This week’s topic: Growth in language translations.
5 questions,
30 seconds,
Promise.
Category: Content management & strategy (Page 176 of 481)
This category includes editorial and news blog posts related to content management and content strategy. For older, long form reports, papers, and research on these topics see our Resources page.
Content management is a broad topic that refers to the management of unstructured or semi-structured content as a standalone system or a component of another system. Varieties of content management systems (CMS) include: web content management (WCM), enterprise content management (ECM), component content management (CCM), and digital asset management (DAM) systems. Content management systems are also now widely marketed as Digital Experience Management (DEM or DXM, DXP), and Customer Experience Management (CEM or CXM) systems or platforms, and may include additional marketing technology functions.
Content strategy topics include information architecture, content and information models, content globalization, and localization.
For some historical perspective see:
https://gilbane.com/gilbane-report-vol-8-num-8-what-is-content-management/
Your day in the sun may finally be dawning.
While preparing for an upcoming webinar on technical publications in global markets, we reviewed the content/globalizaton management topics that we’ve covered recently in white papers, case studies, and other webinars. An emerging–and insistent–theme is the role that product support content plays in the nearly universal drive for positive customer experience.
This signals an important shift in the value proposition for investment in content technologies for
technical documentation. One that should warm the hearts of techpubs pros everywhere.
Historically, companies have spent money on technical publishing technology in order to realize operational benefits–more automation, content reuse, lower headcount, and so on. The value proposition was inward-facing. Now, however, value is increasingly derived from outside the operations of the organization. High-quality technical content impacts customer satisfaction, drives new revenue in new markets, enhances product usability, and reinforces brand. The value prop is now outward-facing. And these dimensions of ROI can pour a whole lotta sunshine in the corner offices of worldwide organizations.
In addition to the July 11 webinar with Idiom and EMC, check out these Gilbane artifacts for evidence of the value shift in technical publishing.
From the Autodesk case study:
Regarded as a strategic and essential company asset, product documentation is a significant component of the company’s customer-centric information supply chain. With over 60 percent of revenue derived from outside the United States, Autodesk’s vision for content globalization is paramount to continued market leadership.
See also the Sun Microsystems case study and recorded webinars with Medtronic and Astoria.
I was part of a Web 2.0 panel in New York City earlier this week, moderated by Bryant Shea, Director of Content Management at Molecular. It was an intimate affair – we had about thirty people in the room, drawn largely from media/entertainment, financial services, and insurance firms.
We wanted to encourage audience participation — about five minutes into the event, one person piped up, “We know that Web 2.0 is all about user generated content. We certainly agree – we’ve put up a blog for our customers. Now what do we do with all this content?” Good question – we spent the rest of the evening trying to answer.
I’m not sure we ever reached a resolution but this got me thinking. What’s equally important is the prior question – why put up a blog in the first place? Business strategies need to drive technology choices; technology options can then drive business opportunities.
Now there are certainly plenty of plausible reasons for companies to want to encourage blogging about their products and services. Building brand loyalty, supporting the fans, wanting to learn about customers experiences (both the good and the bad), facilitating a peer group who can support one another, perhaps even turning to loyal end users to help with product development – the list goes on.
Companies have many options for engaging their customers. But they first have to be open to having the conversation with them, and have some inkling of how they’ll use all the insights they acquire.
Note, an inkling is a clue or a hunch – it’s not (yet) a plan. Allowing customers to blog back, blog about, and blog with one another is only the first step in a larger process. With Web 2.0, there’s lots of room for experimentation – trying things out, and seeing what works, moving on. What’s new is the ability to link things together.
Implementers and the business managers who support them need not have a formal plan about how they’re going to use all the user generated content. What they do need, I believe, is the willingness and the time to listen, and then to figure out how best to join the conversation.
Are here.
The results are in — and they’re not surprising. Well, actually one is. A mere 35% of respondents indicated that their companies have a formal brand management team. The result to our second question, “Does the team include a localization or translation subject matter expert?” was a resounding 100% “No.” This, unfortunately, is the “not surprising” part. Although our N was smaller than we’d like, we expect that the trend would have continued on the same course.
