banner-news

Assoc. Prof. Chinh Ho

TDTU Adjunct Professor
Faculty of Business Administration

Place of work
The University of Sydney, Australia

Email
hoquocchinh@tdtu.edu.vn

Research areas

Intelligent Mobility; Choice Modelling (Discrete Choice Modelling); Freight Modelling; Transport Planning; Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and Sustainable Travel Behavior

Research activities

A world-leading expert in Mobility as a Service (MaaS), the author has accumulated a total of 3,542 citations, an h-index of 27, and an i10-index of 50 on Google Scholar (with 2,747 citations recorded since 2021). They are a co-author of the renowned Sydney MaaS Trial and have co-authored numerous publications in top-tier transportation journals, such as Transportation Research Part A, Transportation Research Part C, Transportation Research Part E, Transport Reviews, Transport Policy, Journal of Transport Geography, and Transportation.

Their research focuses heavily on travel behavior modeling, household interactions, MaaS, on-demand transport, and sustainable transport planning for both urban and rural areas.

Publications

1

Hensher, D. A., Nelson, J. D., Balbontin, C., Ho, C., Wei, E., Mulley, C., et al. (2026). Establishing evidence of initiatives undertaken by non-mobility service providers that are aligned with sustainable travel behaviour change as a next generation focus of MaaS. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 205, 104889.

2

Hensher, D. A., Wei, E., Nelson, J. D., Kandanaarachchi, T., Mulley, C., et al. (2026). Establishing the level of support for transport initiatives which make a positive impact on travel behaviour.

3

Hansson, L., & Ho, C. (2025). Workshop 7b report: Sustainable transport systems designed to meet the needs of both users and residents. Research in Transportation Economics, 111, 101579.

4

Hensher, D. A., Nelson, J. D., Wei, E., Kandanaarachchi, T., Balbontin, C., Ho, C., et al. (2025). Windows of change as precursors to changing travel behaviour aligned with sustainable mobility.

5

Ho, C. (2025). Integrating on-demand transport into the public transport network: Assessing the value for money of replacing fixed routes. Transportation Planning and Technology, 48(7), 1481–1505.

6

Ho, C., & Yamamoto, T. (2025). Exploring user choices and societal implications of MaaS. In The Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Urban Transport.

7

Ho, C., & Yamamoto, T. (2025). Unleashing the potential: Exploring user choices and societal implications of MaaS. In The Routledge Handbook of Sustainable Urban Transport (p. 293).

8

Kandanaarachchi, T. B., Nelson, J. D., Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., Wei, E., & Ho, C. (2025). Establishing a framework of support to scale in mobility as a service: Consolidated insights from the literature on potential governance frameworks. Research in Transportation Economics, 112, 101583.

9

Nelson, J. D., Mulley, C., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., Xi, H., & Balbontin, C. (2025). The MaaS blueprint for regional towns and rural hinterlands.

10

Smith, G., & Balbontin, C. (2025). Workshop 7a report: Sustainable transport systems designed to meet the needs of both users and residents. Research in Transportation Economics, 112, 101578.

11

Win, A. T., Nelson, J. D., & Ho, C. (2025). Perceptions of autonomous vehicles among older adults and people with physical disability. Journal of Urban Mobility, 8, 100165.

12

Xi, H., Nelson, J. D., Mulley, C., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Balbontin, C. (2025). Addressing transport disadvantages in regional and rural areas through integrated mobility services. Research in Transportation Economics, 114, 101650.

13

Hensher, D., Nelson, J., Balbontin Tanhnuz, C., Ho, C., Wei, E., Mulley, C., et al. (2024). Establishing evidence of initiatives undertaken by non-mobility service providers that are aligned with sustainable travel behaviour change as a next generation focus of MaaS. SSRN 5000871.

14

Ho, C. (2024). Integrating on-demand transport into an existing transport network: A data-driven simulation approach. International Conference Series on Geotechnics, Civil Engineering and Structures.

15

Kandanaarachchi, T. B., Nelson, J. D., & Ho, C. Q. (2024). Conceptualising trust and collaboration among stakeholders in MaaS ecosystems. Transport Policy, 157, 98–110.

16

Kandanaarachchi, T., Nelson, J., & Ho, C. (2024). Building trust and collaboration among the stakeholders in a mobility as a service ecosystem – Insights from two MaaS case studies. SSRN 4253442.

17

Militao, A. M., Ho, C., & Nelson, J. (2024). Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) and the potential of multiservices.

18

Nelson, J. D., Xi, H., Mulley, C., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Balbontin, C. (2024). Insights from users and providers of regional and rural mobility services, current and future.

