For an agency or a global company, a reliable Greek-language partner is part of the delivery system. The right conversation covers quality, capacity, terminology and escalation rather than price alone.
Why a rate card is not enough
A low rate can become expensive when files return late, terms change from batch to batch or queries go unanswered. Ongoing work depends on habits that a price list does not show.
Procurement should therefore test how the partner works, not only what it charges. The questions below help reveal process maturity before the first live project.
It also helps to describe your own content honestly: volumes, subject areas, file types and review steps. A partner can only plan realistic capacity when it knows what is coming.
Ask about the actual team
Check which specialists will translate, revise and manage the account, and how subject expertise is assigned. Request a realistic schedule for recurring and urgent work.
A large network helps only when the assignment and review route are clear. Ask who makes the final call on a disputed term and who answers when a deadline is at risk.
Continuity matters for recurring work. Ask how the partner keeps the same translators and reviewers on your account, and how a new linguist is briefed on your glossary and style.
Inspect the working method
Discuss translation memories, approved terminology, style guides and file formats. Ask how queries are documented and how changes are applied across a program; this reveals whether the partner can maintain consistency over time.
Certification is a useful signal when you know what it covers. OMADA is certified to ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 17100:2015 by EURO CERT, and our quality page explains how revision and accountability work in practice. For EU-facing content, ask whether the team uses institutional resources such as IATE ↗, the EU’s terminology database.
Clarify how machine translation is used, if at all. A credible partner can explain when MTPE and AI-output review fit the content and when full human translation is the safer route.
Ask about tools and file handling too. A partner should accept your formats, return them intact and protect tags, placeholders and layout without manual rework on your side.
Agree measurable handover
Set expectations for acceptance criteria, feedback, security and version control. If source files contain personal data, confirm how the partner handles it under the EU’s data protection rules ↗.
A small pilot with genuine material can test collaboration more fairly than a generic sample. Review both language quality and communication during the pilot.
Define what “delivered” means: the file format, the QA notes, the updated termbase and any open queries. A clear handover lets your team move content into production without extra checks.
Look beyond a test score
A pilot should assess the partner’s questions, version discipline and response to feedback as well as translation quality. Agree how each issue will be resolved and who owns the final terminology decision.
These habits become especially important when volumes rise or several departments submit content at once. Institutional buyers such as the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the EU ↗ work with external providers in the same structured way, and our article on multilingual tender workflows shows how volume and format shape delivery.
Agree how the relationship will be reviewed. A short periodic look at feedback, recurring issues and upcoming volumes keeps both sides aligned as needs change.
A checklist for selecting a Greek partner
- Meet the delivery roles. Identify the translators, reviser and project manager for your account.
- Review terminology practice. Ask how glossaries, memories and style guides are maintained.
- Check certification scope. Confirm which services the quality certificates cover.
- Agree escalation. Define who decides on disputed terms and missed deadlines.
- Settle security and versions. Agree data handling, file transfer and version control.
- Pilot with representative material. Assess quality, questions and response to feedback together.
Language managers can then scale the relationship with fewer surprises.
Further reading: IATE terminology database ↗; European Commission: data protection ↗; Translation Centre for the Bodies of the EU ↗.