The Strategic Bet I Placed on Vietnam — And Why It Was Right

 

By Lance Li, BW Industrial CEO Originally published on dantri.com.vn, this essay reflects Lance Li’s personal observations formed over years of living and working in Vietnam—years spent alongside hundreds of international manufacturers during one of the most dynamic periods in the country’s FDI journey.

I grew up in a country where development unfolded at extraordinary speed. In China, entire stretches of expressway could appear overnight, and an industrial park that broke ground in spring could welcome its first factory by autumn. What once perceived as a miracle, I later understood to be the result of discipline, standardization, and a relentless drive to avoid stagnation.When I entered the industrial real estate sector, my guiding principles became clear: progress, standards, and predictability. Investors do not fear higher costs; they fear uncertainty. And during my years there, ambiguity was rarely part of China’s system.

Many questioned my decision to move to Vietnam at a time when China’s industrial sector was at its peak. But in Vietnam, I saw something familiar: a country standing at the threshold of transformative growth, energized by youthful ambition, a formidable work ethic, and a clear focus on its development roadmap. I wanted to be part of that moment again—to contribute my experience and witness the birth of a new industrial era. What I did not foresee was how profoundly my five-year journey in Vietnam would reshape my own understanding.

The Rhythm of Progress

From the beginning, Vietnam’s workforce left a deep impression on me of being quick, intelligent, and adaptable. The challenges, however, lay in the administrative systems. Provinces often processed the same documents differently; technical standards were interpreted inconsistently. A single application could pass through multiple rounds of review, each requiring changes that another province might not even flag. At times, we completed the construction of a ready-built factory project, only to overhaul it to comply with newly issued regulations. The disparity in decision-making speed was particularly striking: 20 days in one province could stretch to three months in another.

Yet, with time, I came to realize Vietnam’s unique rhythm of change—quiet, steady, and deliberate. Incremental improvements began to compound into broader shifts. A file that once required four revisions now needed only one. A provincial official who initially hesitated over NFPA standards began proactively asking about sprinkler system designs. Young BW engineers returned from overseas training with innovative proposals to enhance operational readiness procedures, often surpassing my expectations.

These signals, subtle yet unmistakable, point to a nation that is advancing with confidence.

Two Models, One Goal

Fundamentally, Vietnam and China operate under different industrial development models. China’s path has been characterized by “scale – standards – speed,” while Vietnam, from my observation, follows “flexibility – learning – adaptation.” In China, the system is unified nationwide; in Vietnam, the approach often varies by province. But this very difference can be a strategic advantage, granting Vietnam greater agility, responsiveness to feedback, and assimilation to global standards.

Still, to unlock its full potential, Vietnam must embrace what fueled China’s rise: standardization. Predictability is paramount. Nationally harmonized administrative procedures, mandatory operational readiness (OR) inspections, and consistent and measurable permitting timelines would allow Vietnam to compete directly with any industrial hub in Asia. Enhancing the Provincial Competitiveness Index (PCI) isn’t about rankings—it’s about creating a unified framework across provinces, forging a “cross-provincial consistency” that enables industry to thrive.

The same principle applies to industrial land pricing. For years, Vietnam has been compared to China without acknowledging their fundamentally different land systems. China uses a pure upfront model with no annual rent scheme. Primary land is government-priced with a fresh 50-year tenure (now sometimes 20–30 years, depending on location), enabling the government to keep land affordable for manufacturers at a rate far below the market. Secondary market land, while privately negotiated and more expensive, is relatively uncommon.

Vietnam, by contrast, operates a dual system of upfront and annual rent. Investors lease land through industrial park developers—not directly from the government—so the remaining tenure at handover is always less than 50 years. Pricing is driven by the free market with no standardized method across provinces, and is significantly higher compared to China’s land costs. Under this structure, manufacturers struggle to forecast their input costs, and in some cases, land expenses consume a disproportionately large share of production inputs, eroding overall competitiveness.

Investment in infrastructure and streamlined administrative processes for new IP approvals can make more industrial land accessible. This increased supply would help moderate the cost of industrial land, thereby sustaining Vietnam’s competitiveness relative to other SEA countries.

The Road Ahead

Looking forward, with strong reforms, key provinces could harmonize administrative procedures within 3–5 years; infrastructure upgrades in energy, ports, and logistics could position Vietnam among regional leaders in 5–10 years. Stabilizing land supply and pricing is a longer-term endeavor—around 7–15 years—demanding proactive planning, transparency, and consistent governance. But these challenges are solvable when treated as foundational priorities.

I believe that once Vietnam aligns land quality, pricing clarity, and technical standards, high-quality FDI will accelerate at an unprecedented rate. After 5 years immersed in Vietnam’s industrial parks, I have come to see its future clearly. I see young engineers working until midnight still smiling; provincial officials championing new models; local manufacturers designing factories to meet international benchmarks; and new industrial parks planning not for short-term cost, but for 30-year operational efficiency.

Vietnam is standing at a pivotal moment—a golden window of opportunity. Yet golden moments do not wait. The world will not pause for Vietnam to standardize or reform. Every nation has its breakthrough point, and Vietnam is standing on the edge of its own.

I cannot say how long I will remain in my current role, but I know this: I placed my career bet on Vietnam, and the last 5 years have proven that choice right.

If Vietnam stays its course—standardizing systems, ensuring land transparency, investing in infrastructure, and respecting global norms—then in ten years, the question will no longer be, “How can Vietnam catch up with China?”, but rather, “How did Vietnam become Asia’s next industrial powerhouse?”

And I will say, with immense pride, that I saw it coming. I saw it from the sunlit construction sites, from the machines humming through the night, and from the hopeful eyes of a young generation, certain that tomorrow will be better than today.