Michael Porter bàn về tính cạnh tranh của Việt Nam

Michael Porter.
Michael Porter ñược xem là một “nhà chiến lược” xuất sắc nhất hiện nay bởi hàng loạt các cuộc
bình chọn uy tín. Sau thành công trong việc tư vấn cho Thái Lan và nhiều quốc gia châu Á khác,
cách ñây khá lâu ông Michael Porter ñã trình bày với nguyên Thủ tướng Phan Văn Khải những yếu
tố cấu thành sức mạnh cạnh tranh của Việt Nam.
Dưới ñây là ñoạn trích giới thiệu bài viết của ông ñăng tải trên website chính thức tại ðại học Harvard.
“Chỉ có các doanh nghiệp mới có thể tạo ra của cải, không phải chính phủ. Tôi nhìn thấy ở Việt Nam một
năng lực sản xuất và môi trường làm việc rất tốt.
Sự phát triển chính là một quá trình nâng cấp nền kinh tế, trong ñó môi trường kinh doanh sẽ là nơi luôn
ủng hộ và khuyến khích những cách thức mới mẻ và hiệu quả ñể tạo ra sức cạnh tranh của mỗi doanh
nghiệp nói riêng và tổng thể doanh nghiệp trên toàn quốc nói chung cũng như ngay cả trong thương
trường quốc tế. ðể nói giản ñơn nhất về năng lực cạnh tranh của doanh nghiệp, nền kinh tế và quốc gia
Việt Nam, chúng ta cần thấu hiểu vài vấn ñề chính của tính cạnh tranh.
ðiều ñầu tiên , là cần phải vượt lên trên sự dựa dẫm vào sự tăng trưởng xuất khẩu. Những tín hiệu ban ñầu
cho thấy tham vọng có thể xây dựng Việt Nam trở thành một ñịa ñiểm năng suất cao và nâng cấp các khu
vực nội ñịa.
Thứ ñến, tôi nhìn thấy, và các báo cáo quốc tế cũng khẳng ñịnh như vậy, là Việt Nam ñang phát triển một
khu vực cá nhân trong nước mạnh mẽ và ñộc lập. ðó cũng ñồng nghĩa với việc phát triển quá trình tư hữu
hoá và sự quản lý của Chính phủ, phát triển thị trường tài chính.
Một ñiều tối quan trọng là cần phải giải quyết những ñiểm yếu chủ chốt của môi trường kinh doanh, như
tính quan liêu và tệ tham nhũng, cùng với sự yếu kém của cơ sở hạ tầng.
Sau ñó, tôi cho rằng Việt Nam cần phải tập trung vào những ngành kinh tế chủ chốt và có ưu thế, như du
lịch, dệt may, giày dép, thuỷ hải sản và dầu khí.
Có một ñiều cuối cùng mà tôi muốn mọi người lưu ý là cần phải thúc ñẩy sự phát triển theo những mức
khác nhau: các tỉnh trong nước Việt Nam, khu vực ðông Dương sau ñó phải lấn dần sang khu vực ðông
Nam Á. ðó là con ñường quan trọng cần theo”.
Theo Kiến Phước
Báo Sài Gòn Tiếp thị

National Competitiveness:
Issues for Vietnam
Meeting with
Prime Minister Phan Van Khai
and his delegation

Professor Michael E. Porter
Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness
Harvard Business School
Cambridge, Massachusetts
June 24, 2005
This presentation draws on Michael Porter, Klaus Schwab: The Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005, Oxford University
Press, 2004 and other sources. For further information on the Report and on the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness see
www.isc.hbs.edu

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

1

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Topics for Discussion

•

National competitiveness: essential concepts

•


Competitive assessment of Vietnam

•

Key issues for Vietnamese policy

•

Profile of the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

2

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


What is Competitiveness?
•

Competitiveness is determined by the productivity (value per unit of input) with which
a nation, region, or cluster uses its human, capital, and natural resources.
Productivity sets a nation’s or region’s standard of living (wages, returns on capital,
returns on natural resources)
– Productivity depends both on the value of products and services (e.g. uniqueness,
quality) as well as the efficiency with which they are produced.
– It is not what industries a nation or region competes in that matters for prosperity,
but how firms compete in those industries
– Productivity in a nation or region is a reflection of what both domestic and foreign

firms choose to do in that location. The location of ownership is secondary for
national prosperity.
– The productivity of “local” industries is of fundamental importance to
competitiveness, not just that of traded industries
– Devaluation and revaluation do not make a country more or less “competitive”

