I'm certain that back then, times were challenging, if not more challenging than today. Possibly the biggest challenge back then was the lack of customers and work at the time. Not to mention gaining access to necessary technology. And the word globalization almost certainly didn't exist.

While we live in tumultuous times today, the likelihood of survival and prosperity for most translation and localization firms will depend more on their company's business vision and ability to execute that vision than the lack of potential customers or the development of any single new technology. And fortunately for us. For while I wouldn't predict a fast rebound to previous opportunity levels, I continue to expect that the demand for translation-related services should continue to grow.

Just as a strategy that worked in 1946 probably wouldn't work in 1990, maybe today's MLVs need to once again re-invent and reinvigorate themselves as well. As our customer's business needs continue to change and evolve, so should those of MLVs. In the past focusing on technology has been a key driver to growth; but that may not work as well today. For we may have entered a new technology phase of improvement of existing technologies more than the development of completely new technologies. While that certainly will change in due course, it helps put the focus back on delivering high-quality translation services at a profit.

Changing the perception of what translation involves

I'm convinced that one of the biggest challenges that MLV's face is the perception of what we do versus what we really do. As with most things in life, translation is both an art and a science, requiring creativity as well as sound business practices. However, over and over again I witness our customers discussing translation as a mechanical activity carried out at a lower-level position, something slightly above secretarial.

This perception makes it even harder to demonstrate the value for the services of an MLV. Why not just go on the Internet and hire translators yourself? Where maybe years ago it wasn't the case, today it is a necessary part of our translation services to make sure that we "add value" along the way and educate our customers on the value that we bring. From hiring translators, to managing projects to actually translating text, MLVs usually do "add value" and most companies are better off by working with an MLV.

But I question the wisdom and effectiveness of marketing slogans such as "we have a database with over 5,000 qualified translators" and I worry about the overall effect this has on the perception of what we actually do. Does anyone really have that many qualified translators? And what constitutes "qualified"? To interview and check references alone would be an enormous and costly activity.

Classifying our relationships with our "freelance" translators as "freelancers" also carries with it a less than positive connotation. The term "freelancer" does not, in most cases, suggest the proper value to the translator-agency relationship. In many conversations with clients the term has been used and usually to suggest that these "freelancers" are easily replaceable.

I would suggest that in order to satisfy any customers' on-going translation needs, these so-called 'freelancers" would in fact need to demonstrate a better than average understanding of their customers industry and a greater than average ability of translating documentation for that particular client. And it would need to show that how that relationship required training and the investment of a considerable amount of time to satisfy a client's requirements. In other words, putting a translation team that regularly delivers high-quality translations on a timely basis in many languages is a complex activity that suggests far more value than simply "our translators are freelancers".

My point is that maybe what we should be selling is translation management solutions that compete positively with non-language vendors such as advertising agencies, training companies and printers that regularly "manage" translation activities on behalf of end clients. These companies purport to 'add value" and market their ability to manage translation activities. Shouldn't we be doing the same?

Not a commodity, a complex challenge

The perception that translation is a commodity and that you can get similar results from almost any vendor is actually the complete opposite of my experience as an agency owner. Translation results do vary greatly and there is no "secret sauce" or "formula" that guarantees quality. And each agency has its own particular strengths and weaknesses. Even the popular "we use in-country translators" slogan does not really reflect any truth about 'value'.

My favorite German advertising translator, for instance, lives in London! From my point of view it's far more important that he worked as a copywriter at a well-respected ad agency than where he currently lives. In-country translators alone do not guarantee quality. Effective translation requires the correct understanding of the source text, which requires industry knowledge, or specific expertise in many cases, and appropriate writing skills. I could argue that a translator proficient in translating legalese may not be as proficient at translating creative messages. And understanding that may be a key component to satisfying our customers.

Translation quality, surely, is produced by age old methods, used in almost every industry: training, communication, the proper use of technology, craftsmanship, working towards well defined goals and understanding the mission of each project.