19

Smith, G., & Ho, C. (2024). Workshop 5 report: New service models – Governing emerging mobility services. Research in Transportation Economics, 103, 101398.

20

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2023). Light commercial vehicles destination choice: Understanding preferences relative to the number of stops and tour-based trip type. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 171, 103042.

21

Hensher, D. A., Wei, E., Liu, W., Ho, L., & Ho, C. (2023). Development of a practical aggregate spatial road freight modal demand model system for truck and commodity movements with an application of a distance-based charging regime. Transportation, 50(3), 1031–1071.

22

Mulley, C., Nelson, J. D., Ho, C., & Hensher, D. A. (2023). MaaS in a regional and rural setting: Recent experience. Transport Policy, 133, 75–85.

23

Nelson, J. D., Mulley, C., Xi, H., Hensher, D., Ho, C., & Balbontin, C. (2023). Drivers and barriers towards Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) in regional and rural areas: Insights from service providers and end users.

24

Smith, G., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Balbontin, C. (2023). Mobility-as-a-Service users: Insights from a trial in Sydney. European Transport Research Review, 15(1), 40.

25

Tsai, P., Ho, C., McGinn, E., Jamaldeen, M., Adams, D., & Tsamassiros, P. (2023). Measuring amenity benefits of public realm in railway station precincts. Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), 44th, 2023, Perth.

26

Xi, H., Li, Q., Hensher, D. A., Nelson, J. D., & Ho, C. (2023). Quantifying the impact of COVID-19 on travel behavior in different socio-economic segments. Transport Policy, 136, 98–112.

27

Ho, C. Q. (2022). Can MaaS change users' travel behaviour to deliver commercial and societal outcomes? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 165, 76–97.

28

Kandanaarachchi, T., Nelson, J. D., & Ho, C. (2022). Building trust and collaboration among the stakeholders in a Mobility as a Service ecosystem – A theoretical framework.

29

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C. Q., & Reck, D. J. (2021). Mobility as a service and private car use: Evidence from the Sydney MaaS trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 145, 17–33.

30

Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., & Reck, D. J. (2021). Drivers of participant's choices of monthly mobility bundles: Key behavioural findings from the Sydney Mobility as a Service (MaaS) trial. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 124, 102932.

31

Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., Reck, D. J., Lorimer, S., & Lu, I. (2021). MaaS bundle design and implementation: Lessons from the Sydney MaaS trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 149, 339–376.

32

Verzosa, N., Greaves, S., Ho, C., & Davis, M. (2021). Stated willingness to participate in travel surveys: A cross-country and cross-methods comparison. Transportation, 48(3), 1311–1327.

33

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2020). Do preferences for BRT and LRT change as a voter, citizen, tax payer, or self-interested resident? Transportation, 47(6), 2981–3030.

34

Echaniz, E., Ho, C., Rodriguez, A., & dell'Olio, L. (2020). Modelling user satisfaction in public transport systems considering missing information. Transportation, 47(6), 2903–2921.

35

Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2020). Obtaining direct and cross-fare elasticities from Opal e-data in Sydney, Australia. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 54(4), 289–316.

36

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Reck, D. J. (2020). Is there a relationship between private car use and subscribing to mobility as a service (MaaS) bundles?

37

Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., Ho, C., Wong, Y., Smith, G., & Nelson, J. D. (2020). Understanding Mobility as a Service (MaaS): Past, present and future. Elsevier.

38

Hensher, D., Ho, C., Mulley, C., Nelson, J., Smith, G., & Wong, Y. (2020). MaaS trials – What have we learnt. In Understanding Mobility as a Service (MaaS). Elsevier.

39

Hensher, D., Mulley, C., Ho, C., Nelson, J., Smith, G., & Wong, Y. (2020). Understanding MaaS: Past, present and future.

40

Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., & Wang, S. (2020). Joint estimation of mode and time of day choice accounting for arrival time flexibility, travel time reliability and crowding on public transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 87, 102793.

41

Ho, C. Q., Mulley, C., & Hensher, D. A. (2020). Public preferences for mobility as a service: Insights from stated preference surveys. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 70–90.

42

Li, Z., Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2020). An empirical investigation of values of travel time savings from stated preference data and revealed preference data. Transportation Letters, 12(3), 166–171.

43

Mulley, C., Ho, C., Balbontin, C., Hensher, D., Stevens, L., Nelson, J. D., & Wright, S. (2020). Mobility as a service in community transport in Australia: Can it provide a sustainable future? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 107–122.

