Why Localization Standards Matter Even if You Think

Why Localization Standards Matter, Even if You Think They Don’t Localization World Silicon Valley 11 October 2011

Imagine a world without standards

Session Agenda Business impact • Why organizations care Standards players • Who cares Standards scope • What they care about Actions • What you can do next

Experts David Filip, LRC/CNGL Patrick Guillemin, ETSI Arle Lommel, GALA Jaap Van Der Meer, TAUS

Session goals Entice Interest in understanding Educate Awareness of issues and possibilities Encourage Insight into local applicability Engage Impact on global business performance

We will not. . . �Pass judgment on what standards are good or bad. �We suggest a free market approach. �Preach about which standards are most important. �Pain points vary widely. �Argue about approaches �Panelists are happy to pick up discussions for those who are interested. �Attempt to sort out overlapping initiatives. �See “free market approach” above.

Business Impact Why organizations care

Business maladies Symptom Cause Inefficient processes Too much manual work, too many hand-offs in the workflow, lack of cross-functional collaboration High costs Too much manual work, redundancy of effort, no term management Can’t adopt latest and greatest technology Burdensome migration costs Failure to capitalize on new regional opportunities Inability to scale, lack of automation and integration

Language afterthought syndrome � Time to market delays � Inefficiencies due to redundant translations � Content that should be reusable but isn’t � High customer support costs due to mediocre quality of translated content � Time and money to retrofit translated content to meet regulatory requirements � Time and money to deliver content for incompatible consumer devices � Maxed out language capability, constrained by non-scalable globalization infrastructures � Inconsistent and out-of-synch multichannel communications � Mysterious localization and translation costs Multilingual Product Content: Transforming Traditional Practices Into Global Content Value Chains, Gilbane Group, 2009 Outsell’s Gilbane Services

Standards as a pain reliever Obstacles to improving content globalization practices Lack of cross-functional process/collabortion Fast timelines for marketing content Lack of resources Lack of education/visibility Technology issues/integration Poor content quality Lack of project mgt/insight Multilingual Marketing Content: Growing International Business with Global Content Value Chains, February 2011, Outsell’s Gilbane Services 10

Standards as a pain reliever Obstacles to improving content globalization practices Lack of cross-functional process/collabortion Fast timelines for marketing content Lack of resources Lack of education/visibility Technology issues/integration Poor content quality Lack of project mgt/insight Multilingual Marketing Content: Growing International Business with Global Content Value Chains, February 2011, Outsell’s Gilbane Services 11

Global Content Value Chain Strategy Practices Infrastructure (People, Process, Technology) Impact Create Manage and Store Publish and Deliver Enrich with Metadata Optimize Competencies Collaborate Measure and Improve Audience engagement Consume and Contribute Customer satisfaction Content-Driven Business Value Core Content Functions Localize and Translate Market expansion Revenue growth Profit increases Risk management Brand consistency Multilingual Marketing Content: Growing International Business with Global Content Value Chains, February 2011, Outsell’s Gilbane Services

One standard, multiple impacts “A new localization/translation strategy could leverage the principles behind product and content componentization and deliver its own innovation in parallel. Just as [management] knew that component content management (CCM) would be key to handling the level of reuse complexity within the planned DITA library, [the localization manager] knew it could also help alleviate the pain of the ‘multilingual multiplier’ – the phenomenon of financial impact due solely to the cost of delivering content in another language. Some source topics would need to be translated to all languages, some to just a portion; in all, each topic could be translated into two to 20 languages. Without an integrated approach to translation management within the proposed CCM, the environment would simply not scale for global growth. ” -- The FICO Formula for Agile Global Expansion, Gilbane Group, 2009

Standards Players Who cares

Participants (partial) � Siemens � Intel � IBM � Nokia � Tektronix � Fuji/Xerox � Cisco � Oracle � Alcatel-Lucent � Nikon � Dell � SONY � Microsoft � Yahoo � Adobe � Rockwell Automation � HP � Trend Micro

Standards Scope What they care about

Questions for the panel?

Open standard, what does that mean? Open Transparent Restricted RF (F)RAND Open-open has full open source reference implementation May still produce “world class” standards but in fact Proprietary

IP Policy 1 �Patrick says: FRAND RF

IP Policy 2 �David says: FRAND RF

IP Policy 3 �Even if Patrick is right Animal Dolphin