Two interpreters working together should strengthen access, not create another dynamic for the Deaf person to navigate.
Co-working in BSL interpreting is intended to support effective communication through shared responsibility, preparation and professional cooperation.
Two interpreters are present, working as a team.
But what happens when that partnership begins to feel more like competition?
Through my own experiences and wider observations, I've noticed how the dynamics between co-working interpreters can sometimes become more visible than the collaboration itself.
One interpreter may take control without discussion. Corrections may become frequent or uncomfortable. Differences in approach may begin to affect how the interpreters work together.
And the Deaf person can notice.
The tension. The interruptions. The lack of coordination.
Instead of concentrating fully on the conversation, they may find themselves distracted by what is happening between the professionals providing their access.
That raises an important question.
When does professional collaboration become a distraction from the communication it is supposed to support?
Of course, interpreters do not have to agree on everything.
Different interpretations, professional judgements and approaches are part of working between languages. Sometimes, corrections or clarifications are necessary to maintain accuracy.
The issue is not that one interpreter corrects another.
It is how those situations are handled.
Is the intervention necessary for accuracy? Is it communicated professionally? Does it support the interpreting process, or does it create confusion and tension?
There is a difference between helping a colleague and appearing to compete for control.
Co-working also involves managing demanding assignments, sharing responsibilities and supporting one another when concentration or fatigue becomes an issue.
For that to work, interpreters need mutual trust, clear communication and an understanding of their respective roles.
But professional relationships should not become the responsibility of the Deaf person to manage.
If tension develops between interpreters, the person relying on the interpretation should not be left feeling caught in the middle.
Their attention should remain on the discussion, the information and their own participation.
This does not mean every disagreement is unprofessional or that every awkward interaction reflects competition.
Interpreters are human. Different personalities, working styles and professional judgements will not always align perfectly.
But professionalism includes recognising when those differences begin to affect the work.
What matters is whether the interpreters can address them without allowing the dynamics between themselves to overshadow the purpose of the assignment.
And if those dynamics affect access, the Deaf person's concerns should be taken seriously.
Co-working should not become a measure of who knows more, who performs better or who has the final say.
It should be a professional partnership built around effective communication.
When interpreters work together, the quality of their collaboration matters just as much as their individual skills.
Because two qualified interpreters being present does not automatically mean they are functioning as an effective team.
THE QUESTION
What happens to communication access when the professional dynamics between co-working interpreters begin to overshadow the conversation they are there to interpret?
