| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Blueboard: Please stop misusing it! Thread poster: Tomás Cano Binder, BA, CT
|
|---|
Robert Forstag 
United States
Local time: 06:11
Spanish to English
+ ...
Tomás Cano Binder, BA, CT wrote:
Dear fellow colleagues,
May I kindly ask everyone to reconsider posting positive Blueboard entries when you have only done one small job for a certain customer?
A customer owes me over US$ 1000 for months and their Blueboard score is now artificially high because several people who did one single small job for this person decided that their tiny, but positive experience was worth sharing with everyone.
Please, stop entering Blueboard entries about companies you have no history with! It really does not help! High scores for tiny jobs paid quickly launder the record of companies that pay small jobs quickly, but big jobs very slowly, if at all!
Best,
Tomás
As I am sure you yourself realize, the positive ratings in question were quite possibly posted at the behest of the outsourcer (and for the specific purpose of neutralizing your own negative rating).
This raises the interesting question of what a translator should do when faced with a request by an outsourcer to post a rating after doing a single small job.
I think there are two basic choices:
1.
Politely decline, and state that you will be happy to provide a rating after you have done several more jobs for the client [or set specific criteria in terms of number of jobs or time elapsed].
2.
Go ahead and provide the rating, but make it clear in your comment that the rating is based on a single small job.
| | | | SirReaL
Germany
Local time: 12:11
English to Russian
+ ...
I only post a Blue Board score for an agency after I've done multiple jobs for them and can vouch for them (or justifiably knock them down). Like you, Tomas, I wish everyone did the same.
| | | | | Practice is very different from theory. | Nov 3, 2017 |
There is really no point in having five different grades on the Blue Board.
I have said this several times, and people agree, but it is difficult to go against the majority!
In theory, only really super outsourcers should have 5-ratings.
Average, paying on time, no problems agencies should be given 3 or 4.
But for some reason, agencies do not like being given less than 5. A single small, problem-free job, prompt payment and a couple of courteous mails, do no... See more There is really no point in having five different grades on the Blue Board.
I have said this several times, and people agree, but it is difficult to go against the majority!
In theory, only really super outsourcers should have 5-ratings.
Average, paying on time, no problems agencies should be given 3 or 4.
But for some reason, agencies do not like being given less than 5. A single small, problem-free job, prompt payment and a couple of courteous mails, do not really justify a top rating alone.
Did the agency ask you about your rate, and did they accept a realistic fee for the job? Or did they impose their 'budget', take it or leave it?
Did they offer a good deadline, or agree to negotiate if you could not manage the date they suggested?
If appropriate, could they provide reference material or suggest where you could find it? Do they provide TMs and glossaries if relevant?
Would they be able to help with special terminology if you needed help, or if it was much easier to ask the client than spending hours trawling the Internet and guessing?
Do they send the text in a format that is easy to work in, or pay extra if you need to spend extra time on formatting?
*** Is it easy to get hold of source texts and deliver the translation, and is it easy to send your invoice, or do you have to spend a lot of time struggling with a bureaucratic portal, just to get the job, deliver it and get paid? ***
That kind of thing deserves consideration for a 5-rating, but if you have already given a 5, just because they actually sent you a few peanuts on time, the Blue Board does not distinguish the really good outsourcers from the bottom feeders.
[Edited at 2017-11-03 14:55 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 11:11
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Surely it should be on the basis of adequate experience | Nov 3, 2017 |
Robert Forstag wrote:
I think there are two basic choices:
1.
Politely decline, and state that you will be happy to provide a rating after you have done several more jobs for the client [or set specific criteria in terms of number of jobs or time elapsed].
2.
Go ahead and provide the rating, but make it clear in your comment that the rating is based on a single small job.
I've chosen to do (1) on a number of occasions. One thing I won't be drawn on is the tit-for-tat request from agencies: I'll give you WWA feedback if you'll give us a good LWA rating! Instead, I make a note to do it after the next invoice (or several). Nowadays, I rarely give any sort of BB entry after a first job, as I simply don't now how things are going to pan out. I've several times experienced outsourcers who pay the first invoice very quickly, and the second far more slowly. I really think that's a policy decision for some agencies. But some clients are so good that they deserve recognition; and fellow freelancers need to be warned about a few others.
