| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Presentation by Translated.net on workflow automation. Reactions? Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
|
|---|
Jeff Whittaker wrote:
For the second company, you only log into their system when/if you are available and ready to work... When a translation pops up on your screen for you to view, you generally have around 2-3 minutes to decide whether or not you wish to accept this job.
What? You're supposed to sit around waiting for a job to "pop up", then scramble to accept it?! A lot of the stuff I see takes quite a while to analyze and bid; if anyone wants a response in two or three minutes they can generally go fishing elsewhere as far as I'm concerned unless it's a very short, simple file. I like to take the time to see what I'm getting myself into.
The idea of "logging in" and waiting breathlessly for the next job to come up anywhere - even with my favorite agencies - is not appealing and more than a little ludicrous. It's hard to imagine having the time to waste on such an activity.
For me at least, notification by mail - possibly with a link to some simple, straightforward web-based TMS where I don't have to remember my damned password - is really the most practical way to go. If I'm "hungry" for jobs, I can set Outlook to check the mail server every few minutes; if I don't want to be distracted, I can switch off the automatic checks and just download the mail when I have time to deal with it.
| | | | Brandis (X)
Local time: 07:13
English to German
+ ...
| Kevin speaks my heart out.. | Aug 4, 2008 |
Hi! mostly it is the fastest reaction may be also the lowest possible price bid counts into a project. There would be a PO and the outsourcer comes with the shortest time frame. The whole game begins once you deliver the translation, they start pickiing on this or that some may be a few words, but do not pay for a transproofed edition. If we look at those posters Translation / editing / Proof reading and the CAT tool implementation all that for mere low price along with the TM suited for the tar... See more Hi! mostly it is the fastest reaction may be also the lowest possible price bid counts into a project. There would be a PO and the outsourcer comes with the shortest time frame. The whole game begins once you deliver the translation, they start pickiing on this or that some may be a few words, but do not pay for a transproofed edition. If we look at those posters Translation / editing / Proof reading and the CAT tool implementation all that for mere low price along with the TM suited for the target language.
Why else do you think there is so much of competition. Today I know agencies offering €0,045 a word job and I do not understand how they survive and what they pay their translators. Platforms like Globallink and others were known very early to most of us and people like me left them intentionally.
If I had a choice I would rather not go for such solutions unless an outsourcer comes with explicit request to implement these and I would certainly not be going for that low price (IMPLEMENT GLOBAL LINK - THEN THE SITUATION IS DIFFERENT, DO NOT BRAG ABOUT WHAT YOU GET IN THE QUALITY) MT brings totally different headaches, me and my teams had our own part of experimenting with that stuff.
On the other hand I keep receiving these trados product and schooling offers of last there is another offer in localisation, as it though it were something new to me at USD 100,- . Seems to me, this whole thing is about reducing the quality and making more fatter transaltion that does not make any sense. BR Brandis ▲ Collapse
| | | | 1279 (X)
Local time: 01:13
| I'll "prefer" automated systems when... | Aug 4, 2008 |
Henry D wrote:
Also, and on the other hand, speaking about translation management systems in general -- not Translated.net's solution in particular -- only 17% of respondents say that 'yes' they prefer to use them.
I wonder: why the disparity between the theoretical benefits and the real-life preference of translators?
I have no doubt that agencies will continue to move towards higher levels of workflow automation, which I imagine could eventually save us all time. However, I won't favor these systems until the benefits for translators cross from theoretical to tangible.
In my experience, the biggest obstacle to increasing productivity is the fact that different agencies use different systems, all requiring various levels of maintenance. If all of my regular clients moved to automated systems, I would probably spend an hour getting all of the programs started at the begining of the work day. (Sign in, answer messages, change availability setting...)
Aside from this main hurdle, the systems still also create a fairly high "annoyance factor." For example, one company's system has a little icon on my desktop that I can toggle to show my availability, kind of like the Proz availability feature. That is logical enough, but when I have the program set to "I'm busy," the system continues to remind me multiple times a day that I have it set as "I'm busy." It's a bit aggravating when I'm swamped with work and my inbox starts to fill up with automated "Are you still busy?" emails.
Also, being that translators tend to be particularly sensitive to shades of meaning and the nuances of classification, I think we naturally resent the false dichotomy sometimes imposed on us by automated systems. For example, one particular system I've used requires editors to select "pass" or "fail" for translations reviewed. The catch is that the reviewer cannot actually make changes to the document being reviewed (he/she can make notes), but if the translation "passes," it goes directly to the client without being reviewed by a PM. I once had to "fail" a very good translation of a real estate contract because there was a minor omission in the portion of the text describing the property boundaries. Yes, it was important, but no, I'd hate for the translator to lose rank because of it. I left notes to the effect, but of course I never received a response.
I imagine that the majority of translators who do not prefer working with these systems have had similar experiences. We'll tolerate them, but we won't say that we "prefer" them just yet...
| | | | | Another "lovely" experience with TMS as Translated.net | Aug 4, 2008 |
Dear colleagues!
