If you have been in the translation industry for more than a decade, you almost certainly remember EN 15038 — the European standard for translation services that shaped how agencies operated across the continent from 2006 until its replacement in 2015. Today, references to EN 15038 still appear in older contracts, procurement documents, and agency marketing materials. But the standard has been officially superseded by ISO 17100:2015, and understanding the differences between these two standards is essential for any language service provider that wants to remain current and competitive.
In this article, we trace the history of EN 15038, explain why it was replaced, detail the key differences between the two standards, and provide a practical migration guide for agencies that need to update their processes and certifications.
The History of EN 15038
EN 15038:2006, officially titled "Translation services — Service requirements," was published by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) in April 2006. It was a landmark document for the translation industry — the first formal European standard that specifically addressed the quality requirements for translation service providers.
Before EN 15038, there was no widely accepted framework for evaluating translation service quality. Agencies operated according to their own internal processes, and clients had no standardized way to compare providers. The arrival of EN 15038 changed that by establishing minimum requirements for translation service providers across several key areas.
The standard defined requirements for human and technical resources, quality management, project management, client-supplier relationships, and the translation process itself. Most notably, it introduced the mandatory requirement for revision — a check of the translation against the source text by a second person — which became a defining characteristic of quality-conscious translation workflows.
Why EN 15038 Was Successful
EN 15038 gained rapid adoption across Europe for several reasons. It provided a common quality framework that procurement teams could reference in tenders. It gave agencies a benchmark to measure their processes against. And it elevated the professionalism of the entire industry by codifying best practices that leading agencies were already following.
Government procurement agencies in the EU began referencing EN 15038 in their tender requirements, effectively making it a prerequisite for agencies seeking public sector translation contracts. Many private sector buyers followed suit, recognizing the value of a standardized quality benchmark.
Why EN 15038 Was Replaced
Despite its success, EN 15038 had significant limitations that became increasingly apparent over time. As a European standard, its geographic scope was inherently limited. Translation agencies in Asia, the Americas, and other regions had no equivalent framework, creating a fragmented global landscape where quality standards varied by region.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recognized the need for a truly global translation quality standard. Working through ISO Technical Committee 37 (Terminology and other language and content resources), a working group was established to develop an international standard based on, but improving upon, EN 15038.
The result was ISO 17100:2015, published in May 2015. Upon its publication, CEN formally withdrew EN 15038, and European national standards bodies replaced their local adoptions of EN 15038 with adoptions of ISO 17100. The transition was complete: EN 15038 ceased to exist as a current standard.
Key Differences Between EN 15038 and ISO 17100
Geographic Scope
The most obvious difference is scope. EN 15038 was a European standard, adopted by CEN member countries but carrying no formal weight outside Europe. ISO 17100 is an international standard recognized by ISO's 160+ member bodies worldwide. For translation agencies operating globally, this difference is transformative. A single certification now carries weight in every market, rather than being limited to European clients and procurement processes.
This expanded scope also means that ISO 17100 was developed with input from a broader range of stakeholders, including representatives from Asia, the Americas, and other regions. The result is a standard that better reflects the diversity of the global translation market.
Translator Competence Requirements
Both standards address translator competence, but ISO 17100 provides significantly more detail and flexibility in how competence can be demonstrated. EN 15038 referenced formal qualifications (university degrees in translation or equivalent) but was relatively vague about alternative pathways.
ISO 17100 specifies five distinct ways a translator can demonstrate competence: a recognized graduate qualification in translation, a recognized graduate qualification in any other field plus two years of full-time professional experience, five years of full-time professional translation experience, or equivalent qualifications. This more detailed and flexible approach acknowledges the reality that many excellent translators enter the profession through non-traditional routes.
ISO 17100 recognizes that competent translators come from diverse backgrounds. The standard provides five clear pathways to demonstrate qualification, making it more inclusive while maintaining rigorous quality expectations.
Technology Requirements
EN 15038 was published in 2006, when translation technology was far less mature than it is today. The standard made limited reference to technology tools and provided minimal guidance on translation memory management, terminology database requirements, or quality assurance tool usage.
ISO 17100 addresses technology more comprehensively, recognizing the central role that CAT tools, translation memories, terminology databases, and quality assurance software play in modern translation workflows. While the standard does not mandate specific tools, it requires that translation service providers have appropriate technological resources in place and that these resources are properly managed.
