Cracking China – has Mandarin become de rigueur for modern Asian counsel?
For would-be new hires at several international law firms in China and Hong Kong, speaking Mandarin has come to be a strict and unyielding prerequisite. "Certainly from our point of view, hiring someone in Hong Kong without Chinese language speaking skills is a waste of time," says Antony Dapiran, a fluent Mandarin speaker and capital markets partner with Davis Polk & Wardwell in Hong Kong. "I honestly do not see how they can function, especially if they are dealing with capital markets work."
September 28, 2011 at 07:03 PM
5 minute read
As language skills become more important in Asia, Jessica Seah asks if junior ranks have to speak Mandarin
For would-be new hires at several international law firms in China and Hong Kong, speaking Mandarin has come to be a strict and unyielding prerequisite.
"Certainly from our point of view, hiring someone in Hong Kong without Chinese language speaking skills is a waste of time," says Antony Dapiran, a fluent Mandarin speaker and capital markets partner with Davis Polk & Wardwell in Hong Kong. "I honestly do not see how they can function, especially if they are dealing with capital markets work."
Firms like DLA Piper and Davis Polk have listed fluency in Mandarin Chinese, the predominant language spoken in mainland China, as a requirement for potential candidates. According to headhunters, firms such as Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, Latham & Watkins, Sidley Austin and Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe also typically shortlist candidates with the ability to speak Mandarin. Ben Cooper, a headhunter with CML Recruitment in Hong Kong, says the requirement also increasingly applies to in-house roles.
But how necessary is it really? Dapiran's own boss at Davis Polk, Asia managing partner William Barron, doesn't speak the language. Neither does Anthony Root, the longtime head of Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy's Asia corporate practice, or Ashley Alder, Herbert Smith's Asia head, who is about to take charge at Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission. Add to that list Christopher Clarke, Hong Kong managing partner for DLA Piper, and Poh Lee Tan (pictured), managing partner of Baker & McKenzie's China offices. She speaks Cantonese, the main form of Chinese spoken in Hong Kong and her native Malaysia, but not Mandarin.
The truth is, it's different at the top. "In large cross-border M&A deals, there is more of a willingness to tolerate non-Mandarin speakers because Chinese clients understand that a senior partner needs to lead," says Root. "They want to get the best advice when venturing out, so they recognise and value seniority and experience that comes from outside of China."
Chinese clients may well understand that more senior partners cannot speak Mandarin, notes Root, just as older Chinese officials cannot speak English. And seniority, or sometimes even just the appearance of it, matters.
"I was at a meeting where it was all in Chinese and people were translating it for me in bits and pieces," recalls Barron. "The Chinese chairman said something… and the translation came back to me and it was 'I'd like to know what the old white guy thinks'."
Of course, there's little doubt that the ability to speak Mandarin is a huge advantage. And in certain areas like capital markets, it is deemed especially critical. Chinese companies have driven the Hong Kong initial public offering boom of recent years and have become darlings of the New York Stock Exchange as well; firms want partners who can communicate effectively with such clients through every step of the process.
"I think Chinese is absolutely essential to advise issuers as, with very few exceptions, the [Chinese] founders of these companies do not speak English or are not comfortable doing business in English," says Douglas Markel, a Beijing-based partner at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett who speaks Mandarin fluently.
But it's less important in other areas. "There are different businesses out here; whether or not you need to know how to speak Mandarin depends on the business you deal in," says Root. "For sectors like banking and finance or high-yield debt capital markets, the documentations still need technical English language skills, so that makes room for the non-speakers."
Root also points out that capital markets in Hong Kong may become less China-dependent over time, as more companies consider following in the footsteps of Swiss commodities trading firm Glencore International and fashion house Prada, non-Asian companies that chose to list on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.
The real issue confronting firms is whether there are enough Mandarin speakers who are also really good lawyers. "The capability to read, write and speak Chinese is certainly an important skillset, but equally so are qualities like leadership, superior technical knowledge and excellent client relationship management skills," says Bakers' Tan.
Legal recruiters say there is a definite shortfall of candidates who fit the bill of having strong skills, credentials and language ability. "The ideal person is one who is born in China and studied in the US or the UK," says CML Recruitment's Cooper. "But there isn't a massive number of them, so the ones who do have that background are highly sought after."
In the near term, the shortage is likely to intensify as US firms continue to expand newly-launched Hong Kong law practices. Barely two years ago, most leading American law firms only practised US law in Hong Kong, but now almost all the top names have added Hong Kong law capability. Dapiran joined Davis Polk's Hong Kong office last year from Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer as part of that wave. Barron says that the office has doubled in size since 2010, with most of its new recruits speaking fluent Mandarin.
In the long term, with more Western students studying Mandarin than ever, law firms are likely to have less and less trouble meeting their needs. But if the numbers of Mandarin speakers come up short anytime soon, firms say they know where their priorities lie.
"First-rate legal skills are by far what is most important," says Markel. "If need be, we would rather make do with someone with very strong legal skills and no Chinese language rather than risk compromising the quality of our work product."
The Asian Lawyer is a US affiliate title of Legal Week.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSingapore Leaders Stress the Importance of the Rule of Law Amid Geopolitical Tensions
Can Law Firms Avoid Landing on the 'Enemy' List During the Trump Administration?
5 minute readLetter From Asia: Will Big Law Ever Bother to Understand Asia Again?
Trending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250