Setting up a 24/24 crisis remote interpretation service

The blitzkrieg of saying hello wide and large, spam like, I unleashed yesterday through XING (a LinkedIn look-alike service) has generated unexpected results. Besides a "I definitely don't want to meet you" answer to which I could agree in reciprocity, I have received kind words from various corners of the planet, although many from Japan. Some haven't registered to XING, but as I highlighted, I am no stakeholder in the system and doubtful of the value of it all unless you decide to go out of the wood and start shaking hands and having coffees.

One noticeable reaction came from an old Japanese business acquaintance suddenly eager to meet. He had "thought" in the past to do so but ... you know the arguments for procrastination. How infinite and generic they can be. So an appointment is in the box now, and even though I do not want to think that there's something coming beyond coffee, it is seemingly related to an experience that started circa 2005 and lingered with ups and downs through 2008. It also was a major trigger to start writing this blog. Or put in this way : it was a major trigger to look straight into the face of that multifaceted job too many times spelled by users rather than actors, that is, liaison interpreting. The story goes like this, in summary mode.

Sometimes in 2005, I was contacted out of the blue by an unknown Tokyo SME asking me  : "Would you be interested to do over the phone interpretation for medical research?". The situation was such that if I had been told to go to the Moon the next hour, I would have said "Sure, give me a minute to grab my wetsuit". My experience in medical interpretation was absolute zero. The plot quickly appeared to be a scrambling for the setting up of a service with no reference, no "déjà-vu" to rely onto, that of a 24/24 ready for action in less than 5 minutes system for allowing Japan and the US to discuss within the scope of an international clinical study. The conceptual map of what was basically involved is here.

It was at first guess work, first in setting up systems, protocols, methodology, securing resources and many more issues. I was supposed to interpret although the go sign had been in waiting for months already, but quickly got involved in everything above. Now with the distance of time, I could write a detailed postmortem analysis but I will shorten the task instead on core issues and lessons that might one day come back to usage.

Why create a system from scratch when there are corporations offering over the phone interpretation?

Because these are totally inadequate where highly specialized interpreters, always the same people, are needed.

Aren't there highly specialized interpreters?

There must be many, but those people are busy, or loath at working in hazy conditions as was such the case. The money was very enticing for a B or B+ level interpreter without enough assignments. It was too low for a busy interpreter who would risk to miss the virtuous loop of work and recommendations by stepping out of the loop through dedicated X number of days to stay at home and wait for the phone to ring. Even being paid to wait was not a big enough incentive. And again, that SME was unknown on the local interpreting market.

Securing human resources

So they had to tap into the mercenary type of people being interpreters just by claiming they are. Isn't it the way it starts for so many of us not issued from Swiss schools and the likes? It so happened that at a time, close to 10 people scattered over three countries at least allowed to cover a 24/24 on-call ready to unleash interpretation service in a tense, crisis set-up. On one side, a doctor would submit a patient who had reached near-lethal state for a green light from the other side upon examination to proceed with drug testing. Time was limited once the operation started, and many issues arose in the making that sounded like an episode of mission impossible. It went overall rather well until the program ended. As I am not allowed to go into deeper details, I would instead list up a few key issues that were raised, highlighting that there is no easy issue and that it does cost money to set up something seriously working in quasi-permanent crisis management mode and mood. Because the situation was an anticipated crisis management help service.

Systems:

- Although the process involved audio conference call using a Japanese service to do so, redundancy was quickly perceived to be essential, starting with means to know quasi-instantly who was ready to be online, and who was ready to back-up the interpreter on duty whenever unexpected things happened. They almost happened every time. At the time, even on the US side, Skype was more a word than a tool. It saved the day many times, including in chat mode, by allowing for instance one listening side to type and send to the interpreter that very core word making the communication to choke at that moment. If it were to be done again, additional layers of redundancy should be used like Twitter and more dedicated tools. Even standard landline phone proved to be  flaky, and audio quality at times appallingly bad due to the audio conference service layer. The choice of audio conference service provider should be led by two core issues : ease of front-end use and audio quality. And a third, multiple access points including the usage of mobile phones.

People:

- There was no specialized interpreter for the subject at stake, and there will never be. They have to be created. A very difficult, technical, medical subject it was, meaning that allowing interpreters to learn is a requisite. Helping them do so, not just asking them to look on their own for information and learning resources is mission critical. Therefore, people ready and eager to invest time and energy, all paid, to delve into difficult stuff are mandatory. They can be found more easily with non-seasoned interpreters.

- Interpreters don't share. They are terribly bad at this and it starts early. Any personal example you may think about that contradicts this assertion is just that, an example.  Otherwise, interpreters professional network without big names would be easier to find and join. Therefore, a learning environment based on sharing must be implemented from day one. We had a private wiki, but tools do not generate the usage of them. So sharing and learning as a community must be ironed in as a compulsory rule from hiring, coming with processes like remote training classes (we did it), remote presentations from specialists (we did it), scheduled remote meetings to discuss issues and solutions, we did it. But as the discovery of this came late, and there never was a sense of community, let alone of a sharing community. When recruiting people, highlighting clear and plain that going solo won't do is a requisite. Some interpreters must be raised as leaders in that effort.

Autonomy:

- The process was task and protocol intensive, generating a lot of stress while interpretation hadn't yet started. The interpreter of the day was like the shuttle captain at the command of the cockpit, manipulating many gears, talking to Houston and on average two or three other sides before the real tripartite interpretation session would take place. Often, the session duration would turn way shorter than the preparation tasks.

Many stress induced, but also technical issues like plainly loosing connexion on supposedly stable landlines happened many time. Each session was a heroic session reminiscing of the Mission Impossible series, the old ones. All this required the interpreter in charge to judge and take action swiftly on how to proceed when protocols would go wrong. Additional layers of protocols came in, adding yet confusion even for manual oriented people aware that at times, action required the dreaded "improvisation" to be switched on.

After some time, we would be allowed not to stay home but always ready to be contacted through mobile phones, I carried two, as well as a laptop with wireless module, serious headset (a big, big issue even at home) and a bottle of mineral water. Among the thrilling situations I can remember was being called while fetching my son at the daycare center, scrambling into a taxi, deploying all the imperfect hardware, reaching home with hard and the soft human ware thrilled by the thrill happening, for a correct landing later on. Another time, at a coffee shop where good earphones played a crucial role although they are never good enough, only messed by a drained battery saved a few minutes later by finding a replacement at a nearby convenience store. That's why you don't do the James Bond stuff in the middle of nowhere.

I almost did though, one under a lamp at night in the street and the hallo of a welcome vending machine, another time crouched behind a car on a parking lot. It was warm and not raining. Doing it at home was a little bit more comfortable, but in any case, it asks for autonomy, which is part of the themes to raise in the learning community dynamics.