Enhancing port competitiveness through service and security excellence: a case of Vietnam

In the 21st-century, ports have evolved from simple cargo gateways into strategic hubs that shape global trade, regional development, and national competitiveness. Handling over 80% of global merchandise by volume, they face rising demands to operate efficiently, securely and responsively amid a rapidly changing logistics landscape (Nguyen and Woo, 2022).

This pressure is even stronger in emerging economies like Vietnam, where seaports are vital drivers of growth. Rapid industrialization, rising FDI and an expanding export base have sharply increased demand for high-performing ports (Le, 2022). Recent studies highlight that competitiveness depends not only on throughput and infrastructure but also on reliable services, strong security, and network connectivity (Vo et al., 2025; De Martino, 2018). Ports that offer efficient, reliable and connectivity services are more likely to become preferred ports of call, reinforcing competitiveness as the ability to meet market expectations at a reasonable cost.

Vietnam's maritime network includes 34 seaports, with Hai Phong and Cai Mep designated as special-class ports and eleven others, such as Quang Ninh, Da Nang and Ho Chi Minh City, classified as Class I in key economic regions (Figure 1). The rest comprise seven Class II and fourteen Class III ports. This classification, based on functional importance and capacity using a 100-point scoring system, was formalized under (Decision No. 804/QĐ-TTg, 2022).

According to (Decision No. 140/QĐ-TTg, 2025) on the detailed planning of seaport groups for the period 2021–2030, with a vision to 2050, Vietnam's seaport system is organized into five main groups: (1) the Northern region, (2) the North Central Coast, (3) the South Central Coast, (4) the Southeast region and (5) the Mekong Delta. The plan targets a modern, synchronized network capable of meeting growing domestic and international maritime transport needs. Container throughput in Vietnam has expanded substantially, rising from 11.1 million TEUs in 2014 to 30.0 million TEUs in 2024, and is projected to reach 50.0 million TEUs by 2030 (Vietnam Maritime Administration, 2024). According to Lloyd Maritime Company (2024), three Vietnamese ports – Saigon Port (22nd), Hai Phong Port (29th) and Cai Mep Port (30th) – are now among the world's top 50 in cargo throughput.

This growth is fueled by trade liberalization, manufacturing expansion and shifts in global supply chains. While planning and regulation remain state-led, operations increasingly involve SOEs and public–private partnerships, especially in major hubs like Cai Mep–Thi Vai and Lach Huyen. Rapid expansion has also exposed challenges, including uneven service quality, fragmented infrastructure and inconsistent security enforcement.

The issue is not just capacity but also competitiveness, especially in service quality, security and international alignment. Competitiveness today extends beyond throughput or infrastructure to the ability to provide reliable, secure and high-quality services. Shipping lines, freight forwarders and cargo owners now expect fast turnaround, safe cargo handling, and smooth regulatory compliance. In this service-driven environment, port service quality (SER) and port security quality (SEC) have become key determinants of customer satisfaction, loyalty and port choice (Chang and Thai, 2016).

Although their importance is increasingly recognized, research has largely treated port service quality and port security quality as separate topics. Service quality has been widely examined through models like SERVQUAL and ROPMIS (Le et al., 2020; Phan et al., 2021; Roh et al., 2025; Thai, 2008; Ugboma et al., 2004), while security studies focus mainly on compliance with frameworks such as the ISPS Code, C-TPAT and CSI (Chang and Thai, 2016; Chlomoudis et al., 2011; Yeo et al., 2013). Yet, few studies explore how these dimensions interact or jointly influence port competitiveness (Chang and Thai, 2016). This gap is especially significant in emerging economies like Vietnam, where rapid trade growth, institutional reforms and evolving security demands (Le and Nguyen, 2020) create conditions that cannot be understood by examining service or security alone.

