Taihe: A Lawyer’s Story | Growing Through Reflection — Seven Years in Practice, Cultivating Strength Across Diverse Areas of Legal Work

Release Date:

2026-08-29

Editor’s Note:

In Taihe, every lawyer has their own story.

Some have moved from the bench to the defense table; others, having completed their studies abroad, have chosen Taihe; and still others have forged their journey here, transforming from interns into partners. Though their backgrounds and areas of expertise vary, they all share a common ethos—professionalism, resilience, and warmth.

This is precisely the intention behind launching our “Taihe: Lawyers’ Stories” column. We hope to show you the most authentic side of the Taihe lawyers—beyond the courtroom. And through their stories, we aim to help more people understand that at Taihe, law is not merely a profession; it is a passion worthy of your trust.

Q: What was the catalyst or which person inspired you to become a lawyer? Looking back today, do you still hold on to that original aspiration?

A: When I was a student, I didn’t harbor any grand ambitions; I simply believed that law is a tool for resolving real‑world conflicts and hoped to leverage my professional expertise to help clients untangle the intricate challenges they face. That was the most straightforward starting point behind my decision to become a lawyer. Only after stepping into practice did I come to realize that ideals must take root in the gritty, everyday realities of life. Looking back on seven years of legal practice, I find that my original aspiration has remained intact—only now it has been reinterpreted. In my youthful imagination, a lawyer often seemed bold and unapologetically assertive; today, I see that初心, at its core, is more about rigor and restraint. It may not always be dramatic or high‑octane, but rather a commitment to approach each entrusted matter with care, seeing it through to solid, well‑grounded results—and in the midst of life’s complexity, delivering a dependable, professional answer.

Q: At the outset of your practice, why did you choose either litigation or non-litigation? What has kept you committed to this path?

A: During my early years in practice, I did not confine myself to either litigation or purely non-litigation work; instead, I engaged in a broad range of matters, including routine legal advisory services, contract drafting and review, compliance assessments, commercial due diligence, and the resolution of contractual disputes. In those formative days, I viewed this as an invaluable opportunity to hone my foundational skills across diverse practice areas, gradually adapting to a professional environment where litigation and non-litigation activities are seamlessly intertwined.

What has truly sustained me along the way are the tangible, positive feedbacks I’ve received in practice: a contract riddled with vulnerabilities, once revised, achieves risk closure; potential compliance risks are flagged well in advance; and a stalled dispute finds a viable path to resolution. These small yet genuine moments of value inspire me to keep moving forward, steadily and purposefully, on the path of law.

Q: What do you consider to be the most significant difference between litigation and non-litigation practice? If you have experience working across both domains, how would a litigation lawyer view a non-litigation lawyer, and vice versa?
A: In my view, the fundamental difference between the two lies in their focus: non-litigation is forward-looking, emphasizing risk prevention; litigation, by contrast, looks to the past, aiming to resolve disputes after they have arisen. Providing ongoing legal advice, drafting contracts, conducting due diligence, and ensuring compliance are all about helping clients avoid potential pitfalls down the road; whereas litigation addresses issues that have already materialized, leveraging existing facts and evidence to secure the most favorable outcome.

Having worked across both litigation and non‑litigation practice for an extended period, I’ve gained a clear sense of the differences between the two. Litigation lawyers excel at adversarial thinking, placing great emphasis on evidentiary details, issue‑by‑issue analysis, and courtroom advocacy; by contrast, non‑litigation lawyers tend to adopt a business‑oriented perspective, habitually seeking a balance between transactional objectives and legal risks. Each approach has its own strengths, yet they also reflect distinct viewpoints: litigation practitioners sometimes view non‑litigation work as overly theoretical, lacking the rigor of real‑world advocacy; meanwhile, non‑litigation lawyers often perceive litigation as having a limited grasp of the underlying logic of commercial transactions.

Personally, engaging with both types of business simultaneously has been a valuable asset. When reviewing contracts and conducting due diligence, I habitually adopt a post‑event dispute‑oriented perspective to anticipate potential risk points, integrating litigation‑focused thinking into proactive risk management.

Q: If one aspires to become a professional lawyer, how long does the typical transition period—encompassing education, skill development, and practical experience—usually take? How did you navigate this stage?

