I’ve come to the conclusion that unprofessional and/or unskilled translators aren’t awarded work just because they are cheap. They are awarded work because they are willing to do whatever it takes to give the client what they want.
This quote reminded me of how important it is for translators to offer a service that is truly relevant. Replace “YouTube” with “unskilled translators”, and “Hollywood” with “professional translators” (!), and see what you think.
“… Even the most popular YouTube clips may totally fail in the standard Hollywood definition of production quality, in that the video is low-resolution and badly lit, the sound quality awful, and the plots nonexistent.
But none of that matters, because the most important thing is relevance. We’ll always choose a “low-quality” video of something we actually want over a “high-quality” video of something we don’t.”
Tech Is Too Cheap to Meter: It’s Time to Manage for Abundance, Not Scarcity. Chris Anderson. Wired Magazine, 22.06.09 (my emphasis)
If translation becomes too cheap to charge for, what else are you offering that clients might actually want and be willing to pay for? (Note I’m referring to language services only here. But I’m not here to judge – I know what it takes to support yourself through university ;))
Producing beautifully written prose that is perfectly faithful to the original is just a small part of what it means to be a freelance translator. We’re also required to apply a broad spectrum of translation-related skills to any number of communicative tasks.
The key to being relevant is applying these skills to clearly contribute to an end result that:
a. the client wants
b. the client is aware that they want.
These end results will vary according to who you work for, but may include things like increased sales, winning a tender or greater exposure among their own target clients.
We are hired to meet a want (or a need) as perceived by the translation buyer, regardless of how “valid” we may deem that want or need ourselves.
That’s not to say we can’t have an active influence on the buyer, for example by drawing attention to an unmet need, by trying to amend their perception, or ultimately, by declining a job.
But sometimes half the battle is disentangling what the client needs and what you think the client needs. This shift in perspective isn’t always easy for a translator.
It seems to me that viewing ourselves as providers of professional services, instead of producers of translation products, is a significant step towards ensuring we remain relevant.
It’s also a way to forge a future for ourselves free from the fear of being rendered redundant or irrelevant by technological or economic changes.
Photo credit: 08-05-10 Give Me Something I Can Believe In , from Bethan Phillips’s photostream on Flickr.
Hi Sarah,
“It seems to me that viewing ourselves as providers of professional services, instead of producers of translation products, is a significant step towards ensuring we remain relevant.”
Beautifully put. As per your advice. we have been trying to become “providers of professional services” .
We provide certified translation for most major languages. Since a large chunk of our work is done for the USCIS, US courts, US colleges, US schools, etc, our translators have become experts in the documentation required by these US institutions. Given our expertize, we not only produce “translation products”, we also provide value added assistance and information to our clients. We have even updated out website to share information with the visitors to our site – The Certified Translation.
Thank you for your excellent advise.
Of course. I’m just looking for the big thinking on this subject. International travel was all about ships until someone invented the airliner. Anyone got a plane out there? I’ll let you know if I find one – mind you, I’m more likely to build my own, I sold my hang glider to buy a house, afterall!
Jim,
That’s just how this industry works – many other writer types get paid by the word, like journalists, feature writers, article and technical writers etc. It’s the best way to judge the volume of work and charge an appropriate amount. Why would that need to change? If you are not happy with the amount you get paid, you need to raise your rates to the level that you are comfortable with, however like with many other services, translation is only worth something that someone else is prepared to pay for it.
Cheers,
D.
So busy here, don’t know whay I’m answering you right now – well I think I am – brain currently addled by webcasting blah blah techhie translation… I’ll get to the point in minute: We’re paid by the word. We bring a massive host of skills / knowledge to converting those words but if we continue to work on the pure wordcount basis we will get paid £100 /1000 words or whatever. I’m glad there there seems to be a ‘just say no’ movement across professional translators. Tell them all to go and stuff their peanuts! No not the bally translators, you know who I mean, stop criticising anyway, this is a rant! 😉 My clients come back to me because I do a good job. I have also managed to raise my prices over the past year, still based on £/word though. This needs to change. Anyone have thoughts /ideas on that one?
Customers want inexpensive and good quality translation. Is hard to meet the demand once you are operating on western market.
A possible way to ensure you “have options” as a translator is simply to develop a new skill (make sure it is currently in demand though), so that your cash flow is not from translation services alone. This way, you will be in a better and more confident position to decline translation jobs that you don’t like. e.g. underpaid, without much fear for your monthly income. Some of these potential skills might be related to your specialization as a translator such as web-design or marketing.
Thank you for your great blog. Keep up the good work!
-Roman
YES, TRANSLATORS HAVE OPTION although we are working in a very competitive market. It is fact that even serious customers are looking not only to quality translations but also to low costs. In this era of internet a customer will catch a professional translator from a mother-laguage-land, ensuring that he’ll get a quality product for a lower cost. The only difference between the professionals who live in out of the mother-language land vs. those who do, is the life-cost between them, but the working conditions are almost the same most of the times. In other words, customers are looking for a cheap labour. Even those who accept lower prices, they do so not because they are satisfied with what they get paid but for being too needy to say NO. But, so as to survive decently, we have to be firm and know to say NO to those who abuse our professionality. It’s true that if today you accept the rate below you minimum, tomorrow they’ll ask you to “work for me for free if you want to receive my offers in the future”. YES, TRANSLATORS HAVE OPTION, AT LEAST OF SAYING NO.
