Daniel Pink has put out a video with some interesting facts learned by those in science studying human behavior in the workplace. It’s relatively short, chock-full of information, much of which goes against what we’ve all ‘known’ for quite awhile. Watch it or not, I’ve included it to allow you to understand how I’m relating its content to the real estate industry.
In a nutshell, credible studies tend to show that money isn’t the predictable motivator we thought it was when it comes to doing things requiring, you know, thought and stuff. In fact, they learned that when it comes to tasks requiring real thought, that the more reward promised, the bigger the failure. Hhmm
Supposedly if management in large real estate firms would allow greater autonomy, create an atmosphere fostering mastery, and give purpose to their agents, they’d crush the competition.
Many in real estate have compared large real estate brokerages to boutique brokerages using this template. The assumption is that boutiques draw agents wanting to be part of the mix, so to speak. Yet except for the large dinosaur operations, many if not most of the BIG firms are at least making valiant attempts at becoming agent-centric, in spirit if not in fact. This, in my opinion, is why the big firms won’t die out. They’re making the turn — it just takes carriers longer to achieve the actual directional change.
The discussion though, has now turned to how all this affects branding — in real estate. Let that sink in — but first install the three main words used by Pink’s video:
Mastery — Autonomy — Purpose
Before continuing, know I’m with you. Mastering what we do for a living is a good thing — as is sufficient autonomy and having a purpose important to the practicing agent. But seriously, real estate? Branding? Get outa here.
Look, I understand there are niches of price, location, property type, etc. Ultimately the buyer or seller has to choose a company. Whether your home is a million dollar showpiece or a $99,000 condo conversion in an iffy neighborhood, the bottom line reason thinking people use to pick an agent will always be the same — at least 80% of the time.
Let’s talk about what works with sellers and what doesn’t.
Sellers often host their own Listing Olympics, with agents giving all levels of listing presentations. When I was a house agent, from 1969-1976 it was true then too. Going full time in 1974, I started a farm, a newish concept back then. Once established, know how I won Listing Olympics almost every time versus far more experienced, and easily more impressive agents?
“Mr. and Mrs. Seller, here is a list of the last seven homes to sell in this development. I personally listed and sold four of ’em.”
This was immediately followed by the Medal Ceremony.
In that farm’s peak years of production, I was 23-25 years old. I worked for a three horse operation who thought marketing was seeing folks at the Little League game and sayin’ hi.
Our brand back then? Our listings sold fast — for a lot — and closed. I was one of those three horses. The other two were a retired Navy Chief who looked like Buster Keaton wakin’ up from a nap, and the owner who was a displaced sixth generation farmer from Iowa who looked the part. Brand smand.
Mastery
Please point to the agents in your market you’d grace with the status of Master Agent. Know even one? Who really spends time mastering the skill sets required to be in our business? Not freakin’ many. Why do ya think they stand out like the Hope Diamond on a dungheap? There’s precious little mastery in real estate. Thousands of master posers, but that’s a different post.
Autonomy
Come on now, we’re talkin’ about real estate here. Tell me what’s NOT autonomous about the typical agent’s day to day life. Each day is a blank check, which most agents manage to bounce on a regular basis. If there’s a business not suffering from a lack of autonomy it’s real estate.
In fact, who will disagree out loud that autonomy isn’t the very reason most agents and new firms fail miserably? Yet they mew and whine about ‘corporate’ real estate, which finds them moving to the newest boutique brokerage, which only means they’ll fail looking maybe a bit more hip and stylish, technologically speaking.
If I ever again hire agents to work under me, they’ll do business the way I tell them, or work elsewhere. Mine is not the only way by any measure, but it’s the way you’ll work if my company name is on your card. Autonomy my ass.
For most agents autonomy is the enemy.
Purpose
Is there anything in real estate more overrated than the so-called motivating ‘Purpose’ of brokerages? “Our mission is to spread the American Dream” and dozens of other meaningless reasons for existence. My all-time favorite is the one about “Serving others, while making the world a better place in which to live”.
Even if it’s genuine, you think sellers will choose you cuz you’re makin’ the world a better place? Even if you do believe that, you don’t have the huevos to say it in public. π
Wanna know why Hyundai is now so popular with car buyers? While GM, Ford and the rest, including Japanese carmakers are touting the same warranties and claiming the same high quality as they have for decades, Hyundai just walks up to the confused car buyer and says one thing.
“Our cars carry bumper to bumper warranties for 60,000 miles and our power trains are warranted for 100,000 miles or 10 years.”
That’s why there are so many more Hyundai’s on the road than there used to be. No fireworks, no impressive PowerPoint presentation. π They’ve put their warranties where their claims are.
Visit any neighborhood in the country, and the guy/gal who’s listing and successfully selling the most listings in that area for the highest prices, quickly — wins. When they don’t get the occasional listing, it’s rarely they were ‘beaten’ by their competition. It was more likely family, or friend, etc.
Marketing? If I’m not performing, and you are, I lose. Marketing only gets ya in the door. If the other guy is sellin’ the hell out of that neighborhood, you’ll be shown the same door. Marketing smarketing.
