WEEK 1

1. Vendor Management from the LSP perspective

Unlike client-side vendor management, which typically focus on managing LSPs, this course explicitly takes a vendor-side perspective. In other words, we are learning how an LSP manages its own vendors, including freelancers, subcontractors, and occasionally other LSPs.

An LSP often acts as both a service provider and a buyer at the same time. While responding to client needs, the LSP must also procure linguistic and technical services downstream. Vendor management, therefore, is not just operational coordination but a core business function that directly affects cost, quality, scalability, and client trust.

This represents a clear shift from the client-side vendor management perspective that I am more familiar with, and it requires rethinking many decisions through a new set of logic and assumptions. I found this change in perspective both challenging and interesting.

2. The Procurement Cycle

The need often originates from the client, not the LSP. The LSP then interprets that need, evaluates whether it can be fulfilled in-house or in another forms, and decides whether external resources are required. Only after this internal evaluation does procurement truly begin.

I think this reinforced an important mindset shift. Vendor management is not about defaulting to outsourcing. It starts with asking the right questions internally before spending money externally. This distinction is critical.

The approval step forces accountability. It requires someone to justify why an external vendor is necessary, whether the cost makes sense, and whether alternatives have been considered. This step protects both financial health and working efficiency.

On vendor-side, especially when working with freelancers, relationships are often task-driven rather than relational. Formal contracts may exist, but sometimes the engagement relies on simpler agreements, email confirmations, or established trust. This does not mean structure is optional. Even in informal setups, there must be clarity around scope, deadlines, rates, and payment expectations.

The final stages of the procurement cycle focus on delivery and review. Once work is delivered, the LSP must assess whether the outcome actually solved the original problem. Choosing to work with the same vendors again offers benefits such as consistency, reduced onboarding time, and potentially better pricing. However, renewal should be a deliberate choice based on performance, not convenience.

WEEK 2

1. Clarifying “Needs” Comes Before Vendor Management

One of the strongest messages this week was that vendor management does not begin with sourcing. It begins much earlier, with clarifying what the actual need is. For example, even a simple request like “translate this” usually hides multiple unknowns, including purpose, audience, format, delivery expectations…

From the vendor-side perspective, the LSP carries the responsibility of turning an unclear request into something that can be executed. That clarification work is what makes procurement possible in the first place. Without it, any vendor decision is built on assumptions rather than requirements.

2. Vendor-Side Needs Are Already Shaped

Client-side needs often start as open questions. Vendor-side needs usually do not. By the time a request reaches vendor management, it has already been filtered through the LSP’s service offerings and internal workflows.

In reality, vendor managers are frequently procuring for internal stakeholders such as PMs. The client’s request is no longer the need itself. The need is to enable delivery in a way that is reliable, repeatable, and aligned with how the LSP operates.
This distinction helped me understand why vendor management feels more structured and constrained than client-side decision making.

3. “Translate This” is Not a Complete Instruction

One of the pre-class exercises highlighted how misleading a simple instruction can be. Before assigning work, the LSP must understand what kind of content it is, how it will be used, and what success looks like for the client.

The key step is not execution but interpretation. We are not passing instructions downstream as it I, we are converting a vague request into a set of procurement-ready conditions. That conversion step is where many quality and delivery risks are either eliminated or introduced.

4. The Right Translator

The discussion around the “perfect translator” made it clear that perfection is not the goal. Fit is. A translator may be highly skilled (e.g. PhDs game testers) but unavailable, slow to respond, or unfamiliar with the required tools.

In vendor-side work, availability and reliability often function as gating factors. A theoretically ideal match does not exist if they cannot take the job or meet the timeline. Selection is therefore about trade-offs, not optimization.

I believe this section framed vendor selection as a practical decision under constraints, not a search for the best possible profile.

5. Vendor Decisions Accumulate Over Time

We also discussed on the longer-term impact of vendor management decisions. Relying on the same few high-performing vendors can create bottlenecks, while constantly sourcing new ones may increase risks. Each vendor decision contributes to the shape of the overall vendor ecosystem. Some choices optimize for speed. Others invest in future capacity.

Good vendor management requires balancing both, rather than defaulting to one approach.

WEEK 3

1. Vendor Management Is Also About Being Found

Up to now, we have focused on how an LSP defines needs and evaluates vendors. This week we looked at the other side of this equation. Our vendors are not only being evaluated. They are also evaluating us.

You’re looking for vendors… They are looking for you too.