Some of my entries (an increasing percentage, I think) have been in response to a request for feedback - the email notification I get every day from the BB. I don't know how many people get them.
| | |
|
|
|
Daniel Frisano
Italy
Local time: 12:11
Member (2008)
English to Italian
+ ...
| Reciprocity (as in When You're Good to Mama) | Nov 3, 2017 |
Christine Andersen wrote:
In theory, only really super outsourcers should have 5-ratings.
Average, paying on time, no problems agencies should be given 3 or 4.
But for some reason, agencies do not like being given less than 5.
Imagine this:
**
In theory, only really super professionals should have 5-ratings.
Average, delivering on time, no problems translators should be given 3 or 4.
But for some reason, translators do not like being given less than 5.
**
Would you be happy to be given a 3 out of 5 for a well-done job?
| | | | | It depends on what you are rating | Nov 3, 2017 |
Christine Andersen wrote:
In theory, only really super outsourcers should have 5-ratings.
Average, paying on time, no problems agencies should be given 3 or 4.
[Edited at 2017-11-03 14:55 GMT]
The number we give denotes our "Likelihood to Work Again" for the outsourcer. Therefore if 5 means I am definitely willing to work for them again and 1 means I wouldn't go near them with the proverbial barge pole, surely 2, 3 or 4 relate to whether I would be willing to work for them under certain circumstance. 4, for instance, might mean I would do work they provided I have time to spare, 3 if I have a really lean patch and 2 if I am desperate because I have had no work so far this month. Of course this will be directly linked to whether they are super, average or bad to work for. But even if they are not super you might be perfectly happy to work for them and can justify giving them a 5 because you are. True perfection is, after all, very hard to find.
| | | | Tina Vonhof (X)
Canada
Local time: 04:11
Dutch to English
+ ...
| Jenny's suggestion | Nov 3, 2017 |
I think Jenny makes an excellent suggestion: when entering a rating on the BB, you should be asked how many jobs you did for this outsourcer and that number should appear in a separate column beside your comment.
I would also suggest refraining from mentioning the specific PM(s) you worked with. PMs come and go and some are nicer/easier to work with than others. Those comments don't mean much after a year or two. You are asked to rate the company as a whole, not the PMs specifically... See more I think Jenny makes an excellent suggestion: when entering a rating on the BB, you should be asked how many jobs you did for this outsourcer and that number should appear in a separate column beside your comment.
I would also suggest refraining from mentioning the specific PM(s) you worked with. PMs come and go and some are nicer/easier to work with than others. Those comments don't mean much after a year or two. You are asked to rate the company as a whole, not the PMs specifically. In your final email, or when you confirm receipt of payment, you can let them know that you enjoyed working with them, etc.
[Edited at 2017-11-03 16:44 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 06:11
Spanish to English
+ ...
| LWA not an adequate basis for rating | Nov 3, 2017 |
Sarah Lewis-Morgan wrote:
The number we give denotes our "Likelihood to Work Again" for the outsourcer. Therefore if 5 means I am definitely willing to work for them again and 1 means I wouldn't go near them with the proverbial barge pole, surely 2, 3 or 4 relate to whether I would be willing to work for them under certain circumstance. 4, for instance, might mean I would do work they provided I have time to spare, 3 if I have a really lean patch and 2 if I am desperate because I have had no work so far this month. ...
This is really the root of the problem, since, while they certainly overlap, "LWA" is far from identical to "quality of experience/performance."
After all, I may be highly likely to work again with an agency whose rates I consider less than optimal, whose project managers I regard as immature and unprofessional, whose payment terms strike me as uncomfortably long, and whose communication (in terms of timeliness and transparency) frequently leaves me feeling exasperated.
Surely at least some of you reading this have been less than deliriously happy with agencies that you have accepted work from on a regular basis, and that you do not regard as deserving of stellar quality ratings.
[Edited at 2017-11-03 17:36 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 04:11
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Yes, excellent suggestion | Nov 3, 2017 |
Tina Vonhof wrote:
I think Jenny makes an excellent suggestion: when entering a rating on the BB, you should be asked how many jobs you did for this outsourcer and that number should appear in a separate column beside your comment.
| | | |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
I agree that a BB comment and score made after doing only one job for an outsourcer is not very meaningful.
As Proz is at present introducing all kinds of "improvements" to its various facilities, I'm sure that an improvement to this aspect of the BB would not be beyond its capabilities.
