Translation services: price objection handling
Use this price objection handling exercise to identify whether the concern is affordability, comparison, confidence or scope before discussing a concession. You are discussing a translation and terminology review project with a marketing manager publishing in a new market. The point of the practice is to make a useful decision together, including recognising when the offer is not a fit.
Agree what drives the concern and compare at least two honest options, including keeping the original scope.
The situation
In this fictional brief, the same product terms are translated inconsistently across materials. The buyer wants a reviewed translation with an agreed terminology glossary. Your offer is a translation and terminology review project, but you must first establish whether its scope addresses the actual need.
A relevant delivery constraint is that the client must identify the intended audience and final reviewer. Treat that as a fact in the exercise; do not remove it to make the sale easier.
| Your counterpart | a marketing manager publishing in a new market |
|---|---|
| Offer under discussion | a translation and terminology review project |
| Evidence available | a short translated sample with reviewer comments and terminology decisions |
| Terms to clarify | Define language variant, word count, file formats, review rounds and specialist checks. |
How to approach price objection handling
A useful question for this stage: “If the price stayed the same, which part of the proposal would still feel uncertain?” Ask it when the conversation creates a reason for it, rather than reciting every question in order.
- Acknowledge the concern. Identify the comparison and the decision criterion. Make the scope visible before discussing alternatives.
- Ground the discussion in the buyer’s work. Ask: “Which product terms must stay consistent across every customer touchpoint?” Listen for a concrete example before making a claim.
- Use evidence relevant to the decision: a short translated sample with reviewer comments and terminology decisions. Explain what it demonstrates and what remains unverified.
- Agree what drives the concern and compare at least two honest options, including keeping the original scope.
An industry-specific concern
Buyer: “An automatic translation is almost free.”
Possible response: “It may be useful for a draft. Let us compare the audience, consequences of errors and the level of human review the material needs.”
Why this response helps: it acknowledges the concern, brings the discussion back to a verifiable requirement and leaves room for a different decision. Adapt the wording to what the buyer actually said.
Run the practice
- Prepare for two minutes. One person takes the seller role and one plays a marketing manager publishing in a new market. Read the offer and constraint separately from your preferred answer.
- Have a five-minute conversation focused on identify whether the concern is affordability, comparison, confidence or scope before discussing a concession. The buyer should answer consistently with the brief and ask for evidence when a claim is vague.
- Add this challenge: The buyer asks for an immediate percentage discount. You can change scope or timing, but you cannot invent margin or authority.
- Pause for feedback. Quote one useful question and one missed opportunity. Repeat the difficult exchange using a different response.
- Finish by writing the actual agreement. A sensible option, when it fits, is to translate a representative sample and agree the review standard. A clear decision to pause is also a useful outcome.
What to avoid
| Common mistake | Offering a discount before discovering what the buyer is worried about. |
|---|---|
| A stronger direction | Let us check whether we are comparing the same scope and responsibilities first. |
| Scope and claim boundary | Do not claim legal certification or native-market validation unless provided. |
| What to measure in real work | consistency with the approved glossary and resolution of reviewer comments. Establish a baseline and definition before interpreting a change. |
An example conversation
When you say the price is too high, what are you comparing it with?
Our concern is that the same product terms are translated inconsistently across materials. Also, the client must identify the intended audience and final reviewer.
Which product terms must stay consistent across every customer touchpoint?
An automatic translation is almost free.
It may be useful for a draft. Let us compare the audience, consequences of errors and the level of human review the material needs.
If the price stayed the same, which part of the proposal would still feel uncertain?
Your working sheet.
Make the exercise your own. Notes are saved in this browser when storage is available. Download a copy to keep; avoid confidential information on a shared device.
Example: the same product terms are translated inconsistently across materials; the client must identify the intended audience and final reviewer.
Example: If the price stayed the same, which part of the proposal would still feel uncertain? Industry question: Which product terms must stay consistent across every customer touchpoint?
Example: a short translated sample with reviewer comments and terminology decisions. Do not claim legal certification or native-market validation unless provided.
Example: Propose a clear next step, such as: translate a representative sample and agree the review standard. Confirm the owner and date.
Review your work
This is a reflection checklist, not an automated assessment.
Questions
Who is this translation services exercise for?+
Can I use the example as a script?+
How should I assess the result?+
Fictional training scenario. The dialogue illustrates response choices; it is not a customer testimonial or a record of a real sale.
Explore more sales resourcesTake the conversation further.
Read a practical guide to structuring your sales practice, or explore the current London sales masterclass.
Plan your sales practiceExplore Jordan Belfort in London