"I need an adapter. No, this doesn't work. It enables a US plug for foreign sockets, but what we need is using a foreign plug with US sockets. Can you help?"
We who are engaged in the language industry use the term localization every day but seldom, if not never, see it from a magazine out of our small world. That's why I was a little surprised when I find the word localization on the cover page of Harvard Business Review (HBR), issue April 2006.
Recently someone asked me whether the Chinese government allows a foreign business to wholly own a (localization) firm in mainland China? As this is not the first time I get such a question, I'd like to share the answer here and provide some information that might be helpful to companies who are interested in establishing an operation unit in China.
Complaints, negative TV reports, or even lawsuit… these happened simply because the companies didn't provide translations in Chinese while the consumers thought they should.
The answers will determine whether localization industry would embrace machine translation technology before machine replaces human translators, if the day could come finally.
My last article for BetterLocalization.com mentioned the point that only the language service providers (LSP) who act before the mass can improve economic productivity by adopting new technology. If technology cannot be a reliable source of economic productivity increase, what would it be, if there is such a source?
Application of new technology like translation memory (TM) increased productivity of translators significantly in the past 7 years. However, why didn’t language service providers (LSP) increase their profit accordingly?
The Balanced Scorecard (BSC) model is a well-known management tool for enterprises seeking performance excellence. How to combine the model successfully with the real-world environment of language services providers is a challenge.
How about getting localization tools without paying for license fee? And those localization tools are continuously improved and we always receive free upgrades? Moreover, we don’t have to buy tools from our competitors any longer?
Today’s business model for localization tool development makes our ecosystem unhealthy. Users (service providers) are unwilling to upgrade the tools because doing so doesn't benefit them. Developers cannot sell more and have no resources to bring new product. Without better tools, service providers cannot satisfy customers and the customers want to pay less. Then the vendors will have smaller budget for tools.
“Today’s translation model is not sufficient to meet the needs of global communication. It is too slow, too costly and it lacks the capacity to cover the volume and language requirements of global companies and their customers…”
If you dislike the word “cheaper”, feel free to replace it with improved ROI, better cost-effectiveness, increased value, or anything else you may prefer. Whatever word you choose, we talk the same topic: how to do more with less.
Running makes the antelope, thinking makes the man. We keep thinking and with this weblog, we share our personal
knowledge and thought with the localization community.