Localization Reader
Working with International Partners in Localization Projects
By Carlos Evia, Virginia Tech
The process of localization goes by definition beyond mere translation and attempts to adapt a document or product to the specific needs of the culture of users. Technical communicators and subject-matter experts (SMEs) in any field, smart and competent as they might be, cannot know everything when it comes to satisfying information needs of users in different countries or cultures. They may need to work with a partner from the target culture or country. (Throughout this document, I use the term "partner" in singular, but it could also apply to a team of writers or a whole organization). The partner could be involved all through the localization lifecycle, or might be involved during certain, specific stages of analysis, composition, or testing.
This document's purpose is to inform technical communicators involved in localization projects about the need for making good choices when selecting an international partner. It is based on my experience as a writer and localization partner for American firms adapting products and documents in Mexico, and on my research as an external observer of localization cases in academic and business settings.
A good partner's qualities
In a globalized workplace setting, many developing countries are more oriented to service than production of goods. Therefore, potential partners for a localization project could be everywhere, from big consulting firms to small, freelancing enterprises. While reputation and experience in international projects are top qualities to look for in a potential partner, it is also relevant to consider the following criteria:
- Understanding of technical writing as a professional activity. Not every country in the world has technical writing as an established profession or academic field. Thus, potential partners could be translators or journalists without a necessary perspective from the intersection of technology and communication from which most technical writers work in the US.
- Technological proficiency and compatibility. Many standards and conventions about technology in writing might not be adopted in the target country. For example, the source document could be structured in DocBook or DITA, and the partner might not even know about basic XML. This could represent additional training investment for the company.
- Knowledge about cultural and contextual differences. If a potential partner promises a flawless and perfect collaboration, then you need to walk away and find someone else. Cultural and contextual differences will arise sooner or later whenever groups with established ways for solving their problems get together in personal or professional environments. Instead of pretending they won't happen, the partner should be ready to address them and try to solve them with your company.
- Word of mouth. Learning about the track record or reputation from a partner is a wise investment of time. Furthermore, recommendations from mutual acquaintances could also work and make the process easier.
Where to find a partner
In some localization projects it might be necessary to post announcements in local media looking for a qualified partner, but other projects might come with a default partners who could be working for the client company as internal or external auditors or consultants.
Working directly with the client
When localizing a product or document, sometimes the client's information technology department might be appointed as a partner. Keep in mind that, in many countries, technical writing does not exist as a field and most technical content is developed by information technology (IT) people who may or may not have a background in writing. This could be extremely beneficial because of their understanding of the everyday procedures and information needs of the target company. However, those IT workers might have communication problems in their own language and culture, having problems expressing their ideas, or not being competent writers. A few years ago, the IT department at a newspaper in Yucatan, Mexico was the partner for an American company localizing a professional editing software package. The extremely technically oriented Mexican workers didn't know how to hyphenate words in Spanish for non-justified text and formatted the document to their best understanding. The originating company, with writers who didn't speak Spanish, couldn't recognize the problem, and the resulting draft of a standard operating procedure was discarded after three whole days of work.
The client could also assign the task to people in other departments better known for communication skills than IT SMEs; however, these people might not fulfill other important criteria described above.
Working with independent consultants
The originating company could hire consultants who could also be working for the client. In some cases, this partnership could be the most effective since the involvement of an unbiased third party would allow the process to focus on the user's needs without any territorial concerns about ownership between seller and client. Nonetheless, in the worst-case scenario, an independent consultant could be trying to take advantage of the company paying the consultant's fee. In many developing countries, consultants only make a small portion of what an American consulting firm would make in the US. Consequently, when dealing with an American client, some consultants might try to aim for a high fee which, even when it might be fair and deserved, would be out of context for the economic situation of the target country.
Working with government agencies
Due to legal requirements and standards, some cases require the use of a government-appointed partner. All the cases of this nature in which I have been somehow involved ended up in serious technology transfer, organizational change, or cultural difference chaos. The government-appointed partner might have a legal, barebones and even perfunctory approach to the process, which might not be looking for the end users' benefit as its main goal. During the localization of a widely used American academic content management application, a Mexican government partner wrote, without any collaboration, the "official" manual in Spanish. This manual was nothing but a literal translation of the English original, taking into consideration none of the target-specific adaptations that a localization project requires. The client university, working with government funds, couldn't reject the manual or request a new version, and as a result the project failed.
Conclusion
Regardless of their involvement, localization partners always leave a visible mark on the final product, since their input is unique and unlike what the original team would have produced. Therefore, the partner should be seen as a necessary and integral component of the localization team, and the budget, plan, and scope of the documentation process should be properly modified to accommodate the best partner available.
Carlos Evia is a professor of Professional Writing at Virginia Tech. He received his Ph.D. in Technical Communication and Rhetoric from Texas Tech University, and his Master's in Computer Systems from Universidad LaSalle in Mexico City. Carlos has workplace and academic experience in technical writing and localization of technological products.
