Efficiency at What Cost? Are We Setting Our Linguists Up for Failure?

CAT tools are essential when you are managing high volume, multi language projects. However, when standardisation becomes a default rule and it is applied to every job, every file, every time, quality can quietly suffer. This is particularly true for smaller documents, where the overhead of the tool is often greater than the benefit.

Having worked in this industry, I fully understand why CAT tools became the default. When you are translating hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of words, unification is not optional. Consistency, terminology control, versioning and QA checks cannot be managed sustainably without the right technology.

But the problem is not the tool.

CAT tools should support great translators, not trap them.

Is a CAT Tool Always Necessary for a Small Document?

Here is the uncomfortable question many linguists (and some project managers) are thinking:

Is translating a small document in a CAT tool really necessary?

For short, self contained texts, the benefits of a CAT environment can be marginal. If there is little or no repetition, no meaningful TM leverage, and no future update cycle, the cost of importing, segmenting, tagging, running QA, exporting and cleaning files can outweigh the gains.

In these cases, efficiency becomes procedural rather than linguistic.

The Small File Paradox

For small documents, CAT tools can sometimes:

• Slow down the process rather than speed it up
• Introduce segmentation that breaks natural flow
• Prioritise system compliance over clarity and tone
• Create avoidable friction (logins, licences, set up, exports)

When Standardisation Becomes Dogma

We always use a CAT tool can be a perfectly reasonable policy, until it replaces judgement.

Not all content deserves the same handling:

• A legal contract is not a brand campaign.
• A product specification is not a homepage headline.
• A one off letter is not an evergreen knowledge base.

When workflows are chosen for uniformity rather than suitability, we risk turning translation into a manufacturing line, where the output is consistent but not necessarily correct, natural or persuasive.

The Tag Obsession: When Correct Is Not Linguistic

One of the most persistent frustrations for linguists is rigid tag enforcement, especially when translators are then asked to justify why tags moved.

Yes, tags matter. They protect formatting, links, variables and structure. However, insisting tags remain in the exact same position across languages often reflects technical convenience more than linguistic reality.

Different Languages Have Different Structures

Languages expand, contract, reorder and reframe meaning. Word order shifts. Adjectives move. Gender and agreement appear where English has none. A perfect tag position in English may be awkward, or even incorrect, in another language.

Expecting tags to sit neatly in the same place across fundamentally different syntactic systems is not quality control. It is convenience.

And when translators are forced to defend tag movement instead of meaning driven decisions, quality becomes secondary to system compliance.

The Real Issue: Forced vs Supported

A CAT tool becomes a quality problem when it is imposed without the support that makes it work:

• Clean, relevant TMs (not outdated, noisy or mismatched data)
• Client approved terminology (glossaries and termbases that are maintained)
• Style guides and tone of voice notes (especially for marketing content)
• Reference material and context (screenshots, audience, purpose)
• Realistic deadlines that allow translators to think and QA properly

Without these, the tool does not improve quality. It increases cognitive load and pushes linguists towards safe but suboptimal choices.

How to Use CAT Tools Without Undermining Quality

The goal is not to abandon CAT tools. It is to use them intentionally. Here are practical ways to protect quality and efficiency:

1. Match the Tool to the Job

Small, self contained documents often do not need CAT environments. A shared document or a simple word processor may be faster and cleaner. Reserve CAT tools for what they do best, managing repetition, consistency and terminology at scale.

2. Clean Your Translation Memory

A bloated, outdated TM is worse than no TM. Regular maintenance, removing deprecated segments, updating terminology and flagging low confidence entries, transforms TM from a liability into a real asset.

3. Approve and Maintain Your Terminology

A glossary is only useful if it is current and client approved. Outdated or contradictory termbases create friction, not flow. Invest in proper terminology management.

4. Provide Context, Not Just Files

Translators need to understand purpose, audience, tone and constraints. Style guides, reference materials and clear briefs are non negotiable. CAT tools cannot replace context.

5. Allow Linguistic Judgement on Tags

Enforce tag integrity, but allow tag movement when linguistics demand it. Your QA should check that tags are present and intact, not that they are in the same position as the source language.

6. Build in Review Time

Quality happens in revision, not in the first draft. Unrealistic deadlines force translators to ship the first acceptable answer instead of the best answer. Time for proper QA is not a luxury. It is a prerequisite for quality.

The Bottom Line

CAT tools are powerful when they serve translation, not when translation serves the tool.

The question is not whether to use CAT tools. It is whether you are using them well, with proper support, maintenance, context and realistic expectations.

Efficiency without quality is not efficiency. It is just speed. And linguists should not be forced to choose between being fast and being right.