This study fills this gap by examining how port service quality and port security quality interact to shape customer satisfaction and how satisfaction subsequently influences port competitiveness. It introduces port security quality as a service-oriented construct, emphasizing users' perceptions of security effectiveness rather than mere regulatory compliance. Based on service marketing and maritime logistic literature, this study proposes a conceptual model to test these relationships in the Vietnamese port sector.

Focusing on Vietnam, one of Southeast Asia's fastest-growing economies with a strategic location, strong manufacturing base and expanding logistics infrastructure (Nguyen et al., 2024), the study offers practical insights for port authorities and logistics professionals seeking to boost competitiveness through integrated service and security improvements. Academically, it bridges two traditionally separate research streams by developing a unified framework that strengthens the theoretical understanding of port competitiveness and provides actionable guidance for achieving sustainable competitive advantage.

In today's complex, customer-driven maritime logistic environment, port service quality (SER) is a key driver of operational performance and customer satisfaction. Rather than focusing only on infrastructure or throughput, SER reflects how well ports meet user expectations across multiple service dimensions.

Service quality assessment in ports builds on foundational service management theories, which view quality as users' perceived performance relative to expectation (Grönroos, 1984; Parasuraman et al., 1988). Although early models like SERVQUAL and SERVPERF have been applied, their suitability for port operations has been questioned, leading to the development of port-specific frameworks. Studies have proposed various dimensions, from efficiency, timeliness, and safety (Compés López and Poole, 1998) to information access, turnaround time, infrastructure, and cost (Ha, 2003). More recently, the ROPMIS model (Thai, 2008) has become a widely used tool for evaluating service quality in maritime settings. Research consistently shows that higher SER enhances customer satisfaction and broader social outcomes (Le et al., 2020; Phan et al., 2021; Roh et al., 2025; Thai, 2016).

In Vietnam, service quality is shaped by national policies, such as (Decision No. 1579/QD-TTg, 2021) on seaport system development and (Circular No. 54/2018/TT-BGTVT, 2018) on service standards, and by corporate strategies that emphasize digitalization, streamlined procedures, and improved customer care (FPT Securities, 2025). These frameworks aim to strengthen service competitiveness, support global supply chain integration, and align with Vietnam's logistics development goals (Decision No. 200/QĐ-TTg, 2017). Investments in SER therefore not only enhance port operations but also reinforce long-term competitiveness in national and international trade.

Port security quality (SEC) is an emerging but underdeveloped concept in maritime research, referring to the service level of security operations in ports. Although port security has been widely examined, SEC remains poorly defined (Chang and Thai, 2016). Past studies often treat security as one element of overall service quality (Irvine and Levin, 2001; Levin and Irvine, 2005), but growing threats, including terrorism, smuggling, piracy, cyberattacks, etc., highlight the need to understand security performance as a distinct service dimension. SEC covers both compliance with international frameworks (ISPS Code, MTSA, CSI, C-TPAT, SAFE Framework, EU Regulation 725/2004, AEO programs) and the operational effectiveness of risk management, technologies, procedures and personnel (Sadovaya and Thai, 2012). identify three key dimensions: facility security (CCTV, RFID, non-intrusive inspections, EDI systems), personnel management (training and drills) and security procedures (inspection protocols, incident reporting, document control). In Vietnam, security practices are guided by the Maritime Code (2015), the Law on Maritime Traffic Safety (2015), Decree No. 58/2017/ND-CP and Circular No. 13/2017/TT-BGTVT on ISPS compliance (Securities LPBANK, 2025).

Despite regulatory progress and new technologies, port security still lacks standardized assessment indicators and customer-oriented aspects – timely response, clear procedures and smooth coordination – remain underemphasized. Treating SEC as a measurable, service-focused concept may help align regulatory requirements with evolving expectations in global maritime logistics (Chang and Thai, 2016).

Customer satisfaction is widely recognized as the outcome of comparing expectations with actual experiences (Anderson and Fornell, 1994; Oliver, 1980). When services meet or exceed expectations, satisfaction leads to customer loyalty, and in contrast, unmet expectations result in dissatisfaction and complaints (Hallowell, 1996).