•

Nations or regions compete in offering the most productive environment for
business

•

The public and private sectors should play different but interrelated roles in creating
a productive economy

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

3

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Determinants of Competitiveness

Macroeconomic,
Macroeconomic, Political,
Political, Legal,
Legal, and
and Social

Social Context
Context

Microeconomic
Microeconomic Foundations
Foundations
The
TheSophistication
Sophistication
of
ofCompany
Company
Operations
Operationsand
and
Strategy
Strategy

The
TheQuality
Qualityof
ofthe
the
Microeconomic
Microeconomic
Business
Business
Environment
Environment


• A sound macroeconomic, political, legal, and social context creates the potential
for competitiveness, but is not sufficient
• Only firms can create wealth, not government
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

4

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Productivity and the Business Environment
Context
Context for
for
Firm
Firm
Strategy
Strategy
and
and Rivalry
Rivalry
z

Factor
Factor
(Input)
(Input)
Conditions
Conditions
z


z

Presence of high quality,
z
specialized inputs available
to firms
– Human resources
– Capital resources
– Physical infrastructure
– Administrative infrastructure
(e.g. business registration, rules,
licensing, property rights)
z
– Information infrastructure
– Scientific and technological
z
infrastructure
– Natural resources

A local context and rules that
encourage investment and
sustained productivity
improvement
Demand
Demand
–e.g., Intellectual property
Conditions
protection
Conditions

Meritocratic incentive systems
across all major institutions
z Sophisticated and demanding
Open and vigorous local
local customer(s)
competition
z Local customer needs that
anticipate those elsewhere
Related
and
Related and
z Unusual local demand in
Supporting
Supporting
specialized segments that can be
Industries
served nationally and globally
Industries
Access to capable, locally based suppliers
and firms in related fields
Presence of clusters instead of isolated
industries

• Successful economic development is a process of successive economic upgrading, in
which the business environment in a nation evolves to support and encourage
increasingly sophisticated ways of competing
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

5


Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Clusters and Competitiveness
Cairns (Australia) Tourism
Public
Public Relations
Relations &&
Market
Market Research
Research
Services
Services

Travel
Travel agents
agents

Tour
Tour operators
operators

Restaurants
Restaurants

Attractions
Attractions and
and
Activities
Activities


Food
Food
Suppliers
Suppliers

e.g.,
e.g., theme
theme parks,
parks,
casinos,
casinos, sports
sports

Property
Property
Services
Services

Maintenance
Maintenance
Services
Services

Airlines,
Airlines,
Cruise
Cruise Ships
Ships


Hotels
Hotels

Local
Local retail,
retail,
health
health care,
care, and
and
other
other services
services

Local
Local
Transportation
Transportation

Souvenirs,
Souvenirs,
Duty
Duty Free
Free
Banks,
Banks,
Foreign
Foreign
Exchange
Exchange


Government
Government agencies
agencies

Educational
Educational Institutions
Institutions

Industry
Industry Groups
Groups

e.g.
e.g. Australian
Australian Tourism
Tourism Commission,
Commission,
Great
Barrier
Reef
Authority
Great Barrier Reef Authority

e.g.
e.g. James
James Cook
Cook University,
University,
Cairns

College
of
Cairns College of TAFE
TAFE

e.g.
e.g. Queensland
Queensland Tourism
Tourism
Industry
Council
Industry Council

Sources: HBS student team research (2003) - Peter Tynan, Chai McConnell, Alexandra West, Jean Hayden
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

6

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Influences on Competitiveness
Multiple Geographic Levels
World Economy

Broad Economic Areas

ASEAN

Groups of Neighboring

Nations

Indochina

Nations

Vietnam

States, Provinces

Cities
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

7

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Specialization of Regional Economies
Select U.S. Geographic Areas

Seattle-BellevueSeattle-BellevueEverett,
Everett,WA
WA
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehicles
and
andDefense
Defense

Fishing
Fishingand
andFishing
Fishing
Products
Products
Analytical
AnalyticalInstruments
Instruments

