How to Handle Bad Translations

Bad translations are something that every localization project manager (LPM) would like to avoid. The LPM can take actions to ensure the quality of the translations, such as selecting qualified vendors, providing clear instructions and guidelines, and conducting quality assurances. However, sometimes bad translations may still happen in a LPM’s career, either due to human errors, miscommunication, or unrealistic expectations. How should the LPM handle this situation when the internal team complains about the quality of the translations? This article will analyze the possible reasons and provide some tips for the LPM to deal with this scenario.

Setting Expectations

The first step for the LPM to prevent bad translations is to set clear and realistic expectations with the internal clients. The LPM should understand the needs and goals of the internal clients, such as what type of content they want to translate, who are the target audience, what is the purpose of the translation, and what is the desired quality level. For example, some content may require transcreation, which is a creative adaptation of the source text to suit the local culture and context, while some content may only need translation, which is a faithful rendering of the source text into another language. The LPM should explain the difference between these services and let the internal clients know what they should expect from each one.

The LPM should also set up and share relevant resources and tools, such as glossaries, style guides, terminology databases, and translation memories, with internal teams. These resources can help ensure consistency and accuracy of the translations across different languages and projects. The LPM should also solicit feedback from the internal clients on these resources and update them regularly to reflect any changes or preferences.

Staying Calm and Professional

Despite setting expectations and providing resources, bad translations may still occur due to various factors. When the internal team complains about the quality of the translations, the LPM should stay calm and professional, whether it’s actually a bad translation or not. The LPM should not take it personally or react emotionally, as this can affect their judgment and communication. The LPM should also not blame or accuse anyone without evidence or investigation, as this can damage their relationship and reputation with both the internal team and the vendor.

The LPM should request the people who think the translation is bad to provide a few examples of the issues they found. The LPM should also reach out to the vendor and ask them to initiate a quality investigation. The vendor will review the examples provided by the internal team and inspect the translation with the source text, the instructions and guidelines, and any other relevant information.

The issues identified can categorized into three types of issues: preferential, controversial, or objective.

Handling Different Types of Issues

When the internal team complains about the quality of the translations, the LPM should first ask them to provide some examples of the issues they found. The LPM should then contact the vendor and work with them to conduct a quality investigation. Normally there are three types of issues: preferential, controversial, or objective.

Preferential issues

Preferential issues are issues that reflect the reviewer’s personal preference, but are not incorrect or inaccurate translations. For example, the reviewer may prefer a different word or phrase than what was used in the translation. The current translation has no objective errors and can be accepted by the general public. These issues usually occur when the preference was not specified in the glossary or style guide, or was not communicated before the project started.

If the vendor identifies the issues as preferential, the LPM should verify this with the internal reviewer. If the reviewer agrees, the LPM should arrange a meeting with the reviewer and the quality manager from the vendor to discuss the preferences and update the glossary and style guide accordingly. The LPM should also work with the internal team to decide whether to publish the translation as it is and update it later, or to wait for the revision, depending on the launch date, content type, and budget.

Since these issues are caused by unclear requirements, the vendor may not agree to revise the translation for free. However, if there are some subjective errors in the translation, and if the LPM handles this situation calmly and professionally, the vendor may be willing to offer a reduced rate for the revision. To prevent these issues from happening again, the LPM should take sample translations and hold regular meetings with the internal teams and the vendors until the vendors fully understand the preferences.

Objective issues

Objective issues are issues that are clearly wrong or inaccurate, and can affect the quality and usability of the translation. For example, the reviewer may find grammatical, spelling, punctuation, or formatting errors in the translation, or may notice that some information is missing, added, or changed from the source text. The translation has many errors and inconsistencies, and can confuse or mislead the target audience. These issues are usually caused by human errors, technical glitches, or quality control failures.

If the vendor identifies the issues as objective, the LPM should ask them to provide an updated ETA for correcting the issues and delivering the revised translation. The LPM should also request a discount from the vendor based on the severity and frequency of the issues. The LPM should monitor the progress and quality of the revision process, and conduct another quality check before accepting the final deliverable. Once the project is completed, the LPM should ask the vendor to perform a root cause analysis and provide an action report for documentation. The report should contain the following: why this happened, what is the corrective action, how can prevent this from happening in the future.

Controversial issues

Controversial issues are issues that are not clearly right or wrong, but may depend on different interpretations, perspectives, or contexts. For example, the reviewer may disagree with the tone, style, or register of the translation, or may find some cultural or idiomatic expressions inappropriate or offensive. However, the translator may have strong opinions that the original translations are correct according to their interpretations on the source, context or style guides.

These issues are usually caused by lack of communication or alignment between the internal team and the vendor, or by different understandings on the source or preferences of the target audience.

If the vendor identifies the issues as controversial, the LPM should facilitate a discussion between the internal reviewer and the vendor to understand the root causes and the impacts of the issues. The LPM should also consult with other experts or stakeholders, such as linguists, subject matter experts, or end users, to get their opinions and feedback. The LPM should then work with both parties to reach a consensus and a resolution that can satisfy everyone’s needs and goals. The LPM should also document the decisions and the rationale behind them, and update the instructions and guidelines accordingly.

Most of the cases in real life...

Most of the quality complaints are hybrid, meaning that they contain a mix of preferential, objective, and controversial issues. The vendor will first send the feedback to the original translators, who will likely justify their translations. Then the vendor will send the feedback back to the LPM. If the internal reviewers still have a different opinion after reviewing the translator's feedback, the vendor will initiate a third-party investigation.

A third-party investigation means that a third-party linguist, normally the vendor’s quality manager, who is highly proficient in translation and the target language, will review the translation and the feedback. Normally the vendors will not initiate a quality investigation in the first place as this will increase their cost. Therefore, If the turnaround of the project is tight, the LPM should inform the vendor of the urgency and ask them to start the third-party investigation when sending the initial feedback to the vendors.

If the vendor thinks that some of the feedbacks are not valid, they will provide a feedback validation form to the LPM. The form contains the source text, the target text, the feedback, and the reason why they think the feedback is not valid. The internal reviewer can review the validation form and reply in a separate column if they disagree with certain feedback. If the number of controversial issues is high, the LPM should hold a meeting with the reviewers and the quality manager from the vendor to further discuss the issues. The LPM should also understand that validating the feedback before implementation is a responsible behavior; The internal reviewers may be experts in the company’s products and services, but they may not be linguists and may introduce objective errors in their feedbacks.

At this point, the LPM should use their best judgment and mediate the issues between the vendor and the internal stakeholder. If the issues are preferential, then the LPM should work with the internal team and understand their preferences. If they have more expectations than translation, the LPM should identify the best service that fits their needs. If the issues are objective, then the LPM should work out a solution with the vendor to fix the translation and prevent this from happening again. The goal is to produce a translation that best fits the company’s interest.

Conclusion

Bad translations can be a nightmare for any localization project manager, but they can also be an opportunity for improvement and learning. The LPM should handle bad translations with calmness and professionalism, and work with both the internal team and the vendor to resolve them effectively and efficiently. The LPM should also take proactive measures to prevent bad translations from happening again, such as setting clear expectations, providing relevant resources, and conducting regular quality checks. By doing so, the LPM can ensure the quality of their localization projects and build trust and credibility with their clients and partners.