We all know about those famous mistranslations, and DTB has seen its share of them. One of my favorites stories is a project where a Spanish translator living in Miami who we contracted with to translate an Oldsmobile catalog, translated the expression "Push the Envelope" into Spanish. This catalog was to be used in the U.S. and was primarily for the Cuban and Mexican markets in California, Texas and…you guessed it for Miami! (If that isn't in-country enough for you.) Anyway the original translation was a literal one that really did mean, "push the envelope"… as in across the table! Fortunately the project had a happy ending.

Ironically, while our customers take for granted the effort required to translate complex messages and information, translation agencies face more profit margin pressures than ever before. While many customers may think that we are a commodity, the truth is that delivering high-quality translations on a regular basis is a complex challenge growing more complex every day. This disconnect is at the root of the value misconception. Until our customers realize the value that we deliver and the problems we help them solve and the goals we help them reach translation agencies will continue to suffer from the perception that we are interchangeable and struggle financially. Marketing our true value is the challenge that we all face.

Translation Memory: a missed opportunity for software vendors, agencies and end customers

I may be the only person who thinks that translation memory has little to no awareness in the U.S. corporate world or the publishing industry. Yet as someone who regularly meets with clients (outside of service information groups), I feel perfectly comfortable saying that hardly anyone has heard of translation memory. And almost everyone misunderstands it as some kind of 'machine translation'. This has made the implementation of translation memory into the publishing process slow and costly for translation agencies and clients alike, with a great deal of time spent demonstrating how the technology works and why it's important. In other words, simply "selling" the end client on the software.

Due to a natural conflict of interest, translation agencies and translation software vendors have rarely worked effectively well together to increase awareness, acceptance and use of the tools. This lack of co-coordinated effort is a root cause of why translation memory is so little known. Only a certain portion of a company's documentation is produced using translation memory and many departments with translation needs don't even know the technology exists.

Translation agencies would be natural partners to increase awareness and use throughout an organization. And managing the implementation of translation memory into the publishing process would demonstrate "value added" services. Software vendors would gain by selling more licenses' as more translations are actually produced using the same process.

Apart from the corporate world, another missed opportunity are all of the local universities in each of our communities. For instance, Michigan alone has close to 50 universities and not a single one has a language program that includes translation memory. Nationwide in the US, less than a handful do. If translation memory were a part of more of these programs, more potential translators would have heard of and had experience with the software, translation agencies would benefit by gaining translators with more skills and software vendors would again sell more licenses.

As a result, universities would be able to produce future translation professionals with more of the necessary knowledge to participate in the translation industry. This disconnect between software vendors and the local universities creates challenges and lost opportunities for would-be translators and translation agencies alike.

However, marketing at the local level requires a local presence and can be very costly and time consuming. To persuade universities to change their programs takes years and a lot of hours. Partnering with translation agencies would be a smarter and less costly strategy than going it alone.

Aren't we really selling multilingual publishing services?

Both my father and uncle have been in the business for a long time and more than once I've heard them ask why they weren't appreciated like advertising agencies, accountants or at least writers. Advertising agencies are respected for their "creative" abilities in producing communication solutions to marketing challenges. Understanding their clients' challenges and helping them reach their goals has usually been the key to their success. While they produce "advertisements" they are really doing things like "brand positioning" and creating and influencing customer perceptions. Their ability to do so is the true value that they deliver. Unlike them, translation agencies have rarely successfully marketed their services in a manner that communicates and influences our customers on the true value that we deliver.

Our inability to do so has opened the door for other types of organizations to be perceived as adding value to the translation process. While these third parties usually have a core competency somewhere else in the publishing process, they now create yet another barrier between translation companies and end users. This inability to directly influence end users contributes to the perception that I hear so many of my contemporaries complain about.

While what we do is "translate", what we are really doing, surely, is preparing multilingual training programs to help companies with their training needs, producing service information that really does help technicians properly repair products and developing foreign language advertisements that really do influence consumers' perceptions?

If MLVs continue to market their services using traditional strategies we will continue to be viewed as a commodity that can be easily replaced and continue to face profit margin challenges. Demonstrating our true value and how we help our customers reach their goals is what we need to market to our customers.

Rick Woyde is President of Detroit Translation Bureau and chairperson of the SAE J2450 Translation Quality Metric Task Force and can be reached at +1 248 593 6710 or by e-mail at rickw@dtbonline.com.