2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

0-7803-9028-8/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE. 851

The Hidden Costs of Cross-cultural Documentation Marie-Louise Flacke

CRT, Tekom, INTECOM flacke@editions.net

Abstract For businesses, localization is essential to increasing overseas revenue. Going beyond translation and providing an effective localization for each target country is the key to successful global marketing. Project managers neglecting cultural, legal and geographical aspects of a target country might damage the company’s image and definitely increase localization costs. Including local experts on the localization team and setting up a direct connection between management and country specialists is a good way to attain a cost-effective localization. Keywords: cross-cultural communication, documentation challenges, localization costs, hidden costs, localization pitfalls, global marketing. Introduction By the end of 2005, it is estimated that only a third of all Internet users worldwide will be English speakers [1]. For corporations trying to expand their markets, localization is essential to the success of a product in overseas markets. To reach their global customers, organizations need to localize products and documentation without putting their localization investments at stake, because of cultural gaffes. Based on experience in editing localized documentation, this study shows some localization pitfalls and their indirect costs. Translation and Localization To reach global customers, organizations need to speak the consumers' language. Is translation the right step? Why localize?

Translation is converting concepts from a source language into a target language. A good translator focuses on reproducing the original text as closely as possible into another language. Translating means the translator gets into the author's shoes and provides the audience with the feeling it is reading the original text. Localization goes beyond translation. Localizing means taking into account a whole country with its culture: “Taking a product and making it linguistically and culturally appropriate to the target locale (country/region and language) where it will be used and sold” [2]. Indeed, “Translation alone does not make your site local” [3]. Translation is only a part of the localization process. In fact, good translation is a key (but only one) element of localization, which is the baseline for effective localization Localizers focus on adapting documentation to a specific culture. To customize a product for a country, professional localizers get into the user's shoes of the target (local) audience. They include the set of information associated with a place, known as “locale”, into the localization project. When going global, a corporation should go beyond translating its product information and make sure that product and documentation are properly localized. Needs for Localization Because of the high revenue generated by overseas sales and because “most global end-users prefer to use a product in their own tongue rather than English, which to them is a second (or third) language” [3], organizations have their products and their documentation translated into several languages.

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

852

Not only do users prefer a product in their own language, but they also welcome documentation that fits into their culture. “In fact, a product that is localized well will appear as though it was originally produced in that country” [3]. Localized products sell better, but how much does the localization cost? Translation Budget Translation costs are part of the localization budget. Various figures have been circulating about high translation costs. A striking example is given by the European Union (EU):

The European Union's bill for translation will have to balloon by nearly 60 percent to over 1 billion euros a year to prevent the bloc from turning into a Tower of Babel after its eastward enlargement. The European Commission said the annual cost of written translation was expected to grow to 807 million euros in the next few years from 549 million in 2003, when Brussels institutions already translated a staggering 1.3 million pages. [4]

Because the EU aims at providing each European citizen with the most accurate information in each European language, it cannot but render each publication understandable to each citizen. This means translating the official publications into 20 languages. Localization Effort In the private sector, organizations invest massively in localizing products and documentation. As an example, cellular phones and the pertinent documentation are localized in 50 languages. Costly Localization When going global, an organization should be aware that budgeting 50 different translations of the same source documentation is not enough. Each translation must comply with the quality standards applying to its locale. At this stage, quality in translation and localization is of the essence. Any poorly localized product might generate considerable costs: “According to

the U.S. State Department, U.S. firms alone lose $50 billion in potential sales each year because of problems with translation and localization” [3]. Not only is extensive translation a pretty expensive activity, but if poorly localized, a product will have a dramatically increased budget and still not reach its potential customers. Localization service providers and translation experts have searched ways to both provide quality translation and maintain the costs within reasonable limits. Techniques and Tools A way to reduce translation costs, as suggested by localization service providers, is using Machine Translation (MT) and Translation Memory Software (TMS). TMS helps speed up the work of translators: by comparing what needs to be translated to what has already been translated, it helps the translator to focus on the updated text and ignore the already translated and approved text. Machine translation (MT) performs an automatic pre-translation of the source text that is then reviewed and fine-tuned by a professional translator. What impacts have these tools had on translation costs? How far can they help reduce the localization budget?