Dad laughed all the way to the bank with this mindset, which is why I think that way now. All he did was list and sell houses — over and over and over. Try 1,000+ sides a year for four consecutive years, while never having as many as 30 full time agents.
Lookin’ through the wrong end of the telescope
I suggest the central problem in real estate brokerage is not the business models. It’s not the technology. It’s who’s hired to do the job. Dad had a three question job interview.
1. Will you work honestly and with integrity?
2. Will you work HARD?
3. Will you work my way?
‘Yes!’ was a must answer for all three. Applicants looked into his merciless eyes and knew he wasn’t messin’. This was business, and he was in charge of hiring successful people. Posers cowered in his presence. His agents slaughtered the rest of San Diego’s brokerages for average annual income — year in, and year out. One of his main competitors had 16 office for Heaven’s sake and still couldn’t keep up. Why do ya think he always had way more than his share of super-star agents? They KNEW they’d make more just by being able to say the company name to a seller.
Dad wasn’t on TV or radio. He wasn’t even a member of the Board of Realtors OR the MLS. You were fired on the spot if you sold another broker’s listing. He didn’t cooperate with anybody. What his company listed, it sold. Hell, he didn’t even have ‘For Sale’ signs. At any given time, his firm had more listings at or under the median price than the entire San Diego MLS.
He was not a popular guy at the Board, but boy was he popular with his own agents. The buyers and sellers on those 1,000+ sides each year were kinda fond of him too.
All he did was list and sell homes. And homeowners knew this. Sellers and buyers would hafta go up three rungs on the ‘I Care’ ladder to be apathetic about your purpose for being an agent or a brokerage owner.
Look through the end of the telescope used by buyers and sellers. They’re constantly scanning the skies for the agent who is producing R-E-S-U-L-T-S — not promises or hi-tech marketing plans.
Wanna know why much of the public thinks real estate agents are fulla shit? Cuz all the marketing, all the face to face and online conversations are about everything under the sun — but not about the results for which they’re searching.
I figure he hates this when I do it, but Greg Swann is the perfect empirical example of getting things right. Yeah, I know, he loves to talk about all the TechCrap and how what he does in this or that realm of the business sets him apart — and to a large extent it’s true. (Here comes the big JayLo but) BUT, most of what he’s done the last several years has been geared to be able to say just one thing to sellers:
“That house down the street, with the Historical Designation? Yeah, I sold that, and the other two a few blocks over too.” OR “Here’s what we did for the last investor who wanted what you want.” Medal Ceremony
Greg produces results — period — end of sentence — stop arguing cuz you’re embarrassing yourself. He does it his way, Russell Shaw does it another way, but they’re both winning most of the listing wars in which they care to fight. Both those guys have higher IQs than is safe, but still…They win cuz they can state simply — and prove just as simply — that they sell homes.
Succeeding in the Real Estate Industry
This blog has been preachin’ how to succeed since Day 1.
Gain true Mastery of the required skill sets.
Wisely use the nearly infinite Autonomy this business allows you. (Um, that’s code for ‘Get off your lazy ass and work HARD.)
And my favorite — Have aPurpose. For the most part, what it is won’t matter to anyone but you, but have one. Or, even better yet, just decide to do everything you do ON Purpose.
If your so-called ‘brand’ doesn’t translate to the public as you consistently producing their desired R-E-S-U-L-T-S — either change what you’re doing or find another way to make a living.
Ken Brand says:
C’mon MAN. What’d you see a burning bush, and then run off and write this Golden Fleece of an article.
A couple a weeks ago Chris rips off his Intensity piece, and I’m thinking WOW, I wish I could write “real” like that. I was just start’n to get over it, then up you jump and sent a Titan Missele like this into orbit.
Seriously, I laughed every other paragraph, because it’s true as oxygen.
It’s one of few, read, re-read, re-read, think, re-read. You get the picture.
Thanks, wish I could see it and say it like that.
Cheers.
June 16, 2010 — 6:04 pm
Greg Swann says:
The things you say about me are very sweet, Jeff, but I don’t deserve them. For everything we might bring to a transaction, the one thing that matters most is getting behind them damn mule and pushing the plow past the stones in the soil. I did love that video, though.
June 16, 2010 — 6:25 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Hey Ken — thanks for the thoughts. I also liked Chris’s Intensity piece.
You write this stuff all the time.
June 16, 2010 — 6:19 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Ah, the rare sighting of the HumbleSwann. π
You produce results, which is why folks work with you in ever growing numbers, both buyers and sellers.
June 16, 2010 — 6:30 pm
Brian Brady says:
Classic Bawld Guy.
June 16, 2010 — 7:22 pm
Sean Purcell says:
Couldn’t agree more with your recipe for being successful in real estate… or anything else for that matter. You’ve been sharing the secret – in one way or another – for years now: “Show up, work hard, show up again tomorrow, repeat.”