In the context of port services, satisfaction is particularly tied to the quality and speed of good distribution. Efficient operations supported by reliable infrastructure, advanced logistics technologies and well-managed resources are crucial to ensuring timely delivery and dependable supply chains (Roh et al., 2025). High satisfaction in this sector not only improves service performance but also enhances a port's competitiveness in global trade (Panayides, 2006). emphasized that the primary goal of logistics is to boost customer satisfaction through high service quality at a low operational cost. In the maritime logistics sector, increasing attention has been given to identifying the key factors that influence customer satisfaction (Alsalfiti and Notteboom, 2025; Le et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2016; Thai, 2016). Overall, the literature highlights that consistent delivery of efficient, reliable and customer-oriented port services is essential for achieving and sustaining high customer satisfaction levels.

Port competitiveness is a multidimensional concept shaped by infrastructure quality, operational efficiency, service performance, market orientation and long-term adaptability. Scholars have examined it from various perspectives, from physical and cost advantages (Heaver, 1995) to value creation (Huang et al., 2003) and responsiveness to market demand (Notteboom and Yap, 2012; Chang and Talley, 2019), further highlighting competitiveness as a port's relative position within a network of alternatives, stressing interport rivalry and differentiation. More recent customer- and supply chain–focused research shows that competitiveness now depends less on throughput or infrastructure and more on a port's ability to deliver reliable, secure, seaport connectivity and well-integrated services (Vo et al., 2025; De Martino, 2018).

To structure this expanding field (Yu et al., 2023), identified four major research streams: performance evaluation, port choice behavior, competitive strategy and inter-port competition, areas increasingly influenced by digitalization, green port initiatives and supply chain resilience. Synthesizing these perspectives, port competitiveness can be viewed across five domains: market reach, operational efficiency, strategic collaboration, customer-focused services and sustainability. This framework reflects the evolving nature of competitiveness amid rapid technological change, environmental pressures and shifting global trade patterns and highlights the need for integrated, future-oriented research.

SER plays a pivotal role in shaping both customer satisfaction and operational success within maritime logistics (Grönroos, 1984; Parasuraman et al., 1988; Ha, 2003; Thai, 2008). High service quality reduces delays, enhances reliability and ensures accurate, timely information flow-factors that directly influence customers' perceptions of value and trust in port operations (Le et al., 2020; Phan et al., 2021; Thai, 2016). Conversely, poor service quality, such as inconsistent vessel turnaround times or inadequate infrastructure, can create operational bottlenecks, erode customer trust and diminish competitiveness. Traditionally measured by physical throughput and infrastructure capacity, the concept has evolved to include timeliness, reliability, access to accurate information, infrastructure adequacy and responsiveness to customer needs (Grönroos, 1984; Parasuraman et al., 1988; Ha, 2003; Thai, 2008). When ports deliver services that meet or exceed user expectations, customers are more likely to remain loyal and recommend the port, thereby enhancing its competitive position in the global logistics network. As such

While traditionally treated as a subset of overall service quality, SEC has emerged as a distinct factor critical to safeguarding port operations (Chang and Thai, 2016; Sadovaya and Thai, 2012). Effective security mitigates risks such as terrorism, smuggling, cyberattacks, and cargo theft, which can disrupt operations and damage a port's reputation (Munyai and Govender, 2024). Strong security protocols, when implemented efficiently, can foster trust among customers, reduce the risk of cargo loss and ensure uninterrupted trade flows (Sarathy, 2006; Sheu et al., 2006). These outcomes enhance perceived service reliability and can indirectly strengthen competitiveness. However, excessive or poorly managed security procedures may cause delays or increase operational costs, potentially lowering customer satisfaction and diminishing the competitive advantage (Udeh, 2024). Thus

Customer satisfaction, defined as the post-consumption evaluation of whether service expectations are met or exceeded (Oliver, 1980; Anderson and Fornell, 1994), is central to long-term port success. High satisfaction levels are linked to increased customer loyalty, positive word of mouth and repeated usage, factors that enhance a port's market position and competitiveness (Roh et al., 2025; Panayides, 2006; Thai, 2016). Conversely, dissatisfaction can quickly lead to loss of business to competing ports. Thus, customer satisfaction is both an outcome of quality service delivery and a strategic driver of competitiveness.