For example, people making BB entries could be asked to indicate how many jobs they have done for the outsourcer according to a range such as:
* 1
* 2
* 5 to 10
* More than 10.
Another platform concerning the payment practices of outsourcers requires something of that kind when entries are made.
It would certainly make BB entries, both positive and negative, more meaningful and hence make the BB a more useful and reliable guide.
What about it, Proz hackathoners?
Good suggestion. Well do something along those lines.
Have a nice weekend everyone!
| | | | Thayenga
Germany
Local time: 12:11
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
| 1 job is not enough | Nov 4, 2017 |
Providing a "5" BB entry after only a single job doesn't mean anything. It's almost like those tit-for-tat entries.
In order to provide a more accurate picture, BB entries should only be made after a minimum of, let's say, 5 completed and timely paid projects to reflect a certain consistency of an existing/on-going business relationship, and not just a mere mayfly.
IMO misuse equals abuse, and should not be tolerated. It's always good to "accept" BB entries with the req... See more Providing a "5" BB entry after only a single job doesn't mean anything. It's almost like those tit-for-tat entries.
In order to provide a more accurate picture, BB entries should only be made after a minimum of, let's say, 5 completed and timely paid projects to reflect a certain consistency of an existing/on-going business relationship, and not just a mere mayfly.
IMO misuse equals abuse, and should not be tolerated. It's always good to "accept" BB entries with the required grain of salt. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Use/misuse of the BB | Nov 4, 2017 |
I fully agree with all those translators in favour of using the BB only once you have done several jobs for a company, or a big job, and been paid on time. Some companies are very clever, assigning small jobs, worth a few euros, which they will pay without any problem and when it comes to jobs worth several hundreds or thousands, they all of a sudden become bad payers. Big jobs or repeat jobs become an indication, not an occasional small one. If some colleagues do not understand that, it is a re... See more I fully agree with all those translators in favour of using the BB only once you have done several jobs for a company, or a big job, and been paid on time. Some companies are very clever, assigning small jobs, worth a few euros, which they will pay without any problem and when it comes to jobs worth several hundreds or thousands, they all of a sudden become bad payers. Big jobs or repeat jobs become an indication, not an occasional small one. If some colleagues do not understand that, it is a real pity and lack of professionalism. We are not living in a world where translators give Brownie points to a company hoping to get assigned further jobs and if they believe that, they may be in for a few unpleasant surprises. I would have expected more grown-up and professional behaviour. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson wrote:
One thing I won't be drawn on is the tit-for-tat request from agencies: I'll give you WWA feedback if you'll give us a good LWA rating!
Good, and I hope others do the same. This isn't backscratching, it's on the road to blackmail. But I'm not naïve and I know it happens. Just like to applaud those who don't give into it... and like to continue to believe that we are in the majority.
A number of positive scores and comments would not make me feel entirely sure of anyone. I admit that a couple of rotten scores and comments are highly likely to dissuade me totally. Tversky and Kahneman would not be very proud of me, but I think they might understand! *
For something like the BlueBoard to work, the rules need to be respected and lots of (recent) scores and comments need to be entered for it to make sense. There is merit in its existence, as there is in a willingness to take on board suggestions made for improvement.
* Read Kahneman's "Thinking, fast and slow".
[Edited at 2017-11-04 16:47 GMT]
| | | | | Entries won´t be observed at all | Nov 5, 2017 |
Today I again received one of the numerous "New Blue Board Outsourcer Entry Alerts" for a German agency (based in Cologne with a name related to the river Cologne is situated at, for more details please send me a message) with which I made special experiences regarding payment in 2011. Their average rating is about 2,5 in general and 1,4 for the past 12 month. Although their series of negative entries doesn´t stop, they still find freelancers, even established ones with premium degrees and a pr... See more Today I again received one of the numerous "New Blue Board Outsourcer Entry Alerts" for a German agency (based in Cologne with a name related to the river Cologne is situated at, for more details please send me a message) with which I made special experiences regarding payment in 2011. Their average rating is about 2,5 in general and 1,4 for the past 12 month. Although their series of negative entries doesn´t stop, they still find freelancers, even established ones with premium degrees and a proz membership of 10 years and more. What does this tell us? (See above) ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Please forgive me for I have sinned | Nov 5, 2017 |
Yes, I admit that I have used the BB for occasional or one-off jobs, BUT I usually say how many projects I have done for that outsourcer…
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Blueboard: Please stop misusing it! | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