A: My personal experience has taught me that years of practice do not automatically translate into professional expertise. The development of true professionalism depends not only on the length of one’s career but, more importantly, on sustained, topic‑specific learning, hands‑on experience with similar projects, and the iterative refinement of one’s professional understanding. During this transitional phase, it is not enough to simply learn how to draft documents or conduct case research; the real challenge lies in mastering the art of client‑focused business selection and cultivating a systematic, holistic way of thinking. In the early stages of my practice, I responded to a wide array of client needs, honing my foundational skills through extensive real‑world work. Now, at this stage, I proactively undertake strategic business structuring, deliberately directing my efforts toward areas such as state‑owned enterprises, investment and financing, and capital markets, while building on my existing expertise to expand into new domains of knowledge. Deepening one’s specialization is a gradual, step‑by‑step process: balancing day‑to‑day responsibilities with long‑term strategic planning.

Q: Have you ever encountered highly stressful phases in your professional practice—such as high‑stakes court hearings, complex transactions, or cross‑border negotiations? How did you manage to recalibrate and keep moving forward?

A: In practical work, it’s inevitable to encounter periods of intense pressure; complex projects and multitasking schedules can place significant psychological strain. When faced with stress, I don’t push myself to rush through all my goals at once. Instead, I break tasks down: I decompose large projects into manageable, actionable steps and tackle them one by one. Outside of work, I recharge by engaging in outdoor activities, stepping away from the rigidity of my professional routine. Being a lawyer is a long‑term career; I allow myself to move forward steadily, without feeling compelled to achieve every goal by a specific deadline.

Q: At Taihe, what kind of support or influence has your team or your partners provided you? How is Taihe’s “mentorship and knowledge-sharing” culture reflected in your own experience?

A: The team and our partners have placed great trust in me, entrusting me with a diverse array of enterprise‑service projects to lead and oversee. On complex or challenging matters, we collaboratively brainstorm case strategies and conduct post‑project reviews to assess successes and areas for improvement. When confronted with intricate compliance issues or contentious disputes, I can readily consult with partners and senior attorneys, saving considerable time and effort by avoiding unnecessary detours.

Taihe’s “mentorship and hands‑on guidance” goes beyond simply assigning tasks; it focuses on teaching people how to fish. It involves not only imparting skills in document management and case handling, but also cultivating a practical mindset for managing client relationships and balancing business needs with legal considerations. Throughout this process, I share my hands‑on experience in routine legal matters, contract review, and investment‑financing with the younger members of the team, fostering an environment of mutual exchange and continuous learning.

Q: If you were to describe Taihe in three words, which ones would you choose, and why?

A: I would choose: pragmatism, inclusiveness, and symbiosis.

First and foremost, we are pragmatic: we respect the business itself, prioritize case quality and our clients’ real needs, eschew hollow labels, and address legal issues in a down-to-earth, results‑oriented manner.

Second, inclusivity: The platform welcomes lawyers from diverse practice backgrounds and with varied areas of expertise, supporting both those who wish to deepen their expertise in established fields and those who seek to explore emerging practice areas, while allowing lawyers to grow at their own pace.

Third is symbiosis: lawyers do not operate in isolation; cross‑team collaboration flows seamlessly, and when tackling multidisciplinary projects, team members can leverage their complementary expertise to deliver comprehensive solutions for clients.

Q: How do you typically interact with clients? What key considerations should you keep in mind when communicating with them?

A: When working with clients, my guiding principle is to disclose risks objectively, avoid making unrealistic promises, and refrain from painting an overly rosy picture. Clients often aspire to an idealized outcome, yet legal practice is inherently fraught with uncertainty. I make it a habit to lay out all favorable factors, potential risks, and the pros and cons of various options, then collaborate with clients to select a solution that aligns with their business objectives.

A key aspect of communication is understanding the client’s true business objectives, rather than fixating solely on the legal provisions themselves. Many corporate clients revise contracts not because they are quibbling over the wording, but to close a deal and sustain their business relationship. Lawyers should avoid simply declaring something “unfeasible”; instead, they must consider how to manage risks within an acceptable range if the transaction is to move forward.

Q: If, during the course of handling a case, you discover that a party has failed to truthfully disclose material facts, how would you typically proceed?

A: In such situations, I thoroughly explain to the client the importance of truthfully stating the facts, highlight the risk of losing the case if key facts are concealed, and outline the potential implications for the lawyer’s professional practice, thereby guiding the client toward reconstructing the objective facts. If the client nonetheless chooses to withhold critical information, I reassess whether it remains appropriate to continue representing them. Upholding this fundamental principle is both a duty of care to the client and a safeguard for the lawyer’s own professional integrity.