44

Perera, S., Ho, C., & Hensher, D. (2020). Resurgence of demand responsive transit services – Insights from BRIDJ trials in inner west of Sydney, Australia. Research in Transportation Economics, 83, 100904.

45

Reck, D. J., Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. Q. (2020). MaaS bundle design. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 141, 485–501.

46

Tang, L., Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D., & Zhang, X. (2020). Demand for travel information: What, when and how much is required by urban travellers.

47

Echaniz, E., Ho, C. Q., Rodriguez, A., & dell'Olio, L. (2019). Comparing best-worst and ordered logit approaches for user satisfaction in transit services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 130, 752–769.

48

Hensher, D. A., Balbontin, C., Ho, C. Q., & Mulley, C. (2019). Cross-cultural contrasts of preferences for bus rapid transit and light rail transit. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 53(1), 47–73.

49

Hensher, D. A., Balbontin, C., Ho, C. Q., Mulley, C., Macário, R., & Stewart, A. (2019). Evaluating bus rapid transit and light rail transit on a level playing field in developed economies: A cross-cultural comparison. In Developing Bus Rapid Transit (pp. 68–89).

50

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C. Q., & Ellison, R. B. (2019). Simultaneous location of firms and jobs in a transport and land use model. Journal of Transport Geography, 75, 110–121.

51

Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., & Wong, Y. Z. (2018). Potential uptake and willingness-to-pay for Mobility as a Service (MaaS): A stated choice study. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 117, 302–318.

52

Ho, Q. C., & Ho, L. (2018). Crowding on trains and platforms: A new approach to big data. Proceedings of the Computer-Aided Systems in Public Transport (CASPT) Conference.

53

Mulley, C., Ho, C., Ho, L., Hensher, D., & Rose, J. (2018). Will bus travellers walk further for a more frequent service? An international study using a stated preference approach. Transport Policy, 69, 88–97.

54

Verzosa, N., Greaves, S., Ho, C., & Davis, M. (2018). Willingness to participate in travel surveys: A cross-country and cross-methods comparison. 40th Australasian Transport Research Forum.

55

Balbontin, C., Hensher, D. A., Ho, C. Q., & Mulley, C. (2017). Cross-cultural contrasts of preferences for bus rapid transit and light rail transit. International Conference on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport.

56

Ellison, R., Hensher, D., & Ho, C. Q. (2017). Endogenous treatment of residential location choices in transport and land use models: Introducing the MetroScan framework. Pergamon Elsevier.

57

Hensher, D. A., Ellison, R., Ho, C. Q., & Weisbrod, G. (2017). How well does BRT perform in contrast to LRT? An Australian case study using MetroScan_TI.

58

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Beck, M. J. (2017). A simplified and practical alternative way to recognise the role of household characteristics in determining an individual's preferences: The case of automobile choice. Transportation, 44(1), 225–240.

59

Ho, C. Q., & Hensher, D. A. (2017). Application of irrelevance of state-wise dominated alternatives (ISDA) for identifying candidate processing strategies and behavioural choice rules adopted in best–worst stated choice settings. Journal of Choice Modelling, 25, 40–49.

60

Ho, C. Q., & Mulley, C. (2017). Understanding the determinants of walking as the basis for social marketing public health messaging. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

61

Ho, C. Q., Hensher, D. A., & Ellison, R. (2017). Endogenous treatment of residential location choices in transport and land use models: Introducing the MetroScan framework. Journal of Transport Geography, 64, 120–131.

62

Ho, C., Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., & Wong, Y. (2017). Prospects for switching out of conventional transport services to mobility as a service subscription plans – A stated choice study. International Conference Series on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport.

63

Ho, C., Mulley, C., Tsai, C. H., Ison, S., & Wiblin, S. (2017). Area-wide travel plans – Targeting strategies for greater participation in green travel initiatives: A case study of Rouse Hill Town Centre, NSW Australia. Transportation, 44(2), 325–352.

64

Mulley, C., & Ho, C. (2017). Understanding the determinants of walking as the basis for social marketing public health messaging.

65

Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2016). Identifying a behaviourally relevant choice set from stated choice data. Transportation, 43(2), 197–217.

66

Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. Q. (2016). Experience conditioning in commuter modal choice modelling – Does it make a difference? Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 95, 164–176.

67

Hensher, D. A., Greene, W. H., & Ho, C. Q. (2016). Random regret minimization and random utility maximization in the presence of preference heterogeneity: An empirical contrast. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 142(4), 04016009.

