Until a couple of months ago, co-blogger Steve Dickinson was the legal columnist for one of China’s most prominent English language business publications. As part of his regular monthly gig, Steve submitted an article on how to avoid joint venture mistakes. The censors rejected it and I assume they did so because it might be detrimental to Chinese companies seeking joint ventures.

AmCham Beijing did not have such constraints and it just published the article in its China Brief publication, entitled, “Avoiding Mistakes in Chinese Joint Ventures.“[pdf] It provides a roadmap for avoiding the mistakes that have given Chinese joint ventures such a bad name.

The article starts out by noting that with “the exception of some market sectors, China is remarkably open to foreign investment, and in the past several years WFOEs [Wholly Foreign Owned Entities] have become the most common vehicle for foreign investment, partly due to investor skittishness as stories about past problems with Chinese EJV [Equity Joint Venture] partners made the rounds.

The article notes how “thoroughly vetting your joint venture partner” will “dramatically increase your likelihood of success,” but states that most China joint ventures fail because the foreign partner made the “fundamental mistake” of believing its 51% ownership gave it effective control over the joint venture:

Foreign investors too often assume that a Chinese joint venture company is managed according to a common Western model, under which a board of directors has controlling power over the company. Since the board is elected by a majority vote of company owners, most foreign investors will strive to obtain a 51% ownership interest in the EJV. As majority owner, the investor then assumes he has the right to elect the entire board, and thus effectively control the company.

After winning the struggle for percentage ownership, as a concession, the foreign investor will frequently allow the local side to appoint the representative director and the company general manager.

Unintentionally, this concession cedes effective power. As a result, the investor’s struggle for board control is rendered meaningless. Frequently the Chinese side intentionally angles to ensure this outcome. We know of cases where an EJV partner concedes on the percentage ownership issue in return for control over the two key management positions in the company.

In order to exercise effective control over a joint venture in China, investors must avoid this mistake. It is necessary to have control over the day-to-day management of the joint venture company.

The article then sets out the following basics for maintaining control over your Chinese Joint Venture:

The power to appoint and remove the JV’s representative. The side that appoints the representative director will have significant control over operations. The usual practice of conceding the power to appoint a key officer or director to another investor is a mistake.

The power to appoint and remove the general manager of the joint venture company. It must be made clear that the general manager is an employee of the joint venture company who is employed entirely at the discretion of the representative director. The common practice of appointing the same person as both representative director and general manager is a mistake.

Control over the company seal, or “chop.” The person who controls the registered company seal has the power to make binding contracts on behalf of the joint venture company and to deal with the company’s banks and other key service providers. The power over that seal should be carefully guarded. Ceding control over it as a matter of convenience is a mistake. There is a long, documented history of this seemingly minor consideration dooming EJVs.

Steve then notes how the Chinese side to a joint venture will usually refuse to agree to these three measures of control by claiming it is more efficient to have them control day-to-day management of the company. The Chinese side will also often claim that “they cannot bring their political connections, or guanxi, into play unless their own people act as the representative director and general manger.” Steve sees these claims as red herrings used to disguise the Chinese company’s efforts to gain operational control over the company.

Relinquishing these three control mechanisms to the Chinese company will likely be problematic for the foreign company:

Once these three control mechanisms are entirely under the control of the partner, foreign investors will quickly discover that they have relinquished all power. When this happens, the investor should face the reality of the situation, and either reduce the investment to a minority share or abandon it altogether. Once power over operations is out of an investor’s hands, it becomes very difficult to run a successful partnership in China.

Steve will be speaking on China Joint Ventures at JP Morgan’s upcoming China Conference. This yearly conference, which truly is THE China conference, will take place at the Grand Hyatt in Beijing from April 23 to April 25 and it will, as always, include a huge roster of the leading China experts in various fields. Click here for the draft agenda. Steve is scheduled to speak on Thursday, April 24, from 17:00 to 18:00 in the Grand Ballroom Number 1. The title of his talk is “Pitfalls of Establishing Joint Ventures in China.”

  • Jack ji(Chinese Lawyer)

    Dan, in my experience I think it is not a mistake of joint venture, only a mistake of the negotiations for the founding of joint venture. JV is better than WFOE in some cases. For example, foreign partner need the old assets or workers of local factoris. Or some industries are forbiden to invested by wholly foreign company. So JV is necessary, but should be handled carefully.

  • Tian

    Great points about control. However, the other side of the coin that is equally important is alignment. I would argue that you form a joint venture for collaboration since in a WFOE you have a much better control. In a normal company you generally would want the board to fight is out in private and reaches “unanimous” decisons. Decisions along the 51% line still feels like a losing cause to me. Therefore, aligning the interest of your Chinese partner with yours is just as important as keeping control of the JV.

  • Hubert Shea

    Having a local JV partner might have benign or malign effect on daily management of the company. “Same bed, different dream” syndrome is not unusual in EJVs and there are two issues a foreign company should consider before entering into any MOU or JV agreement with local EJV partners: First, non-financial due diligence to identify business reputation, integrity, and management culture and practices of prospective EJV partners counts the most; 2. 51% ownership interest in the EJV for securing control seldom works if the general manager in the EJV is the employee of the local partner or if the general manager is the employee of the foreign company but he/she lacks skills and experience in bridging cultural barriers in daily management.

  • Dana

    As someone who has been (and continues to be) on the wrong end of a joint venture gone bad, I agree with everything said here. Is it possible to resign as the “faren” when one has no effective control over the company? I don’t want these bozos to be signing contracts that I’ll end up legally responsible for!

  • @Dana – Just out of curiosity, would it be okay if you told us a little more about what exactly went wrong with your JV – in vague terms of course. Didn’t your company speak to a consultant about the various pitfalls of setting one up before you went through with it? How did the advice you got stand up in the light of day?

  • China Joint Ventures. Can Things Get Any Worse?

    When I was just starting out as a lawyer, I negotiated what I thought was a great settlement for my client. The amount it would pay would be far less than we were expecting it would take to settle, and the other side would be giving us a more complete …

  • Kyle Caldwell

    Which is better, registering a JV with a Chinese wife as the Chinese partner or a WFOE? Thank you for your advice, just found your blog today and find it interesting and informative. I will be back.

  • China’s First Foreign Nail House. Dude, Where’s Your Contract?

    Lara Farrar and Xie Yu wrote an excellent article for the China Daily and AsiaOne on the recent controversy swirling around what is being called China’s first foreign nail house case. The article is entitled, “1st foreigner ‘nail household’ in China,” …