The title pretty much says it all – but I should add the caveat that agents embrace social Darwinism when the herd being thinned does not include THEM.
Before continuing further – full disclosure here – I am a full-time agent. I do sometimes work as an adjunct professor of biology/natural sciences. But such work is very part-time and more because I enjoy it than for income. (I’d be in a ton of trouble if I relied on teaching for income.)
There have been several recent blogs about the war between part-time and full time agents. It kind of reminds me of the war between stay-at-home vs. working moms of the 1980s. Each camp is armed and dangerous – and with fewer sales to go around – the goal is the extinction of competition that they feel is squeezing their ability close enough sales in order to survive. It’s kill or be killed so the waring parties are in opposite fox holes exchanging fire.
I don’t know what it was like before. I came into this industry at the tail end of the boom. Productivity was already heading well south and new agents were hated beyond belief. When I walked into my first brokerage – bright-eyed and bushy tailed – I was greeted with a mixture of out and out hostility and anger combined with smug amusement. Skirmishes between the long-term full-timers and part-timers were common. Over the next few years this escalated to out and out warfare.
“Part-timers are better because they aren’t so pressed to make a sale…There is nothing worse than desperate agent breath!” Major artillary
“Full-timers are available 24/7/365 – a part-time agent means part-time service and a lack of dedication. “ Saturation bombing.
Blah, blah, blah!
Two recent articles by Bernice Ross showed me just how explosive this issue has become. The articles – Crackdown on independent contractors and 8 reasons we need independent contractors, and were actually about the potential loss of the independent contractor status for most agents. But the comment stream led me to realize that in war of the part-timers vs. the full-timers we are at DEFCON 2 and the leaders on either side of the argument are ready insert the brass keys and launch their ICBMs. Rather than looking hard at the issue itself – many chose to view it through the lens of “how can this work to thin the herd.”
Some of the comments included:
” Elimination would allow brokerages to run themselves as real businesses. Training, coaching, team work, company and individual goals and on and on. Such a breath of fresh air.
“The agents who sell one or two houses a year would be gone leaving more for the agents who take this business seriously.”
“If 50% of the agent’s left the field, it would probably be the agent’s who are not committed to being in real estate.”
“If it curtails or eliminates the part time agents it could not be a bad thing. They cannot answer their phone or return calls while mixing paint or selling merchandise. Many are not being fair to their agency, peers, or clients.”
“There are way too many non-professional and part-time agents in this business…. It is time to professionalize this business and hire agents with years of experience and industry knowledge, who have taken the time to get their CRS, their GRI, and many other real estate designations.”
“Memo to Bernice: It’s 2010 and the real estate buying public is one hell of a lot smarter than the average Realtor slug! Improvise, adapt and overcome or go the way of the Fuller Brush Man!”
Note that the article wasn’t even ABOUT part-time agents…Also note that the responses rather CONVENIENTLY cast the surviving agent’s mold in the image of the poster.
To me it comes down to professionalism. I’ve met some very professional and attentive part-timers and some real laggards that were supposedly full-time. Do we need to raise the bar? Absolutely. I think demanding an apprentice period along with a more intensive course of study is in order – perhaps even a two-year degree. That would get rid of dabblers trying to turn a quick buck. But I draw a line of distinction between part-timers and dabblers.
It also comes down to having something unique to offer the client. Instead of seeking the elimination of the competition - the focus would be best placed on finding ways to be indespensible to our clients.
To Search for Homes and for further information go to my website/blog with free home search at The Westchester View.
I am always happy to answer your questions and you can speak to me directly on my moble phone: 914-374-5529.
© Ruthmarie G. Hicks – http://thewestchesterview.com – All rights reserved.
Real estate agents embrace social Darwinsim – the unending quest to “thin the herd”
In the beginning, there was a beginning.
Raise the bar for licensing and quality will naturally follow.
The mega broker that is satisfied with agents who produce two (or zero) closings a year will have fewer 50% agents to pay their overhead/profit. These new agents are very profitable for brokers because, although they come into the business with a boom (family, friends, neighbors, etc.), once their personal sphere has been worked over, that agent either invests to grow their business or becomes one of the perpetual part timers and continues to occupy office space, resources, etc.
I've witnessed the work product of many of the low producing agents who may be part time (day time full time salaried employment) or full time (retirement income). My experience is that they are poor representatives of our industry. If the bar to entry were higher, tougher pre-licensing, tougher exams, higher fees, many would seek other ways to supplement their full time employment or occupy their retirement days. Our industry would benefit through better prepared, more dedicated, hard working agents.
Needless to say, IMO, the public in need of real estate services would be better served by an industry of licensees who manage their businesses as professionals.
In the small state of RI we have about 5000 real estate agents...many are dabblers or part time. No matter what they pull away from the real estate professionals who work at it wholeheartedly & it is their livelihood. Raising the bar helps...our state requires 36 CEU credits a year & with other expenses many of the part time/dabblers are leaving. Apprenticeship is an excellent idea. We have a profession that should be servicing customers properly & thoroughly and that's not being done when you can't devote yourself to your primary business. thanks for sharing.
Featured @ Club Chaos
Really being full time or part time does not direct you to do a better job. . it is about the person, their passion and their morals that makes them a batter agent.
Experience comes from doing the RIGHT things all the time . .with the RIGHT intentions
Like anything else, what you put into it, is what you get out.
Hi, Ruthmarie. Congratulations on the feature. What a great post!
I left an agency that had licenses on the wall for agents that, in three years, I never saw once. I wondered WHY a broker would keep dead wood and would apparently hire anyone who walked through the door...and I don't mean agents new to the profession without a track record, I mean agents who had moved their license from another agency and who had nothing to offer, nothing to bring to the table!
It seems to me that managers interview potential employees and decide whether to hire them so maybe that's the difference. I think that raising the bar rests largely with the broker...it's time for brokers to be MANAGERS and start MANAGING their agents for the greatest good and the biggest gain!
Full-time vs. part-time can be such the red herring. It all comes down to education, experience and dedication. If we, in the industry, would push for more education requirements and tougher licensing rules, we could raise the bar ourselves. If we sit and wait for others to raise it, it will never change.
Almost everyone can be in communication all the time regardless of being full time or part time. When I am with a client (on a listing or showing homes) I do not pick up the phone. Usually I send a swift text to let the person know that I have seen their call but I can not take it. A part timer (usually)has this ability too.
