1 / 37

Case Study: Collaborative Translation Quality Program

Case Study: Collaborative Translation Quality Program. Alex Lik ( Biosense Webster, Ltd., Israel), David Sommer (Net-Translators). Agenda. Introduction Biosense awareness & players Vendor Quality Management practices Biosense challenges ICR benefits, challenges and process Integration

naif
Download Presentation

Case Study: Collaborative Translation Quality Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case Study: Collaborative Translation Quality Program Alex Lik (Biosense Webster, Ltd., Israel), David Sommer (Net-Translators)

  2. Agenda • Introduction • Biosense awareness & players • Vendor Quality Management practices • Biosense challenges • ICR benefits, challenges and process • Integration • Vendor add-ons • Program training, checklists, tools and buy-in • Symbiosis • Wrap-up

  3. If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart. Nelson Mandela

  4. Presenters • Alex: • 20 years in this business • Translator • Writer • Editor • Info Designer • PM • LM • Auditor • David: • 15 years in the technology sector • 5 Years at Software Testing Center of the SII • 7 Years in localization • Managed Large localization projects • Currently Director of Strategic Operations for Localization Vendor

  5. Overview • Biosense Webster • Various approaches to localization have been tried • Dedicated l10n lead 2 years • Identified weaknesses in process • Identified quality challenges • Search for new methodology • Implemented streamlined ICR program • Enhanced internal processes to better support localization • New authoring toolset • VM practices • Identify vendor to provide more value and create deeper partnership

  6. Overview • Net-Translators • Well established in industry • Medium size MLV • Focus on appropriate vertical • Multiple locations of operations staff • Time zone • Proven methodology for quality measurement • ISO 13485

  7. Client Challenge: Awareness • Management • Authoring • ICR • No real go-to person (Accountability) • West-bound vendor • Looks are deceptive • Deadlines and word rate • CMS transition curve

  8. Players • QARA • Marketing • R&D • TechComm • LBU (ICR) • Localization vendor • LM • Common Sense

  9. Vendor Side Quality Management • Defining Quality • Understanding/Defining deliverables • Deconstruct the project • Examine project scope • Assign Tasks to each item • Examine outputs of the individual tasks • Assign a benchmark of quality for each individual output • Communicate quality benchmarks to client

  10. Vendor Side Quality Management • Factors Affecting Quality Expectations • Variance between customer and providers perceptions • Variance between providers perception of the clients perception • Variance between quality specs and delivery • Variance between delivery and what is communicated to client • Variance between customers expectations and perceptions

  11. Vendor Side Quality Management • Defining Quality-Simple Example • Release notes into two languages • Linguistic Quality • DTP Quality • Layout • Headers/footers • Fonts • Style • Graphics • Tables • Callouts • UI References • etc • Time Quality • Experiential Quality

  12. Linguistic Quality Measurement • Choosing a benchmark • TQI • LISA QA Model • SAEJ2450 Quality Metric • DIN 2345 • ASTM F2575 • Other

  13. Sample of Quality Benchmark

  14. How we use this Quality Benchmark • Determine quality of translation • Monitor quality over time • Track quality trends • Create cost efficiencies • Identify areas of potential weaknesses

  15. Bright Side vs. Dark Side + - ICR not in job description Learning curve Translation-hostile No added resources • ICR staff in place • CMS deployed • Brand names managed • Mandate

  16. New Localization Program Kick-off Position

  17. “Ideal partner” checklist • Awareness • Vertical industry field life • Constraints • Regulation • Common language • No interpreter needed in client-vendor dialog • Commitment • Quality • Deadlines • No conflict of the above • Availability • Dedicated staff • Time zones • Storm-proof process • Competence and professional integrity • Process is not enough • Teamwork is not enough • Cost effectiveness

  18. In-Country review benefits • Well versed resources carry out reviews • Adherence to local and evolving regulations • Buy-in to processes • Accountability • Increase clients perceptions of quality • Generate cost efficiencies over time • Higher rate of acceptance of translations • Locale/Industry combination

