Ten years ago, bilingual lawyers were highly sought after. Today, in certain areas, having only two languages is simply not enough. The change is very clear: lawyers are often now expected to be linguists.

While clients may demand that their lawyers can operate in several languages, lawyers cannot ask the same in return. This means that there is often a requirement for key documents to be translated. Translating requires skill and attention to detail, something lawyers should be good at. But translating also takes time. Even before recent economic events, it rarely made sense for translations to be done at a lawyer's hourly rate. Today, the times when it is sensible and practical for a lawyer to translate anything substantial are few and far between.

There are varying translation requirements amongst firms engaged in or involved with international trade, and there are several ways to meet this need. The ways in which translations are handled have already gone through the first phase of some significant changes, and will continue to change in the coming months and years.
There are three main ways to get translations done: by using juniors in-house, by using an in-house translation team, or by outsourcing. Each has its own distinct advantages and disadvantages, and many firms use a combination of all three.

Using Juniors

The option of using junior lawyers is part of a standard 'pyramid' staffing model. The highest fee earners and business developers at the top of the pyramid are supported by a broader base of junior lawyers, including trainees and interns, who do more of the heavy lifting. Apart from providing an efficient cost structure, this system often produces lawyers who are well trained through what is effectively a long apprenticeship.

Examples of pyramid staffing models vary. For instance, the biggest firms typically have a more evolved structure with specialist support staff. This means a narrower pyramid of actual lawyers, where juniors are not expected to provide the same level of support. Specifically in relation to translations, for example, a relatively new recruit at a top-tier firm, who is already quite expensive, might become resentful if asked to do a lot of translation work over an extended period of time. However, the same level person at a second-tier firm, particularly if there is a wider pyramid creating more internal competition, is likely to show more hunger as well as being cheaper.

In the short term, from the perspective of juniors doing translations work, nothing much will change. There might be some reduction in the amount of work around and, conceivably, some slightly more senior lawyers may be more keen to appear busy by holding on to the kind of work they would otherwise pass along. Certainly, there will be enough resource available to do what is needed.

In the medium term, the shape of the pyramid is likely to distort. Hiring has already slowed. After a couple of years, the base will become too narrow and a bulge will develop in the middle. When the economic cycle eventually picks up, there will be more business but not enough juniors. This will result in an increase of outsourcing to translations agencies. Some of the work will also shift up to the bulge of mid-level lawyers, who may be less motivated to provide support rather than receiving it. However, attrition at this level will likely be welcomed by management, who can replace the mid-level lawyers with cheaper recruits lower in the pyramid.

Eventually, with economic stability, the pyramid will regain its shape and normality will be restored.

In-House Translation Teams

There are real attractions to having a team of dedicated, experienced translators on hand. But such teams are a significant fixed cost. In-house translations teams are therefore most prevalent among the biggest and richest firms, where they are now an all too easy target for cost cutting.

Organisations that require a very high level of physical security for their data have a greater need to keep their translation teams. Several these teams are being taken over by outsourcers - typically groups involved in document life cycle management - to become a 'near site' service. The team is housed in cheaper, but still secure, premises. This is not simply window dressing - it results in genuine cost savings. However, the organisations that really do require this level of physical data security are typically those which routinely handle a lot of price-sensitive information, eg banks. Lawyers have less of a fundamental need to keep in-house translation teams. In the last year or so, a few in-house translations teams have been closed. Of those remaining, some will be aggressively reduced or closed and others will reduce naturally. It is unlikely that any are growing.

In the medium term, when conditions improve, there will be some rebuilding of in-house teams but they are unlikely to return to historic levels. Rebuilding will probably not be a deliberate, consciously implemented strategy; instead, a few lawyers will want to take roles that are less demanding and possibly part-time. Some of these will become translation coordinators, doing the work themselves or outsourcing it in a more controlled and organised way than is the norm today.

Long term, it is unlikely that in-house translation teams will ever be as large as they are today. Work will simply be outsourced.

Outsourcing

Outsourcing to translation agencies has grown in a fairly consistent fashion over recent years. However, the way lawyers and translation agencies work together is undergoing significant changes, and will be virtually unrecognisable ten years from now.

Today, when a lawyer needs something translated and doesn掐 have an internal resource (either because the internal resources are busy or because they simply do not exist), the work gets outsourced. This supplier might be picked from a list, or the lawyer (or a secretary) might simply find and instruct a supplier almost at random. The process is typically very ad hoc.

As the larger firms begin to consider outsourcing more and keeping less in-house resource, there is an increasing focus on the quality of the translation agency. In this respect, Europe has developed faster than Asia. As international work has increased particularly within the EU and also emerging Europe, which together encompass a lot of language pairs, the amount of work being outsourced to translation agencies has increased faster than in Asia. Much of the spending, since it is passed on to clients, has avoided real scrutiny: a firm who estimated their annual spend to be around ?50k discovered it was close to double that amount. Because costs have been going unnoticed, the process has not been the subject of much attention. However, the business is getting too big to ignore, and the lessons currently being learned in Europe will in due course be learned in Asia.

