Work in unison with your vendors,tune the quality of your translations    and don’t loose your tempo        Valentyna Kozl...
InText Translation Company    Founded in 2002 in Ukraine    We translate from European languages into Russian and    Ukrai...
InText Translation Company                       May 18–19, 2013                          Kyiv, Ukraine3
The Dark Times4
The Dark Side of the Database                         2500 vendors                  500 active     2000 inactive        20...
No Communication between    Translators and Editors    •   A translator never knew whether        an editor liked his text...
PM Motivation    •    There was no incentive for project         managers to produce high quality         projects    •   ...
Analyzing QA Models    •   LISA QA Models        (1.0, 2.0, 3.0)    •   ATA Framework for        Standard Error        Mar...
InText vs. LISA QA Model9
Feedback10
XLS FORM TO TMS11
Translator’s Rating12
Suppliers Motivation     Rating – Pay Scale Connection            Rating             Pay Scale             4.5 to 5       ...
Creating a Linguistic Rating of     a Project      Translator’s rating        4.2      Monolingual proof        + 0.2     ...
PM Motivation          StatisticsProject    Number           AverageManager    of projects      projects                  ...
PM Motivation     KPI                      +                Salary: ¥1000 x 102.12% = ¥ 102116
Skills Management     Subject Areas17
Skills Management     Tools     Form:     Statistics:18
Who Manages the System?19
Well-known QA    InText QA                                    Feedback         models         model                       ...
Requirements            Regional Language Vendor            Suppliers = Freelancers            Trusted editors            ...
Results     Company’s point of view                                    4. Linguistic quality         1. Rational payments ...
Results     Freelancer’s point of view             Shows how his quality impacts the rate             A translator knows h...
New Challenges24
New Challenges     Subjectivity     •   Different marks         for one and the         same mistake25
Finding Objectivity26
New Challenges                              Lack of     Labor     Subjectivity                           transparency inte...
Solution     InText QA Model 2.0     1. Edit the text     2. Compare the translated and edited files28
InText QA Model 2.029
InText QA Model 2.0     5. Obtain results: a TQI and 8 skill-scores30
Same Mistakes = Same Scores = Same Ratings:           Repeatability and Predictability31
Thank you for your attention!         Any questions?                          Valentyna Kozlova                           ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Rate me, my friend

1,017 views
654 views

Published on

Author: Valentyna Kozlova
Presented at Locworld Seattle on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,017
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Rate me, my friend

  1. 1. Work in unison with your vendors,tune the quality of your translations and don’t loose your tempo Valentyna Kozlova InText Translation Company
  2. 2. 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 Oil and Gas Technical and Engineering Satellite and Rocket Technologies Information Technologies and Telecommunications2
  3. 3. InText Translation Company May 18–19, 2013 Kyiv, Ukraine3
  4. 4. The Dark Times4
  5. 5. The Dark Side of the Database 2500 vendors 500 active 2000 inactive 20 well-known 480 strangers5
  6. 6. 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 day6
  7. 7. 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 Freelancers Well-known Strangers7
  8. 8. Analyzing QA Models • LISA QA Models (1.0, 2.0, 3.0) • ATA Framework for Standard Error Marking • SAE J2450 • ITR BlackJackQuality Metric • Microsoft MILS8
  9. 9. InText vs. LISA QA Model9
  10. 10. Feedback10
  11. 11. XLS FORM TO TMS11
  12. 12. Translator’s Rating12
  13. 13. Suppliers Motivation Rating – 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/word13
  14. 14. Creating a Linguistic Rating of a Project Translator’s rating 4.2 Monolingual proof + 0.2 Bilingual proof + 0.3 Bilingual + subject + 0.5 matter proof 4.2 + 0.3 = 4.5 3.7 + 0.2 = 3.9 3.7 + 0.5 = 4.214
  15. 15. PM Motivation StatisticsProject Number AverageManager of projects projects ratingAndrew 185 4.45 PM Helen, Jan-Jul 2012Anna 182 4.50Helen 206 4.57Kirill 197 4.60 All projects by PM, May 12 15
  16. 16. PM Motivation KPI + Salary: ¥1000 x 102.12% = ¥ 102116
  17. 17. Skills Management Subject Areas17
  18. 18. Skills Management Tools Form: Statistics:18
  19. 19. Who Manages the System?19
  20. 20. Well-known QA InText QA Feedback models model Q&A Department Skills TMS management Rating-Pay Translator’s Scale rating connection Linguistic PM motivation rating of a project20
  21. 21. Requirements Regional Language Vendor Suppliers = Freelancers Trusted editors Q&A department 1 year Involvement of upper management21
  22. 22. Results Company’s point of view 4. Linguistic quality 1. Rational payments rating of projects 2. Stop collaborating with low-quality 5. Motivated PMs translators 3. Checking editors’ 6. Past knowledge is performance accessible to new employees22
  23. 23. Results Freelancer’s point of view Shows how his quality impacts the rate A translator knows how he has performed and what areas he should improve Top freelancers get special bonuses23
  24. 24. New Challenges24
  25. 25. New Challenges Subjectivity • Different marks for one and the same mistake25
  26. 26. Finding Objectivity26
  27. 27. New Challenges Lack of Labor Subjectivity transparency intensive • Different marks • Translators • Transferring for one and the would like to scores and same mistake monitor and comments from • Subjective compare their Excel to TMS scores and ratings • Sending lots of pass/fail • Impossibility of emails with judgment completing the feedback form for the entire volume of text27
  28. 28. Solution InText QA Model 2.0 1. Edit the text 2. Compare the translated and edited files28
  29. 29. InText QA Model 2.029
  30. 30. InText QA Model 2.0 5. Obtain results: a TQI and 8 skill-scores30
  31. 31. Same Mistakes = Same Scores = Same Ratings: Repeatability and Predictability31
  32. 32. Thank you for your attention! Any questions? Valentyna Kozlova qa@intext.ru

×