Customer satisfaction can serve as a critical link between quality improvements and competitive outcomes. Ports with high service quality and robust security are likely to generate higher satisfaction, which, in turn, motivates customers to maintain long-term relationships and choose the port over alternatives. From a causal perspective, service quality improvements enhance operational efficiency and responsiveness (Le et al., 2020; Phan et al., 2021; Thai, 2016), while effective security increases perceived safety and reliability (Chang and Thai, 2016; Sadovaya and Thai, 2012). Both factors strengthen satisfaction, which then translates into competitive advantage through repeat business and customer advocacy (Le et al., 2020; Roh et al., 2025). Conversely, if service or security quality declines, satisfaction will likely drop, weakening the port's market position.

The proposed research model is presented in Figure 2.

The study adapted and refined measurement items from prior research, ensuring linguistic and conceptual equivalence through a rigorous back-translation process with two independent bilingual expert groups (Bulmer and Donal, 2005). Two independent groups of bilingual experts conducted the translation and back-translation of the original English-language items, thereby ensuring semantic consistency and minimizing potential misinterpretations.

An initial set of 32 items across four constructs was reviewed by 15 maritime experts, including academics, shipping lines, freight forwarders and logistics providers for clarity, contextual relevance to Vietnam, and construct alignment (Table 1).

Based on their feedback, items were reworded for precision and cultural appropriateness. The finalized set (SEC: 11; SER: 10; SAT: 5; COM: 6) was validated by the same panel. Table 2 summarizes all variables, their descriptions, and sources. All items were measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

To test the proposed model and hypotheses, this study uses partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) via SmartPLS 4 (Ringle et al., 2022). PLS-SEM is suitable for exploratory research, complex models with mediating or moderating effects, and contexts with emerging theory, while accommodating relatively small sample sizes (Chin, 1998; Hair et al., 2014).

The analysis followed two steps: (1) assessing the measurement model for reliability, internal consistency, and validity and (2) evaluating the structural model for collinearity, path coefficients, R², effect sizes and predictive relevance. Bootstrapping with 5,000 subsamples tested path significance, allowing examination of both direct and indirect relationships.

Data were collected via a mixed-method survey combining online and face-to-face channels to enhance sample diversity and generalizability (Shankar et al., 2020). The survey targeted key Vietnamese port customers as shipping lines, logistics providers and cargo owners (Roh et al., 2025).

Industry associations supported distribution: the Vietnam Shipowners' Association sent 100 questionnaires to shipping executives, the Vietnam Logistics Association delivered 200 to logistics firms, and 200 were sent to cargo owners via the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Vietnam Shippers' Council.

Conducted from October 2024 to January 2025, the survey yielded 273 responses, with 259 valid (51.8% response rate): 24.3% from shipping firms, 48.7% from logistics providers and 27.0% from cargo owners. Respondents' experience ranged from less than five years (42.9%), five–ten years (37.8%), to over ten years (19%) (Table 1).

The measurement model showed strong reliability and validity (Table 2). All outer loadings exceeded 0.7 (Hair et al., 2020), Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.917 to 0.937, and composite reliability ranged from 0.938 to 0.950, all above the 0.7 threshold. Convergent validity was confirmed with AVE values between 0.656 and 0.761 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). These results indicate a reliable and valid measurement model, suitable for structural analysis.

Discriminant validity was confirmed using the HTMT ratio, with all values below the 0.85 threshold (Henseler et al., 2015), indicating clear construct distinction (Table 3).

