Introduction

During the J-term semester of my studies at MIIS, I was able to attend the intensive 4-day workshop on Translation Management Systems taught by Adam Wooten. The purpose of the course was to introduce the concept of a translation management system (TMS), explain the application to the translation industry, and give us hands-on experience using different TMS’s. Our goal was to become familiar navigating and implementing a TMS to prepare us for future encounters with these systems. I was previously not aware that there were specific content management systems designed for the language industry. Some of the most popular systems have come from large language service providers as they needed improved organization methods in their growth. Rather than find a CMS or TMS and reprogram it to meet their specific goals and needs, LSP’s would rather invest in creating their own systems in the exact way they want.

The two system’s we were exposed to through the course of the workshop were SDL WorldServer and GlobalLink from TransPerfect. Though varying greatly in complexity and design, both of these TMS’s were designed by their respective companies to meet their specific needs. As part of our course we were given the task of comparing these two systems and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses.

TMS Comparison Assignment

In order to decide which TMS was best, we had to create a system with which we could rank the systems. We came up with six categories that we would measure the systems against each other. Each of the categories would represent a respective stakeholder within our “company”. As we had six people in our group, we all acted as each of the stakeholders and were tasked with deciding what two items would be most important to that stakeholder. In a real life scenario, we figured the situation would be the same: each stakeholder would have a say from his or her respective department, then the manager overseeing the committee would hear out all the respective parties and present a scorecard to the upper management to help them with deciding on a specific system to implement. Our scoring system worked as follows:

We ranked each of the categories based on this rubric. Most scores fell well within the listed numbers, but some still fell outside of this range. As far as a passing score, it would be safe to say that these scores represented grades A through F respectively.

As can be seen in the results, we felt that WorldServer fit our needs much more than GlobalLink. GlobalLink is very complex and can as a result is much more detailed, but when put into practice, WorldServer was successful and included the specific details we preferred.

Comparison for a real client

This comparison project was only the beginning of our comparison work. As our final project, our entire class was combined into one consulting firm. Our commission: to consult an LSP on which TMS they should implement. During our initial interview, we were told the criteria by which we should decide which TMS solution would be best. We were suggested three main solutions and then divided up into sub-groups based on the solutions we were to research. The solutions were XTRF, Plunet, and XTM.

Each group conducted an extensive evaluation of their respective TMS using the scoring rubric seen below.

My group focused on XTRF and how effective it would be managing a LSP as a TMS.