Including WWA ranking in main translator/interpreter directory search criteria Thread poster: Todd Field
|
|---|
Todd Field 
United States
Local time: 04:37
Member
Portuguese to English
I wonder if WWA ranking could be featured more prominently in the search criteria for translators and interpreters?
I do understand the incentive behind using KudoZ points to boost one’s directory ranking, help colleagues, contribute to glossaries, enhance the site and so on.
Having said that, for an agency or other client seeking an experienced, high-quality, reliable linguist, it seems that WWA is a more meaningful search criterion. These users would find what they ... See more I wonder if WWA ranking could be featured more prominently in the search criteria for translators and interpreters?
I do understand the incentive behind using KudoZ points to boost one’s directory ranking, help colleagues, contribute to glossaries, enhance the site and so on.
Having said that, for an agency or other client seeking an experienced, high-quality, reliable linguist, it seems that WWA is a more meaningful search criterion. These users would find what they want quickly, have a better experience, and have an incentive to return to ProZ in the future.
Something as simple as a “rank by client feedback” option on the initial search page (i.e. not hidden under “more options”) could be a very powerful tool for site users.
What do colleagues and site staff think about this idea? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 03:37
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | Not a good idea | Oct 5, 2013 |
Here is why:
It gives translators who have discovered ProZ.com many years ago an unfair disadvantage over all the other brilliant translators, who happened to sign up only recently, because the new members simply didn't have the opportunity yet to collect much feedback. Or because the other brilliant translators work chiefly for direct clients who don't give feedback on ProZ at all. Ranking should be based on qualification (this includes the number of correct KudoZ answers), not on... See more Here is why:
It gives translators who have discovered ProZ.com many years ago an unfair disadvantage over all the other brilliant translators, who happened to sign up only recently, because the new members simply didn't have the opportunity yet to collect much feedback. Or because the other brilliant translators work chiefly for direct clients who don't give feedback on ProZ at all. Ranking should be based on qualification (this includes the number of correct KudoZ answers), not on the length of membership. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Paul Stevens
Local time: 11:37
Member (2003)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Contradictory | Oct 5, 2013 |
Nicole Schnell wrote:
It gives translators who have discovered ProZ.com many years ago an unfair disadvantage over all the other brilliant translators, who happened to sign up only recently, because the new members simply didn't have the opportunity yet to collect much feedback. Or because the other brilliant translators work chiefly for direct clients who don't give feedback on ProZ at all. Ranking should be based on qualification (this includes the number of correct KudoZ answers), not on the length of membership.
I don't disagree that qualification should be an important factor but stating that it should include the number of correct KudoZ answers totally contradicts the first part of your post!
| | | | Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 03:37
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | Maybe somewhat contradictory at the first glance | Oct 5, 2013 |
Paul Stevens wrote:
I don't disagree that qualification should be an important factor but stating that it should include the number of correct KudoZ answers totally contradicts the first part of your post!
You can approach a client to send you a WWA - approaching colleagues to send you some KudoZ points you can not.
| | |
|
|
|
Paul Stevens
Local time: 11:37
Member (2003)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Applying your own words | Oct 5, 2013 |
Nicole Schnell wrote: Paul Stevens wrote:
I don't disagree that qualification should be an important factor but stating that it should include the number of correct KudoZ answers totally contradicts the first part of your post! You can approach a client to send you a WWA - approaching colleagues to send you some KudoZ points you can not.
Indeed you can, so this is something that the brilliant translators that you mentioned earlier who work chiefly for direct clients also have the opportunity of doing!
Also, if we take your own previous comment that "new members simply didn't have the opportunity yet to collect..." and apply it to KudoZ points, how could you possibly classify that as being "fair" to new members?
| | | | Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 03:37
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | This is still not about KudoZ vs. WWA | Oct 5, 2013 |
Paul Stevens wrote:
Also, if we take your own previous comment that "new members simply didn't have the opportunity yet to collect..." and apply it to KudoZ points, how could you possibly classify that as being "fair" to new members?
Ranking via KudoZ points just happens to be the established system.
Also: That non-member direct clients can provide WWAs has been introduced only very recently, if I am not mistaken.
| | | | | Kudoz and WWA | Oct 5, 2013 |
For some reason, I departed KudoZ and I go there only few times maybe in a month or maybe more. Many other translators simply don't have much time to spend in there. I see KudoZ points are not the most ideal classifying method.
But, I have a suggestion, why ProZ.com don't use both ways, i.e. to let the user choose which way to search. So, they can add an option to enable the user to search either by KudoZ points (as a default, maybe) or by outsources' feedback.
Let me k... See more For some reason, I departed KudoZ and I go there only few times maybe in a month or maybe more. Many other translators simply don't have much time to spend in there. I see KudoZ points are not the most ideal classifying method.
But, I have a suggestion, why ProZ.com don't use both ways, i.e. to let the user choose which way to search. So, they can add an option to enable the user to search either by KudoZ points (as a default, maybe) or by outsources' feedback.
Let me know your thoughts!
BR,
Mohamed ▲ Collapse
| | | | Todd Field
United States
Local time: 04:37
Member
Portuguese to English
TOPIC STARTER | Option to rank by WWA or by KudoZ | Oct 5, 2013 |
I like Mohamed’s suggestion of having an option to rank by WWA or by KudoZ.
Automatic ranking via KudoZ is indeed the established system, but if the system can be improved, why not do so?