Denver,
Denver,CO
CO
Leather
Leatherand
andSporting
SportingGoods
Goods
Oil
and
Gas
Oil and Gas
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
andDefense
Defense

Chicago
Chicago

Communications
CommunicationsEquipment
Equipment
Processed
ProcessedFood
Food
Heavy
HeavyMachinery
Machinery

Wichita,
Wichita,KS
KS
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
and
Defense
Defense
Heavy
HeavyMachinery
Machinery
Oil
and
Oil andGas
Gas

Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh,PA
PA

Construction
ConstructionMaterials
Materials
Metal
Manufacturing
Metal Manufacturing
Education
Educationand
andKnowledge
Knowledge
Creation
Creation

San
San FranciscoFranciscoOakland-San
Oakland-San Jose
Jose
Bay
Bay Area
Area
Communications
Communications
Equipment
Equipment
Agricultural
Agricultural
Products
Products
Information
Information

Technology
Technology

Los
Los Angeles
Angeles Area
Area
Apparel
Apparel
Building
Building Fixtures,
Fixtures,
Equipment
Equipment and
and
Services
Services
Entertainment
Entertainment

Boston
Boston
Analytical
AnalyticalInstruments
Instruments
Education
Educationand
andKnowledge
KnowledgeCreation
Creation

Communications
Equipment
Communications Equipment

Raleigh-Durham,
Raleigh-Durham,NC
NC
Communications
CommunicationsEquipment
Equipment
Information
InformationTechnology
Technology
Education
Educationand
and
Knowledge
KnowledgeCreation
Creation

San
SanDiego
Diego
Leather
Leatherand
andSporting
SportingGoods
Goods
Power
PowerGeneration

Generation
Education
Educationand
andKnowledge
Knowledge
Creation
Creation

Houston
Houston
Heavy
HeavyConstruction
ConstructionServices
Services
Oil
and
Oil andGas
Gas
Aerospace
AerospaceVehicles
Vehiclesand
andDefense
Defense

Atlanta,
Atlanta,GA
GA
Construction
ConstructionMaterials
Materials

Transportation
Transportationand
andLogistics
Logistics
Business
Services
Business Services

Note: Clusters listed are the three highest ranking clusters in terms of share of national employment
Source: Cluster Mapping Project, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, Harvard Business School
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

8

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Stages Of Competitive Development

Factor
-Driven
Factor-Driven
Economy
Economy

Investment
Investment-Driven
Driven Economy
Economy


Innovation
Innovation-Driven
Driven Economy
Economy

Input Cost

Efficiency

Unique Value

• Macro, political, and
legal stability
• Efficient basic
infrastructure
• Lowering the regulatory
costs of doing business

• Local competition
• Market openness
• Incentives and rules
encouraging productivity
• Cluster development

• Advanced skills
• Advanced infrastructure
• Incentives and rules
encouraging innovation

• Cluster upgrading


Source: Porter, Michael E., The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Macmillan Press, 1990
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

9

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Shifting Responsibilities for Economic Development

Old
Old Model
Model

New
New Model
Model

•• Government
Government drives
drives economic
economic
development
development through
through policy
policy
decisions
decisions and
and incentives

incentives

•• Economic
Economic development
development is
is aa
collaborative
collaborative process
process involving
involving
government
government at
at multiple
multiple levels,
levels,
companies,
companies, teaching
teaching and
and
research
research institutions,
institutions, and
and
institutions
institutions for
for collaboration
collaboration

• Competitiveness must become a bottoms-up process in which citizens take
responsibility

• Every community and cluster can take steps to enhance competitiveness
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

10

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Vietnamese Competitiveness
Accomplishments

•

Strong GDP growth record; economic growth has been resilient during
the Asian Crisis and SARS

•

The poverty rate has fallen from 58% to 29% from 1992 to 2002

•

Solid labor productivity growth

•

Strong export growth

•


Strong FDI inflows

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

11

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Vietnamese Competitiveness
Issues

•

Prosperity remains at a low level

•

Labor productivity remains very low

•

Vietnam’s business environment remains very weak
– Fall in the GCR business competitiveness ranking in 2004
– Key weaknesses include corruption, physical infrastructure, skill
base, financial markets, technology, cluster depth and the nature of
competitive advantages

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt


12

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Comparative Economic Performance
Real GDP Growth Rates

