The chapter presents the synthesis of workforce development and late industrialisation drawn from the key findings and analytical insights explored in the various chapters. First, the chapter highlights that variation and unevenness are the critical features of retention patterns and discusses why this variation exists. Retention was uneven among industrial parks, influenced primarily by disparities in government policies and the roles of regional and local governments, the capability and strategies of FDI firms, and the peculiarities of local factors—political, economic, and socio-cultural factors. Retention was uneven across firms within the industrial park, driven primarily by their specific strategies, human resource practices, and firm managers’ ability to adapt to local conditions by drawing on their manufacturing experience. Second, a historical perspective on capitalist development and industrialisation clarifies the protracted nature and tensions around labour force development. However, what is remarkable in the Ethiopian case is that this process has at least begun to evolve in an astonishingly short time. This research is original in presenting new evidence of this ‘live’ historical development: the evidence highlights a range of issues, including the relationship between government policies and firms’ strategies regarding the recruitment of labour and labour retention (and changes in these policies and strategies), and the tensions between the competitive forces compelling firm behaviour and the needs of workers for returns to labour. Yet, this study argues that industrial policies and firms’ strategies have inadequately prioritised workforce development. Nonetheless, crafting government policies that can attract FDI while engaging with and managing this pressure is far from easy. In summary, this chapter makes three crucial contributions that have direct implications for policymaking: the variations and unevenness among industrial parks and firms are critical factors in retention and workforce development; the process of historical development has begun and is evolving rapidly; and the tension between firms’ competitiveness and labour rights is a significant challenge. The research also highlights the need for more empirical evidence to inform industrial policies, firms’ workforce development strategies, and new research to fill gaps in the evolving and dynamic nature.