Because of the times we live in and all that has happened in this economy, many agents have had to seek other employment just to stay ahead and to pay their expenses. I empathize, since that is how I originally started in the business, by having another job.
However, when I am in a transaction and I can't reach the other broker and do not get calls back until the evening because they are working at their other job it is more than frustrating. It is a detriment to the transaction and to the clients we are representing. Most agents who are part-time do not admit this fact to the consumer. The client assumes they are getting a full-time professional,when, many times they are not.
Before taking part-time agents, brokers should be aware of the pitfalls and partner them will FULL TIME agent mentors for a few months/transactions to shadow them and participate in their commission income. This has been a model for many very successful part-time agent employment scenarios!
I agree with Fernando, it is about the person, their passion and their morals that determines if they are a professional at what they do in life.
Ruthmarie...
I think that only those agents that have adapted have survived, part-time or not. If someone that works part time can convince a buyer or seller to use their services then more power to them!
Ruthmarie - I've blogged about this topic many times, as you know, so I won't go into all my opinions on the matter here on your well-written blog! But one thing I haven't said out loud (this shall be the first time!) is that as part-timers defend their part-time-ness and full-timers proclaim their superiority, I can't help but think that part-timers (especially dabblers) really have no idea what they're missing by not being full-time. They THINK they're holding up their end of the bargain; they THINK they're being responsive; they THINK they're keeping up on their market knowledge and education because they've never done it any other way. But once you've done this job full-time, with all your heart and 100% commitment, you realize how much is involved... or SHOULD be involved... in the day-to-day practice of real estate. Sort of a You Don't Know What You Don't Know thing.
However, as I must always say during this debate - there are gazillions of full-time agents who SUCK at their jobs and some part-time agents who are pretty good. So, yes, it does depend on the person, obviously, but all other things being equal... a good full-timer is simply gonna be better than a good part-timer.
I guess I am a little on the fence on this one. I want both. I want the individual that is trying to move into the business while performing another job as well to pay the bills. But I also want someone that is professional and when they are involved in a transaction with ME will return phone calls, emails, etc in a timely manner and represent being a REALTOR in a positive light. I know if they can't return my calls, they probably can't return their client's calls. Then we all look bad. Perhaps the answer IS attacking it when they first enter the business.
Thank you
I recently took the Brokers Examination in Louisiana and after 18 years as an Associate Broker in New York I am going to venture out and say that some states have raised the bar. Since there is no reciprocity between New York and Louisiana and Louisiana has a series of laws that is foreign to the other 49 states they really put me through the hoops. In addition to my 18 years and all of those designations (CRS, ABR, etc.) I had to take 30 hours of Law, 30 hours of Brokers Responsibilities and post license another 45 hours that covers in depth Fair Housing, Agency and that is post license. I also have to take another 4 hours on a topic that the Real Estate Commission requires each year. There is no grandfathering on who has to take the continuing education. I mention this because in the course they discuss part time agents and on the National Component it states that the definition of a part time agent is based on production not whether they are putting in 24 hours 7 days a week.
I have a full time buyer agent who works two days a week, she started at 4 days a week, and now down to 2.
She is awesome and does a great job. Because you say you are full time you may goof off and not work, many I know do.
I have been following Bernice's series on Inman.
Oh...I don't think there's a war going on but you make some good points however, I agree with Lenn that the bar MUST be raised to in the educational and experiential areas at the very least because as long as we have such low entry requirements the will be result in poor quality agents.
I wonder if I'll be considered full time or part time in a few years when I decide to do less work and more retirement. Licensed since 1985 and full time since then, I've never taken excessive vacations and always answered the phone 7 days a week. Now, should I decide to head south for 3 months and maybe take a month off in the summer, will that make me part time? We have a few part-timers in the office. They actually are a help, in that they take weekend floor duty. I don't feel they are taking any business away from me, and often they are a help, in that they often do open houses when I have more listings than I can handle.
If they are not successful, and/or they don't like being an agent after the quick rush of the family sale wears off, they will leave the business. At least that is the trend in our office.
In Wisconsin it is very easy to obtain a real estate license. There is a 72 hour education requirement that can be done online (STUPID IDEA) and only 18 hours of CE every two years! (which can also be done online). I've always advocated for tougher licensing standards, including fingerprinting. Recently there was an article in our local news about a convicted sex offender who obatined a real estate license by using fake ID. Fingerprinting would have caught that.
I see a lot of "full-time" agents that have few closings and "part-time" agents that have many. Ideally part-time agents become so successful they "evolve" to full-time.
I have worked with all kinds and have the full spectrum with my company. I'll hire anyone who is professional, period. They don't have to be huge producers. As a matter of fact, if someone were a big producer but not professional they would get the boot. Full or part time, professional is as professional does.
Being a Broker I think new agents bring a Great Deal of Energy to a office. I got in the business in 1979 and you talk about a bad real estate market you must be talking about the 80's. First let me say I got started as a Part time because I had to pay the rent! In my 30 years as a agent/broker I've encourage Part Time Agents to get there business up and running and then become full time agents. And lets not forget that I know agents who work 40 hrs a week and only sell a few homes a year and know the "so called Part Time Agents" who sell 10 -15 house a year. You figure it out!
It closing most of us start out as Part Time Agent unless it's a second career for us and we don't need the income.
Funny how all those that commented didn't feel the need for them to be in an apprentice period for themselves when they started. It holds true that those with a college education want all their peers to be required to have such a degree (except me).
No one here at AR seems to get it - The BROKER is responsible to everything the agent does or does not do (correctly). Police the BROKERs and the agency will soon correct itself. Or, you could make it a true employment position and have Brokers pay agents for all their work for trying to sell the company listings with bonus and commission on top of the salary. See who they hire then.
Human nature is funny. Don't regulate - then they yell that Government (trade association) should regulate that. They can't make up their mind if they want a drink or need to take a leak.
I work at a company whose corporate culture is to cooperate with and help our co-agents. I've never seen an experienced agent resent or refuse to help a newbie. On the other hand, we all try to offer the best possible service to our clients.
I think part-timers are at a disadvantage against the experience, daily contact and training of a full-timer. However, that's not the only factor. Perhaps the real question is: what standards of training, service and cooperation are encouraged and modeled at each agency?
