To successfully launch manufacturing operations in this fast growing country, take advantage of the private and government assistance that's available, advises consultant Kurt Binh.
Long overshadowed by its giant neighbor, China, Vietnam is becoming a manufacturing hot spot in its own right. In fact, this small Southeast Asian country is one of the fastest growing locations for manufacturing in the world. According to Vietnam's General Statistics Office, foreign direct investment in that sector rose 13.3 percent from 2008 to 2009 and 19.7 percent from 2009 to 2010.
With labor and production costs rising in China and companies wanting to spread their supply chain risk rather than depend on a single manufacturing source, Vietnam has successfully positioned itself as a nearby, lower-cost alternative. Any business that shifts production to Vietnam, however, should be prepared for some challenges in such areas as transportation infrastructure and relationships with local companies and government agencies.
As the owner of SCM Vietnam, a supply chain and logistics consulting company, and chief editor of the magazine Vietnam Supply Chain Insight, Kurt Binh understands those challenges. In a recent interview with Editor James Cooke, the enterprising and energetic Binh offered his insights and advice on what foreign companies should do to succeed in his country.
Have you seen increased interest by foreign companies in opening manufacturing operations in Vietnam in the past year?
Yes, Vietnam is another "rising dragon" in Asia; it is really a most attractive country for foreign direct investment. Since Vietnam increasingly is an integral part of the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) market rather than a single market, manufacturing companies investing in Vietnam should really consider themselves to be taking part in the ASEAN market.
Moving manufacturing operations to Vietnam is one of the smart strategies that many foreign companies adopted to minimize a high-risk dependence on China. [Some of the] big players we see in Vietnam include Intel, Samsung, Coca-Cola, Canon, Formosa, Pepsi, Nestlé, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, and Honda.
The most interesting and booming sectors in Vietnam are real estate, retail and distribution, high-tech, heavy industry, and processing.
If a foreign company wanted to begin manufacturing in Vietnam, should it contract with a local company or form its own operation? What are the pros and cons of each approach?
There is no optimal solution that works in each case. We see many international retailers sourcing products in Vietnam. Wal-Mart, Kmart, Nike, and Gap already have Vietnam-based sourcing representatives. But we also have seen many foreign high-tech companies establish their own production facilities in Vietnam. The best advice, then, is: If you want to set up labor-intensive manufacturing, you should partner with local companies, but for capital and technology-intensive businesses, it's better to set up your own operations in Vietnam.
Name: Kurt Binh Title: Owner and vice director Organization: SCM Vietnam, a supply chain and logistics consulting company
Chief editor of the monthly magazine Vietnam Supply Chain Insight
SCM consultant and Infor Supply Chain Partner in Vietnam
Education: Truòng Dai hoc Ngoai Thuong (Foreign Trade University)
CSCMP member since 2009
What are some of the supply chain challenges companies will encounter when establishing a manufacturing operation in Vietnam?
There are many challenges for foreign companies that want to set up a production operation in Vietnam.
The first and most important thing is to understand how to think globally and act locally in Vietnam. Vietnam's culture is somewhat different from Western countries; I have seen many companies face culture shocks when they set up manufacturing in Vietnam. My advice is to try to utilize local experts to help during implementation.
The second important challenge is labor skill and expertise. If you want to build high-tech products and operate sophisticated facilities, then you can face a shortage of well-skilled workers. Intel is an example of [a company that encountered this problem]. When it started a chip factory in Vietnam, Intel tried to overcome the challenges by partnering with a Vietnamese technical university to develop well-trained and skilled workers. Anyway, Vietnam's population is very young and has the capability to learn fast, so a company can quickly fill up any "hole."
The third challenge is the legal and regulatory environment. Although Vietnam joined the World Trade Organization in 2007, the legal environment is still in development. This means that a company can face a sudden change in laws and regulations, especially in the import-export area.
The fourth challenge is logistics infrastructure. Over the years, Vietnam has spent a large amount of ODA (Official Development Assistance) in upgrading its logistics infrastructure, but the infrastructure still does not meet the needs of economic growth and foreign investment.
Vietnam is still many years behind China's infrastructure level. Power blackouts, traffic jams, and port congestion are common bottlenecks that have recently been seen in Vietnam. But Vietnam is still an attractive country for investment because of its high number of young workers, advanced telecommunications, increasing transparency in law and economic policy (thanks especially to electronic sharing of government information), and well-educated students.
Are there third-party logistics companies (3PLs) that can assist foreign companies with distribution in Vietnam?
Vietnam is increasingly deregulating its transport and logistics industry. Ten years ago, there were few foreign logistics and shipping companies with official operations in Vietnam. But now a number of them have set up a long-term business in Vietnam in the form of either a joint venture or 100-percent foreign-owned business.
There are a lot of foreign 3PLs that have invested in Vietnam. You can see the presence of 25 of the world's biggest 3PLs, including such companies as DHL, Kuehne + Nagel, Damco, APL Logistics, FedEx, DB Schenker, and Agility. These companies have strong positions in Vietnam, especially in container shipping, freight forwarding, warehousing, and distribution as well as express services.
Recently I observed that many international 3PLs have invested many millions of U.S. dollars in first-class and multipurpose warehouses and distribution centers in parallel with an expansion of their local presence.
But besides that, you also see the significant rise of local 3PLs with strong ambitions, such as Sai Gon New Port, ICD Song Than, ICD Long Binh, Sotrans, and ITL-Kepple. They have strong investments in service capability, facilities, and management. Some of them have deployed complicated information technology solutions, such as warehouse management systems and transportation management systems, which can provide better visibility and decision support for customers.
What is the best transportation option—truck, rail, or barge—for moving products from the factory to a port for export?
It depends on the location of your manufacturing sites, but most moves are done by trucking. This is due to the limited convenience of barge and rail services. The rail mode only provides transportation between the North and South, while barge transportation only serves the Mekong Delta.
In Vietnam we have strong economic clusters located in the South in such places as Ho Chi Minh City, Dong Nai, and Binh Duong, and in such Northern places as Ha Noi, Hai Phong, Bac Ninh, and Hai Duong. Those clusters account for the majority of foreign investment.
Does the government set transportation rates?
In Vietnam, the transportation rates are controlled by the market and not by the government. So shippers can easily deal with providers to get the best rate to meet their logistics requirements. Besides that, we also have the Vietnam Shipper Council [a government agency], which can help shippers to deal with a transport provider on rate stabilization.
Are there state agencies that assist foreign companies that want to initiate production in Vietnam?
There are three sources of information and help whenever you want to set up production in Vietnam.
The first and official source is FIA (Foreign Investment Agency). This organization belongs to the Ministry of Planning and Investment. You can find more information on their official website, www.fia.mpi.gov.vn. Under the FIA, we have many local agencies that can help foreign companies that want to invest in their locations.
The second source—a very important one for foreign companies—is Amcham, or the American Chamber of Commerce, and Eurocham, the European Chamber of Commerce. The organizations in Vietnam are very dynamic and widely connected with foreign and local companies. So they can help foreign companies with up-to-date and useful information on Vietnam's investment climate.
The third source is private, local investment consulting firms. These companies have close relationships with government agencies and have in-depth expertise in investment setup and implementation.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”