Research Diagnostics Inc-reply

Ransom Hill Bioscience visla at ix.netcom.com
Thu Mar 25 16:20:30 EST 1999


In article <199903252010.NAA78598 at nestor.NMSU.Edu>,
	hroychow at NMSU.EDU ("Hiranya S. Roychowdhury") wrote:

>The following response from "Research Diagnostics Inc" confirms the
>contention in the original posting by Dr. Levenson. They ARE rude!! A firm,
>that survives on providing a service to its customers directly, should
>"please everyone". If it admits to being unable to do so, then it should
>look elsewhere for its revenue. There is also something very wrong with a
>company that responds to an identifiable person as X, Y or Z, and prefers to
>do so in apparent anonnymity.
>
>
>
>At 02:05 PM 3/24/99 -0800, ResearchD at aol.com wrote:
>>We regret that we cannot please everyone and that occasionally error on the
>>web site happen (a II instead of a III on the top of the description). 
>>
>>By the way, the product label and spec sheet sent with the product were
>>correct.
>>
>>We of course allowed the return and the invoice was canceled.
>>
>>It is a shame that such public action is required and a response necessary.
>>We wish Dr X the best in his/her research and look forward to continuing in
>>our 10th year with the research market.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>Research Diagnostics Inc
>>Pleasant Hill Road
>>Flanders NJ 07836
>>phone 973-584-7093
>>fax 973-584-0210
>>email:ResearchD at aol.com
>>web: http://www.researchd.com
>
>
>Dr. Hiranya Sankar Roychowdhury
>GENE LAB/ EPPWS
>New Mexico State University
>Las Cruces, NM 88003
>Ph. (505) 646-5785
>hroychow at nmsu.edu
>

Dear Hiranya:

You are correct in your conclusion that the representatives of the company in question seemed to
go out of their way to be rude. There is no justification for that, any more than there is
justification for customers to be rude to the representatives of companies (although there was
certainly no evidence of that having occurred in this case). It is important, nevertheless, to
remember that it a two-way street. The bottom line being that there is no reason why anyone
cannot be nice to others with whom he or she is dealing.

The statement you made, "A firm, that survives on providing a service to its customers directly,
should 'please everyone'", is not really correct, although I believe you meant it in a different
sense than a literal one.  Indeed, there is no compelling reason for a company to attempt to
please a customer who is rude, abrasive, or makes absurd demands on it.  Often the company would
prefer to be rid of that kind of customer.  Although, as I have said, there is no indication of
that having happened in the case under discussion, it happens often enough.  To believe
otherwise puts one at risk of adopting an arrogant attitude toward the representatives of the
companies who supply materials to the scientific community.  

It has been my experience that most people in this world, indeed, the overwhelming majority, are
nice folks.  Whether they work for a corporation or a university (which is surprisingly like a
corporation in this day and age), they are, for the most part, decent people.

Best Regards,
Mike MacDonell, Ph. D.
Chief Scientific Officer
Ransom Hill Bioscience, Inc. 



More information about the Methods mailing list