  19. In-Country review challenges • Lack of training of reviewers • Colleague based • Difficulty in enrolling resource • Managing schedules • Differing skill sets between reviewers • Challenge of focusing on goals • Scheduling conflicts • Hidden costs • Non-Objective • Ensuring that remarks are implemented in future releases

  20. In-country review processes • Aims of ICR • Generate acceptance of translated materials • Enroll locales in the process making them partners • Regulatory compliance • Increase safety • Lessen exposure to risk

  21. In-country review processes • Tools for ICR (or contents of review kit) • Terminology Database (TermBase) pre-approved by same ICR • Exact source text • Instructions which were given to linguistic resources • Style Guide that covers: • Measurements • Dates • Decimals and thousand separators • Mandate for narrow band of changes • Common methodology for reporting issues

  22. Integration of processes • Integration of vendor and client workflows • Dropped “fire and forget” approach • Integrated teams from both sides • Huge cost efficiencies • Vendor provided - L10n infrastructure • Project manager • Engineers • Tools • Linguistic teams • Test teams • etc.

  23. Integrated Approach

  24. Integrated Approach

  25. Typical Translation Project PM QARA US QARA EMEA QARA CAPLA Tech Comm Localization Management Team Translation Agency Local Business Units ICR Staff

  26. ICR-Affected Project Stages

  27. Add-ons provided by vendor • Knowledge of risk management techniques in localization projects • Ability to provide knowledge based quality benchmarks • Change management techniques • Dedicated project team working collaboratively with in-country reviewers • Ability to compromise for the sake of workflow

  28. Quality management • Experience in quality programs • Dedicated experienced LPM < 10 years • Manages project team • Engineers • QC • Language resources • ICR members • Plans & Defines • Manages timelines • Manages terminology • Risk management • Change management • Content types • UI translation • Manages DITA xml based content • Troubleshoots i18n issues • New projects • Delta’s • Release notes • Relationship manager

  29. Changes In-house • QARA Directors WW buy in • J&J EMEA QARA Conference • Issue statement • Training! Training! • Dedicated Loc Leader appointed • Go-to address • Localization background • WW ICR Procedure • QARA Co-signers • ICR part of job description

  30. ICR Team Building • Who are they? • Communication • Training • Bolts and nuts • Mutual satisfaction and attitude

  31. In-Country Review – Personnel • Key skills • Native speaker of the target language • Adequate language training • Fluent in English • Product knowledge • Target audience knowledge • Team player • Staffing • Assigned by LBU • Approved by RA • Trained and tested by LM

  32. ICR Training • Procedures and skills • Administration • ICR Applicability criteria • ICR in localization workflow • Approval form • Task handling • Communication • Technicalities • “DO”s and “DON’T”s • Terminology

  33. Reviewer’s Checklist • Know why • Attend ICR training • Take part in creating glossaries and style guides before the translation begins • Stick to the terminology you’ve approved • Communicate early, often, and widely • Follow guidelines • Consolidate multiple reviewer comments, submit one review per language • Be a part of the continuous improvement process

  34. LM Checklist for ICR • Know why • WW SOP • Staffing and accountability • Communication • Training • Terminology • Scheduling • Feedback delivery and aggregation • Guidelines • Referee arguments between ICR and LSP • Put in place a continuous improvement process specifically for in-country reviews

  35. Reviewer Guidelines • File Exchange • What’s in the files for review? • Reviewer’s Role • Do/Don’t • Approved original • Mark-up tools • Relevant sections • Objective changes • Change categories • Accuracy • Terminology • Language quality • Country standards • Don’t rewrite • Acute issues

  36. The Symbiosis • Separation between business relationship and work relationship • Feels like in-house unit • Easy escalation • No politics involved • No competition for resources • 0 time-loss on procurement and admin tasks on both sides • Frame POs • Web portal

  37. Summary • Is this really an innovation? • Reduction: • Costs • TTM • Maximized efficiencies • Increased quality • Enhanced vendor bottom line • Partners concentrated on what they do best • Peace of mind • Built single process from different parts

More Related