Ruthmarie: I think what is important here is the quality of the agent and the work they produce. Whether they do it part-time or full-time is immaterial. What counts is quality, and whether or not they can represent their clients as a fiduciary.
I think those who gloat over any "good" agent who leaves the business... because that will leave more business for them... well I think that is sad. A bad agent is a bad agent.
In Texas... in order to sit for the sales exam... not the Brokeer's license exam, but the salesman's license exam... one must have completed 210 hours of Texas Real Estate Commission courses. At 30 hours a course, that is seven courses. Texas, at 210 classroom hours... from what I know... is at the HIGH end for pre-licensing education requirements. And I still do not think that is enough.
What I DO find ridiculous... is the fact that in Texas.... I can sell your home if I have taken 210 classroom hours, and passed a test. BUT... for me to be able to legally perm or cut your hair... I need to have taken 1500 classroom hours to obtain a license. That, my friends, is bizarre.
In the end... it is quality that counts... not being full or part time. And, of course, the ability and track record of representing one's clients in a manner that benefits the client. In my not-so-humble opinion, of course.
Oh, yeah. I forgot to mention - there is a chain that does the mandatory apprentice program for new agents. And, you know how much more professional and superior they are to the rest of us. LOL
The is a bigger issue that full time versus part time as you point out. In my opinion what we are about to see is a larger than incremental restructuring of the industry. Just looking at concepts that are still evolving like Redfin that will thin the herd. They will be taking out the old standard listing Realtor who has not embraced the internet revolution. Companies that are based on downstream recruting will find that the lack of space for these agents will make them lone wolves waiting to implode as we go from bricks and mortar to virtual, coupled with the cost of litigation for ethical alnd legal violations of uninformed and undertrained that will make the cost too high to accept. I could go on but this is becoming a blog post. Get ready for massive change and the social Darwinism that will take care of itself.
I've had a rather unique situation in that I only got my license because I wanted to 'dabble' - in 2007 no less. I had a full time but very flexible job (i.e. I could stop, clock out, take a showing, come back and clock back in anytime).
I really got my start through a series of lucky breaks: A. my office happens to have agents who handle a lot of REO's over a fairly geographical area B. I happen to live a fair distance from my office in the largest market that my office covers C. the REO agents don't have enough time to field calls from all the buyers interested in their listings D. my broker called and basically begged me 'I know you aren't really interested in working in RE but would you be willing to take the overflow leads from buyers close to you?'
A part-time buyer's agent was born. A year later I realized that I was making almost as much at my part time RE job as I was in my full time job and I've transitioned slowly over time to being full time RE and part-time at my previous job.
My point is that if you work hard and serve your clients well as a part time agent (and find some luck along the way) you can be a GOOD part time agent.
As Jennifer mentioned, the average full time agent IS probably going to be better than the average part time agent. The thing is, being part time or full time doesn't necessarily make you average or even good. I'd rather judge someone's work on it's own merits than make a sweeping statement one way or the other.
I love the "it's not me, it's them mentality" on almost every comment on AR. How are there so many agents to complain about? We might need to look in the mirror to see if, GASP, we might be one of "THEM".
Lenn hit the nail on the head. The truth of the matter is that part-time and under-producing agents are a profit center for big brokerages. They don't care how many deals are done each year, as long as they can keep collecting the fees.
So, careful what you wish for people. Run off all of "THEM" and you will soon see your big cushy, impressive, conveniently located office disappear. Gone with are the free postcards, no more office meetings to gab at with free breakfast, up goes the amount of fees you pay, down goes that 85% commission split you rely on...get rid of "THEM" and YOU WILL FOOT THE BILL.
You better believe your big brokerage won't take the hit!
Great article. Quality counts. Little else. #26 WOW the difference between classroom hours required to sell huge dollar volumes of real estate vs. cut, color or curl hair... now that is a good example of just how low our classroom requirement is as compared to others.
Nice article. It's no surprise where I stand on this issue. I believe that work ethic, dedication, and a willingness to work hard to learn the business and represent your clients well are what determine whether you can be successful and not whether you are part-time or not. I am always amazed how heated these discussions get and how much venom is directed at part-time agents.
Professionalism is something that is difficult to instill. It can be taught, but not instilled. My son told me that one evening he was in a bar with some friends after work, and met an agent who was drinking heavily, otherwise behaving badly, and handing out business cards to everyone that would take one. This agent has been in the business quite a while and is well established. At the same time, I've met new agents, some of them very young, that conduct themselves with the utmost of professionalism and integrity.
The idea of raising the bar for licensure should definitely be considered. But the idea of agents attacking one another is unfortunate. Active Rain is such a nice community. We have Realtors supporting Realtors. The very idea that "there's not enough to go around" is limiting to us individually and collectively. We should try to have faith in the future. Although it may sound idealistic, I believe that competition should drive us onward, not anger us.
In terms of sales, it will always come down to the 80/20 rule. People complaining that part-timers take this or full-timers do that is ignoring the reality.
For me, it isn't so much about part vs. full time (which I am), but about professionalism and making sure that the client knows where you stand on availability. Also, I have to agree completely with you Ruthmarie, I have seen some very sharp part-time agents and full-timers that haven't learned a new thing or changed a single business practice in a decade or so and they do not represent the profession well at all.
...just my $.02
I don't hire a part-time accountant, lawyer, mechanic, barber, etc. No one part-time gets my business.
IL next year is requiring all agents with salesperson licences to become brokers, and brokers to get more training to become managing brokers to run an office. I think this may 'thin the herd' as some of the less motivated peopler will decide its too much effort to keep up. My office has been active in offering real estate training classes an hiring brand new agents. I think that about 20% of my office (full time realtors) does 90% of the business. I myself joined the ranks of the full time agent last year after 5 years as a part-timer.
Ruthmarie, I have to agree with Fernando. It would be nice to have dedicated people selling and not really care how many hours a week they do it in.
I'm going to work as hard as I can ad make a living wiith or without part timers.
I know a LOT of long-time reps that do 1 or 2 deals a year. It comes down to incompetence.
Ruthmarie,
While I work fulltime, most of my clients are the part time agents that I work with on deals.
I find them to be very professional and competent.
However, I do agree with Lenn about increased standards to get into the business in the first place.
