I applaud the Houston Association of Realtors for launching a Realtor rating program. It’s another progressive move from Bob Hale. The spirit behind this is commendable.
But here’s the thing: Realtor ratings will never be useful to a consumer unless there are no conditions, no agent filters, and 100% commitment to let the chips fall where they may.
HAR’s effort relies upon agent involvement. They determine which of their clients receives a survey and can thus cherry-pick deals on which they feel confident in receiving a favorable rating.
Creating a site where consumers rate their agents is an obvious and compelling opportunity. It is – theoretically – of huge benefit to consumers and good agents alike. In practice, it has been heretofore mostly meaningless.
Sites like Incredible Agents, AgentRank, HomeThinking, and Agentopolis lack the command and control structure to make this work. They can’t mandate participation, and thus end up with a handful of usually glowing reviews. There are just too many transactions spread across too many agents to build the sort of critical mass you might find for “New York City Hotels” on TripAdvisor.
So how do we make agent reviews meaningful? This may not be the answer you want to hear, but it needs to be done by the broker.
How? Exactly as Redfin does it. They require a review on every transaction, directly surveying the consumer. They then post the unfiltered results on the their website.
You will notice that most of the reviews are positive. But not for the same reason positive reviews dominate the other sites. It’s because Redfin enforces standards and rewards performance against them.
I have always been struck by the irony of a venture-backed company standing out as the exemplar of long-term thinking in this business. A company with investors notoriously impatient for an exit with a longer view than private firms with decades-long histories? It’s a testament to the Redfin’s steadfast vision, but an embarrassment to just about everyone else.
It would be interesting to see a “traditional” company bust out with something like this. To say:
“I don’t care if it makes my top producer nervous.”
“I don’t care if I lose some low-end agents with fat splits.”
“I do care about building trust, which will build my brand, which will sustain me for years to come.”
I know that’s not easy. In fact, it’s terrifying. But I have no doubt that it would be ultimately rewarding.
Note: Matthew Burrus, who heads communications for HAR, emailed me and commented below to point out that participating agents cannot “cherry pick” transactions. If they do not wish to display a rating (members are able to view ratings before they are published) they must opt-out of the program. However, I question whether or not agents will permit a less than favorable review for the sake of remaining in the program and my general concern remains.
Sign up for the 1000watt Spotlight e-newsletter
and keep up with the ideas, apps and people that are changing real estate.
15 Ways to Make Your Marketing Mobile
A mist of difference
10 Tools for MLS Awesomeness
What an awesome post! I think this is where it’s all headed anyway. Redfin has definitely raised the bar and it’s to their benefit to do so. Let’s see how long it takes the “traditional” brokers to do the same. The consumer will go where the trust level is highest and Redfin has created a transparency in their company that I think is unmatched.
Marc,
Actually the group that has been at it the longest doing it the right way is QSC(Quality Service Certified). They not only require a participating agent to share every rating, they encourage every member to go through quality service training to help agents understand what world class service looks like.
Their system benchmarks satisfaction rankings against your office, brokerage, franchise and even the entire database of 50,000+ agents.
What they find is that strong top producing agents participate first and they bring along the rest of the agents following adoption trends similar to any other real estate technology.
There is another flaw in the agentrankings.com etc. group you mentioned. You do not actually have to do business with the agent to make a comment. Why should a consumer believe comments from someone who did not do business with the client. They are simply another method for generating leads. It upsets me to think third parties are playing off strong reputations of agents and selling them leads from it. Top Producers work hard to garner a strong reputation. They should be able to generate business from their reputation without having to pay for it.
We published a white paper a few months ago on the topic of Reputation Marketing. Readers can feel free to download it at waves.wavgroup.com and learn more about how to take control of marketing your strong reputation.
I agree 100% Brian, thanks for sharing.
