Day: June 5, 2018

2018 European Language Industry Survey Results

2018 European Language Industry Survey Results

GALA published the 2018 survey results for European Language Industry. In the preamble, it appears to be one of the most successful  surveys from its kind.

With 1285 responses from 55 countries, including many outside Europe, this 2018 edition of the European Language Industry survey is the most successful one since its start in 2013.

This report analyses European trends rather than those in individual countries. Significant differences between countries will be highlighted if the number of answers from those countries is sufficiently high to draw meaningful conclusions.

Objectives of This Survey

The objectives of the survey have not changed compared to previous editions. It was not set up to gather exact quantitative data but to establish the mood of the industry. As such it does not replace other local, regional or global surveys of the language industry but adds the important dimensions of perception and trust which largely determine the actions of industry stakeholders.

The questions concerning the market as well as the open questions regarding trends and concerns are identical to those in the previous editions in order to detect changes in prevailing opinions.

The survey results report covers many aspect in the language industry. We chose the below aspects to highlight on:

Certification Requirements 

Companies report an increase in certification requirements in 2017 and consequently adjust their expectations for 2018 upward. Although most responding companies expect the requirements to stay at the current level, 25% of them expect an increase. Nobody is expecting a decrease.


Security Requirements

According to the respondents, the real increase in security requirements exceeded even the 2017 expectations, which led them to further increase their expectations for 2018.

Operational Practices

Outsourcing remains a popular practice among language service companies, with 40% indicating that they want to increase this practice. Only 2% report a decrease. Even more popular is MT post-editing this year. 37% report an increase and an additional 17% indicate that they are starting this practice.

Crowdsourcing and offshoring, both often debated in language industry forums, remain slow starters. This year 5% of the companies report to start with crowdsourcing and 4% to increase their use of this practice. Offshoring has already a slightly higher penetration and 11% of the
companies report to increase this practice, compared to 5% in 2017. An additional 3% want to start with the practice.

Note: the graph above does not represent actual usage of the practices, but the level of their expected development, determined as follows: [start * 2] + [increase] – [stop * 2] – [decrease].

Technology

Machine Translation

We will remember 2018 as the year in which more than 50% of both the companies and the individual language professionals reported that they are using MT in one form or another.

The technology cannot yet be considered mainstream, because only 22% of the LSC’s and 19% of the individuals state that they are using it daily, but the number of companies and individuals that are not using it at all has dropped to respectively 31% and 38%.

This does not mean that MT users are enthusiastically embracing the technology, as the answers in the section about negative trends testify, but it is a strong indication that the market has accepted that machine translation is here to stay.

The survey results also show that using MT does not necessarily mean investing in MT. The most popular engine is still the free Google Translate. 52% of all respondents report that they are using the site, but we see a clear difference between the various categories of respondents. While more than 70% of the respondents in training institutes report that they are using the site, only 49% of the translation companies and 52% of the individual translators state the same.

CAT and Terminology Tools

This year’s results confirm the 2017 statement that the use of CAT tools is clearly more widespread in language service companies than in the individual professionals’ community. Less than 1% of the companies report that they are not using CAT tools, compared to 13% of the
individual language professionals.

This year the survey tried to ascertain the level of competition on the CAT market. The survey results indicate that this CAT landscape is becoming more complex, but they also show that the SDL/TRADOS product suite still has a leading position in terms of installed base,
with 67% of the respondents using one or more versions of the product (ranging from 56% of the training institutes to 79% of the translation companies).

MemoQ can currently be considered as the most serious contender, with approx. 40% penetration. The top 5 is completed with Memsource, Wordfast and Across, which all remain below the 30% installed base mark.

Not surprisingly, Multiterm (the terminology tool linked with the SDL/Trados suite) is the most popular terminology tool around – except for the basic Office-type tools that are used 50% more often than Multiterm, which itself is used 6 times more often than the next in line.

Translation Management Systems

The level of penetration of translation management systems in language service companies has not significantly changed compared to 2017, with 76% of the responding companies using some type of management system.

The most popular 3rd party system in this category is Plunet, followed by XTRF. SDLTMS on the other hand seems to be more often selected by training institutes and translation departments.

Recruitment and Training

Skill Level of  New-Master Level Graduates

The results below refer to training institutes, translation companies and translation departments (359 respondents).

A majority of these respondents rate all skills of new graduates as either sufficiently developed or very well developed. Translation tool skills score lowest, despite the stronger cooperation between universities and translation professionals, and the efforts made by translation tool
providers.

10 to 15% used the “not applicable” answer, which indicates that the person who completed the survey is not involved in recruitment and therefore was not comfortable giving an opinion.

Investment in Training or Professional Development

Which Type of Training Have You Organized or Attended in 2017?

The following chart presents the popularity of the various types of training across all respondent types.

Not surprisingly, the respondents representing training institutes, translation companies and translation departments report a higher than average number of trainings organised or followed. Given the importance of lifelong learning, the 15% respondents that did not organise or follow any training in 2017 can – and should – be considered as a wakeup call for the industry at large.

Return on Investment

Training institutions, translation companies and translation departments report a considerably higher impact of training on their performance than the individual professionals, which make up most of the respondents.

Trends for The Industry 

In this edition of the survey, the open question about trends that will dominate the industry has been split to allow the respondents to distinguish between positive and negative trends.

The fact that both language service companies and individual professionals see price pressure as a prevailing negative trend but at the same time expect a status quo on pricing indicates that they are fairly confident that they will be able to withstand the pressure.

Across the board, the increase of translation demand is the most often cited positive trend for 2018, with 16% of the respondents. Advances in technology in general (including CAT), machine translation, increased professionalism and a higher awareness by the market of the importance of language services complete the top 5. Interesting to note is that quite a few respondents, in particular individual professionals, expect that the lack of quality of machine translation can lead to an increased appreciation for the quality of human translation.

That same machine translation clearly remains the number 2 among the negative trends, almost always correlated with the factor price pressure. The traditional fear that machine translation opens the door to lower quality and more competition by lower qualified translators and translation companies remains strong.

The report also includes some insights. We chose the below insights to highlight on:

1-  Most European language service companies (LSCs) can be considered to be small.
2-  The number of individual language professionals that work exclusively as subcontractors decreases with growing revenue.

3-  Legal services remain undisputedly the most widely served type of customer for both respondent types; companies and individuals. 

4-  Machine Translation engines that require financial or time investment have difficulty to attract more than minority interest.

5-  Except for “client terms and conditions” and “insufficient demand”, language service companies score all challenges higher than individual professionals.

Conclusion

This 2018 edition of the European Language Industry survey reinforces the positive image that could already be seen in the 2017 results. Virtually all parameters point to higher confidence in the market, from expected sales levels, recruitment plans and investment intentions to the expectation that 2018 prices will be stable.

2018 is clearly the year of machine translation. This is the first year that more than half of the respondents declare that they are using the technology in one way or another. On the other hand, it is too soon to conclude that MT is now part of the translation reality, with only some
20% of the language service companies and independent language professionals reporting daily usage. Neural MT has clearly not yet brought the big change that the market is expecting.

Changes to the technology questions are giving us a better view of the actual use of CAT, MT and other technologies by the various categories of respondents. New questions about internships have brought us additional insights in the way that the market is looking upon this
important tool to bridge the gap between the universities and the professional world.

Reference: http://bit.ly/2HOJEpx