Countries sorted by 19982003 annual real GDP
growth rate (CAGR)

Annual growth rate
of real GDP

20%
CHINA
MYANMAR

15%

VIETNAM
CAMBODIA
LAOS

10%

INDIA
BANGLADESH
MALAYSIA


5%

THAILAND
PHILIPPINES
PAKISTAN

0%

HONG KONG
NEW ZEALAND
SRI LANKA

-5%

SINGAPORE
INDONESIA
TAIWAN

-10%

JAPAN
PAPUA NEW GUINEA

03
20

02
20

01

20

00
20

99
19

98
19

97
19

96
19

95
19

94
19

93
19

92
19

91

19

19

90

-15%

Source: EIU (2004)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

13

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Comparative Economic Performance
30,000

Japan

Singapore

25,000

GDP per
capita
(PPP
adjusted)
in US-$,

2003

Hong Kong SAR
Taiwan

20,000

Slovenia
S Korea

15,000

Slovak Republic
10,000

Estonia
Latvia
Russia

Mexico
Thailand

Malaysia
5,000

Philippines
Indonesia
Bangladesh

Laos


0%

1%

2%

Myanmar

Cambodia

0
3%

4%

China

Vietnam

India

5%

6%

7%

8%


Compound annual growth rate of real GDP per capita, 1998-2003
Source: EIU (2004)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

14

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Comparative Labor Productivity Performance
70,000

60,000

Hong Kong SAR
Taiwan
Singapore

Japan

50,000
GDP per
employee
(PPP
adjusted)
in US-$,
2003

40,000


S Korea

30,000

20,000

10,000

0
-20%

Malaysia
Philippines
Indonesia

Thailand
India

China

Vietnam
Bangladesh

-10%

0%

10%

20%


30%

Compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of real GDP per employee, 1998-2003
Source: EIU (2004)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

15

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Vietnam’s Export Performance
World export
share in %

World Export Market Shares

0.30%

0.25%

0.20%
goods
services
total

0.15%

0.10%


0.05%

0.00%
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Source: WTO (2005)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

16

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Comparative Inward Foreign Investment
Selected Countries
FDI Stocks as % of GDP,
Average 2001-2003

Asian countries

80%

Netherlands

70%

Estonia
60%

Kazakhstan


Malaysia

Vietnam

Hungary

50%

Cambodia
40%

China

Czech Republic

Costa Rica

30%

Thailand
Poland
20%
Philippines
Russia
Taiwan
10%
S Korea
India
Japan

0%
0%

10%

Slovakia
Brazil
Slovenia

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

FDI Inflows as % of Gross Fixed Capital Formation, Average 2001-2003
Source: UNCTAD (2004)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

17

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Global Competitiveness Report 2004
The Relationship Between Business Competitiveness and GDP Per Capita

Norway

35,000

Asian countries

Iceland Canada

30,000

Ireland
Italy

2003 GDP per
Capita 25,000
(Purchasing
Power Adjusted)

Denmark
Switzerland
Netherlands
Finland
UK
Sweden
Singapore

Spain
Greece
Cyprus
Malta

Portugal
Czech Rep

15,000

Hungary
Slovak Rep.
Poland

Argentina
Croatia
Uruguay Chile
Bulgaria

10,000
Bosnia
Paraguay
Bolivia

0

Austria
Belgium
France
Taiwan

20,000

5,000


United States

Ethiopia

Vietnam
Malawi

New Zealand
Israel

Slovenia

S Korea

Estonia
Lithuania

Chile
Mexico Brazil
Turkey
Tunisia
Jamaica

China
Jordan

Ghana
Kenya

Indonesia


South Africa

Malaysia

India

Business Competitiveness Index
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2004
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

18

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Factor
Factor
(Input)
(Input)
Conditions
Conditions

Factor (Input) Conditions
Vietnam’s Relative Position

Competitive Advantages
Relative to GDP per Capita

Competitive Disadvantages

Relative to GDP per Capita

Country Ranking, Arrows
indicate a change of 5 or more
ranks since 1998

Country Ranking, Arrows
indicate a change of 5 or more
ranks since 1998

Administrative burden for startups

35

Quality of management schools

91

Reliability of police services

36

Overall infrastructure quality

84

Availability of scientists and engineers

40


Quality of scientific research institutions

84

Judicial independence

53

Cell phones per 100 people (2003)