Vendor management is bidirectional. Freelancers assess whether an agency appears legitimate, professional, and trustworthy before agreeing to collaborate.

2. Where Can Agency Be Found

We discussed practical places where agencies can be discovered. This includes professional networks such as LinkedIn, company websites, linguist platforms, industry directories, and community spaces.

The pre-class video added some useful info (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuH2AV02p70). Some general gig platforms such as Fiverr, Upwork, and PeoplePerHour were mentioned as less recommended. In contrast, translation-specific platforms like ProZ and TranslatorsCafe remain important spaces where linguists actively look for agency partnerships. Tools and platforms such as Smartcat, Zingword, LinkedIn, and TeamTranslator also function as discovery channels.

From the agency’s perspective, I also listed five elements that I believe are most important when it comes to increasing visibility:

(1) Strong Linkedin presence:
The agency page should be complete and credible, and PMs or vendor managers should have clear, active profiles. Translators often search people as well, not just companies.

(2) Active and searchable profiles on linguist-specific platforms:
Linguist-specific platforms like ProZ matter because linguists actively use them to find agencies. The agency profile should clearly state domains, language needs, and how to get in touch.

(3) SEO and Google presence:
Having an up-to-date Google Maps profile and a searchable website helps translators who look up agencies by name, location, or keywords like "agency name + language."

(4) Active participation in linguist communities:
This includes conferences, meetups, groups, and professional associations.

(5) Clear vendor onboarding path on the agency website:
The agency website should have an obvious careers section with a simple way for linguists to register and apply for a job.

3. Reality of Scams

Unfortunately, free work requests, nonpayment, CV theft, impersonation, and “pay to work” schemes are quite common in this industry.

But the key insight is that mistrust is rational. From the linguists’ perspective, an unknown agency represents potential financial risk. That means vendor managers must actively react through transparency and professionalism.

At the same time, agencies face scams as well. Fake translators, stolen CVs, impersonation, and machine translation passed off as human work all pose operational threats. Vendor management therefore operates in a dual trust environment. Both sides are cautious, and both sides have reasons to be cautious.

4. Professional Communication -> Risk Mitigation

Do not:

• Commit significant grammatical errors in the email
• Ask the linguist to move to a less formal channel for follow-ups (Telegram )
• Use your own email address, free email (gmail, etc.)
• Ask people to start registering / subscribing, etc.
• Expect an answer asap

Do:

• Get outreach emails properly written
• Get you and your company’s names and titles right
• Refer to easily verifiable information (names and roles on LinkedIn, company website, etc)
• Get to the point

Template:

WEEK 4

1. ISO Standards

This week introduced ISO 17100 and ISO 18587, which was new to me in terms of how they define translator and post editor qualifications. ISO 17100 sets minimum requirements for linguists, including graduate level qualifications or a defined number of years of professional experience. ISO 18587 extends this logic to post editing, requiring post editors to meet the same qualification standards and to work within a structured feedback loop that improves MT engine performance.

2. Qualifications are a bundle of signals

We talked about “vendor qualifications” as a set of dimensions, not a single score. The obvious ones are language pair, specialization, and experience, but the discussion made it clear that we also need to look at signals that reduce delivery risk:

• Baseline signals: degree, years of experience, relevant certifications
• Fit signals: domain alignment, prior similar work, portfolio quality
• Operational signals: responsiveness, availability, time zone overlap, tool literacy, process discipline
  An interesting point that Harry mentioned in class is how experience should often be treated as a threshold, not a “more is always better” ranking factor. From a vendor manager’s perspective, that is practical. You set a minimum bar for safety, then you optimize for fit and reliability instead of blindly paying a premium for seniority.

3. Rates matter, but they are not the only lever

Rates are important because this is a for profit business, but in real vendor side operations, they rarely function as the single deciding factor.
Sometimes the decision is driven by speed and availability. Sometimes it is driven by specialization. Sometimes it is driven by volume, where lower per word rates come with guaranteed output. The key point here for me is that rate conversations are contextual. You are not just buying words. You are buying a delivery outcome under constraints.

4. Intake workflow

The second half of class focused on building an intake process. I list a few key details:

• Do not rely on CVs alone. You are looking for requirements, actions, and evidence, not just a resume.
• Testing should be selective. Not everyone needs a test, especially if you are doing lightweight, low risk work.
• A Zoom call can help reduce scam risk, but it is not common for small, low value jobs. The point is to be intentional about why you add a step, and what risk it mitigates.
• Talent pool and multiple exits are normal. “Not now” is different from “never.” Some translators may not be a fit for the current project but still belong in a future project.