Brian
Around my area some agencies have been thinning their own herd of part timers. I agree with you - it has been my experience that both the part time crowd and the full time crowd contain some superstars and some slugs.
First, thank you for sharing a well-written and thoughtful piece.
I'm not sure the root of issue is part-time vs. full-time, although it is reasonable to assume that the full-time agent simply has more experiences to draw from and therefore becomes more expert (functional Darwinism at an individual level).
What I believe you are describing, however, is the conflict that humans experience between the emotional need for stability and predictability vs. the intellectual need for growth and change in response to an evolving environment.
More on this later, you've got me thinking but I have to go see clients!
Very good article. The herd thinning is LONG overdue. I don't see it as full vs. part time. I see it more as professional vs. unethical, and long term vs. REO/short sale mills. As with every cycle, the barrel only gets re-filled when the bottom of it has been cleaned out. As strenght slowly returns to the market, those that are now on the right side of the "vs" will go back to whatever industry they polluted before getting into ours.
For me personally, I've found that it is better to focus on what I can do to improve my performance or the performance of my team, my agents than to worry about these kinds of issues. If I'm on a constant quest to improve and make ongoing changes in procedures and policies, to not repeat mistakes-repeatedly, then amazingly, my office and staff and agents do actually improve.
We can always look out at the other guy and find fault and point the finger...isn't there some wise saying...oh yes...from the Good Book... about taking the mote out of our eye first....it has served me well.:)
Why do people keep suggesting that raising the bar for licensing will somehow improve the quality of agents. Most of the bad agents Ihave run across are bad because of the service they provide their lack of book knowledge on Real Estate. You can't test for service. Having tougher tests won't make people answer their phones, return calls, work past 5pm, or have a pleasant demeanor.
I'm all for tougher tests and higher standards, but lets don't kid ourselves into thinking that tougher tests will fix all the problems.
Many experienced agents that have years and years in the business, though, have very little ability to learn new things and are barely functional on a computer or mobile device. That's what it's all about these days. I'm not a young person myself, but I love to learn and I'm very capable with new technologies.
Hi RuthMarie, Interesting post and comment stream. Certainly no one believes that the part timers have a monopoly on poor service ( recent experience has proven again that some of the old timers need to step up their game ! ) .
Ruthmarie, enjoyed reading your post and the metaphors galore! Very good! Sink or swim, fish or cut bait . . . licensed agents in my area have decreased. The numbers for Metro Portland are shown in the monthly newspaper and it's clear that the number of licensees have dropped considerably. Whose left standing? Hard to say. I've worked with some seasonsed full-time agent who were VERY, hmmm, not good. Others are knowledgeable. In-house training seems to lack, and is inconsistent in a lot of larger brokerages. Good agents will stand out anywhere they apply their business, whether independent or in a large fish tank.
I guess that I was being naive when I thought the housing crunch would decrease the number of agents. Boy was I wrong! It seems that the numbers are growing!
"Instead of seeking the elimination of the competition - the focus would be best placed on finding ways to be indespensible to our clients"----ENOUGH SAID, great post
Ruthmarie......good feature....good food......A lot has been said.....I related to just about every comment. Real Estate is such a vast subject......I wonder how anyone can really grasp it all? Perhaps some of us excel in certain areas while others do not. I have done tract sales, hard money loans, property management, new sales, resales, land acquisition, commercial sales, entitlements, loan mods, BPO's, consultations, dispute settlement, litigation, short sales, development and construction etc. I am not a specialist or expert in any category.....but I can navigate through them and produce. I have never really done anything on my own as this business involves so many moving parts that teamwork sells Real Estate...not individuals. Think...loan officer, escrow, title etc.....under my supervision....is what closes escrows. I finish what I start, I like what I do and it produces an income as I do it......its is not complicated and very rewarding......MY POINT...you get out of it what you put in........simple as that
Thank you and best,
I'm with Broker Bryant. Just because you've worked in the business for years and have designations up the wazoo, doesn't mean that you service your clients better or are a better realtor. I've worked with both and have found that those things had no bearing on how well they served their clients.
#1 - Hi Lenn -
I've long been an advocate of raising the bar. Many enter just because they can. I like the idea of an apprentice period. Dabblers would think twice before having to run an obstacle course. Yes, Part-timers are VERY profitable - for the broker. I haven't been in this industry long enough to know the history, but the low splits newbies get seem to support the almost extortionary splits top producers get. Since the brokerages often pay for marketing, I moved from one brokerage because I did not want to be in the business of supporting my competition's high maintenance marketing. By demanding high splits a lot of top producers pushed themselves into competition with a flood of new agents that descended like locusts during the boom.
#2 - Hi Ginney - At the height of the boom Westchester-Putnam had nearly 8000 agents. I think we are down to about 7000. Way too many for the size of the population. I looked at a couple of brokerages...The bottom agents pull in a lot of money - for the broker. In one office it was about 25% of their total commission revenue. That's hard to say "no" to considering so many top agents are barely contributing anything for each transaction.
#3 - Hi Carolyn - Thanks for the feature! Talk soon.
#4 - Hi Fernando - I'm with you there. It's very unique to the individual.
#5 - Hi William - thanks for stopping by.
#6 - Hi Leslie - I agree, but the revenue is too hard to pass up. Its the structure of the business that creates these issues.
#7 - Hi Richard - I'm not holding my breath. The powers that be like the status quo. We are low on the totum pole.
#8 - Hi Ellie - I shut everything off when I'm with someone. When really busy, there can be a big space of time before I am able to respond. Now - higher producers have assistants - but I'm not able to support an assistant just yet. Many high producers have similar availability on the phone to those who work another job.
#9 - Hi Claudette - a happy medium has to be found. When I am with clients, I don't answer the phone. I also don't answer when on the road. Some agents control the phone issue by saying they will return calls at a pre-determined time. Some of these people are actually full time. To assume we can all pick up the phone anytime because we are full-time makes no sense. But waiting 8 hours on a major issue is a problem.
#10 - Hi Wallace - I agree. I'm trying to figure out how on earth an "average person" could start in our area without being part-time. Way too risky to dive in FT. You would need so much money. The cost of living is through the roof. It takes way too long to get established in our area. So in NY who is going to survive 5 years of total poverty + business expenses? Most agents HAVE to be PT at first. Apprenticing is the best way to get them grounded.
I think we have several different issues going on. I agree with the need for upping the education, but full time vs part time.