84

Local equity market access

54

Extent of bureaucratic red tape

83

Telephone/fax infrastructure quality

55

Quality of the educational system

79

Efficiency of legal framework


55

Port infrastructure quality

77

Venture capital availability

57

Quality of electricity supply

77

Quality of public schools

58

University/industry research collaboration 74

Quality of math and science education

58

Railroad infrastructure development

61

Note: Rank versus 93 countries; overall, Vietnam ranks 73rd in Business Competitiveness and 83rd in 2003 PPP adjusted GDP per capita
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005

200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

19

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Factor
Factor
(Input)
(Input)
Conditions
Conditions

Corruption
Asian countries

1

Rank in
Global
Corruption
Index,
2003

Vietnam
80

-15


-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Change in Rank, Global Corruption Report, 2003 versus 2001

Source: Global Corruption Report, 2003
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

20

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Factor
Factor
(Input)
(Input)
Conditions
Conditions

Communication Infrastructure

Vietnam’s Relative Position

Per 1,000 inhabitants,
2002

1000
900
800
700
600

Phonelines
Cell phones
Internet users

500
400
300
200
100

Ho
ng

Ko
ng
SA
Si
R
Ko nga

po
re
a,
r
Re e
p.
of
Ja
p
M an
al
ay
s
Th ia
ai
la
nd
C
Ph hin
ilip a
pi
In nes
do
ne
s
Vi ia
et
na
m
In

di
a
Ba Lao
s
ng
la
de
s
M
ya h
nm
ar

0

Source: Human Development Report (2004)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

21

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Context
Contextfor
for
Firm
Strategy
Firm Strategy
and

andRivalry
Rivalry

Context for Firm Strategy and Rivalry
Vietnam’s Relative Position

Competitive Advantages
Relative to GDP per Capita

Competitive Disadvantages
Relative to GDP per Capita

Country Ranking, Arrows
indicate a change of 5 or more
ranks since 1998

Country Ranking, Arrows
indicate a change of 5 or more
ranks since 1998

Cooperation in labor-employer relations

33

Hidden trade barrier liberalization

91

Decentralization of corporate activity


39

Prevalence of mergers and acquisitions

88

Extent of locally based competitors

40

Foreign ownership restrictions

86

Centralization of economic policy-making 41

Effectiveness of anti-trust policy

84

Favoritism in decisions of government
officials

50

Intellectual property protection

84

Regulation of securities exchanges


75

Protection of minority shareholders’
interests

52

Business costs of corruption

69

Tariff liberalization

53

Intensity of local competition

66

Efficacy of corporate boards

61

Note: Rank versus 93 countries; overall, Vietnam ranks 73rd in Business Competitiveness and 83rd in 2003 PPP adjusted GDP per capita
Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

22


Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Taxation

Context
Contextfor
for
Firm
Strategy
Firm Strategy
and
andRivalry
Rivalry

Selected Asian Countries

Positive

Incentive Effect
Complexity

an
Ja
p

m
Vi
et


na

s
Ph
ili
pp
in
e

ea
Ko
r

es
h
gl
ad
Ba
n

C
hi
na

d
Th
ai
la
n


di
a
In

a
al
ay
si
M

Ta
iw
an

ap
Si
ng

H
on

g

K

on
g

SA


or
e

R

Negative

Source: Global Competitiveness Report 2004
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

23

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter


Context
Contextfor
for
Firm
Strategy
Firm Strategy
and
andRivalry
Rivalry

Labor Market Regulation
Selected Asian Countries

Stringency of Labor Market
Regulation*, (0-100)


70
Restrictive
60
50
OECD

40

30

20
Liberal 10

Ko Ind
ia
re
a,
R
ep
C
.
am
bo
di
a
La
os
Vi
et

na
m
In
do
ne
si
a
Ta
iw
Ph
a
ilip n
pi
ne
Th s
ai
la
nd

C
hi
Ba
na
ng
la
de
sh

Si
ng

ap
or
e
M
al
ay
H
on sia
g
Ko
ng
Ja
pa
n

0

Note: Average of values for hiring, firing, and employment condition regulations
Source: World Bank (2005)
200506 GCR Vietnam – KC 2005.06.24.ppt

24

Copyright 2005 © Professor Michael E. Porter