Editing Quality Management

Editing Quality Management

byVeena Venkateshwaran, BMM, ELS

Rucha Kurtkoti, MSc, ELSJaya Ramchandani, MSc

Copyright 2009-2010 Veena Venkateshwaran, Rucha Kurtkoti, Jaya Ramchandani

Confidentiality Disclaimer

All the information disclosed in this presentation whether written or oral is the

intellectual property of Veena Venkateshwaran, Rucha Kurtkoti, and Jaya Ramchandani.

You should not use, copy or otherwise replicate the Confidential Information for any other

purpose

Whatsoever unless discussed with the owners. The concept proposed herein is modeled

on an existing translation quality management system.


http://www.translationquality.com/files/QualityMeas2002.pdf

Introduction


IMPO

RTA

NC

E O

F A Q

MS

A way to objectively quantify a process

A means to reduce the cost of poor quality

A means to increase customer satisfaction

An opportunity for benchmarking

A competitive advantage


QC

VS

. QA

Quality control (QC) is quality verification

over the whole text (e.g., reviewing).

Quality assurance (QA) involves sampling

techniques and is the control of quality over a

statistically significant sample of the whole

text (e.g., quality measurement).


TH

E B

AS

IS O

F A Q

A S

YS

TEM

Repeatable (two assessments of the same

sample yield similar results)

Reproducible (different evaluators should

arrive at a similar assessment for a single

edit)

Objective (devoid of subjective bias)


Our methodology


Key tenets of our QMS

Standard for journal publication

Level of original English / Opportunity for error

Client expectations vis-à-vis service definition


Components of our QMS

Error categories based on service definition

QA form / QA checklists

Sampling techniques/Statistical methods

Standards for quality auditing

Editing Quality Index (EQI)


ER

RO

R C

ATEG

OR

IES

It is very important to have a service

definition in place before looking to categorize

errors. We deal with errors only when they

violate agreed upon service definitions

whether implicit or explicit.


ER

RO

R C

ATEG

OR

IES

Error categorization involves

Selecting small and broad categories

Providing “clear” definitions

Setting tolerance limits (min/max of errors

per x words)

Assigning a weight (critical/major/minor)


QA

FOR

M/Q

A C

HEC

KLIS

TS

We would like to advocate not the use of

“universal” checklists, but of checklists

specifically tailored to each service and / or

step in the process.


QA

FOR

M/Q

A C

HEC

KLIS

TS

For example,

Checklist to evaluate editing company

Checklist to evaluate edited document

Checklist to evaluate first editor

Checklist to evaluate reviewer / QC


QA

FOR

M/Q

A C

HEC

KLIS

TS

Sample checklists


SA

MPLIN

G T

EC

HN

IQU

ES

Sampling should be systematic and

representative of the assignments received

by the organization.

5% of the word count completed should be

sampled, with a minimum of, for example,

2500 words per editor.

Over a six-month period, we will ensure that

the sample is truly representative of the

work done by the company.Copyright 2009-2010 Veena Venkateshwaran, Rucha Kurtkoti, Jaya Ramchandani

STA

ND

AR

DS

FOR

QU

ALIT

Y

AU

DIT

ING

All auditors will be trained and calibrated

with the tool

Tolerance limits for calibration will be set

Calibration will take place every six

months.


ED

ITIN

G Q

UA

LITY IN

DEX

Quality can be measured using various methodologies

Ratio of incorrect/overlooked errors to

correct changes

Defects / 1000 words or defects per page

(250 words), weighted by different

parameters


ED

ITIN

G Q

UA

LITY IN

DEX

What we do:

Count errors based on checklist

Weight the errors by type (minor, major,

critical) to arrive at a quality score

Weight the quality score by level of original

English / opportunity for edit to arrive at the

total error points

Convert the total error points to an editing

quality index (EQI).

0% (worst) 100% (best)


ED

ITIN

G Q

UA

LITY IN

DEX

Minor Errors

Major Errors

Critical

Errors

Quality

Score

Opportunity for Edit

Weighted

Error Points

Word count

Error Densi

tyEQI

1 1 0 3 5 1.5 2243 1496 93%

4 3 1 13 4 9.75 2441 251 71%

1 5 1 14 2 17.5 2120 122 61%

9 12 5 48 5 24 2250 94 58%

10 5 2 26 3 26 2406 93 58%

5 15 3 44 1 66 2173 33 45%

22 13 3 57 1 85.5 2113 25 41%

Example of EQI calculation


ED

ITIN

G Q

UA

LITY IN

DEX

Depending on one’s purpose, there may be more than

a single EQI. For example, an EQI may be developed for

external purposes (to standardize the work obtained

from outsourcing); Another EQI may be primarily for

internal purposes (to measure the quality of a given

special process). And benchmarks will be set

accordingly.


Uses of the EQI

Determining company editing quality

Grading of editors

Process recommendations


DE

TER

MIN

ING

TE

AM

/ CO

MPA

NY

QU

ALIT

Y

We apply a sum product by the EQI of the editor

vis-à-vis the volume completed by him /her to

arrive at the company’s quality.

Service A Service B

Editor A = 10% volume, 80% EQIEditor A = 30% volume, 80%

EQI

Editor B = 30% volume, 60% EQIEditor B = 40% volume, 90%

EQI

Editor C = 60% volume, 75% EQIEditor C = 30% volume, 75%

EQI

Total Service A EQI = 71% Total Service B EQI = 82.5%

Service A volume: 80%Service B volume: 20%

Total Company EQI = 73.3%


GR

AD

ING

OF E

DIT

OR

S

The EQI can be used to grade editors. In order to

grade the editing, we need a scale. An example

scale is as follows. As shown in the scale, if the

EQI is from 100 to 90, then the editor grade

would be 5.

EQI Range Grade

100-90 Grade A editor

90-70 Grade B editor

70-50 Grade C editor

<50 Grade D editor


PR

OC

ES

S R

EC

OM

MEN

DATIO

NS

By analyzing the EQI at each stage of the

editing process, process

recommendations can be made to

improve quality and efficiency.


Fitting our methodology to your organization


PR

OC

ES

S FLO

W

Ongoing Consultation

Operational handover of the system

Calibrating + Training QAs

Benchmarking / Setting Quality Standards

‘Field test’ draft on sample audience

Prepare Checklists & Sampling Procedures


CO

MPO

NEN

T S

OF T

HE E

QM

S

TO

OL

Sampling Quality Auditing

AnalysisReports


EX

AM

PLE

S O

F SYS

TE

M

OU

TPU

T

Detailed reports on individual editor quality / team

quality / total company quality on a monthly basis

Quarterly analysis of QA scores, with alerts for

recommending change in grade if any, or in

removing/upgrading an editor/freelancer, etc.

Feedback report to individual editors on all quality

checked (QA) jobs with comments


Summary


Our EQMS Tool is…

A way to objectively quantify a process: Means to analyze value added at each stage of

your editing process

A means to reduce the cost of poor quality: Continual improvement of editor quality

and weaning out poor editors from your system. Also, accountability from the editor.

A means to increase customer satisfaction: Accurate understanding and adherence to

service definition

An opportunity for benchmarking: To confidently state that all manuscripts will pass an

EQI of, for example, 90%, suitable for international publication

A competitive advantage: In an unstructured market, be a first mover to set up an

exhaustive quality management system.


Thank you!For further information contact

[email protected]://siriusinteractive.co.in


mailto:[email protected]

http://siriusinteractive.co.in/

Education

Editing Quality Management