The structural model was tested using bootstrapping with 5,000 resamples at a 5% significance level (Hair et al., 2019) to evaluate hypotheses and model robustness. VIF values ranged from 2.149 to 2.848, below the 3.0 threshold, indicating no multicollinearity.

Model performance showed strong explanatory power, with R² = 0.805 for SAT and 0.654 for COM. Effect sizes were medium for SEC → SAT (f² = 0.268) and SER → SAT (f² = 0.190), small for SER → COM (f² = 0.101) and negligible for SEC → COM (f² = 0.015) (Cohen, 1988), highlighting the varying impact of predictors on SAT and COM (Table 4).

Bootstrapping results (Table 5) show that SER has a significant positive effect on both SAT and COM (p = 0.000), supporting H1a and H1b. SEC significantly boosts SAT (p = 0.000) but has no direct effect on COM (p = 0.070), supporting H2a.

SAT positively influences COM (p = 0.007), supporting H3, and mediates the relationships between SER → COM (p = 0.009) and SEC → COM (p = 0.012), confirming H4a and H4b. SAT acts as a partial mediator for SER and a full mediator for SEC.

Overall, SER directly drives both satisfaction and competitiveness, while SEC indirectly enhances competitiveness through satisfaction. These findings highlight the importance of integrating service quality, security and satisfaction management to strengthen port performance and market position.

This study provides key insights into how service quality, security and customer satisfaction shape port competitiveness.

First, SER significantly boosts both SAT and COM, highlighting service delivery as a core driver of the competitive advantage. Unlike prior research that focused on infrastructure, efficiency (i.e. Heaver, 1995; Huang et al., 2003) or network connectivity (De Martino, 2018; Vo et al., 2025), this study demonstrates that service quality directly contributes to competitiveness while also enhancing satisfaction, offering an integrated perspective on value creation in port management.

Second, SEC positively affects SAT but not COM, indicating that while security is valued by port users, it alone does not distinguish competitiveness. This aligns with Chang and Thai (2016), who found that SEC improves customer satisfaction. Security enhances perceived service quality but only translates into competitiveness when it improves operational outcomes like reduced delays, better cargo protection, or efficient compliance.

Third, SAT mediates these relationships: it fully mediates SEC → COM, showing that security impacts competitiveness only through satisfaction, and partially mediates SER → COM, meaning service quality contributes both directly and indirectly. This underscores the importance of customer perception as the link between service inputs and strategic outcomes.

Finally, the findings reaffirm customer satisfaction as a central driver of competitiveness, supporting relationship marketing and customer value theories (Lee et al., 2016). Enhancing satisfaction through better service, responsiveness and reliability is therefore critical for long-term port performance.

The findings of this study offer several important theoretical and practical implications for port managers in the Vietnamese container port industry.

First, SER is shown to drive both SAT and COM, highlighting service quality as a dual-path source of the strategic advantage. This supports a shift from infrastructure-centered to service-centered models of port competitiveness, aligning with service-dominant logic and customer value theory (Hales et al., 2017).

Second, SEC, traditionally viewed as a compliance requirement, is reframed as a value-creating service dimension. While SEC does not directly affect competitiveness, it significantly enhances SAT, which in turn drives COM. This position positions security as an “embedded trust mechanism” and underscores the importance of customer-perceived safety and reliability in strategic outcomes.

Third, the mediation results: SAT fully mediating SEC → COM and partially mediating SER → COM, highlight customer perception as the central mechanism through which both functional (service) and intangible (security) attributes translate into competitive performance. This extends relationship marketing, customer value theory and service-dominant logic within B2B port contexts.

Finally, by integrating SER and SEC in a unified model, the study advances a holistic understanding of service quality in ports, emphasizing that security must be embedded within broader service excellence and operational outcomes to generate sustainable competitive advantage. It also opens avenues for future research on how intangible service dimensions interact with digitalization, process innovation and relational factors to shape port competitiveness, especially in emerging economies.

