Recently in Collaboration Category

Our new year's resolution is to get back to regular blogging. We'll start with an easy but time-sensitive post.

After three years in Berlin, Localization World moves to Barcelona this year. The event takes place 14-16 June.

The theme of this year's conference is innovation. Based on what we saw happening with content globalization practices throughout the second half of 2010, innovation is top-of-mind for all industry constituents. Services business models are evolving, driven by strategic collaboration among buyers and sellers of translation services. Technologies for automating the manual tasks associated with content globalization are maturing rapidly. Gilbane's research shows steady progress towards overcoming language afterthought syndrome, as more and more companies realize that one or two key investments can stem the money drain caused by redundant processes. Innovation, indeed.

The call for papers closes 21 January 2011. 

Second in a series of interviews with sponsors of Gilbane’s 2009 study on Multilingual Product Content: Transforming Traditional Practices into Global Content Value Chains.

We spoke with Joan Lasselle, President of Lasselle Ramsay. Lasselle Ramsay is a service provider that designs solutions for content and learning that align how users work with the information needed to achieve business results. We talked with Joan about her company, why they supported the research, and what surprised her about the results.
 
Gilbane: How does your company support the value chain for global product content? (i.e., what does your company do?) 
 
Lasselle: Lasselle Ramsay is a professional service provider, not a reseller or technology integrator. We focus on helping companies develop new product content. Our work spans the value chain, ranging from engineering (at the point of origin), to technical marketing and technical documentation, to learning organizations and support teams. We also look at the extended value chain, which includes partners, suppliers (like translation service providers), and customers.
 
We encourage our clients to operate in both the strategic and tactical domains, providing them with a strategic vision, and helping implement an infrastructure that can deliver structured and unstructured multilingual content.
 
Gilbane: Why did you choose to sponsor the Gilbane research?
 
Lasselle: One of our goals as a service provider is to add value at each stage across the chain. This research study enables us to discover and share the experience and perspective of industry leaders with Lasselle Ramsay clients. We chose this particular study because of the in-depth research, as well as Gilbane’s domain expertise and independence.
 
Gilbane: What, in your opinion, is the most relevant/compelling/interesting result reported in the study?
 
Lasselle: Gilbane’s report sheds light on two key issues that our clients face: the need to address content within the context of larger business trends [referred to as megatrends in the study], and the importance of process improvements. First, companies today are challenged repeatedly to address adverse economic pressures at the same time they respond to the megatrends, such as the evolving basis of competitive advantage. The report makes clear that companies must take measures to address these megatrends in their content practices, or risk being left behind. Even in the face of negative economics and an endless and escalating flood of new data, they cannot sit back and wait. Second, the report illustrates how organizations can benefit from improving cross-functional processes. In many companies, for example, engineering and tech pubs each have their own authoring, content management, translation, and publishing, and neither group shares any processes or tools. What a lost opportunity! Just think of how much they could lower costs and speed time to market if they coordinated processes and collaborated on process improvements.
 
For insights into the megatrends that are shaping content globalization practices, see "Market Context" on page 9 of the report. You can also read about how Lasselle Ramsay contributed to global content value chain development at Hewlett-Packard. Download the study for free.

At the recent Worldware Conference in Santa Clara, California, I was delighted to learn about how a high-tech company was achieving great success in internationalizing their software through crowdsourcing. The story gets more interesting. This was not back-room software plumbing but an innovative application, none other than Second Life, a virtual world and a social-networking MMORG (Massive Multi-Player Online Role-Playing Game).  Launched by Linden Lab in 2003, Second Life enables its users, called residents, to interoperate with a virtual world  through software called a Second Life Viewer. Residents can socialize, participate in group activities, and create and trade virtual property.  According to Google, there are over 9 million residents currently on Second Life.

I attended the presentation, “Brave New (Virtual) World,” and had an opportunity to catch up with Danica Brinton, Director of International Strategies and Localization at Linden Lab.  Here’s what she had to say.

Kadie:  When did Linden Lab realize the importance of internationalization?

Brinton: Around the middle of 2008, Linden Lab realized some discrepancies between U.S. and international business.  While 60% of the residents and twice the new registrations were from outside the U.S., revenue and retention numbers, while still healthy, indicated a gap in the localized  user experience.

Kadie: What happened when you entered the scene?

Brinton: I joined the company in June.  When I checked things out, I was stunned.  I discovered that we were paying $40,000 per quarter to LSPs.  What were we getting?  The viewer was translated only partially into 3 languages, and was nearly incomprehensible.  The website was translated partially into 2 key languages.  In both cases there were a lot of localization bugs.  On the flip side, hundreds of wiki-based Help pages were translated quite well into 8 languages, which was pretty darn good.  An interesting trend…

Kadie: So what did you do?

