Translation productivity tells you how fast a translation was completed. It’s used to profile translators and post-editors, to set prices, compare vendors, to categorize content or evaluate MT engine output.
However, not everybody agrees productivity is the best way to track a vendor’s performance, irrespective of this vendor being an LSP or a translator.
The Naysayers
Those in the naysayers’ camp feel that there are too many variables to take into account for productivity to be a reliable measurement. Some companies argue their relationship with their vendors is built on trust and therefore don’t see a reason to use metrics to track productivity or quality.
Then there’s the concept of productivity itself. As Steve Richardson pointed out during TAUS Annual Conference 2015:“[If] we measure the productivity and use a software application to monitor the time for translation, we need to revisit the concept of translation time.
In the past, translators did research, looked up words in a dictionary and learned new concepts during the process of translation. Many of them did not differentiate the time of translating from the time of learning and researching.
If translators use a quality assurance platform such as the TAUS DQF (Quality Dashboard), which differentiates these two types of activities, ultimately their working habits will change and they may also have a strong motivation to separate the time of learning from the time of translating.”
On 5 September between 4 - 5 p.m. CEST, during the first TAUS Twitter Chat, we will discuss translation productivity. Want to join the debate? Keep an eye on the hashtag #tauschat or leave your name and email address to receive reminders.
For an overview of the #tauschat rules and guidelines, please visit our website.