Catching wrong numbers, dates and names before the client does

The mistakes that cost an agency a client are rarely a debate about phrasing. They are a transposed figure, a date that shifted, a name spelled two ways. They are easy to make, easy to miss on a tired re-read, and expensive when the client finds them first.

Why manual review misses them

A human reviewer reads for meaning, and meaning is exactly where a wrong number hides — the sentence still reads perfectly. Checking every figure, date, and name against the source is mechanical, repetitive work, which is precisely the kind of work attention drifts away from under deadline.

What automated checking adds

Automated quality assurance compares the delivered translation against the source directly. It scores the result, estimates how much of the text reads as machine-produced, and flags discrepancies — the wrong invoice number, the shifted date, the altered customer name — with an editable suggested fix, then produces a report you can keep.

Where it fits in the workflow

• Before delivery, as a gate: no job ships until the factual check is clean or a human has signed off on each flag.
• As a second pair of eyes, not a replacement for review — the reviewer’s judgement still decides.
• As a record: a saved report shows the client, if they ever ask, that the work was checked.

The goal is not to automate the reviewer away. It is to make sure the boring, error-prone part — matching every fact to its source — is never the thing that slips.