You can work part time and give 100% to your business
You can work full time and give 50% to your business.
You can be a new agent who is excited and willing to learn
You can be a seasoned agent who is burned out and is not willing to change.
I can go on...
Bottomline I think it depends on the individual and their work ethics.
#11 - Hi Michelle - I think Fernando is on-target as well. We tend to paint things with too broad a brush.
#12 - Hi Richard - We have not really had that much of a decline in the agent population.
#13 - Hi Jennifer - I started part-time and ended up full-time. What I keep running up against is the utter financial impossiblity of starting full-time here. Unless you have HUGE revenue sources - it simply isn't possible here. Not allowing PT - means only the RICH need apply. That to me is just plain WRONG.
#14 - Hi Scott - I know what you are saying - My response to Jennifer #13 echos what you are saying. But I find that communication gets tougher as the agent gets busier with other clients. So I don't see the difference. Agents have to handle the communication issue their own way. My father has been in and out of the hospital and I have been having communication issues when I'm in areas where phones are just not allowed to be on. Even full-timers have issues. NO ONE is available 24/7/365. That's a red herring.
#15 - Hi Miriam - So you are talking about another 109 hours...I think a few states have something similar. If you go to #26 (Karen Anne Stone) she mentions 210 hours for an agents license (or is it broker??) So some states are raising the bar. But it was interestng that a hair stylist needs 1500 hours! Food for thought.
#16 - Hi Missy - That's the other issue - how do you define "full time"??? It means different things to different people. I was reading Bernice's post for its initial content. What surprised me was the way the posters were contorting the issue into a pretzel to make it work for their financial benefit. What was good for the public or the industry didn't seem to matter! That's what prompted this. It was an excellent series. But I think the crack down is for other areas where employers are trying to get around being what they are - employers.
#17 -Hi Mike - Defining full-time is an issue. Is it pure production? if so many who have other full-time jobs might be full-time.
#18 - Hi Russel - I think what hit me was that an article on a very important issue was twisted into an article about how to thin the herd in the comment stream. That indicates warfare.
#19 - Hi Glenn - One of my best transactions with an agent was with someone who had been working for years. She may have been full time years ago, but was now part-time. 30 years in the business made her very professional and attentive to detail. Why should she be run out of the business? The only thing I would worry about is that the lack of tech skills might harm her listings. But she is in a brokerage that handles a lot of the promotion - so I don't see a problem.
#20 - Hi Pat - That's about what it is in NY.
#21 - Hi Betty & John - That's really one of my points. Also - in many markets it is truly not an option to start full-time if you really need to support a family on what you make. It takes way too long to get established around here - and it also is very expensive - as I found out. Each area is different in that regard.
But I draw a line of distinction between part-timers and dabblers. I wrote a post a long time ago about the Dabblers and there is a difference between the two.
It all comes down to service and professionalism and some part timers do very well.
Thinning the herd is another fact of nature as the strong will and do survive.
Great post. I love reading the good vs evil, I mean, full vs part time, arguements. How about this... Every agent who Sucks, leave the business. There. That outta do it.
#22 - Hi Philip - I think for a bigger brokerage its just too tough to turn down those high splits. They are way too focussed on numbers. But I don't see that changing. They are killing themselves with it though - because rank incompetence pushes the public away. Since they have a lot of information at their disposal - they already think they can do it themselves. If agents create havoc - perhaps they would be BETTER doing it by themselves. It's hard for the public to distinguish between bad and good, professional or not until it is too late.
#23 - Hi Michael - That's the way it is in most parts of the country. Getting rid of all the "dead wood" won't cure the problem. I looked at a couple of brokerages raw data and played with numbers. In our area it looks as though ridding ourselves of low producers would give the top 15% roughly $10k more a year in gross revenue. It might mean the difference in survival for a very few and perhaps more prosperity for those a the top of the food chain.
#24 - Hi Gregory - the difficulty is that the fox is in charge of the henhouse. The large brokers control how the market is run.
#25 - Hi Brian - Its specific to the brokerage. And some use training as money cows for the brokerage - that's yet another issue.
#26 - Hi Karen-Anne - is that for an agent or a broker. If its for an agent -it is probably the strictest criteria in the US....which as you said - is scary. I like your hair-stylist comparision. Puts it all in proper perspective. Did you read Miriam's post (#15)?
#27 - Hi Gregory - Oh yeah - you are right about that!
#28 - Hi Joe - I think a lot of very small local offices who will only list within a small geography will find themselves shaken to the foundations. Yes, real estate is still a local business. I don't think you can sell a home on the web alone, you need boots on the ground. But the days where the handful of local offices is the only viable option are going. I take a middle of the road view on some of this. Local knowledge will never be able to be replaced, but you can't make a living based on 2-3 square miles.
#29 - Hi Leeza - I think some want to eliminate new agents - eliminating PT would do that.
#30 - Hi Julie - VERY few areas of the country have the ability to start up the way you did. The volume is too low and the saturation of agents simply too high. That's part of the problem.
Ruthmarie,
If I were to interview agents to put my personal home on the market, I would have a bias towards full time agents. Could I be missing the best part time agent in the world, you bet.
Rich
#31 - Hi Jenna - Really good point - Those nice big splits that top agents wanted demanded created a lot of the problem because the brokeages needed a slew of low producers to pay for the cost of maintaining top producers - who became pretty costly. And you are correct - the "house" always wins.
#32 - Hi Kristen - I loved Karen-Annes comparision as well -food for thought.
#33 - Hi Stacey-Anne - It's really gotten nuts. But I think Jenna(31) has an interesting answer for some of that - one that exists though is not discussed as much.
#34 - Hi Kate - It's like ethics - you either have it or you dont'.
#35 - Hi Robert - The market share issue is interesting. Lower producers assume that the production form agents that are lower then them on the production line will go to THEM. Not happening - the most will go to those already prospering.
#36 - Hi AJ & Jodi - Many are doing things the same old way - and wonder why it doesn't work any more. Amazing.
#37 - Hi Gary - my stylist is part-time - and is excellent...Given what is required to become an attorney or an accountant - we really can't compare ourselves to that. I have a high degree in another field - and truly - its a whole other ball game.
#38 - Hi Steve - not a bad idea. I'll be getting my brokerage license later. My Dad is very ill and my clients are getting some disruption due to this - so I am waiting.
