Vietnam and the United States have concluded their third round of trade negotiations in Washington D.C., marking significant progress in talks aimed at avoiding a crippling 46% tariff on Vietnamese exports. The four-day negotiations from June 9-12 saw both countries make substantial headway, with Vietnamese Trade Minister Nguyen Hong Dien and US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick conducting the first-ever ministerial-level dialogue in this format.
The stakes couldn't be higher. Vietnam faces one of the steepest "reciprocal" tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, threatening growth in Southeast Asia's industrial manufacturing hub. With Vietnam's $123.5 billion trade surplus with the US—the fourth-largest among all trading partners—and accusations of serving as a waypoint for Chinese goods, the pressure to reach an agreement has been intense.
But what makes Vietnam's approach particularly instructive for negotiation professionals is how they've demonstrated the critical importance of organizational power—not just having it, but knowing how to activate it strategically.
The US has sent a "long" list of "tough" requests to Vietnam, including demands that could force the country to cut its reliance on Chinese industrial goods imports. Washington wants Vietnam-based factories to reduce their use of materials and components from China and is asking the country to control more carefully its production and supply chains.
Faced with these complex demands, Vietnam's response offers a masterclass in leveraging organizational power effectively. Here's how they avoided the five most common mistakes negotiators make:
From RED BEAR's recent analysis: "At RED BEAR, we define organizational power as the ability to influence the other party's expectations and decisions through both internal alignment and external credibility."
Vietnam demonstrated this perfectly by coordinating across multiple levels—from technical teams to ministerial leadership. When Trade Minister Nguyen Hong Dien met with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in Paris, they "agreed to speed up the negotiation process, focusing maximum efforts to achieve the best results." This wasn't just diplomatic rhetoric; it reflected genuine internal alignment on priorities and approach. ReutersReuters
Vietnam's approach showed clear cross-functional coordination. Vietnamese Communist Party chief To Lam was among the first world leaders to speak with Trump, while Deputy Prime Minister Bui Thanh Son met with the US Ambassador to request tariff delays. This multi-level engagement demonstrated internal alignment from the highest levels of government.
RED BEAR insight: "Internal alignment is the cornerstone of organizational power. Without it, even the strongest negotiators end up backpedaling mid-discussion, making real-time concessions, or stalling decisions while they 'circle back' with decision-makers."
Vietnam didn't rely solely on diplomatic goodwill. Under US pressure, they launched a crackdown on illegal transhipment of goods, mostly from China, and repeatedly showed willingness to reduce non-tariff barriers and import more US goods, including planes, farm products, and energy. Vietnam's trade ministry even encouraged all manufacturers in the country to buy more US-made goods to help balance the trade relationship.
The negotiations featured something unprecedented: for the first time, the US initiated a ministerial-level dialogue in this format, with Minister Dien proposing ideas to advance progress while Secretary Lutnick and Ambassador Greer appreciated Vietnam's goodwill and basically agreed with the ideas put forward.
RED BEAR principle: "Power that isn't articulated is invisible. Your counterpart can't see your internal alignment, your operational capabilities, or the strategic depth behind your offer—unless you make it visible."
Vietnam's negotiators understood the political pressures on both sides. Despite harsh criticism from senior White House officials like Peter Navarro, who called Vietnam "essentially a colony of communist China," Vietnamese leaders maintained a constructive approach while being "increasingly forthright about their anger at how the reciprocal tariffs were created."
What emerges from Vietnam's approach is a sophisticated understanding of how to deploy organizational power systematically:
1. Multi-Level Engagement: The negotiations involved everyone from technical teams to the highest levels of government, with both sides agreeing to assign technical teams to enhance exchanges while maintaining ministerial oversight.
2. Concrete Concessions Backed by Action: Rather than making empty promises, Vietnam demonstrated credibility through measurable actions—from cracking down on transshipment to encouraging domestic companies to buy American goods.
3. Strategic Patience with Tactical Flexibility: Vietnam has nearly tripled its exports to the United States since the start of the US-China trade war in 2018, positioning itself as a crucial alternative to Chinese manufacturing. This long-term strategic positioning gave them leverage in short-term negotiations.
4. Cultural Intelligence: Understanding that the Trump administration values transactional relationships and measurable outcomes, Vietnam focused on concrete proposals and visible commitments rather than abstract diplomatic principles.
Vietnam's trade negotiations offer several key insights for business professionals facing high-stakes discussions:
Prepare Your Organization, Not Just Your Presentation: Vietnam's success came from having submitted a comprehensive document responding to US trade requests, demonstrating they had done their homework across all stakeholder groups.
Make Power Visible Through Action: The crackdown on illegal transshipment and commitment to buy US goods weren't just negotiating positions—they were proof points that Vietnam could deliver on its promises.
Align Internally Before You Negotiate Externally: The coordination between Vietnam's Communist Party leadership, trade ministry, and local manufacturers showed how internal alignment translates to external negotiating strength.
Frame Concessions as Strategic Choices: Vietnam positioned itself as part of the "China+1" manufacturing strategy, framing their concessions not as capitulation but as alignment with US strategic interests.
Both sides agreed to hold virtual meetings in the upcoming days to address unresolved issues and prepare for continued virtual ministerial dialogue. Secretary Lutnick stated that the US values its relationship with Vietnam and hopes the country will continue to prosper, acknowledging Vietnam's suggestions and concerns.
The Vietnam-US negotiations demonstrate that even in the most challenging circumstances—facing a 46% tariff threat with a July deadline—strategic deployment of organizational power can create breakthrough moments. The key isn't having the biggest brand or the most resources; it's knowing how to align internally, communicate externally, and back promises with performance.
For negotiation professionals, Vietnam's approach offers a blueprint: organizational power isn't about position or prestige—it's about preparation, alignment, and the courage to make your capabilities visible when it matters most.
RED BEAR trains enterprise teams to develop and deploy organizational power in complex negotiations. Learn more about building negotiation capabilities that deliver measurable results.