Workload - interpreting the numbers

[Teresa Severin]

Young Oh,
Thank you for your offer but we have decided not to meet with you regarding
export opportunities.  I have learned that in the past,  our company has
been associated with representatives of the Department of Commerce and our
feeling is that we have already explored  the export opportunities offered
by the DOC.

Sincerely,
Teresa Severin
Vice President Marketing
Dampp-Chaser Corporation
teresa_severin@dampp-chaser.com
800-438-1524
828-692-8271 USA
828-692-8272 (FAX)
P. O. Box 1610
Hendersonville  NC 28793
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Sturm" <fssturm@unm.edu>
To: <caut@ptg.org>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:26 PM
Subject: Workload - interpreting the numbers


> I'm going off in a different direction for a moment. I think it would
> be useful to append a short explanatory note to the formula, for the use
> of both the techs and any administrators/faculty they might show it to.
> This won't be in the form of a draft, just preliminary ideas for what
> might be contained in such a statement.
>
> The numbers generated by the workload formula are useful beyond simply
> producing a "recommended workload" and a recommended staffing level.
> They can also provide insights into specific needs and long term
> planning.
> Each factor (multiplier) will be a number between 0.1 and 2.0 [these
> numbers are arbitrary, and should probably be fussed with]. Under the
> design of this formula, numbers will generally be fairly close to 1.0
> for most factors in most average situations. Numbers 1.2 or above, or
> 0.8 or below, indicate special circumstances that deserve scrutiny. Some
> examples:
> 1) Under "climate control," numbers under 0.8 indicate conditions that
> lead to tuning instability and other deterioration of pianos. Humidity
> control in the building is strongly encouraged in these cases.
> Alternately, humidity control systems can be installed in individual
> pianos. Investment in humidity control is probably the single most cost
> effective investment in terms of achieving and maintaining high
> standards.
> 2) Under "condition" and/or "age," low numbers indicate a need to
> consider possibly contracting out a fairly large amount of
> rebuilding/reconditioning work over the short term, and/or investing in
> new pianos. High numbers in these areas indicate a new inventory, which
> can be expected to deteriorate over time if plans are not made for
> regular replacement. In other words, if staffing is based on these
> numbers, without simulataneously committing to a regular program of
> replacement, over time the staffing needs will increase and/or quality
> will suffer.
> 3) Under "usage" and "acceptable standards," low numbers will generally
> indicate a conservatory or performance oriented situation, while higher
> numbers will indicate more of a "general" music department situation. If
> this is not the case, low numbers may indicate an inadequate inventory,
> while low numbers may indicate more instruments than are necessary.
>
> As always, comments/suggestions welcome and solicited.
> Regards,
> Fred Sturm
> University of New Mexico