First Blog But Big Question

OK Lisa ... So I asked you to blog and you are coming out with big questions first. 

I still right ... let's see what others think.

Hi Lisa and Allen, 

This is a hot topic here in the rain and most of us agree that more education prior to getting a RE license is needed...for more reasons than just one.

Way to hop out here with a huge question.  I'll follow to see what others have to say.  Good Luck!

I think it depends upon the agent.  Some of us come into real estate after having successful careers in other fields. 

Some people can come out of high school and have a fine career without a college degree, others should have that degree in order to have a basic fundamental level of education in order to be able to start a career. 

Real estate is not brain surgery for people who are smart, know how to interact well with people, and those who continually read and study real estate.  Those who do not continue to read and learn and try to wing it, will not do well. 

There some people who have the money to spend on higher fees but are still incompetent so I don't think that a higher fee will drive out people who shouldn't be in the business.

Apprenticeship is not a bad idea; there are many fields where this is mandatory.  The only drawback to this is some very successful newer agents who know how to run a business are born entrepreneurs who do not need to apprentice, having a broker to call when they have questions is enough support as they are used to working on their own and buck a more traditional approach.  This is what attracts these types to real estate as they don't have a traditional "employer".  Ask me how I know this! 

I personally would not have done well in an apprenticeship situation and would probably not have stayed in the business if that were required.  But, because of my experience in other fields and areas of my life, this was not necessary for me.  I knew what to ask and when to ask for help - that's key - knowing enough to know when you don't know something!

I do think that brokers need to keep a closer eye on the newbies to make sure they are competent.  The bottom line is when a real estate agent is incompetent or negligent, the broker is liable and it gives the office a bad reputation as well, so it is in the broker's best interest to keep them on track. 

Some agents should go through an apprenticeship - not a bad idea and it could be at the broker's descretion.

I agree, education should be a must. Mistakes made due to lack of education that gives Realtors a bad name. I also think 1-2 year apprenticeship would be over the top. Mentoring would be great for new agents, great experience, but this is not rocket science.  I work really hard but I would'nt want my fees to go higher than they already are.

will be nice for some of the agents to have some education ..

I vote that education and stricter supervision is the answers.  Raising the dues makes the good suffer along with the bad.  There are some in this business that are part time/hobbiest that do know what they are doing - just not in RE to make the mega bucks.

 

real estate agents need to have a hire level of education ~ Classic

that fees from the Association and NAR should double if not triple as well as the cost to maintain a license each year  ~ The problem with that theory is that the money would get wasted with no benefit.

He thinks that agents should have 1-2 years of mandatory apprentice practice until they can complete industry specific tasks such as Contracts, Research, Pricing, etc.  his list is extensive. ~ Sounds like a union concept to me. Brokers/Owners would love to have agents working for minimal fees and doing the grunt work. Many of them just prefer to concentrate on recruiting as many new agents as they can so that they can collect 50% of the commissions of new real estate agents. (It's not hard to find a real estate brokerage that spends more money on recruiting then retaining agents.)

There could certainly be an argument for his theory but it should probably go back to just requiring more extensive education to begin with and a harder test that includes Contracts, Research, Pricing, etc...

The system would pretty much sort itself out if the consumer focused more on the agent's experience and abilities then selecting a company because of gimmicky advertising.

I would agree more with your boss's theories then yours. Upping fees to an "Association" or the "Government" certainly has no true benefit to anybody.

I have kicked around on this for a while.  Here are a few thoughts. 

Getting an RE license shouldn't be that difficult.  I'm a free market capitalist, and as such think there should be minimal governmental interference in business.  

Becoming a member of the NAR, however, should not be as easy.  And, it should not be immediate.  I don't think it should be terribly expensive (for reasons previously pointed out).  

Continuing education and performance levels should be a bit tougher.