Ferrari is already looking towards the future, but former engineer Luigi Mazzola believes the team’s priority should be understanding why its Formula 1 development programme is struggling to keep pace with its rivals. The problem goes beyond the performance of the SF-26: when hopes of success are repeatedly pushed back to the following season, maintaining motivation within the organisation can become another serious challenge.
There is one familiar phrase that returns whenever a Formula 1 season approaches its conclusion without delivering the results supporters had hoped for: “We’ll win next year.”
For Ferrari, however, postponing its ambitions until the next championship cannot become an automatic response to difficulties on the track. The question is not simply when a new car will arrive or which upgrade will be introduced next. It is about understanding why the work already completed has not been sufficient to keep the Scuderia ahead of its competitors.
That is one of the central issues raised by Luigi Mazzola, a former Ferrari engineer, in his assessment of the team’s current situation. Beginning with the technical challenges surrounding the SF-26, his analysis extends to the organisation of work at Maranello, the skills available within the team and the motivation of the people responsible for delivering results.
Why Ferrari’s promise to win next year could become a problem
One of the concerns raised during the discussion goes beyond the outright performance of the car. When part of a team’s resources is redirected towards the following year’s project as the current season approaches its conclusion, there is a risk that the ongoing championship begins to feel like a lost opportunity.
This is where the recurring promise of winning next year becomes particularly relevant. Luigi Mazzola connects the issue directly to the importance of keeping the organisation motivated, focused and committed to a common objective.
His reference to the camp bed for which he has become known is more than a humorous remark. For the former Ferrari engineer, the person leading the team must be present at the factory, engage directly with employees and create a sense that everyone is participating in the same challenge.
Motivation cannot, of course, replace technical performance. However, a team attempting to recover ground needs an environment in which expertise, commitment and objectives are all directed towards the same goal. The danger is not simply losing another season, but repeatedly beginning each new campaign with the same expectations without resolving the underlying problems that prevented success the previous year.
Luigi Mazzola questions Ferrari’s SF-26 development progress
One of the most important parts of Luigi Mazzola’s assessment concerns Ferrari’s ability to develop its Formula 1 car throughout a championship.
The former engineer does not suggest that the SF-26 has failed to improve. Instead, he highlights a fundamental distinction in modern Formula 1: improving a car is not enough if rival teams are making even greater progress.
“Maybe you’ve improved, but the others have improved more,” Luigi Mazzola explained.
This is the principle of relative performance. A team can develop an effective upgrade, achieve a measurable improvement and still lose ground in the competitive order because its opponents have gained even more.
Ferrari’s difficulty closing the gap to Mercedes and McLaren through its SF-26 upgrades illustrates why the effectiveness of a development programme must be assessed against the progress of competing teams, rather than simply comparing one version of a car with another.
Luigi Mazzola summarises his concern with another observation: “Clearly, something is getting in the way of all this.”
However, he does not identify a single component or technical department as the definitive cause. His reasoning considers several possible explanations, including the volume of work being completed, the commitment of employees, motivation, the sense of belonging to the project and the skills available within the organisation.
These are different factors, but they are closely connected. Transforming a promising technical foundation into a winning Formula 1 car requires more than identifying an effective aerodynamic or mechanical upgrade. The entire organisation must be capable of producing sustained improvements in performance.
Building a competitive Ferrari is not enough without continuous development
Luigi Mazzola’s analysis raises a broader question: does Ferrari have a development process capable of sustaining a fight at the front throughout an entire Formula 1 season?
His concern is not limited to the initial quality of the car. A Formula 1 machine may begin the championship with good balance, promising aerodynamic characteristics and a competitive mechanical platform, but those qualities must be supported by continuous technical evolution.
Performance in Formula 1 is always relative. Every team searches for new solutions, studies data and attempts to eliminate weaknesses. An advantage established early in a championship can disappear quickly if competitors identify more effective developments.
This has been an important theme throughout Ferrari’s 2026 campaign. The changing performance relationship between Ferrari and Mercedes demonstrates how improvements made by one team can be outweighed by progress elsewhere on the grid.