Figure 1. Localization cost distribution.

Translation Costs Figure 1 shows how localization costs are distributed: whereas quality translation is one of the main issues in the localization process, it accounts for only 50 % of the localization cost.

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

853

Further, the “local approval” is evaluated between 5 and 15 % of the localization. The remaining costs include Content/File handling, Project Management, DTP, Glossary Management, and Translation Memory Management. Based on these figures, translation and local review might be evaluated at 65 % of the localization costs. By streamlining the process, localization providers offering MT, TMS, and Content Management (CM) solutions claim a 30 % cost reduction. TMS tools reduce some translation costs by detecting and re-using already translated text. Therefore, using a TMS tool to reduce translation cost is only profitable for important translation projects that are subject to updates. A one-shot translation does not benefit from a TMS tool. Saving 30 % of the costs does not apply to the whole localization cost but exclusively to the translation costs, i.e., to 50 % of the localization budget. At the end, the reduction shrinks to 15 % of the total cost of localization. Still, considering the size of some localization projects, a 15 % reduction might result in saving millions of dollars. This is a very positive step in the process: the product documentation is translated, and translation costs have been reduced. Quality Checks However, how to be sure the translation meets the quality level that would prevent U.S. firms from losing those $ 50 billion of potential sales? To reach the required level of quality, Nadine Kano [6] stresses the essential step of checking that “translations meet the standards of native speakers with respect to grammar and accuracy of terminology”. Performing a translation QA is a good solution. Provided a native speaker is entrusted with these proofreading tasks, the QA might ensure a higher quality of the translation. Costs of QAs Obviously, this quality improvement has a cost. Proofreaders are being paid on an hourly basis to review and amend the translated text. Consider, for example, that an hourly fee of 40.00 euros can tremendously increase the localization costs. Indeed, the poorer the translation quality is, the

more time the proofreader needs to upgrade the translated text. These extra review costs might neutralize the savings generated by the MT tools. The localization service provider Wordbank [1] is well aware of this threat: “It is also worth noting that the application of strongly promoted translation technologies such as translation memories and machine translation can only really make a (small) contribution to reducing the costs for translation. Their use may increase the cost of the final QA.” Localization managers might be advised to first check how much translation savings implementing an MT or a TMS tool might generate. A senior translator will certainly provide good advice. Localization Pitfalls Still, localization managers have identified several other ways to reduce localization costs by not only considering the translation, but focusing on the local usage and therefore preventing costly pitfalls. Project managers who want to go global must be aware that “Now, more than ever, showing respect for your customer's culture is crucial to your product's success in the overseas marketplace.”[3] Translating a document or a Web site means providing a linguistically correct product. To reach the target audience in a specific country, it is essential to localize, i.e., ensure the product and its documentation are culturally acceptable. A number of tips might help the project manager localize without generating unnecessary costs. Unnecessary Engineering Costs Because localization implies not only translation, but also software re-engineering, it is essential to spot all potential localization issues very early in the process. Performing a Pilot Project (PP), as defined by Microsoft localization experts S. Ebbert and G. Poltrow, is a good way to eliminate localization bugs. “A pilot project is run to find and solve localization problems before the bulk of the work starts and to streamline the localization process. When a product is localized in a few languages, running a pilot can be a time- and cost-saving exercise” [5]. The Pilot Project implies first selecting one or two languages in which the product and the documentation should be

