Agency in translation – then and now

 

Yesterday’s business models no longer work. Once-great retail companies have given way to even bigger newcomers applying modern ways of doing business. On the other side of the equation, customers, once content to go to the local store, now search online. The translation business is no different. Two decades ago, the dominant model for connecting translation purchasers with translators was through agencies of all different sizes. Today, paradoxically, agencies have become global, but numerous customers are increasingly going direct to the translators. The effect on both the service providers and purchasers is significant.

When I began translating in 2004, the business approach for both linguists and the purchasers of their products was quite clear and defined the production chain. Translation agencies of varying sizes, from small local one-person offices to regional or national companies, built up a pool of translators to allow them to provide a specific language-combination solution for their standard job requests. Each agency sought the best translator willing to work at their rate level according to the market rates and chosen business strategy, e.g., boutique and low-cost. Few translators had the skill or even felt the need to market services directly to their potential clients, trusting that the agencies would handle the marketing. For the translator, it meant that finding customers involved contacting as many agencies as possible with the hope of receiving the first job, which would prove their skill and reliability and lead to steady work. For the customer, it was a matter of a simple Google search for an appropriate agency and some price comparison. Life was simple and somehow satisfactory.

Since then, both translation agencies and customers have changed. Global LSPs (language service providers) have purchased countless local and regional agencies and created a market of relatively few worldwide companies, some of them publicly owned, e.g., RWS and TransPerfect. For the most part, these huge corporations apply a high-volume, low-margin business model, driving rates down for both the translator and customer, with the expected effect on quality. The global translation business has become similar to Walmart, i.e., low prices for the customers and low profit margins for the suppliers. On the other side, the new generation of translator purchasers, both general and business, feels comfortable directly searching for their providers, increasingly with the help of AI. They are able to locate an appropriate translator properly situated on the Internet. Contacting an agency is not a default choice.

This change has dramatically impacted both translators and their customers. For translators, it creates two distinct paths for financial success. They can either work with the large agencies at low rates and be efficient enough to make a living. Alternatively, they can opt to invest in marketing and attain direct, higher-paying customers. Admittedly, it is not an all-or-nothing situation. Most professional translator shave clients of both types, but one type dominates. As for the purchasers, those customers with specific quality or certification requirements now invest their time in finding qualified providers. They seek those that choose to bypass the agencies, i.e., they prefer direct sales. The two business dialogues differ greatly.

To be clear, change is never total. Older business models continue to exist and sometimes even thrive long after a new one has supposedly superseded it. In translation, given that the quantity of paid translation continues to increase (despite AI), working with agencies remains a viable option on condition that the translator can produce sufficient volume at the demanded quality. On the other hand, the search for deep-pocketed customers is relentless and challenging in terms of the effort required to find and retain them as they demand value, quite justifiably. Translators choosing this path must legitimately believe in themselves. In the meantime, these are the two major options for linguists and their companies. Of course, for complicated multi-language projects, agencies will remain the best option. Still, how many agencies will exist in twenty years is an open question.