<HTML>In a message dated 7/2/02 11:08:41 AM Central Daylight Time, fssturm@unm.edu writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">In my case, 80 pianos in a condition of neglect after a long period of understaffing were predicted to need four full time techs. Current formula predicts close to one full time, which I would call a very good level of staffing, near "ideal." I can't imagine what four full timers would find to pass the time. The few colleagues who have also run the current numbers have also stated that results are very close to "dead on" in their own situations.    </BLOCKQUOTE> Fred This is very similar to my situation. With as much work was needed to be done to all the pianos when I first got here, 2 or 3 more techs would have been helpful. But then once all the pianos were brought up to acceptable standards, they would have been sitting around most of the time. We need to think about that in future situations. If a department wants all the pianos fixed NOW, then they need to hire the people to get it done. But if they are willing to wait a couple of years while one tech muddles through all the pianos, one tech can take care of all the piano without too much difficulty. This is where the workload formula can be adjusted to suit the circumstance, (Although I think my formula might be better suited for that, because you can assign rebuilding chores on a yearly basis). Wim </HTML>