Project Management Framework
ISO 17100 provides a more structured and comprehensive project management framework than EN 15038. The standard breaks the translation process into clearly defined phases: pre-production (including project feasibility assessment, quotation preparation, and specifications analysis), production (translation, check, revision, review, proofreading, and final verification), and post-production (client feedback handling and project closure).
This more granular framework provides clearer guidance for agencies implementing the standard and gives auditors more specific criteria to assess during certification audits. EN 15038's project management requirements, while groundbreaking at the time, were less detailed and left more room for interpretation.
Revision and Review Distinctions
EN 15038 introduced the concept of mandatory revision (bilingual check by a second person) and optional review (monolingual check by a domain expert). ISO 17100 maintains these concepts but defines them more precisely and clarifies the qualifications required for each role.
Under ISO 17100, the reviser must meet the same competence requirements as the translator, ensuring that the mandatory quality check is performed by someone with equivalent expertise. This represents a strengthening of the quality assurance requirements compared to EN 15038, which was less explicit about reviser qualifications.
What This Means for Agencies Still Referencing EN 15038
If your agency's marketing materials, contracts, or internal documentation still reference EN 15038, it is time to update. EN 15038 has been officially withdrawn for over a decade, and continued reference to it signals to clients and auditors that your organization has not kept pace with industry developments.
More practically, EN 15038 certification is no longer available from accredited certification bodies. Any agency claiming EN 15038 certification is referencing a historical credential that can no longer be renewed or verified. Clients who understand the standards landscape will view this as a red flag rather than a quality indicator.
If your clients' contracts or procurement requirements still reference EN 15038, consider proactively suggesting an update to reference ISO 17100 instead. This demonstrates your awareness of current standards and positions you as a knowledgeable partner.
Migration Guide: From EN 15038 to ISO 17100
For agencies that were previously certified to EN 15038 or had processes aligned with that standard, the migration to ISO 17100 is straightforward. The two standards share the same DNA — ISO 17100 evolved from EN 15038, so most EN 15038 processes remain valid under the newer standard. However, several areas require attention.
Step 1: Gap Analysis
Conduct a thorough gap analysis comparing your current processes against ISO 17100 requirements. Pay particular attention to translator competence documentation (ISO 17100 requires more specific evidence), technology resource management, and project management documentation. A free readiness assessment at baltum.ai can help you identify specific gaps quickly.
Step 2: Update Documentation
Revise your quality management documentation to reflect ISO 17100 terminology and requirements. Update process flowcharts to include the more detailed pre-production, production, and post-production phases specified in ISO 17100. Ensure that your translator qualification records meet the five-pathway competence framework.
Step 3: Strengthen Competence Records
Review your translator and reviser files to ensure each individual's competence is documented according to ISO 17100's specific requirements. Create standardized competence assessment templates that map to the five qualification pathways defined in the standard.
Step 4: Technology Audit
Assess your technology infrastructure against ISO 17100's requirements for appropriate technological resources. Document your translation memory management procedures, terminology database maintenance practices, and quality assurance tool usage. Ensure that data security measures for translation technology are documented and enforced.
Step 5: Certification Audit
Engage an accredited certification body to conduct your ISO 17100 certification audit. If you were previously EN 15038 certified, the transition audit is typically simpler than a first-time certification because many of your processes will already be aligned with the standard's requirements.
Quick Comparison Summary
EN 15038 (2006–2015): European scope, basic translator competence framework, limited technology guidance, pioneered mandatory revision concept.
ISO 17100 (2015–present): Global scope, five-pathway competence framework, comprehensive technology requirements, detailed project management phases, strengthened reviser qualifications, ongoing surveillance audits.
Conclusion: Embrace the Current Standard
EN 15038 played a crucial role in professionalizing the translation industry and establishing the foundation for quality-based competition among language service providers. Its legacy lives on in ISO 17100, which builds upon EN 15038's principles while extending their reach to a global audience and reflecting the realities of modern translation practice.
For any agency that has not yet made the transition, the time to act is now. ISO 17100 is the current, globally recognized standard for translation services quality. Holding ISO 17100 certification demonstrates that your agency operates at the highest international standard — not a decade-old European benchmark that no longer exists.
The migration path is well-defined, and the investment in time and resources is modest for agencies that already had strong processes under EN 15038. The return, in terms of market access, client confidence, and competitive positioning, makes the transition one of the easiest decisions an agency owner can make.
Ready to upgrade from EN 15038 to ISO 17100?
Start with a free gap analysis at baltum.ai or request a quote from TranslationCert. We will help you migrate smoothly to the current international standard.