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

854

localized. Step two consists of running the localization process in the selected language(s). In fact, because running a pilot project helps the localization team “identify and resolve international issues without wasting ... translator's time (and your money) by fixing bugs later“ [5], it becomes a useful localization tool. The return on investment of a PP is indeed very high. Because the localization team does not lose time and money fixing bugs in each localized version, it maintains the costs within budget. The golden rule defined by Microsoft localization experts recommends focusing on the costs of bugs, not on the cost of a single translated word. Because

TotalBugs = coreBugs * Languages

and TotalBugs = Engineering Hours

it is of essence to identify and eliminate bugs at the early stage of the first localization effort. Having several localization engineers fix the same bugs in 20 languages will definitely increase the manpower cost of the localization project. With a machine translation tool, the localization team might have a chance to reduce costs by 15 %. Running a pilot project saves not only translation costs because it translates in only one language and then fix the bugs before launching the translation in other languages; it also saves a large amount of expensive engineering hours. Unnecessary Translations Costs Running the Pilot Project, the project manager will avoid providing the localization team with a poor quality source text. Indeed, being faced with an ambiguous text, the translator will spend unnecessary time and energy to understand what the author means. Should the translator be under considerable time pressure, he might also misinterpret the text and end in an erroneous translation. Because of inaccuracy in the source text, errors might be reproduced in each language and turn into a very costly mishap. Microsoft localization experts Sjoert Ebbert and Gwyneth Poltrow [5] clearly spotted this issue: “Design flaws in the source content can cause ...

serious problems because they tend to multiply in the target (translated) content.“ Further, ensuring a high quality source text facilitates the use of a Machine Translation tool to provide a fast and accurate translation. Country-specific terms are an example of issues in the source text. Selecting “Abbott and Costello” or “Helmut and Hannelore” as examples to help the end user follow a procedure might not be the best choice. How many users ever heard of Costello? of Hannelore? How should a Maltese end user relate these names to the product documentation? How many translators have ever heard of Abbott? What should they do with this entry? Maintain this name or try to localize it? To prevent such ambiguity, product managers keen to properly localize their product documentation will check that “Text and messages are devoid of slang and specific cultural references” [6]. This will definitely smooth the translation process and provide a confusion-free translation. Further, running the Pilot Project, the project manager might screen the source documentation for redundant information. A good way for professional localizers to find and erase the superfluous text is put the end user's hat on and think locally, asking such questions as Is this information pertinent to my target audience? Do users need these details? Indeed, information provided to a customer should be checked for pertinence, before it is translated into dozens of languages. A mobile phone company, for example, might consider eliminating the chapter describing the DTMF functions from its user’s manual. Even though the DTMF functions are fully operational in most countries, translating this feature description in various languages means generating unnecessary translation costs. As a matter of fact, the consumer uses the DTMF keys of his mobile phone without knowing it. There is no point to explain the end user what this specific function means, since he does not need this information. Only telecommunication engineers involved in mobile phone developments might be interested in details on the Dual Tone MultiFrequency (DTMF) functions, not end users. By the way, the “DTMF ringing, sending DTMF parameters ... etc.” chapter should not be provided in 50 languages!

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

855

Another example of unnecessarily translated text is the inaccurate list of technical standards spread over several pages of end user's documentation. Translating, for example, the list of standards the product is compliant to FCC rules, VDE, ICNIRP, GS11, ANSI, etc. does not make much sense. The FCC rules and the ANSI standards apply in the U.S. only, the VDE recommendations are relevant to the German products, and there is no need to have these country-specific standards translated into other languages. Localizing to EU countries requires only mentioning the European norms pertinent to the localized product, since one single norm applies to 25 countries and is marked as “EN”-standard. Localization Pitfalls–Religion Because of the diversity of religions, it is important to check with the local vendor whether a reference to a specific religion is appropriate. For example, it does not make much sense to translate a Jewish calendar into languages spoken in countries using a different calendar. Not only it would mean unnecessary translation costs, but this might also embarrass users with a different religion. A local vendor or a native translator would also prevent internationalization issues such as improperly localizing religious references. A worldwide software corporation had to publicly apologize for “... Using chanting of the Koran as a soundtrack for a computer game which led to great offence to the Saudi Arabia government” [7]. These mishaps are indeed very costly and ruin the project, in particular when the product is withdrawn from the target market: “The software giant managed to offend the Saudis by creating a game in which Muslim warriors turned churches into mosques. That game was withdrawn” [7]. Localization Pitfalls–Culture Localization professionals should always make sure that the product is “tailored to fit the local culture” [3]. Ignoring language and cultural usage might very easily put a product or a site at stake. On his Web site, a consultant specializing in international communication recommended to individuals interested in globalization to first collect data on the country they wanted to localize in. This is definitely an excellent recommendation. Unfortunately, the list of resources for