WEEK 5

1. Before Contracting

Before contracting comes payment negotiation. One side proposes a rate, the other counters, and eventually both agree. However, the underlying logic is more operational than emotional.

Rate negotiation is often handled by the PMs because they are the closest to project profitability. They understand client rates and freelancer rates, and therefore the margin. They also know when they can concede and when they cannot. This is where vendor management intersects directly with financial responsibility.

The tips discussed in class were practical, so I note them down here:

• Understand the work you are assigning.
• Know your walk-away price.
• Be clear on what you can concede.
• Ask for small concessions.
• Make sure your internal stakeholders are aligned.

2. Pre-class exercise:

We looked at the ATA freelancer contract guide as a reference point. One interesting was when we reviewed contract clauses that felt unfamiliar, such as choice of law, non-indemnification, severability, and modification clauses. Harry pointed out that these clauses make sense legally, but most of us would not have thought to include them. We are not lawyers, but we still need to recognize what these clauses are protecting. That distinction was important.

3. Legal Requirement

A large portion of this week’s class focused on legal definitions, especially California Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) of 2020. CA Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) of 2020 defines a contractor using the ABC test:

• A means the freelancer is free from control in how the work is performed. We assign deliverables, not methodology.
• B means the freelancer performs work outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.
• C means the freelancer operates an independent business providing similar services to multiple clients.
  Notes: Even in the absence of a written agreement, actions and communications between parties may serve as evidence of contract formation. It means that email confirmations, agreed rates, and delivery acceptance can all carry legal weight.

4. Tax

Another operational layer is tax compliance. The LSP must report payments for services. Accountants determine what documentation is required based on the freelancer’s tax status. US freelancers provide W-9 forms. Non-US freelancers provide variations of W-8 forms. The vendor manager’s role is not interpret tax law themselves, but to ensure the right documentation is collected and stored.

5. Enterprise Preferences & Sanctions

We also discussed enterprise-level preferences. Some companies prefer to work with freelancers in specific regions due to trade zones, data regulations such as GDPR or LGPD, or tax complexity. Larger LSPs with multiple global branch offices may process payments through specific legal entities for compliance reasons.

If a freelancer is located in a sanctioned country, the correct action is escalation to Legal, not improvisation. Do not proceed without approval. This actually made vendor management feel less operational and more regulatory than I previously assumed.

WEEK 6

1. The real intake workflow

A few details that felt very practical in the intake workflow:

• You usually test before interview because tests are easier to administer at scale.
• Interview before test can happen when budget is tight and you cannot afford paid testing.
• You should follow up at least once, because non response is not always disinterest. Sometimes it is just timing.
• Send the NDA before tests so you are not leaking sensitive material.
• Send tax forms only after someone has passed and is actually ready to work, not at the first contact.

I liked how this reframed intake as a funnel with cost control. Every step you add has a purpose. The workflow should reflect that kind of tradeoff.

2. The 4 Cs

The pre class onboarding framework introduced the 4 Cs. At first it feel like “a lot,” but it is useful because it forces you to cover the right categories instead of improvising every time.

What was helpful is that the 4 Cs map to what an LSP actually needs a new freelancer to know:

• How we operate as an agency
• How projects run in our organization
• How our workflow works from handoff to delivery
• How to navigate tools, people, and escalation paths

All of the focus was not making onboarding “beautiful”, but making it easy to execute and hard to mess up.

3. Onboarding

One point I had not thought about before is that parts of onboarding are not owned by vendor management. Some of the workflow can and probably should be handed off to project management or linguistic services once the vendor is active.

That division makes sense. Vendor management is strongest at building the pool, holding the gate, and establishing the relationship. PMs and linguist leads are closer to day-to-day delivery and can provide ongoing guidance and feedback.

4. Four major areas to evaluate performance

The second half of class introduced performance monitoring in four major areas and asked two practical questions: how do we measure performance, and who measures it.

The key takeaway for me is that performance monitoring is not just “quality scores.” It is a broader accountability model. It also needs clear ownership. If everyone is responsible, no one is responsible.

The discussion also made it clear that a single final score is not enough. If two vendors both land at the same overall score, you still need dimensional visibility to understand risk and fit. In practice, that means a spreadsheet that shows more than one number, and ideally a way to visualize strengths and weaknesses by category.

Luckily, our group's research has shown that this problem can actually be further solved by using a more refined evaluation model.
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rmultD1REGWjBC7LPVV8fyuUCVZDYWkD/view?usp=sharing)