Is marketing outside the United States on your agenda or wish list? Some companies have the luxury of international marketing departments while others use employees at home or abroad who speak other languages to translate marketing materials. But our research at Common Sense Advisory has found that nearly 90% of companies outsource some or all of their translation and localization work. That includes marketing translation, global Web sites, multilingual search engine marketing, and a variety of other tasks supporting international marketing projects. These companies tend to use a stable of language service providers and freelance translators to meet their needs in marketing collateral, advertising, product localization, Web site globalization, customer service and call centers, online help systems, knowledge bases, technical user guides, and training materials.
Regardless of which approach you take, the quality of the translations you perform in-house or with contractors is a topic that inspires vigorous debate at any conference, in every journal, and during any chance encounter of bilingual speakers. Personal preference may take the debaters in one of several directions. Here are a few of the common attitudes toward translation quality:
- Nitpicking focus. Some people angrily pinpoint errors at the word or sentence level, forgetting that 99.9% of the text is perfectly acceptable. Of course, sometimes the detail-oriented approach is necessary, especially when a single misrendered term results in a 180-degree change in meaning.
- Happiness with simple access. At the other end of the scale, some people are satisfied with simply having a translation – any translation – even with poorly rendered text resulting from machine translation with no post-editing. They are grateful that they can gain an understanding of foreign-language materials. Absolute fidelity to the original is not their primary objective; getting access to that information is.
- Philosophical angst. Others may take a more philosophical stand, arguing that cultural context stands in the way of accurate translation. For individuals of this mindset, starting with the basic message or concept and writing from scratch in another language may be a better road to follow. This approach is called “trancreation.”
In each of these cases (and the many other possible views of quality), the debate typically revolves around preference rather than business needs. Instead of arguing about the right words or grammar, people should ask, “Does the translated document achieve its marketing goal? Is it actionable? Will it cause harm?” The challenge with any translation is to assess results from these perspectives. However, we often find that simple misunderstandings – usually caused by inadequate communication – prevent buyers and their suppliers from reaching consensus on what constitutes a good translation.
In primary research that we recently conducted on translation quality, our interviewees complained about a range of causes for bad output, but all their issues often boil down to the fact that translation agencies and translators miss the mark. Whether outsourcers choose the wrong words, produce literal translations, bypass industry-specific terms, or fail to reflect the linguistic flavor of the brand, buyers see their work as flawed. Overzealous review consumes more time than buyers think it’s worth. In the final analysis, these problems all result from a failure to communicate requirements and intentions.
As you lay out your strategy for global marketing, here are a few things to keep in mind as you sign contracts with translation agencies:
- Communicate what you want upfront. While translators and the agencies that employ them sometimes don’t deliver the precision or quality that customers call for, much of the fault actually lies with buyers who don’t make their expectations clear or provide enough direction for their providers to get the job done. A few operational changes, all focused on enhancing the amount, type, and frequency of communication with your language services provider (LSP), can do much to improve overall quality.
- Be very clear on specifics. Outline in explicit detail the behavior that you expect. Be sure to define requirements not just in terms of what you don’t want, but also in terms of what you do expect. If you find that a given behavior or result from the vendor frustrates you, ask, “What did I want instead?” Chances are that you did not lay out your expectations in writing. Defining what you want helps everyone understand how to prevent the undesirable behavior.
- Talk to them regularly. Elicit feedback and clarification requests. Check with your suppliers periodically to ask if there are any questions from the linguists they employ. If the LSP has not yet opened the communication lines to the translators and editors working on the project, your inquiry may prompt them to do so.
- Review periodically. Should the reviewer only check for major deviations from the source meaning? If so, document the definition of what constitutes such an error. Provide examples of major errors and less important ones. These examples may vary by document type – a missing comma may be of no concern in an employee handbook, but it might be an important mistake on a marketing brochure. Make these guidelines clear to your agency, so that everyone has the same understanding.
- Aggregate demand and contracts, so that you’re more strategic to your outsourcer. You’ll have more clout and say in the relationship if you’re looking at a $500,000 or million dollar contract than a bunch of tactical $10,000 engagements.
Donald A. DePalma is president of Common Sense Advisory Inc.
Network