Some of the problems of ad hoc outsourcing are obvious. Does it make sense to haggle over price and deadlines every time? Who knows whether the quality will be good? But some of the less obvious problems are, in fact, much more serious. Almost all agencies rely largely on freelancers because they need to be able to provide capacity in busy times and maintain limited fixed costs during quiet times. A typical agency might have several hundred freelancers on its books. However, very few agencies bother to enter into formal legal relations with their translators. It is an administrative burden and clients almost never check. Even simple due diligence reveals that highly sensitive material is routinely given to people the agency doesn掐 really know, who may or may not be qualified, and who work remotely. It's exactly the kind of framework where accidents might happen.

This will change.

For simple reasons of security and comfort about the quality of service, lawyers will simply insist either on a full-blown tender process or something closely resembling one. There will be some due diligence, volume discounts and service level agreements. Once the process is started, other benefits will also become clear. For instance, as the technology improves, more and more of the bigger translation agencies are using 'translation memory'. Translation memory is essentially a series of computerised bilingual glossaries which help ensure consistency (particularly for terms of art) and, on big projects, make the whole process faster. The translation memory database (which is held by the translation agency but should properly belong to the law firm) gets bigger and more powerful the more it is used; on some jobs it can more than halve turnaround times and reduce costs. This useful bit of intellectual property is easiest to develop with one or two preferred suppliers rather than continuously chopping and changing; a further compelling reason to pick a small number of suppliers and stick with them.

It might take some time - there are after all plenty of other pressing issues - but the path is clear. In five years?time, there will be a smaller number of bigger and more professional agencies. In ten years' time, these translation agencies will dominate market share, and the idea that small unvetted translation agencies can do business with serious law firms will be consigned, where it belongs, to the history books.



Rupert Evans
Director
TranslateMedia Asia
rupert@translatemedia.com

法律文件翻譯： 誰人、哪裡、為何 (Quis, Ubi, Cur)？ 
Rupert Evans評論可供律師事務所選擇的文件翻譯模式， 預計日常和大規模業務的內部翻譯模式將趨於式微。

十年前，雙語律師非常受歡迎。

今天，在某些領域中，僅有兩種語言是不夠的。這種變遷非常明確：現在人們往往期望律師都是語言學家。

儘管客戶可以要求律師能操多國語言，但律師卻不能向客戶提出同樣要求。這意味著，一些重要的文件往往需要進行翻譯。翻譯需要技巧和對細節的關注，這些是律師必須擅長的，但翻譯還需要時間。即使在這一波經濟不景之前，以律師的時薪從事翻譯工作仍顯得相當不划算。今天，需要律師翻譯任何重要文件而又合乎情理和切合實際的情況已不多見。

從事或參與國際貿易的律師事務所對翻譯服務有不同的要求，也有多種方式滿足這些要求。處理翻譯的方式已經歷了第一階段的重大變化，但在今後數個月和數年內還會繼續發生變化。

進行翻譯工作主要有三種方式：由事務所內部初級律師翻譯，由內部翻譯小組翻譯，或透過外判方式處理翻譯工作。每種方式都各有利弊，許多事務所都同時混合採用三種方式。

由初級律師翻譯

由初級律師翻譯是標準的「金字塔」工作模式的一種。收費最高的人員和業務拓展人員位於金字塔的頂端，下面有大批初級律師（包括實習律師和實習生）提供支援，大部分吃力的工作都由後者負責。通過這種長期的學徒式工作模式，除了提供一個有效的成本結構外，亦往往有助初級律師接受良好訓練。

金字塔工作模式隨事務所而異。舉例來說，最大型的事務所通常都有專業支援人員，其金字塔結構更為完善。這意味著金字塔中實際做律師的員工所佔的比例更窄，初級律師不會被要求提供同樣水平的支援，特別是涉及翻譯工作時更是如此。例如，一家頂級事務所中新加入的律師薪酬已經相當高昂，如果要求在一段較長的時間內做大量的翻譯工作，可能會產生不滿的心理。然而，在二線事務所同一情況的律師，特別是如果有一個意在創造更多內部競爭、底層更為寬廣的金字塔時，很可能會表現出更大的競爭。
短期來看，從初級律師處理翻譯工作的角度而言，制度不會有太大的變化。也許工作量會減少一點，並且可以想像，一些較資深的律師可能會更熱衷於表現得很忙碌的樣子，把一些原可不理的工作留給自己做。顯然，事務所有足夠的資源應付需求。

從中期來看，金字塔的形狀可能會被扭曲。招聘新人已經放緩了。幾年後，金字塔的底部會變得過於狹窄，而中間部分卻會膨脹。當經濟週期終於復甦時，業務量亦將上升，但屆時卻沒有足夠的初級律師，這將導致外判給翻譯公司的工作量增加。有些工作也將轉移到處於中間膨脹部分的中層律師，他們可能已不那麼樂於提供支援，而不願接受有關工作。然而，中層律師的這種矛盾心理可能會受到管理層的歡迎，因為他們可用金字塔下層較便宜的新晉律師以代替中層律師。
到了最後，隨著經濟穩定下來，金字塔將會恢復原狀並回到常態。