WWA is arguably a more practical reflection of a translator’s real-world experience. Anyone with linguistic knowledge and some spare time can invest in accumulating KudoZ points, but only working translators can get WWA feedback.
Imagine a simple “rank by client feed... See more I like Mohamed’s suggestion of having an option to rank by WWA or by KudoZ.
Automatic ranking via KudoZ is indeed the established system, but if the system can be improved, why not do so?
WWA is arguably a more practical reflection of a translator’s real-world experience. Anyone with linguistic knowledge and some spare time can invest in accumulating KudoZ points, but only working translators can get WWA feedback.
Imagine a simple “rank by client feedback” option when a user first opens the Translators and Interpreters Directory. Something like this would be an extremely valuable and powerful tool for real-world users of the directories in search of high-quality, reputable, reliable freelancers. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Todd Field
United States
Local time: 04:37
Member
Portuguese to English
TOPIC STARTER | Also consider the user’s perspective | Oct 5, 2013 |
To put it another way, if you were using the ProZ directories to outsource a job, and had to choose from a list of thousands of individuals, who would you want to contact first: something with 0 WWA and 15,000 KudoZ points, or someone with 50 WWA and 1,000 KudoZ points?
| | | | Helen Shiner
United Kingdom
Local time: 11:37
German to English
+ ...
| The value of Kudoz and client non-disclosure | Oct 5, 2013 |
I work for a lot of clients who would not wish for reasons of confidentiality to provide any indication of our collaboration or, indeed, their collaboration with any other translator. That they continue to come back to me as a trusted translator is enough for me.
Kudoz, on the other hand, is a means of publicly demonstrating your translation abilities and your specialist knowledge. Anyone can check your contribution to Kudoz and judge for themselves. I have gained several key client... See more I work for a lot of clients who would not wish for reasons of confidentiality to provide any indication of our collaboration or, indeed, their collaboration with any other translator. That they continue to come back to me as a trusted translator is enough for me.
Kudoz, on the other hand, is a means of publicly demonstrating your translation abilities and your specialist knowledge. Anyone can check your contribution to Kudoz and judge for themselves. I have gained several key clients in this way. I find this far more reliable than a few sentences from a client, who might just as easily be the friend or colleague of the translator being praised.
I don't want lots of one-off clients who say how great I was to work with and then disappear. I prefer good, solid relationships with fewer numbers of them. Collecting large numbers of WWAs would tend to favour the former scenario.
I would vote for leaving the system as it is. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I completely agree with Helen | Oct 5, 2013 |
Helen Shiner wrote:
I work for a lot of clients who would not wish for reasons of confidentiality to provide any indication of our collaboration or, indeed, their collaboration with any other translator. That they continue to come back to me as a trusted translator is enough for me.
Kudoz, on the other hand, is a means of publicly demonstrating your translation abilities and your specialist knowledge. Anyone can check your contribution to Kudoz and judge for themselves. I have gained several key clients in this way. I find this far more reliable than a few sentences from a client, who might just as easily be the friend or colleague of the translator being praised.
I don't want lots of one-off clients who say how great I was to work with and then disappear. I prefer good, solid relationships with fewer numbers of them. Collecting large numbers of WWAs would tend to favour the former scenario.
I would vote for leaving the system as it is.
I'd like to add that already now there are people who post/boast over 50 WWA on their profile page. If the number of WWA suddenly becomes the magic solution for attracting clients, then I fear a huge race will start with the risk that the entire WWA feature may end up looking very silly indeed.
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 11:37
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| The idea has some merit | Oct 5, 2013 |
I can see some merit in giving potential clients the choice of WWA or KudoZ, but I think the WWA route has more disadvantages than advantages. We're already seeing very many entries on the BB that are highly suspect - we all know they're there. The same would unfortunately be true of WWA too if it became ultra-important. I daresay there are already some bogus entries. Also, I wouldn't want any translators to feel that they have to harass each and every client to give feedback, and I certainly wo... See more I can see some merit in giving potential clients the choice of WWA or KudoZ, but I think the WWA route has more disadvantages than advantages. We're already seeing very many entries on the BB that are highly suspect - we all know they're there. The same would unfortunately be true of WWA too if it became ultra-important. I daresay there are already some bogus entries. Also, I wouldn't want any translators to feel that they have to harass each and every client to give feedback, and I certainly wouldn't do that myself. WWA is really useful for those new clients who want 'references' (which I'm not prepared/able to give), but I don't really see 20+ as being necessarily better than 2 or 3. As Helen says: I don't want lots of one-off clients who say how great I was to work with and then disappear. I prefer good, solid relationships with fewer numbers of them. Collecting large numbers of WWAs would tend to favour the former scenario.
I wish there could be some way of ranking us that takes into account all the easily quantifiable facts: KudoZ statistics (not just points), BrowniZ, WWA, years of experience and ProZ membership, qualifications, "PRO" status, etc, etc. But I have no idea how fair it could be, or whether anyone would support it. You're never going to please all of the translators all of the time. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Tina Vonhof (X)
Canada
Local time: 04:37
Dutch to English
+ ...
| Agree with Helen | Oct 5, 2013 |
I totally agree with Helen. I never ask clients for a WWA comment. Those who have entered one have done so on their own initiative.
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Including WWA ranking in main translator/interpreter directory search criteria | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
