-rsh

The reality of the brand promise on a national level can be very hard to keep consistently on the local level, and in my experience, is often not. After years of working in large brands – I realized that none of my listing or buyer presentations EVER referenced the brokerage. With so little perceived importance from that of the consumer, and so much dissatisfaction on my part (failure to deliver on the big broker promise) the value was gone.

As for NAR’s desperate attempt to create a brand promise, I think they are failing to meet with any success for the very reason we’ve discussed. The reality is so out of line with the promise the ads are essentially ignored by the consumer.

Another reason that overbrands are irrelevant is because there is zero quality control. Ford (ostensibly) can control the quality of their product, whereas Century 21 neither can nor does offer similar quality control. The product is the agent; when there are 1.2 million +/- Realtors with no consistency of training, education or consequences (Realtors are more ethical than real estate agents argument doesn’t hold water) how can an overbrand mean much?

I’d argue that local real estate agent/bloggers are spending their time developing their own brands because they don’t buy into their respective overbrands … they want to maintain flexibility to move to another firm – any firm – and take their personal brand with them.

The agent is the product and is the brand.

I wrote about this one because the other convos required a bit more time to digest… coming next, Hyperlocal… Marketing In General… Drinking the Kool-Aid…

-rsh

So of ALL the conversations we had you chose to write about this one…

Here’s what my 2 cents are about this without trying to write an altogether other post in true ROB fashion

1. The agent has little or no say in the NAR brand – (i.e. google “fence sitters video NAR” and tell me if you as an agent identify with it.) Yes Bill – i understand they can “technically” not be part of NAR but let’s be real…

2. The agent (often times) will choose a company with values that support their own but more importantly a company that will supply them with the best support, tools, technology, split, etc.

2.5 The company has “branded” themselves (traditionally – not all) by googling customer buzz words and come up with “values” or “brand statements” that they think will compel the consumer – not necessarily reflect their “brand or values”

3. The agent (typically again – i know their are exceptions) doesn’t know how to actually “brand” themselves and therefore enter the quagmire in 2.5 of “branding” themselves to attract clients – not necessarily who they are.

Those are some pretty glaring problems. So as an engineer, I would take the path of least resistance… teach the agents to brand themselves correctly. Because if the company hasn’t branded themselves in the marketplace, it’s going to make a quicker difference if the agent focuses on themselves instead of trying to influence the company.

If – however – through soul searching and value digging the company HAS uncovered their “brand values” AND has incorporated them into their overall strategy (internal and external) then it makes it easy for an agent to 1)identify 2) Relate 3) Resonate the company brand. Sure, i would encourage an agent to develop their personal characteristics as well, but I think it’s a helluvalot easier to align yourself with something if they’ve actually done some work on it and developed an authentic, honest, and value-driven brand.

More to come as i crossed the line and commented a post on your post – sorry bro.

Matt

Overbrands will likely soon see the value of Agent Created Content and the Underbrands that spew it.

Whoever’s first to organize, reward, and leverage ACC will win this race methinks. Among the current overdogs, I think KW’s uniquely equipped (structurally) to pull something like this off….??

“For one thing, the overbrands then have no incentive whatsoever to care about raising the bar.”

BINGO!