[CAUT] bid savvy

[Jeff Tanner]

On Jan 31, 2007, at 10:42 PM, <lafargue at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Sorry if this is a duplicate, My other computer doesn't appear to  
> be posting this msg.....
> Can anyone advise me on advising a university here on how to word a  
> bid to techs and maximize the chance of getting what they want as  
> far as level of work.  I mean, is "to factory spec"the only thing  
> they can use as a standard to level the playing field on bidders?  
> If they asked for a price on regulating a piano, seven techs will  
> do more than one level of work and charge different amounts and all  
> be able to call it a "regulation" (and factory spec is not even  
> optimum at the highest levels).  They can ask for bids for concert  
> tuning and voicing and get lots of different levels of work, even  
> from RPT's.  Are there sources of info on handling this and  
> optimizing the chances of getting what they are paying for?  The  
> whole system just doesn't seem to be conducive to getting good  
> quality work, just the cheapest price.   Thanks in advance.
>


This might just be the biggest problem we have in our profession.   
And it doesn't end with schools putting out bids.  It happens every  
day when you get that call from people getting prices from the yellow  
pages advertisers.  RPT doesn't guarantee any level of skill, just a  
floor level of basic competence, and we all know non members and  
associates alike who just aren't interested in joining organizations  
or being tested but whose work far surpasses RPT level.  Since our  
profession is not regulated, we run a huge risk of anti trust legal  
problems if the PTG dictates to private or public employers what  
constitutes competence.

The CAUT committee is currently working on a form of continuing  
education credit one can add to his or her resume, but it will only  
be based on attendance of whatever classes happen to be available.   
There is no skill level testing.  The only skill proving prerequisite  
is RPT.

We have the same problem in the full time CAUT setting with wording  
job descriptions.  The only wording I have seen that seems to  
indicate a higher level of ability says something along the lines of  
"successful concert preparation experience at the level required by  
professional touring artists", and to provide some evidence of that  
experience.  But even that has holes.  Perhaps requiring a list of  
references?

Unfortunately, you are correct.  The bid process is designed to  
produce the lowest initial cost, and this is a very difficult  
obstacle to navigate in our unregulated profession.

Fred Sturm wrote:
> How to describe the work they want done? I'm not sure factory spec  
> is going to lead to the results they want.

Yes, but factory spec is better than nothing.  I would suspect in  
most cases the pianos stay so far out that factory spec is a very  
desirable improvement.  I've got a host of pianos here, myself, that  
I wish I had time to keep at least in the ballpark of factory spec.   
Workload is so more the issue in most situations that being able to  
exploit potential is an impossible dream. Agreed, yes, one needs to  
have that ability when it comes to the concert piano.  But it is  
still a workload/cost issue.



Jeff Tanner, RPT
University of South Carolina



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20070201/fd392af1/attachment.html