When teams talk about localization, it’s often framed as a finishing step. Ship the product, extract the strings, translate, and move on. However, as Szymon Metkowski, Language and UX Consultant at Metkowski Translations, explains in this episode of The Agile Localization Podcast, that mindset is exactly what causes broken interfaces, confusing microcopy, and lost user trust.
In this conversation with host Stefan Huyghe, Szymon unpacks what UX-aware localization really looks like in practice. From why microcopy failures can quietly kill conversions, to how AI can help or hurt depending on how it’s used, the message is clear: if language isn’t considered during design, no amount of post-launch fixes will fully save the experience.
Listen to the new episode on:
Localization as a Trust Signal
One of the biggest misconceptions Szymon sees is the idea that localization is just replacing words. From his perspective, language is not a cosmetic layer. It’s a core part of how users decide whether they trust a product. Well-localized UX keeps users in an emotional, intuitive flow. Poor localization does the opposite. It forces people into analysis mode, where they start noticing errors, questioning credibility, and hesitating.
Szymon points to multiple studies showing that users overwhelmingly prefer content in their native language and that language quality directly influences trust. If localization feels awkward or machine-generated, users subconsciously start looking for what else might be wrong. At that point, you are no longer competing with global brands. You are competing with native alternatives that feel right from the first click.
Why Design Is the Real Localization Bottleneck
Many UX localization problems are not caused by translators. They are caused by designs that assume English grammar, English word length, and English sentence structure.
Szymon explains how interfaces often collapse when localized because linguists are brought in too late. Labels overflow. Lines break. Messages lose clarity. And suddenly, teams are scrambling to fix UI issues right before launch, when timelines are tight, and changes are expensive.
His solution? Include linguists in the design phase. Not to translate early, but to help shape the source text that can survive real languages. Small design choices, like avoiding gendered verbs or overly specific phrasing, can eliminate entire classes of localization problems later. Designing for localization upfront is far cheaper than retrofitting after the fact.
"Please don’t treat the localization as a nice-to-have feature. It’s a selling point.
Microcopy: Small Text, Massive Impact
Microcopy is where UX localization succeeds or fails. These tiny bits of text, error messages, confirmations, button labels, and helper hints are often the first real interaction users have with a product.
According to Szymon, microcopy failures represent the highest-impact localization errors. When microcopy is unclear or culturally off, users immediately lose confidence. If the product cannot clearly say “your file is saved” in a natural way, how can it be trusted with something more important?
Szymon also highlights something often overlooked: microcopy has to fulfill a function, not sound clever or generic. It must be unambiguous, culturally natural, and emotionally appropriate. This is also where local humor, when done right, can become a competitive advantage, but only if it’s vetted by someone embedded in the culture.
AI in UX Localization
Szymon is pragmatic about AI. He uses it, especially to generate alternative translations, break repetitive structures, and support creative transcreation. For example, when source content relies heavily on language-specific structures that do not translate well, AI can help generate multiple variants that a human can refine.
But he is firm on one point: AI should never operate without supervision. The biggest risk is not bad grammar. It is nonsense. AI-generated copy can look polished while being culturally wrong, factually incorrect, or subtly misleading.
The safeguard is supervision throughout the workflow, not just post-editing. That includes human review, well-designed glossaries, predefined grammar rules, and prompt strategies aligned with brand voice.
How to Measure Whether Localization Is Actually Working
Instead of inventing special localization KPIs, Szymon recommends using native product metrics. Does the user journey succeed? Do users drop off quickly? Do they switch from their native language back to English? That last signal is especially telling. If users abandon a localized experience in favor of English, it is often a sign that something feels wrong. Localization success shows up directly in behavior.
Final Thoughts From Szymon
Localization is a selling point. Treating it as an afterthought creates friction, rework, and lost trust. Treating it as part of product design creates smoother experiences and stronger global adoption. Szymon’s advice for teams scaling internationally is refreshingly bold: design with language in mind, bring linguists in early, and don’t be afraid to use humor and personality, as long as it is vetted locally. Great UX localization does not feel translated. It feels native by design.
Szymon’s Background
Szymon Metkowski is the Language and UX Consultant at Metkowski Translations, bringing over two decades of experience in the language industry. He specializes in UX localization, cultural adaptation, and the integration of AI and language management systems into translation workflows.
Listen to the new episode on:
Yuliia Makarenko
Yuliia Makarenko is a marketing specialist with over a decade of experience, and she’s all about creating content that readers will love. She’s a pro at using her skills in SEO, research, and data analysis to write useful content. When she’s not diving into content creation, you can find her reading a good thriller, practicing some yoga, or simply enjoying playtime with her little one.