68

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C. Q., & Liu, W. (2016). How much is too much for tolled road users: Toll saturation and the implications for car commuting value of travel time savings? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94, 604–621.

69

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Knowles, L. (2016). Efficient contracting and incentive agreements between regulators and bus operators: The influence of risk preferences of contracting agents on contract choice. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 87, 22–40.

70

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2016). Disruption costs in bus contract transitions. Research in Transportation Economics, 59, 75–85.

71

Ho, C. Q., & Hensher, D. A. (2016). A workplace choice model accounting for spatial competition and agglomeration effects. Journal of Transport Geography, 51, 193–203.

72

Ho, C. Q., Mulley, C., Shiftan, Y., & Hensher, D. A. (2016). Vehicle value of travel time savings: Evidence from a group-based modelling approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 88, 134–150.

73

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2016). Developing good practice outcomes in passenger transport: Strategic policy and practical implementation. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 100(20), 1–2.

74

Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2015). The role of perceived acceptability of alternatives in identifying and assessing choice set processing strategies in stated choice settings: The case of road pricing reform. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 83, 225–237.

75

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2015). Identifying preferences for public transport investments under a constrained budget. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 72, 27–46.

76

Hensher, D. A., Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2015). Identifying resident preferences for bus-based and rail-based investments as a complementary buy in perspective to inform project planning prioritisation. Journal of Transport Geography, 46, 1–9.

77

Hensher, D. A., Li, Z., & Ho, C. (2015). The role of source preference and subjective probability in valuing expected travel time savings. Travel Behaviour and Society, 2(1), 42–54.

78

Ho, C. Q., Mulley, C., Shiftan, Y., & Hensher, D. A. (2015). Value of travel time savings for multiple occupant car: Evidence from a group-based modelling approach. Australasian Transport Research Forum 2015 Proceedings.

79

Ho, C., & Hensher, D. A. (2015). Greening demand chains in urban passenger transport: Emissions saving from complex trip chains. In Green logistics and transportation: A sustainable supply chain perspective.

80

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2015). How much walking do Sydneysiders do in their daily life? Evidence from the Household Travel Survey. Journal of Transport & Health, 2(2), S21.

81

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2015). Intra-household interactions in tour-based mode choice: The role of social, temporal, spatial and resource constraints. Transport Policy, 38, 52–63.

82

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2015). Intra-household interactions in transport research: A review. Transport Reviews, 35(1), 33–55.

83

Hensher, D. A., & Ho, C. (2014). Recognising the irrelevance of statewise–dominated alternatives in defining the composition of a choice set.

84

Ho, C., & Hensher, D. (2014). Housing prices and price endogeneity in tenure and dwelling type choice models. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2(3), 107–115.

85

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2014). Metrobuses in Sydney: How high capacity and high frequency services are benefiting the metropolitan fringe. Research in Transportation Economics, 48, 339–348.

86

Ison, S., Mulley, C., Mifsud, A., & Ho, C. (2014). A parking space levy: A case study of Sydney, Australia.

87

Ho, C. (2013). Interpersonal cooperation in tour-based mode choice: The role of household resources and spatial setting. 13th World Conference on Transport Research.

88

Ho, C. Q. (2013). An investigation of intra-household interactions in travel mode choice [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Sydney.

89

Ho, C. Q., & Mulley, C. (2013). Group travel and public transport use: The effect of fare discounts. Australasian Transport Research Forum 2013 Proceedings.

90

Ho, C. Q., & Mulley, C. (2013). Multiple purposes at single destination: A key to a better understanding of the relationship between tour complexity and mode choice. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 49, 206–219.

91

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2013). Incorporating intrahousehold interactions into a tour-based model of public transport use in car-negotiating households. Transportation Research Record, 2343(1), 1–9.

92

Ho, C., & Mulley, C. (2013). Tour-based mode choice of joint household travel patterns on weekend and weekday. Transportation, 40(4), 789–811.

93

Mulley, C., & Ho, C. (2013). Evaluating the impact of bus network planning changes in Sydney, Australia. Transport Policy, 30, 13–25.

94

Ho, C., Mulley, C., & Shaz, K. (2012). Data inconsistencies detection and correction: An application to identifying joint household travel from the household travel survey. 1st European Symposium on Quantitative Methods in Transportation Systems.

95

Ho, C. Q., & Yamamoto, T. (2011). The role of attitudes and public transport service on vehicle ownership in Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.

96

Ho, C., & Tirachini, A. (n.d.). Mobility-as-a-Service and the role of multimodality in the decarbonization of urban passenger mobility. SSRN 4218500.

