<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Sep 10, 2008, at 7:05 PM, Jeff Tanner wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; ">But what I learned from the process is that there are really two ways to improving salary, and neither one of them involves someone else noticing how great your work is and generously offering to increase your salary.  That approach didn't work at all.</span></blockquote></div><br><div><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Hi Jeff,</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Fascinating account. I agree with you that doing high quality work did not get you the salary you wanted. I will argue, though, that what you did was to set a standard, and to create a demand for that standard. When you left they wanted to maintain and even improve on that standard, or so it seems, and they were willing to spend what it took to do so. </div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I think that many institutions simply accept a very low standard of piano care, partly because that's what they have become used to (partly because that may be all that is available considering the location and the skills possessed by the techs in the area). If they want something better, what they think is that they need to spend millions on new, better instruments, and they don't have that kind of money. If they come up with that kind of money, they buy the new instruments and watch them deteriorate very quickly, because all they do is have them tuned. They need to learn that comprehensive care is the key to quality pianos. They will learn that best if they see models of it in real life. And if we communicate well with them.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>About the Steinway workload calculation, anybody can do that, you don't have to have a Steinway rep come through. I believe the worksheets are up on the Steinway site. If that gives you better credibility than the Guidelines, by all means use it. Personally, I think that far too much emphasis is placed on the workload aspect of the Guidelines. It's a help, maybe, but really a minor part of the document. I think the workload formula is more useful as a way of organizing your time and work: it asks the questions you need to ask, and gives you clues as to how to decide on priorities and set up a schedule. And it points out the variables that make it easier or harder to maintain a high standard of service.<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">Regards,</div><div>Fred Sturm</div><div>University of New Mexico</div><div><a href="mailto:fssturm@unm.edu">fssturm@unm.edu</a></div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div></div></div><br><div></div></div></body></html>