Guidelines comments

[Fred Sturm]

Hi WIm,
 You're right that the numbers crunchers (who seem to be the ones in 
charge, at least of the purse strings), would like us to give them a cost 
benefit analysis in terms they can easily understand. The problem with 
trying to come up with such a thing, as I see it, is that having an 
adequate number of techs per pianos will produce more of a qualitative 
difference than a quantitative one.
	I think we are saying that, if you want the pianos in tune and in 
condition at a level acceptable for higher education use, you need to 
invest in this much maintenance. Will it make the pianos "last longer?" I 
don't know that it will. Pianos "last" forever (relatively speaking). Keys 
continue to go up and down, producing sounds, in most cases for 60 or more 
years, barring vandalism, based on one or two services per year. So unless 
a firm idea of quality is included in the formula, our workload 
recommendation frankly makes little economic sense.
	That said, one useful approach is making the argument that replacing parts 
and rebuilding is less expensive than springing for a new piano. I suppose 
it might be possible to come up with some kind of quantitative formula 
along these lines. Do you have any notions in this regard? Cost of new 
pinblock, soundboard, action replacement versus brand new instrument, for 
example, extended over time. That more or less assumes rebuilding is done 
in-house, though.
	A part of our work involves preventive maintenance - tightening action 
screws is a good example - but I doubt it takes up a very large percentage 
of our time.
	Another fruitful approach vis a vis the bean counters, in my experience, 
is to look at maintenance and replacement budget as a percentage of 
inventory value (calculated in replacement value terms). This is the kind 
of figure they are used to - replacing and maintaining the automotive 
fleet, the computers, buildings and the like. Generally they'll be 
astounded at how low our budgets are when seen in these terms. We address 
this in the Guidelines in the section labeled Budget.
	
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico

--On Monday, June 9, 2003 5:26 PM -0400 Wimblees@aol.com wrote:

> First of all, thank you Fred and Bill for putting together this
> Guideline. This document will go a long way towards helping universities
> cope with the piano maintenance problem.
>
> In reviewing this plan, there is one thing that I keep looking for.
> Perhaps it's in there, but I can't find it. What I am looking for is
> perhaps the same thing university administrators might be looking for,
> and that is a cost vs longevity ratio.
>
> What I mean is, if a university spends x number of dollars on inventory,
> and spends x number of dollars on a technician to maintain this
> inventory, how long can the inventory be expected to last? And what would
> happen to the inventory if the university spends less on maintenance? How
> much sooner will the inventory need to be replaced?
>
> The workload formula tells an administrator how many technicians are
> needed for the number of pianos the school has. But let's say a school
> needs 2.5 technicians for its inventory. What will the effect be on that
> inventory if only 1 full time technician is hired? How much more will it
> cost them in the long run?
>
> I realize this might not be something that can be predicted, but maybe we
> can give it a shot. The other problem we might run into is a disturbing
> piece of information I learned last year. Unfortunately, what I found out
> is that even within the music department, much less the university in
> general, most professors, and even the chair of the department, don't
> care what happens 20 or 40 years from now. Most only care about what
> happens next year. Will they have enough money for their pet project, or
> scholarships, and will they get the raise they were promised? Most of
> them would rather spend $10,000 now on scholarships for next year's
> students, to justify their teaching schedule, than $10,000 for parts for
> the pianos so they will last another 20 years.
>
> So I realize that providing the information I am looking for might not do
> any good, but I think this is the kind of information a school would need
> to adequately protect their inventory.
>
> Wim
>