Classification,clarification,&accountability

[David Renaud]

Warning:

The following IS NOT meant to criticize Associates
in any way. I know some associates that are very
good tuners, and some that are very good technicians.
The following post is meant to address a specific problem.
In fact.... I believe serious associate members suffer
because of a few. The suggestions addressing the
following problem would improve their stature, respect, accelerate
training,
encourage more to become RPT's, and raise standards.

Problem???
------------------------------------------
I show up to tune Yamaha grand.
Client complains about last technician.
Client just spent money on regulation.
Piano desperately requires regulation,
voicing, seating strings........very funky sound,
irregular touch, potentially very nice instrument.
I do not ask who it was, thinking it unprofessional,
but suggest that hiring an RPT, of which there
are "X" number in our region, might help him feel
more secure that a min. standard was being given.

Reply: " I did hire an RPT" ......and the name.

The Associate had promoted himself as a member
of the guild, without  info. concerning designation,
according to client.

This type of misunderstanding hurts RPT's everywhere.
Shoddy work by an Associate hurts the reputation of
Associates everywhere.

I'm sure others can share stories, but we don't
need to hear them, lets not start beating on all Associates,
on account of a few stories and start generalizing.
I want this thread to expand on positive suggestions.

General Observations relating to this.
------------------------------------------
Please correct me if I am wrong about these statements.

Absolutely anyone can show up, pay money,
and be an Associate. As I told the client, you
pay and become an Associate tomorrow.

The new Associate may or may not be interested
in future training, there are no obligations.

It is difficult to discipline, chastise by committe,
or by board, because any problem then becomes a
public affair. Has to be very serious to do anything.
(One on one would be much easier)

Note: I was content as an associate for many years,
before moving on. RPT's in the local were very
patient, much credit to them.

Suggestions....Thoughts----What ifs
------------------------------------------

What if,
there was an informal interview,
and written test, where the cadidate
had to demonstrate, some basic abilities
just to prove they have taken some initiative
in the field, and have begun the journey.
Very basic.

What if,
There was a min. number of meetings
an associate has to attend per year to
maintain the status.

What if,
an RPT sponsor is required, making
one on one private follow up,
and encouragement easier.If this
is formalized,  more interaction would happen
naturally. Perhaps the sponsor could oversee
the first few regulations, hammer jobs....etc.
inasmuch as directing the associate to past journal
articles, inspecting first jobs, and having
authority to request one of those jobs
should be redone if requiring improvement..

Benifits:

If these or similar practices were implemented,
Associate would mean more then it does now
, the many serious associates out there
could guarantee their clients more accountability,
guarantee the designation means they definitely are
involved in ongoing training, and be able to involve
a specific third party overseer if they want to.
Some clients might like knowing the job is to
be inspected by a third party. Some associates
may be attracted to the accelerate training
opportunities this might present.

-----------------------------------------------------
One way of implementing this, that I have never
yet heard suggested, would be to leave designations
exactly as they are, but add a third category for
Associates that will make a minimum commitment
to attendance at training, accountability, sponsorship,
informal testing.
Most associates could move up their designation
immediately just by formally making the commitment,
and having a sponsor.  Perhaps then remaining Associates
could no longer advertise as members, but this new
category could, and it would mean more. The
associates that are left might be piano dealers,
or others with an interest in pianos, but have
reasons not to persure the service angle as a
professional career for themselves personally.
A hobbyist might remain in this designation,
because they want to support the orginization,
participate in some meetings, but do not wish
to becoming a professional piano technician.
Their designation would no longer be lumped in
with those wanting to move ahead.

The people that would benifit the most from this
would be serious associates. It would encourage
RPT's to become more involved with them, and
give the position more stature.


Once again: You may flame me for my ideas,
should they deserve criticism on their own grounds,
but lets stay away from generalizations. Other
ideas on how to deal with the problem as I describe
it.

                              Sincerely
                              Dave Renaud