How-to Guide · 9 min read
Key decisions that determine whether a JV succeeds or fails
Introduction
Joint ventures are powerful tools for international market entry and capability combination — but poorly structured JVs are among the most common sources of commercial and legal dispute. This guide covers the critical structural and governance decisions that determine JV success.
Step-by-Step
Before designing a JV structure, both parties must clearly articulate why a JV is the right vehicle. Typical rationales include: combining complementary capabilities, sharing capital requirements, accessing local market relationships, or meeting local ownership requirements. The success criteria — financial performance targets, strategic milestones, and exit conditions — should be agreed at the outset.
Equity split reflects relative contribution, but governance structure determines day-to-day management. A 50:50 JV requires strong deadlock resolution mechanisms. Majority/minority structures (60:40, 70:30) provide clearer decision-making authority. Board composition, reserved matters (decisions requiring both parties' consent), and CEO appointment procedures are among the most important governance provisions to negotiate.
The JV agreement should specify which party provides management, who controls functional decisions (HR, finance, operations), how inter-company transactions are priced, how IP contributed by each party is licensed to the JV, and what happens if one party fails to deliver its operational commitments. Ambiguity in any of these areas is a common source of JV breakdown.
Most JVs involve commercial transactions between the JV and its parents — licensing of IP, provision of management services, supply of goods. These inter-company arrangements must be structured on arm's length terms to satisfy tax authorities and prevent one party from extracting disproportionate value through commercial arrangements rather than equity returns.
JV exit provisions are the most important and most neglected aspect of JV structuring. Common mechanisms include: drag-along rights, tag-along rights, put/call options (one party can require the other to buy or sell at a pre-agreed formula), and Russian Roulette/Texas Shootout clauses. The appropriate mechanism depends on the JV's strategic purpose and the parties' relative power.
JV agreements should specify governing law (English law and Singapore law are commonly chosen for predictability), dispute resolution mechanism (arbitration before litigation, specifying seat and institutional rules — ICC, LCIA, SIAC), and an escalation process requiring senior management to attempt resolution before formal proceedings.
Related Services
Our teams deliver hands-on advisory across each of the areas covered in this guide. Speak to us about your specific situation.
Related Guides