internationalization displayed on the consultant's site contains a pitfall. Recommending to check the CIA website as a “fabulous resource” [8] to get information on a specific country will certainly cause problems for some overseas citizens! Language ignorance is also a sensitive point. Saying, for example, “German technical writers often use scholarly footnotes and references to other literature .... Their sentences tend to be long, full of compound words and subordinate clauses” [8] will certainly surprise if not upset German writers. Indeed, it is a characteristic of the German language to build words by concatenating existing terms. It is for example grammatically correct to say “Strassenbahnhaltestelle” for “tram stop”, and not “Haltestelle für die Strassenbahn”. When embracing internationalization, it is wise not to measure other cultures solely with one's personal view and culture. Localization Pitfalls–Ethics Ethics is also part of each country's culture and should be addressed very carefully. References to history and weapons, for example, might be highly problematic. In Europe, anything that deals with World War II should be treated by a native localizer. Faux pas might cost thousands of dollars and damage the company's reputation. An Internet Service Provider (ISP), for example, offered French subscribers the opportunity to trade Nazi memorabilia on the Internet. Since such trading is unlawful in most European countries, the ISP was taken to court, both in the localized country and in the U.S.:

A French-based human rights group that protested the sale of Nazi memorabilia on Yahoo Auctions has filed a motion with the U.S. District Court in San Jose seeking to dismiss Yahoo’s lawsuit.

In this case, the localization costs reached an extremely high level. Apart from the translation costs of its site and the pertinent documentation, the ISP was faced with legal costs both in the U.S. and in Europe. Not to mention loss of image! A proper localization would have prevented such a pitfall by having the legal terms of using the ISP Web site checked and adapted by a local legal counsel.

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

856

Reference to weapons is very questionable in most European countries. European papers widely spread the news about some computer manufacturer sales policies displayed on the Internet. Before finalizing a personal computer (PC) acquisition, the potential customer was asked to answer questions about using weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons, missiles, etc. Users perceived these inquiries as pretty awkward and aborted their purchase process. Since this localization bug was widely reported in the European press, the organization lost a considerable number of sales and ruined its image. In this case, localizing the legal terms—and not merely translating them—would have prevented such a business disaster. Indeed, translating the following paragraph in 20 languages does not make sense with regard to globalization:

Further, under U.S. law, the goods shipped pursuant to this Agreement may not be sold, leased or otherwise transferred to restricted countries or utilized by restricted end-users or an end-user engaged in activities related to weapons of mass destruction ....

Since these rules pertain to the U.S. law, they apply in the U.S only. Therefore, translating these restrictions in numerous languages not only increases the translation costs, but generates a puzzled reaction from the local end user: “What should I do with such rules, since I am not based in the U.S.?” Local and Legal? Professional localization teams should focus on localizing the legal agreements for each country. Another example of the risks incurred by poor legal localization is the so-called 77,000 Euros translation. An ISP was fined 77,000 euros for binding customers with illegal agreements. With regard to one piece of European legislation, the ISP terms of use contained 22 abusive clauses and 10 illegal articles. Because the localization team merely translated the original agreements without adapting them to the local legislation, it generated a costly court decision in the localized country. A project manager involved in globalization should ensure that his localization team does not translate legal texts, but invests in legal counseling

to investigate pertinent legal issues applicable in the localized country. Localization Pitfalls—Geography To provide a cost-effective localization, staff not only needs to be proficient in the specific language, but must also have an understanding of geography… because geography sometimes costs millions! As an example, consider this issue of coloring maps:

Tom Edward revealed how one of the biggest companies in the world managed to offend one of the biggest countries in the world with a software slip-up. When coloring in 800,000 pixels on a map of India, Microsoft colored eight of them a different shade of green to represent the disputed Kashmiri territory.

The difference in greens meant Kashmir was shown as non-Indian and the product was promptly banned in India. Redmond was left to recall all 200,000 copies of the offending Windows 95 software to try and heal the diplomatic wounds. ”It cost millions ….”[7]

How could a project manager prevent such a disaster? Additional training in international business and an introduction to country-specific culture would be a good start: “… Staff members are now sent on geography courses to try to avoid such mishaps. Some of our employees, however bright they may be, have only a hazy idea about the rest of the world” [7]. Localization Tendencies Recent tendencies in localization aim at developing a direct link between project management and an in-country single translator for each language, thus reducing the number of agencies, sub-contractors, and intermediates. The senior translator is appointed localization expert in charge of evaluating project size and issues. Depending on the project size, he might decide to set up a localization team made up of professional translators, i.e., experienced native speakers. As the localization expert, he is also responsible for the localization quality.

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

857

Being in-country, he might also pay attention to ethics and make sure that “… The great-nation chauvinism [is] driven away. A worldview that respects every nation, no matter small or big, weak or powerful should be advocated in localization practices.” Because of his direct connection to the project manager, he is able to quickly spot and efficiently resolve potential localization issues. Conclusion When localizing it is essential to remember that “… lack of multicultural savvy attitude cost … millions of dollars” [7]. For a project manager, getting prepared for internationalization would cover these tasks: • Learn to listen to other cultures. • Build a team including (in-country) local

experts. • Provide the team with clear instructions:

localize, don't translate verbatim! • Provide staff with accurate information on

geography, history and ethics. • Reduce the number of intermediates between

management and in-country localization experts.

References [1] www.wordbank.com. [2] LISA, www.lisa.org. [3] Julie Layden. “Localization: Essential for Competing in the Global Marketplace." http://www.fita.org/aotm/0698.html [4] M. Grajewski. “EU Faces Soaring Translation Bill.” www.lisa.org [5] S. Ebben, G. Marshall. “The Localization Process: Globalizing Your Code and Localizing Your Site” Microsoft TecNet. [6] N. Kano. “Developing international software.” http://www.microsoft.com/globaldev/dis_v1/disv1.asp. [7] “How 8 pixels cost Microsoft millions.” The Economic Times Online, 29 August 2004. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-823975,prtpage-1.cms

[8] N. Hoft. “International Interest.” http://www.world-ready.com/r_intl.htm [9] N. Hoft. “German Writing.” http://www.world-ready.com/stcorlando.htm [10] Huatong Sun. “Why Cultural Contexts are Missing: A Rhetorical Critique of Localization Practices." Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Society for Technical Communication, 2002. http://www.stc.org/confproceed/2002/PDFs/STC49-00090.pdf. About the Author Marie-Louise Flacke is a graduate of the American University of Paris (Technical Writing Program). Since 1993, she has been involved in international documentation and her experience in technical communication includes IT, telecoms, network security and aeronautics. She is also proficient in localisation QA, providing content and testing usability of e-documentation. She is Vice President of INTECOM and a member of the French society for Technical Communication (CRT) and of Tekom, Germany. In 2003, she was appointed Judge to the European Technical Documentation Competition. In 2005, she ran several workshops in technical writing at the University of Brest, France (Master's Degree in Technical Writing/Translation).