Consequently, technical work cannot focus exclusively on correcting existing problems. Engineers must also identify new development opportunities, anticipate the evolving requirements of the car and allocate resources to the areas that promise the greatest performance benefits.
That process requires technical expertise, effective collaboration between departments and a clear direction. If something interrupts or slows it down, upgrades may continue to arrive without delivering the performance increase required to compete at the front.
At that point, the following season’s project inevitably becomes another opportunity to start again, potentially without the underlying difficulties having been properly addressed.
Ferrari leadership and the importance of maintaining team motivation
Another significant aspect of Luigi Mazzola’s comments concerns the relationship between an organisation’s internal structure and its performance on the circuit.
When the discussion turns to the repeated postponement of Ferrari’s championship ambitions, the former engineer connects the problem to internal motivation and the physical presence of the person responsible for leading the team.
He returns to the idea of his camp bed, which represents a particular philosophy of leadership. In his view, whoever leads Ferrari should be deeply involved in the daily life of Maranello, understand the people working there and participate directly in building a cohesive organisation.
For Luigi Mazzola, the responsibilities of a Ferrari team principal should not be limited to managing activities during Grand Prix weekends. A fundamental part of the job takes place in offices, engineering departments and technical facilities, where hundreds of employees contribute to designing, producing and developing the car.
Being present also means understanding problems more clearly, recognising individual expertise and establishing direct relationships with the people responsible for turning technical decisions into competitive results.
The central idea is that leadership must create the conditions for employees to work with confidence, consistency and a shared sense of purpose.
However, simply spending more time at the factory is not sufficient. Effective leadership must also involve identifying the right people, recognising their abilities and ensuring technical work is directed towards the correct objectives.
His position therefore extends beyond individual decisions made on race weekends. It concerns the foundations on which a successful Formula 1 organisation is built.
Formula 1 budget cap and development: why there is no quick solution
Luigi Mazzola’s reasoning also connects with the financial restrictions imposed by Formula 1’s budget cap and the difficulty of achieving substantial performance improvements during a season.
Drawing on his own engineering experience, he recalls how challenging it could be to extract even a small amount of additional engine power. In his example, finding another five to ten horsepower could require an entire year of development, even during a period when financial resources and technical freedom were different from those available today.
Modern Formula 1 regulations require teams to make careful decisions about where to invest their time and resources. Not every modification delivers a meaningful performance gain, and not every weakness can be resolved through a single upgrade.
Ferrari’s power-unit development challenges under the budget cap offer further context for understanding how financial restrictions and engineering timescales influence the rate at which improvements can reach the circuit.
The same principle applies to the complete design of a Formula 1 car. Aerodynamics, mechanical performance, power-unit output and energy management must all contribute to the final competitive package.
The objective is not to expect an immediate transformation, but to establish an effective and sustainable development process. Ferrari must demonstrate that it can recover ground through consistent technical progress rather than placing all its hopes in the next generation of machinery.
What must Ferrari change to avoid repeating the same cycle?
Luigi Mazzola’s assessment ultimately raises a question that extends far beyond the outcome of an individual Grand Prix: can Ferrari consistently turn its daily engineering work into greater performance improvements than those achieved by its rivals?
The former engineer does not offer a single explanation for the team’s difficulties or suggest that one dramatic change would solve everything. Instead, he identifies a combination of human resources, expertise, motivation, innovation and technical development as essential elements of a successful Formula 1 organisation.
All these components must function together. If one area begins to fall behind, even a car with a promising technical foundation can become less competitive as the championship progresses.
That makes it especially important for Ferrari to understand where further improvements can be found and whether the resources available at Maranello are being invested in the right direction. The challenge is also reflected in the team’s extensive programme of aerodynamic and power-unit upgrades throughout 2026, where individual developments form part of a wider effort to improve the SF-26.
Only by identifying and addressing the underlying limitations can Ferrari ensure that its next project represents genuine progress rather than another promise of future success.
In Formula 1, preparing a car capable of winning the following year is not enough. A team must build an organisation that can continue improving faster than its competitors, season after season.
That is the fundamental question emerging from Luigi Mazzola’s analysis: not simply when Ferrari will return to winning consistently, but what needs to change within Maranello to make that ambition a reality.