@Karl @TAUS
Perhaps I’m dense/have a micro perspective/lack vision, but I fail to see how your article is “similar” to Sarah’s post. The difference in tone alone is patent.
“And yes – you see the rates dropping with the speed of light and wonder when will they ask you to work for free?” you say. Professional translators have spoken to that issue, on their blogs and elsewhere, time and again. Those of Sarah’s caliber – and I could name many! – have **not** seen their rates drop, we are not chasing after peanuts like monkeys (the “no peanuts” campaign is so self-defeating, it just makes me want to weep), we are even known to turn down work (not our specializations, wrong fit, silly deadline, too many projects).
You invite Sarah – and I suppose readers of her blog – to share with you what she thinks. Yet there is no possibility of commenting on your site.
So I find myself having to “squat” Sarah’s space (thanks for the loan 🙂 ) to quip, “Yes, Translators have Options” and it is not *just* where your article would like to lead us.
The link seem to be incorrect. The correct one should be the following: http://www.translationautomation.com/perspectives/what-options-do-translators-really-have.html
Interesting article Sarah. We just published a similar article titled What options do translators really have? by Joanna Gough. Would be interested to see what you think of it. Thanks.
You raise an interesting and pertinent issue for me – the relevance of human translation and the issue of quality vs. quantity. Just a couple of days ago I had to explain to a certain agency that peanuts=monkeys, and that I won’t be accepting their lowered rates (which dropped way below my minimum level). Still not sure if I did the right thing, but then there is only so low that one can go on this, right?
I think that the market is driving downwards by the clients who are aware that they can get much lower rates if they cast their nets wider. This is particularly obvious in my language combinations (Russian English). I cannot compete with the translators in Russia who will happily take a tenth of what I am asking. So, I’m positioning myself as an expert in translation from Russian, and so far it’s working (knock on wood!) 🙂 I still get queries whether I would proofread machine translation, though…
It’s a tough industry we are in, and I think it’s just going to get tougher. There is always someone cheaper than you are out there, and not necessarily worse – they just live in a cheaper country. And the clients are becoming more and more aware that they can outsource the work to other countries…
Very interesting perspectives – thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences, Patricia and Stella.
Great post Sarah and great comment Patricia. I agree wholeheartedly with you both. Unfortunately, way too many freelance translators have been resisting change for far too long.
They seem to view translation as a sacred art, and treat any attempt to bring the profession into the 21st century as blasphemy. Which is quite ironic considering that language itself is constantly evolving. Basically the majority of freelancers seem to be in denial… after all, you can’t halt the sea of change… especially when it’s driven by giants such as Google et al.
However, I also firmly believe that there will always be a need for professional linguists with expert knowledge. I don’t see legal and financial institutions relying on an automatic translation any time soon. In fact, recently there have been a fair few well-documented cases of embarassing and costly translation mishaps caused by machine translation, (invariably reported in the press with the title “Lost in Translation”).
Anyway, to get back to the point, as painful as it may be, if translators want to survive, they need to shift their focus from purely language-based issues to more practical aspects.
The customer is paying for a service, and therefore ultimately it is the customer that decides the level of service. And this may well vary from one document to another.
So when a customer says they are only willing to pay such-and-such for a particular job, instead of grumbling about exploitation, translators should vary their approach accordingly. Instead of agonising over a sentence in a technical manual because, “it just doesn’t sound right”, remember that nobody really cares whether the manual is perfect prose or not, they just want to know whether to press the red button or the blue button.
On the other hand, if a customer asks you to translate their corporate brochure, the standard expected and the level of scrutiny received will be somewhat different, hence the time you spend on it is justified, and consequently so is the price.
Sounds logical. But the problem is that most customers aren’t sensitive to such matters. They need to be educated. And that’s when you the translator can offer your expert opinion as a linguist. You can explain why the customer needs to pay for a quality translation, by letting them know the potential pitfalls of opting for the budget solution.
If you’re convincing enough, you may even be assigned the job at the price you quote. However, it may well go the other way, and the customer will decide to go for the low cost option as, “funds are pretty tight these days”. That’s their choice. But 6 months down the line, when they realise they need to re-translate that corporate brochure because there was an error on the first page, guess who they will call for the job?
And not only will you have gained the respect you deserve, you will also have gained a valued customer.
Beautifully put, Sarah.
Yes, the market(s) has(have) changed and will continue to change (as will the tools with which we work; I recall sweating over a typewriter, reaching constantly for the Correcto-Type, and waiting for the messenger guy!)
You hit the nail on the head here: “It seems to me that viewing ourselves as providers of professional services, instead of producers of translation products, is a significant step towards ensuring we remain relevant.”
Players at the cat-fish end of the market may well become irrelevant (but how professional were they or how much value did they add to begin with?). The middle of the market is shrinking in favor of MT and the new opportunities it opens for those interested, such as Post-Editing.
Yet I remain convinced that the Hermes/Manolo Blahnik end of the market will remain healthy. Hand-tailoring a meaningful message and contributing to its appropriate, targeted, delivery – not simply assembling words until the ultimate full stop – is what sets providers of ‘professional communications services’ apart from ‘producers of translation products’.