#39 - Hi Ted - A lot of people liked what Fernando said myself included.
#40 - Hi Terry - Its amazing isn't it?
Full Time or quittin time.
Ruthmarie once again I feel that I must come to the defense of part-time agents and agree with those above who believe it is all a matter of discipline and diligence (whether full or part-time).
And once again, I must reiterate that some of the same problems stated above with regard to part time agents all holds true for SOME full time agents as well.
As I responded to Jennifer's blog post the other day, if 20% of agents are closing 80% of the deals, I would imagine that there are a ton full time agents are not carrying their weight as well. So the issue is quality of service, education, caring, character, diligence, time management and other qualities having nothing to do with full or part time status.
#41 - Hi Brian - Lenn as always is right..I agree that many part timers are very competent.
#42 - Hi Kristen - That is happening in brokerages around here who have a model that permits it. But it is not happening in the big brokerages with traditional structure.
#43 - Hi Leslie - I think it has to do with the economic struggle that we are invovled with right now. People want as much for themselves as they can get. NOT PRETTY!
#44 - Hi Pat - A restructuring of the traditional models is also long overdue.
#45 - Hi Bryant - The resistance to the very facts that you state comes more from a need to gain market share I fear - than from concern about the industry, the client and the direction we are going in. Sad but true!
#46 - I agree that agents need to refocus on what they are doing.
#47 - Hi Allen - Discouraging dabblers would be a good thing. And the education is far too lax right now. It's ridiculous.
#48 - Hi Pam - I've seen enormous resistance to the internet. Some of these people aren't so old. If you can't learn something new at 50 - are you going to be senile at 60? Maybe.
#49 - Hi Bill - I think some do think that!
#50 - Hi Carla - I admit it - I went nuts with the metaphors! The thinning has not been an exercise in the cream rising to the top - at least not here. Some less than wonderful agents are doing all too well. Some very good professionals are having a terrible time.
I personally do not hire part timers unless they intend and fully work to transition to full time within 6 months of joining the firm, with a plan. That's MY BAR. Not yours or any other broker's. It's mine, period.
I don't put down part timers, but I want full timers in my office.
I know some very competent and successful part timers, but also know the majority of part timers have jobs (at least in our area) that prohibit them from checking email and VM throughout the day. One cannot return calls before 6 pm and that is maddening when you are doing a deal with her.
#51 - Hi Kim - It's decreased them around here - but not by much. It has concentrated the production even more to the top.
#52 - Hi Brian - Thanks...glad you liked it.
#53 - Hi Richie - You do get out what you contribute. But I've seen some do quite well who were really awful.
#54 - Hi Tammie - its a mixed bag. The education offered appears to be pretty weak. That's one of the issues. Better training - with more academic rigor might raise the bar.
#56 - Hi Margurite - It does depend on the individual - but more education works in other fields. It's the lack of rigor that's at the heart of the education issue. I was in a field where about 80% left either because the education was just too much or because they failed out. That stopped alot of the problems that I see here.
#58 - Hi Cameron - There is a big difference between PT and dabblers. Dabblers are after a quick buck. They don't care and it shows.
# 59 - Hi Eric - Wouldn't it b great if they would do that??? Not holding my breath! Funny response.
#61 - Hi Richard - That is a criteria that many sellers use.
#64 - Hi Charita - We are both on the same page. I saw your response to Jennifer. I just think that there are excellent PT agents out there who really rock.
Ruthmarie,
Second post in about a week on the same subject. Hmmmm. Doesn't it get tiring hearing the same fight take place?
Fact of the matter is, there have been "part time" agents, and we aren't going anywhere...and there are "full time" agents, who aren't going anywhere...and the bad batches from both camps will eliminate themselves due to their unprofessional behavior, not because of the "part-time/full time" feud.
#66- Hi Erica - In our neck of the woods - most people can respond sometime during the course of their work day. But most have desk jobs and are allowed a five minute break.
Interesting twist on a tough subject. I am with Lenn.....Raise the bar!!!
Love your writing style, so much so that I just subscribed to your blog. Having been in the business of real estate for almost a quarter of a century, I've seen so many agents drift in and out of this business. I've also watched as many different modalities emerged, threatening the status quo. Some survived the longer haul while others proliferated then got swallowed up by a changing market.
All through that time there were practitioners lamenting the number of agents getting into the business or the impossibility of competing on what they perceived to be a very unequal playing field. The feeling always was, if only so-and-so were not in the business, things would be better for us/me. The truth is, we all have to grow and adapt to the marketplace we find ourselves in and nobody out there will have more impact on the amount or quality of business we do than ourselves.
My own personal pet peeve is the blatantly unethical agent, the one who lies to their clients, either by commission or omission, the one who says one thing to your face and quite another when you're just out of range. They make my skin crawl and the worst part of dealing with them is they perceive everyone around them to be the problem. It amazes me when they go blithely on their way, leaving destruction in their wake.
As for part time or full time agents, or newbies vs. experienced ones, I find myself sometimes thinking I should hang around them a little more. I'm often impressed by what they accomplish simply by virtue of not knowing what they can't do. :)
If I had a nickel for every time I heard the start of this sentence, "I saw so and so working at the.......
The thinner the better imho
I think what is most important is that the herd is thinned out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The good news is that the not-so-good agents make the good agents look that much better ! I do think that the barriers to entry should be greater with some sort of apprentice period and more training.
Apprentices?? Where is the money going to come from to pay minimum wage, FICA, etc.
Top producers?? That's all about market share. Market share generates sign calls, commissions for the property sold and if possible the buyer sold. Market share shows power.
Ruthmarie:
I like your approach to this problem. Part-time agents vs. full-time agents really isn't the point. If you are threatened by part-timers, maybe it's because you are close to being one yourself soon.
Raising the bar in states like Washington or California, where the classroom hours are almost laughably low, is a fine idea. Currently only 60 hours needed in Washington state! (increases to 90 this summer)
In Texas, we require 210 hours, which is plenty. Many wanna-be agents fail the exams 3 or 4 times before giving up or passing.
I knew a lot of people in college who were terrible students, had no work ethic whatsoever, and still got OK grades. Would I want one of them as a real estate agent? No way!
The system is fine the way it is. People who are good will succeed, people who are not will make excuses in the short term and be gone in the long term.