內部翻譯小組

有一隊專門而經驗豐富的翻譯小組隨時候命當然好，但是，這樣的小組要花相當高的固定費用。因此，內部翻譯小組通常只在最大型和財力最雄厚的事務所才有，在現今經濟環境疲弱的情況下，他們很容易成為削減成本的目標。

那些對數據的實體安全有很高要求的機構，對擁有自己的翻譯團隊有較大需求。部分此類翻譯小組正被外判公司所取代－通常是那些涉及文件生命週期管理的小組－從而成為「近站」（near site）服務。翻譯小組被安排在一個更便宜但更安全的場地工作。這不僅是門面功夫，而是切切實實地節省成本。然而，確實需要這個級數的實體數據安全的機構通常是那些經常處理大量價格敏感資料的機構，如銀行。至於律師，對擁有一隊內部翻譯小組則沒有那麼迫切的需求。在過去一年左右，一些內部翻譯小組已被解散。剩下來的翻譯小組，一些會被大幅裁員或被解散，另一些會自然流失。增長幾乎已不大可能。

從中期來看，當經濟環境好轉，內部翻譯小組會有一定程度的重建，但要恢復到過往的水平似乎不太可能。重建極可能是非故意的、非自覺執行的策略；相反，一些律師可能想接手一些要求不那麼嚴苛、又可以兼職的工作。他們當中有些會成為翻譯協調主任、自己做翻譯或以一種比現時做法更受控制和更有系統的方式進行外判。
長遠來說，內部翻譯小組的規模不太可能會像今天這麼大。翻譯工作將會完全外判。

外判

近幾年，將翻譯工作外判給翻譯公司已蔚然成風。然而，律師和翻譯公司協作的方式正在發生重大變化，十年後的情況更會截然不同。
今天，當一名律師需要進行一些翻譯而沒有內部資源時（或許因為內部資源無暇處理或是事務所內部根本沒有資源），就會將工作外判。這些服務供應商可能只是從一個名單中挑選出來的，或可能由律師（或秘書）隨意尋找並委任某一供應商。這個過程往往是非常隨意和臨時的。

隨著大型事務所開始考慮將更多工作外判，以保持較少的內部資源，他們對翻譯公司的質素也越來越關注。在這方面，歐洲的發展速度比亞洲更快。由於國際工作增加了，特別是歐盟內部和不斷冒起的歐洲小國，它們包括了許多語言組別，外判給翻譯公司的工作量增長速度亦因此比亞洲快。由於有關翻譯的大部分開支都是轉嫁給客戶的，因此事務所對此都沒有嚴格監督：一家事務所曾估計每年的翻譯費用約在25萬英鎊左右，後來卻發現實際費用要高一倍。由於費用一直被忽略，這個過程並沒有受到太多的重視。然而，有關業務越來越不容忽視，現在歐洲所學到的教訓，在適當的時候也將在亞洲重演。

臨時外判的某些問題是顯而易見的。每一次都要討價還價和商討截稿期限的做法是否合宜？誰來審查質素的好壞？事實上，一些較不顯眼的問題其實情況更為嚴重。幾乎所有的翻譯公司都主要依賴特約翻譯員，因為他們必須能夠在繁忙的時段提供人員，但在淡市時又能維持有限的固定費用。一家典型的翻譯公司在其資料庫裡可能有幾百名特約翻譯員，然而，只有少數翻譯公司會與他們的翻譯員正式簽訂法律關係文件。此舉是一種行政負擔，而且客戶幾乎從不檢查。只要做一下簡單的盡職審查，即可發現翻譯公司經常將高度敏感的材料發給了不熟知的人處理，他們可能符合資格，也可能不合格，並且他們都是遙距工作。正是這種工作模式導致事故可能發生。

這種情況將會改變。

出於對安全和對服務品質信賴的簡單原因，律師將堅持只用發展成熟的招標程序或類似程序。另外還加上一些盡職審查、大量折扣和服務水平協議。一旦啟動了程序，其他好處也變得更明顯。舉例來說，隨著科技的提升，越來越多的大型翻譯公司正在使用「翻譯記憶」。翻譯記憶基本上是一系列的電腦化雙語詞典，以助確保一致性（特別是專業詞彙），並且在處理大型項目時使整個過程加快。翻譯記憶數據庫（由翻譯公司持有，但應歸屬於律師事務所）用得愈多，容量愈大、功效愈強；某些工作可減少一半以上的周轉時間和降低成本。只使用一家或兩家首選供應商而非不斷轉換供應商，將較容易累積這種有用的知識產權；這是另一個重大理由只選擇小量供應商，並一直聘用他們。

這可能需要一段時間來建立－畢竟還有許多其他緊迫的問題要處理－但卻是一個明確要走的方向。五年內，更大、更專業的翻譯公司的數目將愈來愈少。十年內，這些翻譯公司將會主導市場份額，而小型、未經過檢驗的翻譯公司將再難以從要求嚴格的律師事務所取得業務，它們將在相關市場中消聲滅跡。



Rupert Evans
總監
TranslateMedia Asia
rupert@translatemedia.com