Brinton: Although we were a small company, when I showed my management the opportunity they were very supportive…but with limited funding.  So we had to get creative.  We enlisted the help of power users to translate the application and website.  To ensure quality control, we set up a repeatable localization framework, with translation, editing, testing, and end user review.  We established a tier system of resident translators, drawing on our super-users.   We built and acquired localization tools to manage translation memories and the localization process, and installed a locale-based ROI calculator to manage costs.  Finally, we hired 3 in-house linguists.  So you can see, it was a hybrid of crowdsourcing from the Second Life community on the one hand, and our in-house linguists and contracted translation agencies on the other.

Kadie: How did you divide up the work?

Brinton:  Who did what depended on the language tier.  Let’s look at the viewer, for example.  For tier-1 languages, we developed the glossary, did the translation, and collaborated with the Second Life community on the editing, QA, and some of the glossary.  For tier-2 languages, the Second Life community did nearly everything. 

Kadie: What kind of results did you achieve?

Brinton: Less than a year later, I can truthfully say that we achieved some dramatic results.  We now translate the viewer and the website into 10 languages, and expect to reach 16 in May.  The active residents from outside the U.S. grew to 64% of the user base, and new registrations are now more than 2.5 times the U.S.  Even better, international revenues have surpassed U.S. domestic revenues.  Between the Viewer, the website, and the knowledge base, we now regularly localize over 150,000 words per language.

Kadie: What’s next for localization at Linden Lab?

Brinton: Strangely enough, past is prologue.  This new localization program is helping to increase customer satisfaction and bolster an affinity group.  You can even say that community-driven translation is building brand advocacy.  Some of the elite power users are evolving into business partners.  Localization is not only supporting our business, it’s helping to grow it.

The Content Globalization practice at the Gilbane Group closely follows and  blogs on the role of multilingual communication in social networking (see interview with Plaxo).
 

How effectively are you linking product engineering and multilingual product documentation processes? What kind of returns are you getting?

To learn about a real-world manufacturing success story, join us for our latest webinar : Broadening Product Lifecycle Management: A Strategy for Multilingual Product Documentation.

• Speeds time to publishing in international markets.
• Increases global content volumes without raising costs.
• Attains greater accuracy and consistency for multilingual product documentation.

Club Car estimates they will save $450,000 over three years! Could these savings and advances in multilingual product communications be yours? Come and find out.

Register today. Moderated by Gilbane Group. Hosted by Sajan.

First, Happy New Year from the Content Globalization team & hope your holiday season included rest and relaxation. Now back to it!

I'm not big on once a year resolutions; I like ongoing "continuations" better - i.e. keep doing what works and throw out what doesn't. In terms of our education mission, what worked best in 2008 is exactly what we set out to do via our inaugural mandate -- talk to practitioners, CIOs, strategists and fellow analysts about our view of the "globalization mandate" and understand how it fits into the "field view." So in terms of "continuations," we're increasing this commitment -- because it works.

Our 2008 experiences throughout corporate consulting gigs and Gilbane conferences underscore a simple truth -- when folks share, communities gather, and corporate operational champions for multilingual communications band together, "things" happen. And our "thing" is solidifying industry awareness that content is a vital part of web experience, customer satisfaction, and multinational expansion programs. The monolingual "one size fits all" approach? Doesn't work.

So what's with my elevator pitch title? It's an ongoing conversation we're having with our community about making the business case for content globalization strategies that are funded, valued, measured and successful. Basically, the elevator pitch for multilingual communications in five minutes or less. Here's one of our favorites, courtesy David Lee from 3M:

Got 30 seconds?

Take our poll on content sharing trends between customer support, technical documentation, and marketing.

Then, consider coming in to Gilbane Boston this week to discuss the results!

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Regina Bustamante, Director of Globalization with Plaxo, to discuss the company's content globalization strategy and how Plaxo users are integral to its success. Plaxo offers a suite of online solutions for social networking. Top services are the address book and calendar applications in addition to Pulse, a sharing and networking tool.

KK: How has the growth of global web access affected the adoption and development of your social networking solutions?
RB: Plaxo's user base continues to grow steadily since we reached the 15 million user mark back in October 2006. As a result, our product release cycles have accelerated from two or three months to just one week. At the same time, Plaxo's non-English base of users and users with international connections is growing rapidly. Shorter product cycles coupled with user demand for multilingual products made it necessary for us to explore new ways to release products to major markets in local languages.

KK: What model did Plaxo use for its initial localization/translation efforts?
RB: We localized our address book and calendar tools into French, German, Japanese, Portuguese, Spanish and Simplified Chinese over a year ago, using LSPs for the initial translations. We then provided early release versions to specific "power users" in each international market who reviewed everything, including the UI and suitability to local cultures.

KK: So Plaxo users provided quality assurance in this effort?
RB: Yes, users were even willing to test and report on features such as sorting, name and address formatting, etc. When Pulse was released with localizations into the same languages, non-English users continued to send suggestions, comments, and to act as informal quality control agents. The involvement of the user community improved the quality of local versions of our software.

KK: The Dutch version, released in July, increased the role of longtime power users, correct?
RB: Absolutely. The Netherlands has quickly become one of the largest markets for Pulse and we expanded the involvement of the user community, relying on a group of long-time Plaxo members for the development of the Dutch glossary.

