Why localised strategies are so much more than just translations

March 17, 2025

Conor Bant

Senior Director - Media, Just Global

Working at a global B2B marketing agency, it is not uncommon for me to hear clients ask about the value of translations, particularly via in-region media teams. It’s an interesting one that usually triggers debate.

While typically the answer to “should we translate these ads?” would logically be “yes”, the language of ad copy on an ad platform really is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to ‘localising’ a campaign (note the use of s instead of z from a UK-based writer).

Is it Even Worth it?

In simple terms, is the cost of developing five different language versions of the same assets going to yield results?

If conversion uplift is minimal, allocating that translation budget into further paid media may ultimately generate stronger MQL/lead volumes. And that’s not considering the adverse impact regional segmentation can have on paid platform bidding efficiencies.

Incremental conversion and performance gains will bring fruit in a large-scale campaign but may not be realised at smaller budget levels.

In a world of, at best, static budgets but growing targets, allocating more Dollars, Euros or GBP may be what delivers results.

Translation vs Localisation

If there are concerns around delivering content in the wrong language, is there a consideration as to what that audience actually wants to hear? So often we see a direct translation of ad units, but does that message carry through across all markets? Differing market maturities and legislations can have a big impact in the tech space.

Taking the example below comparing research trends around technology categories, really ‘localising’ to the German and French markets would be less about translating Analytics and Reporting content to the relevant language, but addressing the audience preferences and promoting AI and ML messaging.

Data source from Bombora Insights

And if we really want to geek out on addressing the in-region audience preferences, the campaign focus and budget distribution for UK would differ significantly from France and Germany, alongside needing more to capture the high volume of interest.

In addition to the topic, true content localisation can look to the most utilised formats. Research below of ads delivered to CIOs in UK and Germany show lower use of video in the German market.

Data sourced from The Trade Desk insights.

This data suggests reduced appetite for video content, so might creating further display and native assets provide greater value and meet the regional trend than a direct video translation?

From differing search trends through to device usage. There is so much depth that media planning can go to in order to really localise, the list goes on. For example, Xing as a platform is used nigh exclusively in the DACH market.

Audience Over Placement Planning

Alongside the value of translating content, a recurring query for in-region planning is the selection of localised publications. “Who do you work with in France?”

Let’s be clear – there is always a value in using such publishers. They can perform a key role in an integrated media campaign, particularly when looking to drive advocacy. However, it is not the only way.

The leading names in tech publishing have extensive reach and are frequently global, and perhaps have an even greater reach in region than a native publisher. And unsurprisingly, the likes of Bloomberg, Foundry and Wider have some sway and repute outside of English-speaking markets.

Regardless, simply going by name is not truly localising. Opting for an audience first strategy where the reach and affinity of the audience are the selection criteria is key to driving performance.

For example, research conducted into media preferences across IT Decision Makers in France and Germany shows that local tech resources are indeed popular. However, in Germany some of the aforementioned tech news behemoths with headquarters in the US over index (source: Telmar). So in this example, a balanced global vs in-region placement strategy would actually be the most relevant and tailored to the German audience, rather than sticking to a local publisher list.

In my day-to-day role I create detailed persona profiles on behalf of clients for key decision makers and influencers across multiple countries. This insight shows fascinating differences in the format of media consumed, frequency of social channel usage, and preferred publications, to help define what an audience first strategy looks like.

End-to-End Translation and a Connected Experience

At this point, we’re still considering what the ad is and where it appears, but we haven’t touched on what happens next. And this is one of the key factors in answering the complex question asked up top.

So, you’ve decided to translate your LinkedIn or paid search ad copy and CTRs are booming. But what happens next? To avoid disconnect in experience, the ongoing user journey needs to follow in the same vein. Translated landing pages, omni-channel nurtures and follow-up is required to ensure any ad translation performance enhancements are not lost.

We have seen examples of great platform metric improvements by translating, but then a poor (and untranslated) landing experience has seen conversion tank, so the vanity metric of CTR and the rest is just that.

Simply directing to a translated landing page isn’t good enough, the content still needs to meet audience needs and provide value to deliver impact.

Some of the points above reinforce the sheer scale of localising a campaign beyond a few ad translations, and why “should we translate these ads?” isn’t a straightforward answer. In an ideal world we would always advocate localising and moving towards personalising. It’s critical to ask how far can you go to deliver a winning experience. And it isn’t all about language.

Might delivering the right message, in the right way, in the right place and at the right time provide more impact than a translation? Quite possibly. If they can read it, that is.