This study offers practical guidance for port managers and government agencies to enhance service, security and competitiveness in Vietnam's container port industry.

First, service quality should be treated as a strategic differentiator. Ports like Cai Mep-Thi Vai demonstrate that digital tools such as real-time cargo tracking, berth scheduling and e-documentation, can transform operational tasks into competitive advantages, supporting national goals for logistics efficiency and trade facilitation.

Second, security should be framed as a value-enabling service rather than just compliance. While SEC boost customer satisfaction, they only affect competitiveness indirectly. Integrating advanced solutions like AI surveillance, automated access control and predictive cargo risk assessment, can enhance reliability and operational flow while aligning with ISPS standards and Vietnam's digital transformation goals.

Third, security strategies should be customer-centric. SAT fully mediates the SEC–COM link, highlighting the need for security measures that improve user experience. Tools like real-time dashboards, proactive alerts and transparent risk communication strengthen trust, satisfaction and retention. Government guidance can encourage such customer-focused approaches.

Fourth, ports should leverage the dual pathways through which SER drives competitiveness. Technical improvements (TOS, automation, scheduling) and relational enhancements (personalized services, proactive support) together elevate operational performance, satisfaction and loyalty. Policies can support this via digital investment incentives, green port initiatives and public–private partnerships.

Fifth, customer satisfaction should be institutionalized as a core KPI. Embedding SAT metrics in performance dashboards, berth allocation, investment planning and team incentives ensures that customer feedback directly shapes strategic decisions. National benchmarking can standardize and monitor service excellence across ports.

Finally, collaboration across the port ecosystem is crucial. Coordinating terminal operators, shipping lines, logistics providers and IT partners through Port Community Systems and digital platforms enables seamless, value-driven services. Government support for standard protocols, funding and integrated logistic corridors can further enhance national and regional maritime competitiveness.

This study provides new insights into port competitiveness in Vietnam's container port industry by integrating port service quality, port security quality and customer satisfaction in a unified model. It offers a holistic view of how ports can sustain the competitive advantage in a service- and security-driven maritime environment.

Findings confirm that SER is a key driver of both SAT and COM, operating through direct and indirect pathways via customer satisfaction. SEC, while not directly affecting competitiveness, significantly influences SAT, which fully mediates the SEC–COM relationship, highlighting the strategic role of security in shaping customer perceptions and trust. SAT emerges as the central channel through which both tangible (service) and intangible (security) dimensions translate into competitiveness.

The study advances theory by clarifying the distinct yet interconnected roles of service and security, reframing port security as a strategic enabler rather than merely a compliance requirement. Managerially, it suggests that Vietnamese ports should integrate service and security into customer-centered strategies, invest in digital platforms (e.g. TOS, customer portals), link security to key performance indicators, engage stakeholders and adopt automation and AI-based risk management.

Overall, this research underscores that ports must evolve from infrastructure-focused nodes into integrated, technology-enabled service hubs. By bridging theory with actionable strategies, it guides ports, especially in emerging economies, toward a customer-centric, security-aware approach to competitiveness in today's complex maritime landscape.

This study has some limitations. While the methodology is appropriate, alternative designs, such as longitudinal or mixed methods, could strengthen the findings. The sample size meets the PLS-SEM requirements but may not fully represent the broader population, limiting generalizability.

The research underscores the strategic roles of port service and security in shaping customer satisfaction and competitiveness, suggesting several future directions. Studies could examine additional mediators like trust or perceived value, explore different types of security (e.g. cyber, procedural) and their integration with digitalization, adopt a broader port ecosystem perspective including stakeholders like customs and logistics providers or conduct cross-country comparisons to enhance generalizability.

We confirm that we have reviewed and adhered to the Ethics in Publishing guidelines, as well as the Ethics Policies of the journal.