RATE ME, MY FRIEND

Work in unison with your vendors,tune the quality of your translations

and don’t loose your tempo

Valentyna KozlovaInText Translation Company

InText Translation Company

Founded in 2002 in Ukraine

We translate from European languages into Russian and Ukrainian

In-house band: 30 employees

Freelancers involved: 60 translators every day

Words translated in 2011: 22 m

2

Technical and Engineering

Information Technologies and Telecommunications

Oil and Gas

Satellite and Rocket Technologies

InText Translation Company

3

May 18–19, 2013Kyiv, Ukraine

The Dark Times

4

The Dark Side of the Database

5

2500 vendors

500 active

20 well-known 480 strangers

2000 inactive

No Communication between Translators and Editors

• A translator never knew whether an editor liked his text

• Editors saw the same mistakes repeated by the same translators day after day

6

PM Motivation

• There was no incentive for project managers to produce high quality projects

• They already knew 20 people who were always ready to translate at a reasonable price

7

Freelancers

Well-known

Strangers

• LISA QA Models (1.0, 2.0, 3.0)

• ATA Framework for Standard Error Marking

• SAE J2450• ITR BlackJackQuality

Metric• Microsoft MILS

Analyzing QA Models

8

InText vs. LISA QA Model

9

Feedback

10

XLS FORM TO TMS

11

Translator’s Rating

12

Suppliers MotivationRating – Pay Scale Connection

Rating Pay Scale

4.5 to 5 8 to 10 shells/word

4 to 4.5 6 to 8 shells/word

3.5 to 4 4 to 6 shells/word

13

Translator’s rating 4.2

Monolingual proof + 0.2

Bilingual proof + 0.3

Bilingual + subjectmatter proof + 0.5

14

Creating a Linguistic Rating of a Project

4.2 + 0.3 = 4.53.7 + 0.2 = 3.93.7 + 0.5 = 4.2

ProjectManager

Numberof projects

Average projectsrating

Andrew 185 4.45

Anna 182 4.50

Helen 206 4.57

Kirill 197 4.60

PM Motivation

All projects by PM, May 12

15

PM Helen, Jan-Jul 2012

Statistics

PM Motivation

16

KPI

+

Salary: ¥1000 x 102.12% = ¥ 1021

Skills Management

17

Subject Areas

Skills Management

18

Tools

Form:

Statistics:

Who Manages the System?

19

20

Well-known QA models

InText QA model

Feedback

Q&A Department

TMSSkills

management

Translator’s rating

Rating-Pay Scale

connection

Linguistic rating of a

projectPM motivation

Regional Language Vendor

Suppliers = Freelancers

Trusted editors

Q&A department

1 year

Involvement of upper management

Requirements

21

ResultsCompany’s point of view

2. Stop collaborating with

low-quality translators

3. Checking editors’ performance

4. Linguistic quality rating of projects

5. Motivated PMs

6. Past knowledge is accessible to new

employees

1. Rational payments

22

ResultsFreelancer’s point of view

Shows how his quality impacts the rate

23

A translator knows how he has performed and what areas he should improve

Top freelancers get special bonuses

New Challenges

24

25

New Challenges

Subjectivity

• Different marks for one and the same mistake

Finding Objectivity

26

27

New ChallengesLack of

transparency

SubjectivityLabor

intensive• Different

marks for one and the same mistake

• Subjective scores and pass/fail judgment

• Translators would like to monitor and compare their ratings

• Impossibility of completing the form for the entire volume of text

• Transferring scores and comments from Excel to TMS

• Sending lots of emails with feedback

Solution

1. Edit the text2. Compare the translated and edited files

InText QA Model 2.0

28

InText QA Model 2.0

29

InText QA Model 2.0

5. Obtain results: a TQI and 8 skill-scores

30

Same Mistakes = Same Scores = Same Ratings: Repeatability and Predictability

31

Thank you for your attention!Any questions?

Valentyna Kozlova

qa@intext.ru