Team size: over 90

Chenyang Xie, Doctor of Juris Doctor, serves as Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of Foxconn Industrial Internet Co., Ltd. Prior to joining Foxconn, Dr Xie was General Manager of the Legal Management Centre at GCL Group.

Dr Xie has received numerous industry accolades, including recognition in the ALB General Counsel Profiles, selection as a Leading General Counsel by Chambers and Legal 500, recognition as an Outstanding IP Manager in China by China IP, inclusion in the first group of experts in the corporate rule-of-law development expert database by Legal Daily, and receipt of multiple awards from China Business Law Journal for consecutive years.

Concurrently, Dr Xie is an expert member of the International Chamber of Commerce, Vice President of the Patent Protection Association of China, a council member of the Institute of Securities Law of CLS, a WIPO arbitrator, an arbitrator at the Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration, and a guest lecturer at Renmin University of China, East China University of Political Science and Law, Shenzhen University, and other institutions.

Furthermore, Dr Xie is the author of the English monograph The Legal Regime of Chinese Overseas Investment and the Chinese book Belt and Road Initiative: Case Studies, Practices, and Risk Prevention.

How do you approach managing legal aspects during periods of instability or crisis to ensure the organisation’s resilience? 

In periods of instability or crisis, the legal function must evolve from a guardian of compliance into a participator of foresight. My approach combines structured risk governance with proactive crisis leadership. 

Building an internal legal department involves establishing a cross-functional structure that integrates compliance, dispute management, export control, and regulatory liaison, rather than merely reacting to events. This allows real-time coordination and ensures that legal decisions reinforce business continuity and governance integrity.

Policy engagement and external collaboration are also critical. In volatile environments, the legal team must move upstream, engaging with regulators, industry bodies, and external counsel to shape interpretations and anticipate policy transitions. By participating early in the rulemaking dialogue, uncertainty can be turned into strategic influence.

Turning adversity into institutional strength is another key objective. Every crisis exposes weaknesses but also accelerates institutional learning. After each major incident, lessons learned are codified into compliance handbooks, SOPs, and digital governance tools, thereby embedding resilience into the organisation’s DNA.

Ultimately, legal resilience is not passive defence; it is about guiding the enterprise through ambiguity with composure, collaboration, and vision, transforming crisis response into a long-term capability for sustainable growth.

How can general counsel foster a corporate culture that supports ESG principles and compliance across all levels of the organisation? 

since the company’s risk control and compliance committee was established in 2022, it has served as the central platform for esg-related governance and coordination. the general counsel chairs the executive committee, while the Fii legal team leads the substantive compliance and risk management workstreams.

In the compliance dimension, the team collaborates with the ESG unit to assess the applicability of California’s SB253 Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act and SB261 Climate-Related Financial Risk Act. Together, they evaluate whether U.S. subsidiaries are required to file reports with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and issue professional compliance opinions and follow-up action plans.

In the risk management dimension, the Legal & Risk team supports ESG governance and ratings. Risk governance forms the core of the ‘G’ pillar in ESG and is heavily weighted by rating agencies.

Through a ‘three lines of defence’ model, the team organises group-wide annual risk assessments and fully integrates ESG factors. ESG risks are prioritised, mitigation measures and KRIs are established, and progress is monitored through annual reports. From 2024 to 2025, ESG-related risks and opportunities accounted for 57% of total risk items, while the overall risk score dropped by 39 points, including a 29-point drop in ESG risk. New opportunities and risks were identified, three each in the Environmental and Governance areas. The Legal team also supported the ESG unit and PwC in conducting a double materiality assessment of impact and financial materiality, aligning methodologies and validating the final outcomes. Furthermore, the team provided expert input for the ESG report’s governance section and participated in external ESG rating reviews, addressing inquiries on risk management performance.

The coordinated efforts of the compliance, risk, and governance teams led to significant achievements in governance impact. The FTSE ESG Rating increased from 4.2 to 4.4 out of 5, ranking in the top 8% globally; the “G” pillar rose from 3.9 to 4.7 (Top 10%), with the Risk Management subcategory achieving a perfect 5.0. Morningstar compliance in the risk management dimension reached 100%. In the S&P CSA 2025, the governance score rose from 58 to 71 (Top 3% globally), while the risk management sub-score, which carries a 9.7% weight, increased from 39 to 67.

What factors influence your team’s decision to use external legal services versus handling matters in-house, and what criteria are used to evaluate their performance? 

Our decision to engage external counsel is guided by a balanced assessment of capability, capacity, and risk.

We typically consider using external lawyers when a matter requires expertise in a field where our internal team has limited experience or lacks jurisdiction-specific licences; when internal resources are temporarily stretched and cannot absorb additional workload within the required timelines; when a case carries significant legal, financial, or reputational risk, warranting an independent opinion; when the company seeks to allocate or share litigation and compliance risks through external representation; when external counsel can act as our voice in sensitive negotiations or disputes, ensuring neutrality and credibility; when the counterparty is represented by a leading law firm, and parity in legal resources is necessary; or when the client, counterparty, or governing regulation mandates the engagement of external lawyers.

Performance is measured by the quality of outcomes, timeliness, accuracy and practicality of advice, cost efficiency, and collaboration with our in-house team. We value firms that demonstrate strategic thinking and accountability — those that align their performance with the company’s long-term goals.