The fact is, most companies have work to do to ensure that corporate brand flows through multi-geographical market segments in a way that’s both consistent and relevant to customers and prospects in specific cultures and locales. It’s not easy. According to Economist Intelligence Unit, authors of Guarding the Brand, almost half of their respondents believed expanding into new territories made brand management all the more difficult. The top two challenges? 63 percent cited cultural differences and 44 percent cited language barriers and translations issues.
It’s sometimes “easier” to avoid dealing with the presence of some 4000+ languages worldwide, but it’s not so easy to ignore when one investigates the facts in smaller “chunks” so to speak. Consider this list of “The 50 Most Widely Spoken Languages” as a more easily digestible example.
If your company aims to expand footprint and revenue generation in this “flat world,” globalization needs to be a part of the brand management discussion. And if you are responsible for leading the charge into a new geographic region — you need to have a voice that’s heard.
The Enterprise 2.0 conference is winding down in Boston today so it’s a good time to reflect on the “two dot oh” phenomena. As industry watchers and marketers, we’ve come a long way since Tim O’Reilly coined the concept two years ago. With hordes of people crowded into the new Westin Hotel in South Boston and the exhibit hall packed like Grand Central at rush hour (I’ve yet to hear an attendance count) I felt a rush of excitement in the air. There’s a certain sense of headiness when talking with entrepreneurs about their latest products and solutions. I was floored by the breadth of creativity.
But what struck me most is the vision thing – the gulf between the claims about Enterprise 2.0 and the realities of how work gets done. Enterprise 2.0 seems to be about blogging for a living, putting up a wiki, realizing that email is broken, and communicating with customers. Oh yes, then there’s unleashing the power of teams, user generated content, and building communities. The list goes on . . .
Yet two words are missing – management and process. In our always on world, we are inundated with information, and constrained by the limits of the twenty-four hour day. We need to take a hard look at how sharing information online creates new sources of value and better modes of organization. David Weinberger said it best in his opening keynote – everything is now metadata. We need to figure out how to harness this incredible openness at our fingertips. Developing a compelling information architecture is going to be even harder than an effective technical architecture.
What comes next? I’m now planning the collaboration and social computing track for our fall conference. (Stay tuned, we’ll be announcing the program later this summer.) I think we need to take a look at the hard issues of designing collaborative business processes. What do you think? I’m open to suggestions. Let me know, beginning by responding to this post. I look forward to our continuing conversation.
I was only able to make it into the Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston yesterday. You can still get a demo pass for today. But I was thrilled to hear analyst, researchers, case study presenters, and yes, even vendors, drill down into one of my favorite phrases: “people, processes, and technology make it possible” and hope the mantra continues today.
Point being, obviously, that 2.0 not just about technology ;-). Its about culture, filling generation gaps, the evolution of *people* networking, and redefining community from the core of where community starts. Humans.
What I didn’t hear, however, is the “L” word — specifically language, and that bothered me. We just can’t be naive enough to think that community, collaboration, and networking on a global scale is solely English-driven. We need to get the “L” word into the conversation.
My globalization practice colleague Kaija Poysti weighs in here.
I was only able to make it into the Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston yesterday. You can still get a demo pass for today. But I was thrilled to hear analyst, researchers, case study presenters, and yes, even vendors, drill down into one of my favorite phrases: “people, processes, and technology make it possible” and hope the mantra continues today.
Point being, obviously, that 2.0 not just about technology ;-). Its about culture, filling generation gaps, the evolution of *people* networking, and redefining community from the core of where community starts. Humans.
What I didn’t hear, however, is the “L” word — specifically language, and that bothered me. We just can’t be naive enough to think that community, collaboration, and networking on a global scale is solely English-driven. We need to get the “L” word into the conversation.
My globalization practice colleague Kaija Poysti weighs in here.