One thought on the consumer side of the equation though. Yes, the consumer really couldn’t care less if you’re a boutique with a “purpose” or a big name with lots of gravitas, they primarily want to know your batting average. Having said that, I’m pretty sure they ARE open to a better mouse trap. Building a better mousetrap is a (the?) truism of capitalism. The problem in the real estate industry, of course, is that our idea of a better method is not much more than perfume on a pig. Even the so-called mavericks (e.g. Redfin) have taken the same old mousetrap and, for the most part, simply changed the bait.
No matter what the system, if people work hard they’ll succeed – no one says this better than you Jeff. But don’t discount the system entirely… the right person showin’ off a better mousetrap might just need a wheelbarrow for their trips to the bank.
June 16, 2010 — 8:48 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Thanks Brian.
Sean — The agents consistently selling homes quickly, for as much as possible, already have the best mousetrap. If it’s possible to list/sell real estate virtually instantaneously, then that’s a better mousetrap I wanna be in on. That leaves price. Price hasn’t changed much as the geniuses who’ve been sayin’ commission rates will be coming down since I was 16, have been partying with the crickets these days.
I agree with your point for sure, I just don’t see any improvements that would matter outside of instant gratification for sellers/buyers and/or a significant drop in price.
You?
June 17, 2010 — 7:25 am
Sean Purcell says:
I agree with your point for sure, I just donβt see any improvements that would matter outside of instant gratification for sellers/buyers and/or a significant drop in price.
You?
I’m working on one. What if we had one of your top agents who already sells homes quickly and for the most money and he didn’t sell the home any quicker or for any more money, but he did so free of all the fraud and potential fraud and appearance of fraud that our current system breeds. What if the results weren’t better (or worse) but accountability and value were much higher? What if (heaven forbid), the value add was quantifiable and money could be saved as an added bonus?
Believe me, when you’re preaching Jeff, I’m saying Amen. “Sell my house quickly and for the most money.” That’s the mantra. I’m not offering (necessarily) to improve on either of those requirements – only on the system for delivering them. If that could be done, do you think the world would beat a path to your doorstep?
June 17, 2010 — 8:56 am
Jeff Brown says:
I understand your point, but it seems there’s possibly a false underlying premise. That is, folks would flock to someone who gets the exact results I or someone else does. i.e., sell fast for much $, but does it somehow more honestly or transparently.
The premise there is that the results haven’t changed a bit, but somehow they’re more honestly obtained? Does that mean their former agent was a fraud? I strongly suspect sellers don’t think the ‘less transparent’ agent (whatever that means) is being fraudulent in any way.
I disagree with you on this point, as my take of ‘transparent’ in real estate brokerage, is that it’s our version of PC.
June 17, 2010 — 9:32 am
Sean Purcell says:
I agree with you on “transparent,” there’s no upside to blowing that horn. (The most interesting thing I found about transparency? People don’t care!) No, I’m talking about changing the methodology.
You’re talking results and I’ll never argue with you on that score: skins on the wall are what matter. All results being equal, however, what differentiates an agent in your office who’s kicking butt from another agent in someone else’s office who is kicking just as much butt? More importantly, how does the agent in your office go about substantially increasing his market share when he’s already a great agent doing a great job?
There are a number of different answers to that question, no doubt; I’m suggesting the sockdolager may be a better system. Is the agent in your office committing fraud or breaking his fiduciary responsibility? Almost assuredly, though maybe not intentionally. The system – the brokerage system – as it is currently practiced makes it almost impossible not to do so. I’m sure there are a lot of agents reading BHB who are extremely careful. I always imagine Greg Swann going way beyond careful… to conscious. But how many agents do you know who would never do both ends? How many do you know who explain that the buyers’ commission isn’t paid for by the seller. How many do you know have even a passing understanding of what it means to be a fiduciary? No, I don’t believe all agents are, even inadvertently, crossing the line – just the majority. π
As for consumers, I don’t know. They may not be interested in a better mouse trap; they’re certainly not clamoring for a better method right now. Then again, we don’t know what we don’t know. Maybe this is simply a matter of education. You suggest people may not care if they get the same results, only somehow more honestly. (Like you, I don’t know what that would mean either.) I’m suggesting that they might care a great deal if – once educated – they get the same results AND true accountabiity. I’m suggesting that an agent acting as a true fiduciary will, by definition, outperform our standard but successful agent of today. I’m even suggesting that consumers – once educated – might even select a newer agent with less skins on the wall and help her gain market share rapidly because her methodology – her system – is superior in developing the two most important steps in client relations: trust and rapport.
One thing I believe we can both agree on is that the system is broken. Maybe we won’t agree that someone who develops a better system is going to reap the rewards, but then again, maybe we will. I seem to remember you yourself taking the process well off the beaten path when it comes to your occasional residential listings. Did you do that because the system in place works so well?
June 17, 2010 — 2:22 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Unless I’m mistaken, the only things I did radically differently was to the property, physically. Back then every now and again I’d do the listing side for a pittance as long as they were doing a 1031 with me.
I think those in the business overvalue so-called accountability big time. I know where you’re coming from, and will go down that path with ya, but not very far.
“Change my damn oil, and shut the hell up.” π
June 17, 2010 — 3:13 pm