Unfortunately, there’s a lot of mediocrity in the real estate business. Sorry, there just is. While I totally agree with what Redfin is doing is the right thing to do, I highly doubt that many companies will dive in head first with something like this. The ones that do will be yet another step ahead in the future.
Brian, this is a great post.
If people simply ask themselves, “What do I think when I see reviews on the hotels, airlines, restaurants I am considering spending valuable time and resources on?” More important, are the ones I have not yet experienced and the ones that I do not have a personal referral for.
People are smart and getting better informed by the moment. Again, ask yourself, “Do I scan the reviews and choose which ones are legit and which ones are not?” Of course we do. We dismiss the unreasonable entries and skip them. But, if we believe a negative review… I know what I do. I pick something else and never think about it again.
I just booked a trip through expedia.com. It was a package (air, hotel, car) for an upcoming conference in May. The reviews of the hotels in particular made a big difference in my decision. I chose the Westin near the airport. Easy reach to everywhere I want to go. Free internet. Free parking. Great style. Starwood points. And, excellent, intelligent and thoughtful reviews that I believed were true. If made a difference and influenced me for sure.
Thanks for the food for thought. This train has already left the station. You have painted the honest appraisal of what our real estate industry must to as a whole to gain credibility within people’s minds.
- Peter R
Brian,
Bob and I wanted to make sure you knew that our program does NOT allow our members to cherry pick which clients receive the survey.
Any participant has 15 days from the date of the closing to provide the contact information of their client to receive the automatically e-mailed survey. In fact, if the participant says they do not have the e-mail address for the client, we ask for a physical mailing address and mail them a hardcopy survey. And so far, more than 2,100 clients have submitted surveys. If the participant does not provide the required information within 15 days, they are automatically removed from the program.
Our Client Experience Rating was established to be an all-or-none system that does not allow “selective opt-out.” Either all results are published or none are. If a participant opts-out for a period, the previous surveys are maintained and will still be included if they later choose to opt back in.
There is obviously an aspect of competition among the participants so prospective clients will likely look for REALTORS® who have ratings and comments posted to know more about the person they are hiring to help them with what is likely the biggest financial transaction of their life.
The integrity of the Client Experience Rating system is dependent upon transparency, which I think anyone who has followed HAR will agree has always been our hallmark.
We always enjoy reading your posts and just wanted to make certain that you and your readers knew that the system does have extensive rules and guidelines to prevent the type of situation you suggested in your post.
Thanks, and keep up the great coverage.
Matt Burrus
Chief Communications Officer
Houston Association of REALTORS®
The on-line feedback resources are perfect. They replace us having to mail feed back cards and letters. On top of that they can be googled and the consumer can check it out in advance.
Aloha,
Keahi
It’s clear to me that online ratings for real estate service as well as other service providers is here to stay. The consumer demands it, and technology provides it. Whether or not this service can ever be provided by the professional associations of these groups is an issue…and even if associations like HAR do provide these services, there will likely be a credibility question from the consuming public…
This would be harder to pull off correctly than many people are willing to try. The participation would be a huge problem, people dont want just one more form to fill out, even if it is an evaluation. I would be very interested to see how they pull it off. Good luck!
Marilyn said:
“There is another flaw in the agentrankings.com etc. group you mentioned. You do not actually have to do business with the agent to make a comment. Top Producers…should be able to generate business from their reputation without having to pay for it.”
With respect to AgentRank.com, wrong on both accounts. Here’s why:
1) AgentRank does not accept anonymous comments or reviews. We’ll soon accept unsolicited reviews, but not before we finish building a system to ensure they are authentic.
2) Any leads generated from agent profiles are passed directly to the agent without cost.
[...] bring this up because soon after I wrote last week about the Houston Association of Realtors‘ new agent ratings program, I came across this blog [...]
[...] REALTORS recently launched agent ratings through the MLS, and the system has already generated some interesting discussions. Glenn Kelman from Redfin has been rating their own agents for some time. Hearing [...]