Sometimes it feels as if “localisation” is something that we have just discovered in the language industry in the last few years. Yet it is really something that has been with us almost forever. For example…

Just the other day, I was talking to a member of our marketing team who recalled his days working with a huge advertising firm that was bought over by an American company in 1999. The owner of the US firm came to the UK to reassure his new employees, telling them that they had bought the company “for the people” and that nothing much would change. He cited how his firm had behaved when they bought companies in Japan, where they learned to follow Japanese culture and working practices. Needless to say, the Americans didn’t think this was necessary in the UK and tried to import their culture wholesale, with the result that virtually none of the original company’s key staff were still there after a few years.
The other story is of a former TV executive who is well-known for appearing on football programmes, where he speaks in the language of the terracing (or rather in the accent and language of the council housing scheme in which he grew up). Strangely, when he appears at events like Edinburgh Film Festival or on radio arts programmes, his modulation and form of address changes and becomes a little bit more ‘luvvie.’ I’m not saying he’s wrong: in fact, his ability to “localise” accents is a useful social skill and helps him connect with the different audiences.
In other words, “localisation” can be a very useful means of communicating with your audience or it can be ignored and, as in the takeover of my friend’s company, a standardised, foreign culture imposed, sometimes with disastrous results (as in losing almost the entire senior management team to the competition!).
These two stories came to mind when I read a sponsored post on a language website which explained how the sponsor had helped Sky, Deliveroo and Snow Peak to tailor their messages to local audiences. In the case of Deliveroo, it was noted that “ even in single markets like the UK, there isn’t one dominant language into which it automatically makes sense to deploy content, however personalising content at language level — something that the company
knows will cut through — through traditional methods would be expensive.”
Of course, automation/machine translation could be proffered as one solution, but given the diversity and complexity of the regional speech across the UK (Doric, Geordie, Cockney, Scouse, Glaswegian, etc.) that is not likely to happen any day soon. Instead, there is a tendency for many companies to lump accents together, whereas, in Scotland for example, the reality is that Glaswegian is as far removed from Doric (NE Scotland) as Catalan is from Spanish, while the gap between Dundonian and Orcadian is similarly vast. And of course, it’s not just the accent, but also the idioms and colloquialisms that make all the difference. As a result, a “standardised” form of Scottish English is used by many UK companies to sell into markets north of the border. Yet surely, if we really believe that “localisation” matters, we should try to get it right? And that, of course, applies to the word “localisation” itself…

I always smile (frown, to be honest) when I see the US spelling of the word “localization” used by American companies who want to do business in the UK. If the Americans really wanted to ‘localize” their communications with the UK, they would use the UK spelling, “localise.” Now I know that some may think this is a bit pedantic, but if we really believe in localisation then we should surely insist on just such pedantry. If “localization” (sic) is to mean anything, it is surely that we really must strive for true localisation in UK markets! Which is, of course, where Global Connects comes in…

Fiona Woodford, Head of Language Services, Global Connects