Q: What does a typical workweek look like? For litigation lawyers, it might be court‑day appearances; for transactional lawyers, project‑intensive deadlines; and for international‑law practitioners, back‑to‑back meetings across time zones… Could you paint a vivid picture of an actual day?

A: As a lawyer specializing in integrated business matters, my week is often packed with fragmented tasks. Upon arriving in the morning, I’m immediately fielding a wide range of inquiries from our regular corporate clients; throughout the day, I juggle contract reviews, due‑diligence document analysis, and the organization of evidence for ongoing disputes, all while coordinating client‑meeting schedules. In the evenings, I frequently find myself refining legal documents. Before I’ve even wrapped up one assignment, new requests inevitably pile up. During project‑intensive phases, overtime becomes the norm. Yet it is precisely through the steady execution of these concrete tasks that my professional expertise is gradually honed.

Q: Do you think the legal profession is highly stressful? How do you typically manage work-related stress and physical fatigue?

A: Professional stress in the legal field is an objective reality, stemming in part from the nature of projects and cases themselves and in part from the industry’s relentless demand for continuous professional development. The profession often amplifies success stories, making it all the more crucial to establish your own pace and avoid blindly benchmarking yourself against others.

My approach to unwinding is fairly simple: I cook or take the kids outdoors. At the same time, I practice moderate digital disconnection by stepping away from work notifications during designated periods, so I don’t get stuck in work mode all the time. Over time, I’ve learned to accept that not everyone needs to become a top‑tier expert in their field; delivering every task I handle with care and thoroughness is, in itself, a significant form of value.

Q: What is your professional creed? How do you view the social responsibility of the legal profession? And how do you balance social responsibility with economic interests?

A: My professional creed is: exercise due care and professionalism, knowing when to act and when to refrain.

First and foremost, being a lawyer is a profession that provides livelihood and security; the economic benefits it affords form its practical foundation. At the same time, the legal profession inherently carries a sense of social responsibility—these two are not mutually exclusive. My bottom line is this: I will not accept cases that violate fundamental principles or entail uncontrollable risks simply for financial gain. Nor is social responsibility confined to handling pro bono matters; earnestly honoring the trust placed in us by every ordinary business and every ordinary client, offering prudent risk warnings, and devising practical, workable legal solutions—this, in its simplest form, is how social responsibility is put into practice. Upholding the legal底线 is itself an act of fulfilling our responsibilities.

Q: If you were asked to redefine the profession of “lawyer” in a single sentence, what would you say? And for young lawyers just starting out, what advice would you most like to offer? Alternatively, under what circumstances would you advise them to proceed with caution?

A: Redefining the lawyer, I would say: a lawyer is a professional practitioner who, grounded in legal rules, helps ordinary individuals and businesses navigate complex realities and find viable solutions.

A few words for young lawyers: Don’t place blind faith in the notion of rapid fame or a shortcut to instant specialization; recognize that growth takes time. At the same time, cultivate an early awareness of how to strategically select your practice areas—avoid passively taking on every case that comes your way, and proactively reflect on your own professional trajectory.

It’s also important to approach this profession with a realistic perspective: if you’re drawn only to the glamorous image of being a lawyer but aren’t willing to endure the rigorous practical training and lifelong learning that come with it, you should think twice before entering the field. Behind the halo lies the steady, day‑in‑and‑day‑out effort required to build expertise.

Shao Yujuan, Taihe Law Firm

Shao Yujuan is a practicing attorney at Taihe Law Firm, Deputy Director of the Listed Companies and State-Owned Enterprises Compliance Committee, a Level‑3 lawyer in Nanjing, and Deputy Director of the Tourism and Convention & Exhibition Law Specialized Committee of the Nanjing Lawyers Association. She was recognized as a 2025 Intellectual Property Law Specialist in the Nanjing legal profession. A graduate of Shandong University with a Master of Laws degree, she also holds fund‑industry qualification. Her practice focuses on non‑litigation and litigation legal services, including ongoing legal advisory and compliance management for state‑owned enterprises, securities compliance and litigation for listed companies, private equity funds, investment and financing matters, and intellectual property issues related to e‑commerce platforms.

Taihe Updates | Taihe (Shenzhen) Makes Its Debut at the 2026 Third Shenzhen Legal Expo, Pioneering a New Paradigm for One-Stop Compliance and Legal Services for Listed Companies

Taihe · Listed Company Securities Compliance Column | Could Responses Provided Through Informal Channels Constitute a Violation of Information Disclosure Requirements?