I don't waste any sleep on it.
Lenn is right - the public and the realtor profession would be better served if professionals were in the majority of agents
The debate will continue as long as the market is not fully recovered. Once everyone stops worrying about what the other person is doing this will go away again.
Part time or Full time, new or seasoned...
all it boiles down to the individual. I agree 100% with #56 Margurite, plus think of this as well...
too many clients, too much business and trying to save money = bad bad bad. Bad service. Some of the REO agents are a good example of this. They can't even return a phone call in a timely manner.
No one says it better than Lenn Harley, unless it is, of course, my broker. Tougher requirements, higher fees and pehaps apprenticeships and education, education, education. I might add a spelling course. Or at least spell check your documents...there is usually a bar on your computer to do that. It would be a start to make us all look a little better.
Hi Ruthmarie~ It doesn't really matter if full or part time. We all pick and choose the hours we work. We all choose to be fantastic agents or mediocre agents. Those that choose to be mediocre or to do just enough to get by, those are the agents that need to get out of the business and just quit! Those that choose to exceed their clients expectations are the ones that should stay in the business.....
I agree, if I were a home owner looking to sell a home, i would want a committed agnet to sell my home. Not one that would maybe return my phone call. There are some agents who are part time and do a real good job in real estate. However, they treat it as a busines and not a hobby. Enough said on this subjsect.
I know some AMAZING part time agents who only sell a few homes a year, by choice or by design--they work a specific clientele or specialty, stay educated and would easily have full time work if they chose.
I know some HORRENDOUS top producing full time agents who make life more difficult for everyone and a large part of their success is due to the professionals who help keep their deals afloat for the sake of their own clients.
Ruthmarie, it's pretty much all been said - the big brokerages definitely don't mind all the newbies who do their several deals before they discover real estate isn't all they thought it would be. They make lots of money on those deals.
I think one of the frustrations with part timers is the their unwillingness to 'fess up and tell the other agent OR their buyer/seller that BTW, they won't be able to communicate all day or maybe even for a couple of days. That has happened to Frank on more than one occasion. In one instance, it almost blew the deal because there was a deadline. Also frustrating are the ones where you end up doing all the work because they don't know what they're doing.
A buyer's agent working under the direction of a Missy Caulk would be in good hands and their buyers would be taken care of. I am definitely in favor of apprenticeships or mentoring. I think mentoring is a great idea. Florida has pretty stiff education requirements, like Texas, but just getting the license doesn't mean you've got it all together. You still need OJT.
Hi Ruthmarie...You've elicited some interesting comments. My standards resemble Fernando's. I think it is simplistic to suggest that more education would make such a big difference. There are brokers, (supposedly a sign of experience and additional education) I have known that I would never want to emulate.
Education is very important but a lack of ethics and morals are the core of the problem with many agents that do not perform to a high standard.
Kate
This is always an interesting debate. What I see being lost in this discussion is the seller's part. It's their job in who they decide to hire. If they made comprehensive, well researched decisions, most of this may in well be moot. That said, I agree the barrier to entry needs to be orders of magnitude higher. The pre-licensing requirements are a joke.
I wouldn't know how to handle this business if I was a part timer. I just don't see how it could be profitable. You need to be available and you need to prospect and build just to make a decent income. To excel I believe you have to put more than full time to achieve that goal. Good luck to any part timer. They'll need it.
I think that as long as a person has the ability to do the job properly, it doesn't matter if they're full or part time.
Great post. I remember those mommy wars, stay at home vs the working mom! I think that no matter what if you are experiences, know your market, are expectional with your clients and exceed their expectations it does not matter if you are part time or full time. Do a good job, treat your clients like you would like to be treated and dedicate the time your promised to your client. And, btw, Bernice Ross totally ROCKS! She's part of my interview series.
In regard to part time vs. full time, the market will decide we don't get to. IF a part timer can make a go of it then they will do that.
I agree, let's focus on why we are the best for our clients.
Love this....it's not about the time spent, as long as you spend the time needed for each client. I think it's the hungry full-timer who needs someone to blame for their lack of success.
# 68 Hi William - It just seems to be all over the place. I thought it was amazing that an important Inman article about the IC status of real estate agents morphed into a "let's use any means necessary to thin the herd" vendetta on a comment stream. It was a stunning example of how angry this has become. I worry that agents will stop cooperating altogether and start firing shots at each other openly. Scary. I wonder how many of the agents who are so eager to get rid of the part-timers would find themselves out on their tails? Careful what you wish - you just might get it.
#70 - Hi John - Lenn is generally right about everything...When I'm on the wrong side of her opinion it makes me question myself.
# 71 - Hi Geri - thank you so much. I've only been doing this for about 4.5 years - but I sensed that when I started I was walking into something that was undergoing monumental change. I think what surprised me was why some agents were so stuck on "uptime" and referrals from the broker when it was frighteningly clear that this was no longer going to be the meat and potatos of anyone attempting to earn a living. I used to think the obession with the uptime phone was some sort of psychotic sickness. I never knew a time where that DID work. The "ethically challenged" agents drive me nuts because they continue to thrive. And they do leave havoc in their wake. The other thing that I really don't like are the new middle men who are gobbling up google juice and inserting themselves between the agent and client for an extortionary fee. This will only drive costs UP and force commissions up in the long haul. I refuse to work with them.
#72 - Hi larry - Careful what you wish - you just might get it!
#73 - Hi Michael- Not so much in my area...A bit, but many hanging in with no deals for over a year.
#74 - Hi Christopher & Stephanie - The difficulty is bad agents reflect badly on the industry.
#75 - Hi Lenn - I think people are thinking about shadowing agents for a year to learn how it is done. I don't know how practical it is. Certainly no agent will be willing to do so when competition is so insanely fierce. Which is a good point.
#76 - Hi Aaron - It's very lax in NY - surprisingly so. Tons of dabblers - but I draw a line between dabblers and part-timers.
#77 - Hi Kathy - The trouble is that the current brokerage model works in the opposite direction.
#78 - Hi Duane - one might suggest that the presence or lack of this topic is an indication of the health of the market....
#79 - Hi Bill - this is too true. if you aren't overwhelmed by your PT job - you might be trying to do too many deals. Either way, the client suffers.
#80 - Hi Suzanne - I agree - it really is distressing to see what we have sometimes.