This topic is so very clear, that I can agree with most of what was said above, also and in particular with the points on Logoport & Co.
But what do you think about the fact, that the company behind a TMS as mentioned in the title of this thread won't accept invoices others than written in the TMS itself? I am not joking, this really happened to me with a translation agency from Italy!
If somebody is really so very "bound" to such a transla... See more Dear colleagues!
This topic is so very clear, that I can agree with most of what was said above, also and in particular with the points on Logoport & Co.
But what do you think about the fact, that the company behind a TMS as mentioned in the title of this thread won't accept invoices others than written in the TMS itself? I am not joking, this really happened to me with a translation agency from Italy!
If somebody is really so very "bound" to such a translation agency, maybe it makes sense to issue the invoices in their system. But they can't assume, that after 2 real jobs done after several years of being registered with them I will move my whole data for invoicing to their TMS. Why should I do so?
It is a sad fact, that it took me 4 or 5 e-mails back and forth, a very serious call and to threaten with a bad record in the Bluebord and elsewhere to get paid for something like 1100 words of translation (there were no complaints on quality at all). The only argument that convinced them to pay my scanned and e-mailed invoices, was my question if they also refuse invoices sent by ordinary mail from their telecommunication, electricity and other municipal providers.
TMS are really funny!
Have a good laugh...
René Stranz-Nikitin
[Edited at 2008-08-05 06:45] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
René Stranz-Nikitin wrote:
If somebody is really so very "bound" to such a translation agency, maybe it makes sense to issue the invoices in their system. But they can't assume, that after 2 real jobs done after several years of beeing registered with them I will move my whole data for invoicing to their TMS. Why should I do so?
As some people have pointed out, this isn't an issue of an entire industry using one platform, but individual agencies and clients *still* using a system of their own devising, which means that the linguist is expected to follow a different procedure for every client they have - how does this add value for us?
In the US, the health insurance industry is set up similarly - sadly, for the practitioners involved - and the end result is that you can go to a doctor and be told they won't take your particular insurance - because they simply can't accommodate all the unique administrative/billing systems.
So in our field, until/unless there is actually an industry-wide standard (or a number of "standards" far less than the 20 or so listed in the survey), how does what's available actually reduce administrative efforts for a true freelancer who works with several clients?
| | | | Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 07:13
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| I'm with Kevin on this one point | Aug 5, 2008 |
Kevin Lossner wrote:
>> Assume:
>> – Translators waiting and ready to start
The idea that a larger number of good translators will be "waiting and ready to start" seems a bit ludicrous. The good ones that I know aren't waiting around for anything, they are working to get a backlog of projects delivered.
When I quickly looked through the presentation, this item caught my eye. "Translators waiting and ready to start". I think there is a misconception here... translators don't "wait". They "work". And if a translator is required to wait, then he should be paid for waiting (and that is where the minimum fee comes in).
Also, the system assumes that translators are permanently at their desks, so that they can see and respond immediately when a job comes in. As for me, even if a job notification does pop up, if I'm busy with something at that time, I'm not going to drop what I'm doing to check what the notification is all about.
Furthermore, it is a fallacy that translators will do no admin if the client does admin for them. There is always admin, no matter how "easy" the client's system is. If the client is the only client and if the client's system is completely compatible with my bookkeeping system and my region's taxation system, yes, then maybe I could be tempted to replace my admin with the client's admin system, thus removing admin from my list of chores.
| | | | | BLINDED BY TECHNOLOGY? | Dec 23, 2010 |
Translated.net’s ‘Workflow’ sounds good but I doubt whether it will make translation agencies change their wicked (and often irrational) ways.
Apropos Translated.net, I received an ‘urgent’ request for a 500-word test piece late yesterday afternoon for submission this morning. The carrot dangled before me was the unverifiable ‘information’ that a client was about to drop 200,000 words for translation into the agency’s lap over the next two months. To do the unpaid t... See more Translated.net’s ‘Workflow’ sounds good but I doubt whether it will make translation agencies change their wicked (and often irrational) ways.
Apropos Translated.net, I received an ‘urgent’ request for a 500-word test piece late yesterday afternoon for submission this morning. The carrot dangled before me was the unverifiable ‘information’ that a client was about to drop 200,000 words for translation into the agency’s lap over the next two months. To do the unpaid test piece, I had to request a ‘purchase order’ (goodness knows why—the agency was not going to part with a penny).
To cut a long story short, I asked for the ‘purchase order’ only to be told the work had already been assigned to other translators. Would Translated.net’s proposed workflow system avoid this kind of nonsensical time wasting? I think not—the problem lies with the mind set of agencies and their relentless drive to turn translators into 21st serfs. The real question is not whether we need Translated.net’s workflow but whether we ojught to work for agencies at all.
[Edited at 2010-12-23 15:24 GMT]
[Edited at 2010-12-23 15:26 GMT]
[Edited at 2010-12-23 15:29 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Presentation by Translated.net on workflow automation. Reactions? | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
