Inaccurate translations are always embarrassing, but in some industries, they can also be extremely detrimental. In the automotive industry, for example, a highly complex, optimized network of hundreds of players depends on perfect communication. Inaccuracies can have serious consequences here.
How many parts do you think does an average car have? McKinsey counted them two years ago and came up with roughly 20,000 individual parts per car. But the following figure is even more remarkable: According to the consultancy study, global automotive manufacturers can be linked to more than 18,000 different suppliers.
There’s no question that these figures are significantly lower in the field of electromobility. From a mechanical perspective, electric motors are much simpler. They also don’t use components like gearboxes, exhaust systems, and clutches. But regardless of the drive system type, the production process of an automobile always involves a huge network of companies that are rooted in different cultures with different languages. It goes without saying that all these companies need to communicate seamlessly and flawlessly.
The cascading information rollout in the automotive industry has lots of predetermined breaking points
The pyramid shape of the automotive supply chain highlights how crucial flawless translation is.
- Tier 1: The system suppliers communicate with the OEMs at the highest technical level. The documents exchanged on this level often comprise hundreds of pages. They include development specification sheets with detailed performance requirements, validation and test protocols, production process approval procedures, and, of course, long-term contracts and master agreements.
- Tier 2: The component suppliers receive the technical requirements specified by the OEMs via Tier 1. Needless to say, these documents must be precise.
- Tier 3: The suppliers of raw materials and basic components also deal with material and quality specifications. These requirements are often contained in technical data sheets that must be translated into several languages.
This creates a cascading communication structure in which the risk of information loss or distortion is just as significant as the obligation to transparency. All it takes is one French OEM communicating a technical requirement to an Austrian Tier 1 supplier, who in turn works with a Chinese Tier 2 supplier, and suddenly two translation steps are involved. Here are some of the typical error sources along the way:
Product and technical specification sheets – quality assurance begins with language
Product and technical specification sheets are the key elements of communication. They define what must be delivered, in what form, and with what characteristics. They also set the quality standard that ultimately defines the product. If translations of these documents do not meet the highest standard, they create errors right at the root of the information chain.
To understand the gravity of this issue, imagine a scenario involving the correct conversion of measurements or physical units. Material designations can be even more difficult to navigate. For example, tempered steel is designated 42CrMo4 in Germany, but it is known as SCM440 in Japan and AISI 4140 in the US.
Things get particularly tricky outside of industrial nomenclature. An infamous example is the translation of modal verbs. The English terms “shall,” “should,” and “may” can all be translated as “sollen” in German, but they lose their varying degrees of obligation this way. In specification sheets or contracts, this simple oversight can sow the seeds for disputes down the line.
Change management: Quality management under time constraints
Very few car models remain unchanged throughout their entire product life cycle. In fact, the opposite is generally true! Quite often, there are design changes, quality improvements, material substitutions for a component, or sometimes just a change in color. Technical changes are communicated within the supply chain via engineering change orders (ECOs) or engineering change notifications (ECNs).
ECOs and ECNs must not only be communicated with absolute precision. They are also time-sensitive. As soon as an OEM issues an ECO, all suppliers around the globe are notified at the same time. Even a few days’ delay can result in a company manufacturing parts or components based on outdated specifications, which in turn can cause enormous damage.
It is also crucial to assign ECOs with unique version numbers, validity dates, and revision numbers. This metadata must be consistent in all languages. This is why ECOs are a perfect application area for term databases and translation memory systems.
Book a free initial analysis
Take advantage of our free initial analysis worth €900 for your next translation project. We will show you potential savings and how to optimize your translation processes.
Quality assurance in the automotive industry, where precision is paramount
OEMs keep their supply chain on a tight leash with agreements specifying quality assurance and quality control. These legally binding Quality Assurance Agreements (QAA) are usually drawn up in several languages. Although contracts usually specify which language version is authoritative in the event of a conflict, it goes without saying that all versions should always be legally and technically correct.
As with all translations of legal texts, the devil is often in the details when it comes to QAA. It does matter whether “warranty” is translated as “Garantie” or “Gewährleistung.” The quality of translations can be crucial here.
Global supply chains in the automotive industry fundamentally demand consistent linguistic accuracy and correspondingly precise translations. This also applies to audits, assessments, technical drawings, measurement and test reports, declarations of conformity, and much more. But there is also a cultural component, which can be quite challenging.
What does the automotive industry have to do with linguistic culture?
Even though the automotive industry must follow strict rules, we need to remember that ultimately it comes down to people interacting with each other. Translations that do not take cultural idiosyncrasies into account can be just as damaging here as content-related errors in the translations.
These differences become particularly obvious when we compare the German communication style with Asian customs. OEMs who make it blatantly clear to Asian suppliers that they are dissatisfied with certain components and expect rapid rectification run the risk of personally offending their counterparts. Expressing a sense of urgency may be perceived on the other end as a harbinger of the end of the business relationship.
Of course, this applies both ways. If Chinese partners promise to “do their best” to meet a recently changed timeline, to European ears this sounds like “We can do it.” But what they may actually mean is: “This is probably not feasible, but we don’t want to disappoint you directly.”
Similar pitfalls also lurk in cultures that seem closer to us. Even Italians and Scandinavians communicate in significantly different ways.
For translation agencies, the automotive industry, with its drive for maximum efficiency, is definitely an extremely exciting and rewarding field. However, this is only the case if they can meet several expectations. In addition to excellent language skills, they must also have in-depth and up-to-date knowledge of the technologies, an understanding of industry practices and political components, as well as a keen sense of cultural idiosyncrasies.