#81 - Hi Vickie - I just wish it would sort itself out like a meritocracy. Doesn't work that way.
#82 - Hi Shawn - thats the line between dabblers and part-timers/Full-timers.
#83 - Hi Candice - the latter type seems to be everywhere. They get a lot of deals done because the sponge off others.
#84 - Hi Sharon - I do sort of get why some part-timers won't fess up. With the kind of hostility its a real problem....
#85 - Hi Kate - the difficulty about morals is that you either have them or you don't. Can't be taught - at least now with an adult.
#86- Hi Chris - I think its very hard for sellers to understand the process. Its convoluted and complex. All these poor folks want to do is sell their home. Navigating the system is like a minefield. Like chosing Goldman Sachs to help you manage your portfolio!!!
#87 - Hi Frank - but there appears to be no way for anyone to start up unless they are filthy rich to begin with. At least not around here. The failure to produce a living income in our area is about 98%. For those that do make it. You start to actually get out of the red in 3 years in a good market. In our current market its about 5-6 years. I'm only seeing green this past year. 3.5-4 years. I had a lot of savings and part-time work as an adjunct professor for about 3 years. I needed that income - no way I could have made it without it.
#88 - Hi Christine - I know lawyers who are excellent, but they are part -time while their kids are young. Same thing here. i don't see what all the fuss is about. I think its just to eliminate a lot of the agents so that more business will flow. But then call it what it is! Social Darwinism.
#89 - Hi Lydia - I was in school (college) in the mid-eighties when that war was going on. They were like armed camps! I love Bernice Ross too. Always read her articles.
#90 - Hi Gene - The market is eliminating more full-timers than part-timers in my area. I think the full-timers can't make it on the one income - so that leaves part-timers. Some good, some dabblers.
#91 - hi Jirius - It's a simple concept isn't it? Work for your clients!
#92 - Hi Karen - I understand concern for market share. My answer when I realized I had maxed out - was to spread out. You have to be aware of what is going on around you. I think many were blindsided because they would hear a top producer say they were doing "fine" but didn't realize that person was lying through their teeth.
#90 - Hi Gene - The market is eliminating more full-timers than part-timers in my area. I think the full-timers can't make it on the one income - so that leaves part-timers. Some good, some dabblers.
#91 - hi Jirius - It's a simple concept isn't it? Work for your clients!
#92 - Hi Karen - I understand concern for market share. My answer when I realized I had maxed out - was to spread out. You have to be aware of what is going on around you. I think many were blindsided because they would hear a top producer say they were doing "fine" but didn't realize that person was lying through their teeth.
Hi Ruth Marie,
Very interesting topic, as noted by the number of comments. I find it interesting that lots of the comments want the bar to be raised higher for incoming..make the fees much more expensive..have a probationary period for new-comers..have much tougher testing..Of course, we are all "in" so who cares about how tough it is for the next group,right?
Ruthmarie:
And your point is? lol Well written and interesting comments, I employ part timers and full timers but have a very high minimum production level of commissions $75,000 so I don't have a problem with either.
Produce or work for another brokerage
Ty
I am not sure how this battle started. With the number of agents out there, especially in California, something like 600+000 selling 800+000 listings at the height of the market when I, like you entered it at the end, I cannot imagine getting rid of the part-timers is going to make the slightest bit of difference. The competition is still going to be huge. I would rather have someone actually working part time and keeping up than have them quit the busines but keep their license and represent people in their sphere of influence which is how a lot of them get their business in the first place I would imagine. As a full timer, when busy, I have no time to market, so I can't imagine a part-timer being much competition in that area.
Hi Ruthmarie! Great post. I too got into real estate at the end of the boom and I've fought for every listing and every buyer. I think that someday I'll look back at all I've acomplished and be thankful that it was never easy for me in the beginning. We appreciate things more when we earn them and I've devoted my career to being the best agent I can be for my clients!
This is a great post...
I would just make one observation:
This seems to truly be an issue if one spends a lot of time at the water cooler... Honestly, this is the first I have heard of this - but then I don't drink coffee and I tend to work - not chit chat...
Oh well, more stuff for someone to waste their time on. As for me - I have some contracts to upload...
Oh, and yes, I am full time, but I would be working my tail off if I was part time too - which I was for a long time.
#99 - Hi Linda - A lot of our training is "on the job" I think it would depend on how long we've been "on the job" and how much we have in the way of closed transactions that would determine who was Granfathered.
#100- Ty - Gross commissions to brokerage and agent? You would have no people around here. I was just starting to gain traction in the second half of last year. My gross commissions were below that level, but from my study of the MLS, that put me in about the top 12% production wise. Actually - you might be dealing with only the top 5% - thats LOCAL agents as in the agents in my city.
#101 - Running numbers helps keep me focussed. in our area if you took low producers - I picked an arbitrary number of under $2.5 million in gross sales - that kept about 18% of the agents still alive. It would have added maybe about $10k to each agents gross sales - if it was distributed evenly - which would never happen.
#102 - Hi Julie - Certainly none of us are sitting around an uptime desk waiting for the phone to ring....
#103 - Hi Terkel - I was actually reading Inman news about IC status of agents when I came up with this. This is WHY I work from home.
It is so interesting to read these comments and see how different states regulate the real estate industry.
In Idaho fingerprints are required for licensing, and to get a broker's license you have to have to have both time as an agent and a specific number of transactions. Unfortunately, we still have a huge number of agents who are far from professional - whether part time or full time.
I've met some great agents on both sides of the fence, some part time, some full time. I think it is just a matter of them and their personality and how they treat the business. I have dealt with agents that are part time and you would never know it based on their customer service and quick response time. Then on the other side of the fence "Full time" agents that shut their phones off at 5pm and weekends because they can afford to.
Its the quality of the work...who cares if they are parttime or fulltime? As long as they can be available and get the job done, what difference does it make? Many of the fulltimers are now working jobs becasue they can't afford to live...but they are still in business...
I don't have a problem with part time agents, and certainly don't feel like they need to be driven from the business. These complaints come from bad realtors who have to find someone to blame other than themselves for their poor productivity and inability to pay their bills. We live in a culture that avoids personal responsibililty and is always looking for a scapegoat. I'm too busy closing deals to worry about other agents and what they are (or are not) doing. If full time agents spent more time on lead generation and less time on looking for excuses, we would all be better off.