Produktivitätsverlust durch manuelle Mehrstufenfreigaben

Definition

Australian LSPs often orchestrate complex, multi‑stage workflows (translation, editing, proofreading, in‑country review, client review) via email and spreadsheets instead of a TMS with workflow automation.[2][3][10] Each stage waits on manual assignment and confirmation, and files are passed around as attachments. Industry guidance stresses that the biggest time‑waster is not translation speed but manual handoffs and file management, which slow projects down and consume PM capacity without adding value.[4] Logic‑based estimation: for a 100,000‑word software localisation or marketing localisation project billed at AUD 0.18/word (AUD 18,000 revenue), 3–5 separate review stages typically generate ~40–60 hours of project management and reviewer coordination work if run manually (status chasing, packaging files, QA consolidation). Modern TMS workflows and integrations can cut coordination and idle time by 25–50 %, freeing 10–20 hours per project. Valuing internal time conservatively at AUD 60/hour, that is AUD 600–1,200 avoidable internal cost per 100,000‑word project, or 3–7 % of project margin. Across 20 such projects a year, a mid‑size provider loses AUD 12,000–24,000 in productive capacity that could be re‑deployed to additional billable work or faster delivery that captures more deals.[1][2][3][4][10]

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Translation & Localisation providers in Australia 🇦🇺 routinely waste 10–20 % ihrer Bearbeitungszeit – typischerweise 10–20 Stunden pro 100.000 Wörtern – auf manuelle Koordination von Mehrstufenprüfungen. Automation of task routing, notifications, and in‑platform review can recover this capacity and bring work forward into revenue faster.

Affected Stakeholders

Projektleiter Lokalisierung, Vendor-Manager, In‑house‑Übersetzer und Revisoren, Freelance‑Übersetzer, In‑Country‑Reviewer beim Kunden, Account Manager

Related Business Risks