97

Militao, A. M., Ho, C., & Nelson, J. (n.d.). Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) and the potential of multiservices: How bundled services and gamified rewards influence user adoption. SSRN 5318915.

Research projects

1

Sydney Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Trial – Đại học Sydney (đồng nghiên cứu chính): Thử nghiệm MaaS thực địa lớn nhất Úc, công bố hàng loạt bài báo về hành vi đăng ký gói MaaS và ảnh hưởng tới sử dụng xe cá nhân.

2

MaaS in Regional and Rural Areas – Nghiên cứu về triển khai MaaS tại các khu vực nông thôn và bán nông thôn (2023–2025).

Books

1

Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., Ho, C., Wong, Y., Smith, G., & Nelson, J. D. (2020). Understanding Mobility as a Service (MaaS): Past, present and future. Elsevier.

Collaborative activities

Mô hình MaaS và hướng đi cho giao thông đô thị bền vững

Với phần trình bày của PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh (Đại học Sydney, Australia), một góc nhìn mới về tương lai giao thông đô thị đã được mở ra thông qua chủ đề về mô hình MaaS (Mobility as a Service) – xu hướng đang định hình lại cách con người di chuyển trong các đô thị hiện đại. Chương trình được tổ chức tại Trường Đại học Tôn Đức Thắng (TDTU) ngày 15/4/2026.

Từ các nghiên cứu và dẫn chứng thực tiễn tại Úc và Nhật Bản, nội dung trình bày đã làm rõ tiềm năng mở rộng mô hình MaaS như một giải pháp tích hợp, giúp tối ưu hóa hệ thống giao thông, nâng cao khả năng thích ứng của đô thị trước những thách thức ngày càng gia tăng về hạ tầng, môi trường và phát triển bền vững.

Không chỉ dừng lại ở lý thuyết, các phân tích còn gợi mở cách tiếp cận mang tính hệ thống trong việc kết nối các phương thức vận tải, khai thác dữ liệu số và xây dựng chính sách điều phối linh hoạt. Qua đó, MaaS được nhìn nhận không chỉ là một mô hình công nghệ, mà còn là nền tảng thúc đẩy chuyển đổi tư duy trong quản lý và vận hành giao thông đô thị.

Chủ đề đã thu hút sự quan tâm của đông đảo giảng viên, nhà nghiên cứu và sinh viên ở nhiều lĩnh vực khác nhau như kỹ thuật, kinh doanh và quản lý. Những trao đổi học thuật sôi nổi xoay quanh khả năng ứng dụng MaaS tại Việt Nam cho thấy nhu cầu cấp thiết về các giải pháp giao thông thông minh, đồng thời phản ánh sự kết nối ngày càng chặt chẽ giữa nghiên cứu quốc tế và thực tiễn trong nước.

Không khí thảo luận mở đã góp phần lan tỏa những góc nhìn đa chiều, từ bài học chính sách của các quốc gia phát triển đến những thách thức đặc thù của các đô thị Việt Nam. Qua đó, chương trình không chỉ mang ý nghĩa học thuật mà còn góp phần định hình nhận thức cộng đồng về giao thông bền vững và thích ứng trong bối cảnh đô thị hóa nhanh chóng.

Thông tin diễn giả:

PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh hiện công tác tại Viện Nghiên cứu Giao thông và Logistics, Trường Kinh doanh, Đại học Sydney (Australia). Ông có nhiều nghiên cứu chuyên sâu trong lĩnh vực hệ thống giao thông, logistics và các mô hình vận tải tích hợp.

Nhân dịp này, ông được trao Thư bổ nhiệm làm Giáo sư cộng tác (Adjunct Professor) của TDTU. Đây là một trong những chính sách mà TDTU tiên phong triển khai nhằm quy tụ các nhà khoa học, chuyên gia uy tín trong và ngoài nước, thúc đẩy hợp tác và chia sẻ các vấn đề học thuật, nghiên cứu.

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung
PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh trình bày chuyên đề tại Hội trường

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung
Người tham dự đặt câu hỏi thảo luận cùng diễn giả

 

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung
TS. Võ Hoàng Duy – Phó Hiệu trưởng trao Thư bổ nhiệm Adjunct Professor cho PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh

 

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung
PGS.TS. Phạm Thị Minh Lý – Trưởng khoa, Khoa Quản trị kinh doanh tặng hoa cảm ơn PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung

 

 

4.15_Dien_gia_cong_chung
PGS.TS. Hồ Quốc Chinh chụp ảnh lưu niệm với Ban tổ chức và người tham dự chương trình