The top 25 global websites from the 2017 Web Globalization Report Card

I’m excited to announce the publication of The 2017 Web Globalization Report Card. This is the most ambitious report I’ve written so far and it sheds light on a number of new and established best practices in website globalization.

Here are the top-scoring websites from the report:

For regular readers of this blog, you’ll notice that Google is yet again ranked number one. But Google isn’t resting on its laurels. While many software companies are happy to support 20 or 30 languages on their websites, Google continues to add languages across its many products. Consider Gmail, with support for 72 languages and YouTube, with 75 languages. And let’s not overlook Google Translate, now at 100+ languages.

Google could still stand to improve in global navigation, though I am seeing positive signs of harmonization across its many product silos. But I do maintain the recommendation that Google present a more traditional global gateway to visitors across its sites and apps.

Other highlights from the top 25 list include:

  • Consumer goods companies such as Pampers and Nestlé are a positive sign that non-tech companies are making positive strides in improving their website globalization skills.
  • IKEA returned to the list this year after making a welcome change to its global gateway strategy.
  • Nissan made the top 25 list for the first time. BMW slipped off the list.
  • As a group, the top 25 websites support an average of 54 languages (up from 52 last year); if we removed Wikipedia from the language counts the average would still be an impressive 44 languages.
  • GoDaddy, a new addition to the Report Card, wasted little time in making this list. Its global gateway is worth studying.
  • Luxury brands such as Gucci and Ralph Lauren continue to lag in web globalization — from poor support for languages to inadequate localization.
  • The average number of languages supported by all 150 global brands is now 31.

But as you can see here, the rate of language growth, on average, is slowing. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. Companies are telling me that they are investing more on depth and quality of localization — which is of huge importance.

The data underlying the Report Card is based on studying the leading global brands and world’s largest companies — 150 companies across more than 20 industry sectors. I began tracking many of the companies included in this report more than a decade ago and am happy to share insights into what works and what doesn’t. Time is often the greatest indicator of best practices.

I’ll have much more to share in the weeks and months ahead. If you have any questions about the report, please let me know.

Congratulations to the top 25 companies and the people within these companies that have long championed web globalization.

The 2017 Web Globalization Report Card

Click here to download a PDF brochure for the report.

Boeing and the trouble with flags in global gateways

Examine the Boeing global gateway below and see if you can see a problem:

boeing_flags

I did not realize the Middle East had an official flag but, according to this gateway, it does.

And herein lies a major problem with using flags — they’re not well suited to regional websites.

Apple has a similar problem as illustrated by its Latin American flags:

apple_flags_16

So what’s the solution?

Stop using flags for global navigation.

It’s quite simple actually.

And, yes, I do believe that Apple will drop flags from its website. Eventually.

For more on this, check out The Art of the Global Gateway.

Web Globalization Leaders in Life Sciences

webglobalization_lifesciences

As life sciences companies broaden their global sights to include new and emerging markets, their global (and mobile) websites have not always kept pace.

SDL recently commissioned a report in which I benchmarked a select group of 25 life sciences websites:

  • Abbott
  • Abbvie
  • Amgen
  • Astra Zeneca
  • Baxter
  • Bayer
  • Beckman
  • Coulter
  • Becton Dickinson
  • Boston Scientific
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb
  • Edwards Life Sciences
  • Eli Lilly resenius
  • Gilead Sciences
  • Hill-Rom
  • Johnson & Johnson/Janssen
  • Medtronic
  • Merck
  • Perkin Elmer
  • Pfizer
  • Sanofi
  • Sciex
  • Smith & Nephew
  • St. Jude Medical
  • Stryker

From languages to localized content to usability, this report highlights those companies that have done the very best at taking their websites global. In addition, this report provides valuable best practices from which companies across all industries can benefit.

You can request a free copy of the report here.

And I will be presenting from the report on May 25th via webinar, also free. You can register here.

I hope you can join!

 

 

 

What’s the most multilingual website?

I often point to Wikipedia as one of the most multilingual websites on the Internet.

Which is a major reason why Wikipedia finished in third place in the 2016 Web Globalization Report Card.

But Wikipedia is not the most multilingual website.

For that, I’d have to point toward the Jehovah’s Witnesses website.

As only partially illustrated by the screen grab below, the Jehovah’s Witnesses site supports nearly 600 languages, up from 400 in 2010.

jw_gateway.700

In comparison, Wikipedia supports only 271 languages.

Google supports only 125 languages.

(It feels odd to write “only” and “125 languages” in the same sentence)

I should be clear that I’m using a liberal definition of “supporting a language.” Most of the languages supported by the Jehovah’s website are represented by very little content — about a dozen or so web pages. This is also static content — the stuff that doesn’t require monthly or even annual updates. Nevertheless, it’s hard to deny that 600 languages is a notable achievement.

Here’s a sample page in Marathi:

jehova's witness global

 

I want to highlight the global gateway: The menu includes all available languages (displayed in the local languages). And, equally important, a global gateway icon is well positioned in the upper right corner of every web page, as shown below:

Jehovah's Witness global gateway

 

I prefer a globe icon as the one used here says “translation” more than global gateway.

So how does the JW.org website compare with other religion websites?

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supports an impressive 115 languages, up from 40 a few years ago.

And the website has made great strides in improving its global gateway. Shown below is the language menu:

LDS global gateway

 

And here is the globe icon used to highlight the gateway:

lsd_gatewaydetail2

 

The Holy See supports a mere 10 languages, which, to its credit, is an increase from five years ago.

Holy See global gateway

 

I also visited the Christian Scientist website, which has made progress over the years–up to about 20 languages.

Christian Science home page

 

I reviewed a handful of other religion websites but found nothing beyond English and Spanish.

While I doubt anyone is going to come close to challenging Jehovah’s Witnesses soon in languages, I’d love to see more competition. So if I’ve overlooked any website, please let me know.