For
people who are deciding on a Language Service Provider (LSP)
or which software is needed to manage translation projects
within their organization, there are mounds of data and
hype to wade through before you are able to make your choice.
Not unlike buying a "Green car", where your choices in the
U.S. today range from Hybrid cars, to FlexFuel (E85) vehicles,
to converting your dad’s old Mercedes to run on restaurant
fryer-fat; each of these solutions come with a heap of marketing
messages, facts as well as fiction which you need to pick
through when making your choice.
On the translation supplier side, we see
a lot of merger and acquisition activity going on across
the entire content value chain – from content creation to
translation. For example, SDL’s recent purchase of Tridion,
a moderately sized vendor of content management, resulted
in an increased service offering outside of the usual scope
of a language provider. We now see the first LSP providing
content management combined with translation integration.
Seen as a new shift in the industry, we believe that this
merger closes SDL’s doors to potential customers who already
have, or are in the process of, implementing another content
management system. However, M&A activity, like the much
publicized SDL/Tridion merger, will continue as growing
businesses in the localization industry grapple with their
unique questions of whether to build, buy, or partner with
vendors outside of their core competence in order to sell
their clients a "wider-solution". The real question is,
with these large, fairly inflexible solutions becoming more
prevalent, where does the customer end up in the mix? Are
these merged behemoths the only choice left?
Examining the structure of different products
and approaches can provide insight into the nuances of different
translation solutions. When it comes to building a translation
solution there are what seem to be an unlimited number of
choices available, all with a slightly different methods
of how to solve your problem. Current client needs and the
plethora of services available are just too diverse to synthesize
into an all-encompassing solution; hence the problem with
creating a solution purely out of an M&A transaction.
WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM A TRANSLATION
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM? (TMS)
With TMS systems, the current industry buzz
is focused on where a system begins and where it ends; what
is chargeable and what is not. Features such as Content Management,
or integration with other Content Management Systems (CMS)
as well as whether to include workflow and translation memory
into your TMS are determining factors on what solution you
should choose. Using online banking as a metaphor, most banks
have an on-line transactional portal which you expect to be
free, with some basic self-management functionality such as:
1. Transfer funds between linked accounts
2. Pay bills (auto-recurring or manual)
3. Download activity
4. Define auto-alerts relating to activity
Much like a TMS, fees are waived if you keep your money
(content in the case of TMS) in the bank of the web portal
you use. However, if your banking needs are complex, say
you wish to be able to manage all your money regardless
of which bank(s) your money is in, and/or you wish to buy
and sell stocks real-time, you may need to "rent" software
to manage all that in one place (or portal). Most banks
have realized this concept by offering this extended functionality
for a fee. Similarly, most current TMS systems allow you
to add features or use premium features for a fee.
While these systems are still taking shape on staging servers
behind the closed doors of LSP’s and Software companies,
most of them have a web-based portal which clients expect
to be free along with some basic functionality, like being
able to:
1. Upload files as jobs or to quote
2. Review/Edit translated content for approval
3. Track projects and measure spend across divisions
4. Download completed files
5. Access Translation Memory and Terminology/ Glossary
WHAT DO TMS USERS REALLY NEED?
Many solution providers decide on their portal’s feature-set
by sitting in a conference room and white-boarding all the
things they think their clients would like to have in a
system with the aim of "building a better mouse-trap." Or
they seek out an M&A target that they think fits the bill.
Six months later, they have V2.5 of their portal.
We believe there is a different approach. Thebigword has
taken revolutionary steps…get ready…"we’ve asked our clients
and prospects directly what they would like to see via our
Customer Advisory Board." While many solution providers
would argue that a TMS is so much more than these five features
listed above, thebigword has recently conducted a survey
from 5,000 customers/prospects asking them what they want
from a TMS, which has validated our assumptions which features
are basic (used by the majority) and which are enhanced
(for the minority) and come with a fee. We’ve learned some
incredibly valuable information about what clients really
need, and have made some informed decisions about which
features and functions are not really relevant to the majority.
One example of this was learned from a question we posed
about what level of detail was needed around project tracking.
The surprising majority answer was "I don’t care as long
as the project is delivered when I expect it." This answer
makes sophisticated project tracking features and functions
of TMS’s systems irrelevant.
And when the respondents in the survey were asked, "Does
the need exist within your organization to use multiple
translation services suppliers?" the answers were equally
surprising.
The minority of respondents, who answered "Yes" or "Maybe",
were then asked "why was this important?" The majority there
responded with "Efficiency and Choice" as the predominate
reason for having the ability to choose multiple suppliers
within the same system. So having a way to open a once "captive"
TMS from an LSP would be something a significant group would
need. We believe that Translation Management Systems therefore
should come with an option to manage other suppliers, albeit
for fee, in a similar way to the way financial services
portals and salesforce.com can add features and functions
in a modular way. There needs to be a shift in thinking
from the existing "captive" TMS solutions that are widely
used to a belief that solutions should provide users with
a flexible way of incorporating multiple suppliers AND provide
the best result for the user.
BRAINLESS, PAINLESS AND SIMPLE
One of the biggest problems with the TMS systems you see
today is how complex they are to configure and use. While
they work in the end, getting there is not the most intuitive
path for the most common user of these systems: a translation
requestor on the client- side. Many TMS are a patchwork
of various systems cobbled together to create a whole. Most
do not have a single, cohesive design – from a user’s perspective.
Exacerbated by increased M&A activity, this is already happening
in the industry with various degrees of complete cohesive
functionality.
MORE THAN TECHNOLOGY: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE SERVICE
Perhaps I’ve put too much emphasis in this discussion on
the actual TMS system that LSP’s provide – so allow me to
put things in perspective. Regardless of how fantastic the
TMS solution is, any time anyone in the human component
of the translation process doesn’t do what they should be
doing, when they should be doing it - is the moment the
whole translation process comes to a screeching halt. Nothing
happens. So however enamoured we become with the features,
functions and backbone technology of any TMS system, it
is critical to remember that without using the right people
and having applied or configured the right process to the
system you have, the most grand web globalization plans
will fail. We believe that there is NO replacement for the
human touch in content management in order to support clients
with what they need in creating their localization strategy,
mapping their workflow, and enrolling all their global stakeholders
in a process which a new system will support.
Additionally, not enough can be said about the importance
of project management in the success of any translation
project – using any technology. Experienced buyers of translation
know that the success of their projects (or the failure)
rests on how their project manager sets expectations, communicates
throughout the project, and accommodates change as it hits
the process. So in the end, it’s really the people and the
process which give life to the technology – not the other
way around. It is easy to forget that fact as we compare
the features and functions of TMS systems taking for granted
the fact that someone has to stop, think, and translate
something accurately – all at the right time in the process.
While M&A activity generally indicates a consolidation
in an industry and a translation of better products for
users, we believe that when it comes to TMS and content
management, bigger isn’t always better. Bigger, in the case,
means less flexibility, less human touch, and less choice.
The good news is, in the end, the customers always get what
they want. In the next few years, these new, merged solutions
will bend to customer demands and we will see flexibility
and intelligence emerge in a new form of TMS.
ClientSide News Magazine - www.clientsidenews.com
