|
In this issue…
Responsiveness, Added Value, Flexibility, Transparency (RAFT)…
MTM’s philosophy of a more pragmatic vendor network
The 1996 status report states: 'there are no blueprint solutions for the localisation industry—, and you could well ask if we need one. Selecting a vendor is corporate strategy dependent, product (line) dependent, department dependent and even people dependent. MTM has clients on all these decision-making levels and so, I imagine, have many vendors. It is our objective to turn the problems of this highly volatile and often unstructured localisation industry inside out to discover the hidden challenges within. And besides the linguistic ones there are many other challenges: managerial, technological, logistical and cultural. MTM is building a network which is designed to absorb the pluriformity in client requirements and convert it every time into a uniform multilingual deliverable. In short: tailored services. Consequently, we do not see it as our task to preach one specific localisation gospel, unless it is the belief that there are many gospels worth believing in. I do not think that means we should not be a member of the LISA. In fact it makes being a member even more interesting: complex problems usually need complex solutions. The LISA at least makes a serious effort to identify, define and quantify the problems in the business, even though the solutions may still be diverse or non-existent. MTM (Multilingual Translations Management b.v.) was founded at the end of 1994 and joined the LISA at the end of 1995. MTM was founded by European in-country localisation companies to provide the client with one-stop centralised project management, and at the same time to start building a European network based on the four key principles of Responsiveness, Added value, Flexibility and Transparency (RAFT). These principles apply not only to MTM's project management front office in the Netherlands, but also to each individual partner. Responsiveness … the network is alertWe feel our organisation should be alert, highly communicative, eager to learn and committed to solving problems. If the market is complex, the business model applied cannot be simple. Our small learning organisation is modelled to handle many different types of client: the quality- driven, tool-driven, GA-driven and the budget-driven. In real life this means we try to locate and manage the solutions to sometimes extremely individual client requests. Usually, the solutions are there, in the network, but they are not always at one location. For just one project, for example, we may require multi-media expertise from our partner Midori S.A. in Barcelona or SGML expertise from our partner Step.In. S.r.l. in Rome. MTM's role is to locate and reroute the existing know-how and deploy it where it is needed. This is not an easy job by far, but most of the processes are now pretty well streamlined, and all our partners fully aware of what is needed. For them, it was a matter of switching their minds to thinking in international terms instead of in local ones. Now, we handle our problem reporting in an almost fully automated way: our partners are made aware of all the problems reported in a project, regardless of whether they occurred in Iceland or in Italy. They can thus react to them, as can the project manager and the client. Distinct severity coding and report numbering make each report unique and easily traceable. This report-once-solve-many reporting system is very effective and keeps our partners well-informed and committed. Added value… the client definesYou can only get the credit for added value if the client at the very least recognises it as such. Added value is in the eye of the beholder. Our opinion is that each individual MTM partner should add value to the network as a whole. Bringing a new area of expertise to the group adds value and can bring extra business for all; it is a two-way street. Translation quality should actually not be considered an added value, since it is supposed to be the core activity. We know, however, that some publishers and vendors believe that 'higher translation quality does not sell more—; this may be an interesting thought but it is an irrelevant one: as a matter of principle you should never settle for second rate in translation, because there is no need to. At least, not if you, as a client, have a proper native- speaking validation system in place which ensures you get good value for money. And for the bargain-driven outsourcers out there, beware: the economising short-term winner can easily become a long-term quality loser. In our experience a client will only outsource the project management and pay for it separately when you have something to offer which they do not have (technical or human skills) or do not have enough people for (low headcount). Managing all the in-country vendors by yourself as a publisher or OEM is from a managerial and technical point-of-view quite effective, but many organisations simply do not have enough staff to do this. Project management is also considered an individual and special quality within the MTM network itself. The one-stop project management office in the Netherlands is a front office which, in the background, continuously reroutes existing know-how within the network from one partner to the other, and focusses on business development. Within projects the office functions as an alert and sometimes aggressive troubleshooter. The MTM office also stimulates in-country sales activities by the partners to feed the network from all sides. Currently, some 80% of the multilingual workload is managed by the MTM front office, whereas about 20% is managed by in- country partners using the network resources. Flexibility… the network reactsIt is important for the network to be highly flexible and adaptable to a specific client; it should be pragmatic in dealing with the client's requirements, and should not impose 'proven' solutions too readily. A solution which works for one client, may turn out to be catastrophic for another. The client's own organisational and cultural background should be key here, and the network should have the flexibility to respect this. We gained some good experience in this respect while working for both Japanese and US companies. The RAFT-concept we are currently implementing to select our network partners also puts emphasis on flexibility in the sense of ability to quickly up- and down-size team resources. Partners have a commitment to both MTM and each other in this respect. We consider these commitments to be the intrinsic value of our network. Lacking capacity within one partner may affect all others, and a multilingual product should be treated as a single deliverable. In principle, clients should never have to be bothered by “local problems' when they buy a one-stop service; after all, this is the reason they come to us in the first place. Since MTM functions as an open network, each individual partner knows how the others are performing in this respect. It is a matter of company policy and psychology not to hide such issues. Not only does this make us more alert, it also promotes team- building within the network, which is crucial for complex multilingual jobs. Transparency… the client is awareIn general, our clients are also aware who is doing what, where and why. Even though still very much evolving, it is safe to say that MTM consists of a nucleus of shareholding partners, and two additional concentric circles of partner companies; a first circle of fixed partners (potential shareholders) and a second circle of so- called preferred suppliers. The procedure is such that the best partners will move from the outer layer to the inner nucleus, become co-owners of MTM, and consequently have an influence on our strategy; both a Darwinian and a democratic approach. We realise that our transparency may imply vulnerability if a partner is not performing well enough; however, our partners realise they cannot hide behind our one-stop back: after all, the MTM client knows the partners, and this has a highly self-regulating effect. If it comes to the worst, we have a sanction system in place which may ultimately lead to expulsion (even of a shareholding company). For large vendors with wholly- owned local subsidiaries this is most probably a more cumbersome process. For MTM, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. It should be added, though, that even if you have smart procedures in place for worse-case scenarios, the “network chemistry' is still most important. Group cohesion can only be achieved if you share the same capabilities, attitudes and commitment, if there is something to learn from each other and if there is something to gain in terms of new business. As far as I recall, there have not been any business models like ours in the past, and if I am well-informed there are no similar (partner ownership) models like ours active today. But I am open to correction on this point; you cannot know it all in the localisation business. Joop Janssen
|
LISA Business Data Forum Summaries and Presentations LISA Globalization Consulting Network Webinars and TouchPoint Advisory Calls LISA Forum USA LISA@Chinasoft Fair LISA Forum Asia LISA Forum Europe LISA Forum India Open Standards • TBX • TMX |
||