation, is certainly transferable. For others, additional qualifications, security clearances, or longer training periods are necessary.
The key is to think in terms of competencies, not job titles: Who has mastered precise manufacturing processes? Who is familiar with automated systems? Who has experience with electronics, software, system integration, or technical documentation? This perspective opens the industry to career changers without lowering safety-critical requirements.
Employees must therefore adjust to a different culture of responsibility after a job change.
Companies, too, need to rethink their approach. Those solely seeking candidates with years of industry experience will hardly be able to meet their staffing needs. Rigid job profiles narrow the market precisely when new talent is required. What's needed are clear qualification pathways, structured competency analyses, and systematic knowledge transfer between experienced specialists and new employees.
Between development, acquisitions and external expertise
The defense industry can therefore benefit from the scaling capabilities of other sectors without adopting their production models wholesale. The key is to strategically leverage existing expertise while simultaneously developing new expertise where specific requirements apply. The "Build, Borrow, Buy" principle, already discussed in May, provides a realistic framework for this. Internal employees and junior staff are developed, external specialists are brought in for projects and peak workloads, and additional skilled workers are recruited strategically.
Scaling like the automotive industry? Yes. Wherever industrial processes and expertise are transferable. No. Where safety requirements, experiential knowledge, and specialized qualifications make the difference.