We discuss a great deal here about the customer experience and how important it is in this day and age for companies to truly open up a dialog with their users. I found this absolutely amazing letter online that I had to share. Let me give you a short back story on this.

There is a real person named Scott Williams who lives in Newport, Vermont. What I guess Mr. Williams does as a hobby is he digs things up in his backyard and then sends them to the Smithsonian Institute. He names the random crap with scientific sounding names he finds in his backyard  and insists they are archaeological finds. Let me state upfront, I am not making this up.

So picture that you are the Chief Curator of the Smithsonian Institute and you have some crazy guy sending you trash from his backyard, what would you do? I know I most likely would throw his letters and crap into the garbage and not think of it for another second. Well, the Chief Curator of the Smithsonian is a much better man than I as he actually sent Mr. Williams a letter back regarding one of his “artifacts”. Below is the letter that Mr. Williams received. I know it is a bit long, but I promise you it is so well worth the read.

Smithsonian Institute

207 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC 20078

Dear Mr. Williams:

Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled “93211-D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post…Hominid skull.” We have given this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and regret to inform you that we disagree with your theory that it represents conclusive proof of the presence of Early Man in Charleston County two million years ago. Rather, it appears that what you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety that one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be “Malibu Barbie.”

It is evident that you have given a great deal of thought to the analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite certain that those of us who are familiar with your prior work in the field were loathe to come to contradiction with your findings. However, we do feel that there are a number of physical attributes of the specimen which might have tipped you off to its modern origin:

1. The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are typically fossilized bone.

2. The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic centimeters, well below the threshold of even the earliest identified proto-homonids.

3. The dentition pattern evident on the skull is more consistent with the common domesticated dog than it is with the ravenous man-eating Pliocene clams you speculate roamed the wetlands during that time.

This latter finding is certainly one of the most intriguing hypotheses you have submitted in your history with this institution, but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily against it. Without going into too much detail, let us say that:

A. The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has chewed on.

B. Clams don’t have teeth.

It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your request to have the specimen carbon-dated. This is partially due to the heavy load our lab must bear in its normal operation, and partly due to carbon dating’s notorious inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic record. To the best of our knowledge, no Barbie dolls were produced prior to 1956 AD, and carbon dating is likely to produce wildly inaccurate results.

Sadly, we must also deny your request that we approach the National Science Foundation Phylogeny Department with the concept of assigning your specimen the scientific name Australopithecus spiff-arino.

Speaking personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the acceptance of your proposed taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down because the species name you selected was hyphenated, and didn’t really sound like it might be Latin. However, we gladly accept your generous donation of this fascinating specimen to the museum. While it is undoubtedly not a Hominid fossil, it is, nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great body of work you seem to accumulate here so effortlessly.

You should know that our Director has reserved a special shelf in his own office for the display of the specimens you have previously submitted to the Institution, and the entire staff speculates daily on what you will happen upon next in your digs at the site you have discovered in your Newport back yard. We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation’s capital that you proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing the Director to pay for it. We are particularly interested in hearing you expand on your theories surrounding the trans-positating fillifitation of ferrous ions in a structural matrix that makes the excellent juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex femur you recently discovered take on the deceptive appearance of a rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.

Yours in Science,

Harvey Rowe
Chief Curator- Antiquities

Mr. Rowe, I salute you for taking the time to write this absolutely classic letter. I found via this web site.

Technorati Tags: customer experience, Smithsonian Institute

Related posts:

1. Customer Experience to Customer Service A couple of weeks ago, I decided with summer coming it was time to get myself a new pair of...
2. A Letter to Sprint’s CMO Kim Klaver has a great post where she writes an open letter to Mark Schweitzer the Chief Marketing Officer of...
3. The Customer Experience I came home last night and sitting on my front step of my house were two new, hot of the...
4. Poor Customer Service – Why Oh Why? Before I begin, I want to give you a little bit of info on me. I hate to shop. Going...
5. Customer Feedback – You Need it One of the things that I hate most in this world is going to a mall. It doesn’t matter if...