NOT the title one would expect form a "training" company. But, here is why we offer this reasoning.
- The majority of agents in this business do not succeed at a level they desire
- The gap between those who succeed and those who are average is large. On average, this gap can be as high as 85%. That is, for every 100 agents, 85 do not succeed at a level close to top producers. (for example an average agent may produce 2-4 million in sales, whereas a top agent over 25-40 million).
- Studies indicate that thast this lack of success, and this gap has nothing to do with trainnig for agents as it exists today!
To be a little more specific, training today typically focuses on knowlege that can be tested, but often not used (as it pertains to owning and working a business in real estate). Or, it may cover the substantive knowlege, or even skills that many will use to do well in the business. Examples might include listing prresentations or business planning.
Here is the catch however--this training, be it lecture, with activities and role plays, with or without follow up assignments, tends to make the same mistake over and over. It focuses on where an agent is weak.where they do not naturally gravitate towards in knowledge or skills and try to compensate for this by making the poor---better--which in many cases ends up--at best---average.
What's the problem you ask? We need help in an area....we get it. Well, it sounds logical without question. But in review of those aorund you, or even your own efforts and business--how is that working out for the average agent?
- How many agents go to training and use consistently, over time what they learned in that session?
- How many agents can testify that their business is significantly better than it was before becasue of training?
- How many agents do you know that can claim their have gone from ordinary to extraordinary because of some new knowledge or skills they posess as a result from a seminar?
And....here's this kicker...so to speak....even if we know some, often, it wasn't training that made the difference per se.
So, what's the answer? Well..that is to come in following sections. For now, I want to invite others to comment--maybe guess a to what they think the answer is...
Best,
dg
www.activexperiences.com
;)
Links;)
Tags (Tag Cloud);)
Archives
I should probably wait untill you finish your series of articles....but I cant resist, somethig you said regarding most training, really struck a nerve
I once attended a sales meeting where they showed a video taken at a company paid trip attended by all the companies top producers. This was really a big deal, It was an around the world trip, Starting in Bermuda, then London, Rome, Amsterdam, Turkey, Japan, Hawaii, SanFrancisco, Chicago and NewYork It was meant to be motivating but I found it just the opposite. The top producers on the trip were so far removed from average me, that I couldnt see any way I could aspire to their heights. However the speaker pointed out something at the end of the presentation that I thought was profound, and something you said in your post reminded me of it
(Training)....It focuses on where an agent is weak.where they do not naturally gravitate towards in knowledge or skills and try to compensate for this by making the poor---better--which in many cases ends up--at best---average
The speaker pointed out that the top producers in our firm had very little in common one with the others...They were young and old; black and white; men and women; well dressed and casual; good looking and not so; one guy even had a pony tail (which at the time was really odd). The only thing that they had in common was that most of them specialized in one part of the market, or with one type of client. They knew that they could not be all things to all people. The message was that we all had something that we did well that we could capitalize on; that we should figure out what we did best and enjoyed the most and concentrate on that.
I think thats the answer
Now if there was only something I do well