KK: What's in store for the future of Plaxo's localization/translation efforts?
RB: For future product releases, we will move to a crowdsourcing model based on a translation portal we are developing that will enable any Plaxo community user to submit and comment on translations. To ensure high levels of quality, this portal includes separate roles for a language moderator and project manager.

KK: What will be the key to success for this model?
RB: Plaxo's position as a provider of no-charge consumer software helps us to engage users for localization/translation assistance. The key is to only ask users to help with things that directly benefit them. Our crowdsourcing model is not intended to entirely replace LSPs. For example, we have no plans to use crowdsourcing to translate the corporate website or documents such as the Terms of Service or Privacy Policy.

I distinctly remember asking this question to my peers (and to myself!) at various companies throughout my technical writing career. Lots of times I got the same question as the answer. And most times, the "who's go it" discussion occurred in the midst of a post-mortem point release meeting or as a result of a technical support inquiry based on conflicting documentation narrative or procedures.

I worked with an exceptional group of writers during the late 80's through the mid-90's. We were dedicated to accuracy, consistency, reusability, and making sure that Engineering and Quality Assurance never forgot where we sat. We were pioneers at the time in achieving single-sourced print, electronic, and online help documentation without the benefits of mature commercial tools. When managing the translation of documentation products, we spent lots and lots of time on the phone. We were stressed. Highly stressed.

For all our good intentions, a paper-based Style Guide complete with change pages and various scribbles in the margins to document new decisions didn't cut it. Rigorously-developed templates and in turn DTDs, did not deliver the foul-proof uniformity insurance we imagined. After all, we were creative and passionate writers! Bound by common goals for quality, but invigorated by the chance to innovatively describe complex and technical subjects in new and interesting ways ;-). Unfortunately for our translator-counterparts, there were times it just didn't compute.

I've shown my age by reminiscing as a "that was then, this is now" exercise. Content creation and in particular, managing team-authored product support content has come a long way. Social computing technologies will undoubtedly take it even farther. What I'm most impressed with now, is the availability and value of authoring assistance (as opposed to absolute control) that brings a living, breathing corporate Style Guide into the technical writing and translation environments without disrupting creative flow or requiring re-training.

Join me on April 9th to discuss the value of authoring assistance with technology provider across Systems, language services provider Argo Translation, Inc., and Quad/Graphics, a customer reaping the benefits of authoring assistance technology in a FrameMaker environment.

One of the blogs I read regularly is penned by Irving Wladawsky-Berger, Chairman Emeritus from the IBM Academy of Technology. A 37-year IBM veteran (and recent retiree as of May, 2007) Wladawsky-Berger writes on innovation, corporate culture, knowledge management, and as you would expect, technology. Usually thought-provoking, I've been re-visiting a particular entry while observing "the winds of change" in the content and translation management software industries.

In this entry, Wladawsky-Berger writes, "While it is easy to focus on the global, universal aspects of the successful innovation hubs - great technologists, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists - they miss the very local, human elements that make it all work." Words close to my pet peeve, the significance of the triad of people, process, and technology in global content management strategies. IMO, it is no mistake that this age-old expression lists people first, technology last, and process as element that ties the two together.

Truly localized content, more than just red = rojo, is impossible to produce without cooperation, collective responsibility, and the premise that "differences still matter" and perhaps the world isn't so flat after all. (Wladawsky-Berger's entry spurred me to purchase Pankaj Ghemawat's book, Redefining Global Strategy, published this past September.)

When globalization is an incidental black box in the process model with planning and execution relegated to the final stage of product support or web content delivery, the local part of globalization disappears. Granted, even the power of the Internet does not erase the fact that merging collective, culturally-aware, and local expertise is hard. But hey, collaboration has always been hard, simply because it's not about technology, it's about motivation, feedback, a sense of responsibility, a feeling of community -- you know, all those human complexities.

We believe social computing has the energy to encourage and enable innovative collaboration in global content management, but even these applications will face the user adoption test: usability and relevancy to the task at hand. We're off to find some of the most intriguing examples of success. Got one? Comment here and stay tuned.

I keep being fascinated about the role of language in social media. I read a very interesting article on multilingual social bookmarking in the Just Landed web site. English is extremely dominant in social bookmarking, although a lot of the English sites also contain bookmarks to non-English sites. Among the non-English sites, German dominates. I also noticed that there are multilingual Indian social bookmarking sites which include several Indian languages.

Is social media actually compartmentalized by languages? Christian Kreutz has an excellent entry in his blog about the multilingual social web. As he says: "So it is a dilemma. On one way English allows us to communicate worldwide, but at the same time it narrows down the potential for collaboration by simply contradicting cultural diversity."

I would guess that more social and customer-generated media will eventually mean more machine translation, because it would be nice to share thoughts over the language barrier. Or I might be quite wrong, and most of the discussions and social sites will actually be quite local, shared by people who already share a language. Language is, after all, more than words: it is also culture and connotations and nuances, some of which are impossible to translate.

It would be interesting to hear from the MT community: do you see increased demand from social media sites?