Content that stops drifting apart between languages.
A multilingual content architecture for pharmaceutical companies whose product specifications and technical facts have diverged across languages over time, rebuilt so a fact is stored once and rendered consistently everywhere.
The failure pattern is predictable: each market edits its own language version independently, and within a couple of years the German and Spanish pages describe the same product differently. In a regulated sector that is a compliance exposure, not just an inconsistency.
A content model separating shared technical facts from translatable copy, migration of existing divergent content back to a single source, market-specific claim handling where genuinely needed, and a publishing workflow that prevents future drift.
We build the structure translated content lives in and manage the workflow around it, so your translation and linguistic review partners can plug straight in without technical friction.
The scope our multilingual content architecture work has operated within.
The mechanism of drift differs by how content is currently managed. Multilingual content architecture starts from that mechanism.
What comes up when languages have drifted apart.
The audit compares content directly across every language version rather than relying on assumptions, cross-referencing claims, dates and figures page by page to flag factual discrepancies. Most companies are surprised by how much divergence has accumulated once older translations, regional updates and one-off edits are checked systematically against each other.
No, translation and linguistic review sit with a specialist supplier or your own local teams, not with us. What we build is the content architecture the translated text lives in, along with the workflow that routes new content for translation and approval, so every language version follows the same path before publishing rather than drifting independently.
That is determined together with your team during the migration itself, rather than assumed in advance. The usual approach is checking each disputed claim against the authoritative regulatory source or master document, since the existing language version that has been live longest is not automatically the one that is currently correct.
Complementary, and best fixed together where both problems exist. This work addresses the content-model side of keeping languages accurate and consistent, while see multi-country architecture covers the technical targeting layer — hreflang, domain structure — that search engines rely on, which often needs correcting alongside the content model rather than in isolation.
Multilingual content architecture often connects to these related problems.
A catalogue that has diverged between languages over time. Tell us how many languages and we will tell you how we would approach the multilingual content architecture.