If someone asked you to describe your recruiting strategy in one sentence, what would you say?

Most hiring managers stumble on this question because it’s difficult to define strategy.

Here is a helpful definition that Rich Millington recently published:

A strategy is the unique value you provide to prospects that they can’t get anywhere else.

A strategy statement describes how you will prioritize your efforts to deliver that unique value.

Using this definition, here are some short strategy statements to get you thinking about your unique value.

We’re the most reliable/trustworthy.
We have the friendliest culture.
We’re the most exclusive.
We’re the most nimble.
We’re the most comprehensive.
We’re the most focused.
We’re the best at assisting new agents.
We’re the best at helping experts.

You already know it’s unrealistic to try to be good at everything.

But it’s also a mistake to be truly good at something and then fail to clearly communicate it to your recruiting prospects.

When someone raises a complaint on your team, are you able to ask probing, non-defensive questions about the topic?

Do your questions encourage a free flow of information to be exchanged?

Do the real, underlying issues of complaints come to the surface during your discussions?

If not, you may need to change your mindset on how you handle negative information.

In a post from the archive, Dave Mashburn describes how a professional communicators handle complaints.

1. They assume the complaint is not the real problem. This allows the follow-on questions to be non-defensive. For example, if someone is complaining about fees, ask questions that would reveal what it would take to experience value.

2. They display a high level of confidence. Confidence is an incredibly powerful trait. As opposed to arrogance, confidence is the mix of knowing your craft so well that you can be a tremendous resource to those who need it while still coming across as humble and approachable.

3. They dissociate with chronic complainers. Professionals do business with those who appreciate the value of their work. There are some people who cannot be helped. It’s better to focus on those who respect your contribution.

Your high-potential agents need a strong leader who does not wilt when complaints surface.

Can you rise to this level?

In a post from the archive, Dave Mashburn reminds us how most high-performers achieve success.

In a meeting this morning, a couple of individuals whom I respect a great deal were referring to a mutual friend of ours as “a genius,” citing examples of the notable expertise that he has developed.

He was not just a smart person with innate talents–he disciplined himself to become great. Not in giant leaps, but in small steps, every day.

In our times of instant gratification and low frustration tolerance, it’s common to become discouraged when you experience fatigue and frustration.

At this juncture, the emerging geniuses reframe their pain as a necessary part of the process and remind themselves that few things worth having come easily.

==========

Editor’s Note: Next week, Ben will be out of the office on vacation. During this time, we’ll be republishing five of the Top 25 Insights from the previous 12 months. He’ll return on August 9th with more original content.

==========

In a recent podcast, Tom Ferry interviewed Byron Lazine on how to generate listings using the old-school technique called “circle prospecting.”

It’s setting the most listing appointments for us right now, and it’s super simple.

Byron’s script with a potential client goes something like this:

I’m working with dozens of buyers right now who are super interested in your neighborhood.

Do you know if any of your neighbors or friends are thinking about selling in the coming weeks so I could introduce them to my buyers?

This script is effective because it gives the prospect a subtle way to raise their own hand, but it also invites them to share additional information about others in their network.

The same technique can be used for recruiting, and it may be even more effective.

For example, let’s suppose you’re talking with an agent who recently had a co-op transaction with one of your top agents. At some point in the conversation, insert this phrase:

You just got a taste of what it’s like to work with one of our professionals.

Do you happen to know anyone in your network who’s thinking of making a change or would benefit from working with a team like ours?

If you have good professional relationships and a great reputation, even your competitor’s agents can be a source of referrals.

If an agent wants to learn something new or get an answer to a question, where do they turn for help?

According to researchers, they most commonly ask their manager, ask a peer, or search the internet for answers.

What they don’t do is reference their training materials or seek out company-published information (these resources were generally listed as the least helpful).

When interviewing someone, you may not be helping yourself by talking about your company’s training program.

Why? From the candidates’ perspective, you’re offering them something that was generally useless and unappreciated at their last place of employment.

How do progressive companies handle this issue?

They talk about the learning environment in their companies (i.e. everyone is always learning and sharing ideas).

They talk about the knowledgeable and helpful people they’ll get to interact with in this role.

They talk about autonomy. Being a real estate agent is about setting your own course and learning new stuff every day.

The real estate industry’s premier marketing thinkers at 1000Watt recently published some of their research and thoughts on loyalty.

Why do 82% of consumers report they’re happy with their real estate agent during a transaction, but over 60% never talk or connect with their agent again?

The assumption that super-servicing a customer will win their loyalty may be wrong.

Delighting customers doesn’t build loyalty; reducing their effort—the work they must do to get their problem solved—does.

Solving the industry’s loyalty problem lies, quite simply, in reducing the amount of effort people need to expend solving their own real estate problems.

I suspect the retention of agents to your office or team follows the same trajectory.

Many brokers focus on delighting their agents with great support, tools, and financial arrangements.

These are all necessary and important factors, but they’re a baseline.

True loyalty is earned by reducing the amount of effort agents need to expend to solve their own business-related problems.

Getting to this objective takes attention to detail, business acumen, and empathy—all things that great managers can access quickly.

Seth Godin surmises that the world of design operates on two axes:

Did you produce within the constraints?

Did you deliver measurable results?

Good design doesn’t exceed the available resources and produces measurable change against the agreed upon objectives.

Great design is better than good design because it uses fewer resources and/or creates even better results.

With so much external capital flowing into the real estate industry, it seems many of the traditional economic restraints have been removed—especially in the recruiting arena.

Companies who are offering unreasonable splits, signing bonuses, low caps, and other short-term financial incentives are making progress by removing constraints.

This may produce some results in the short term, but it’s not sustainable.

When the pendulum swings the other way, who will be the winner? The great designers.

These are innovators who will build profitable systems that are good for the agent, good for the consumer, operate within constraints, and produce measurable results.

Don’t get caught up in the race to the bottom. Spend your time, effort, and creativity designing a better system.

In a post from the archive, Dave Mashburn describes the mindset of high-performing negotiators.

If you go into a negotiation believing the worst and expecting to be taken advantage of, you’re likely to be too aggressive and competitive. Your motive is to win the battle.

On the flip side, if you are overly concerned about offending, you’ll likely be passive and make too many concessions. This mindset produces poor results too.

What’s the alternative?

A mindset that assumes a positive outcome for both sides.

A positive expectation breeds trust and acceptance of the other party as a reasonable and rational person.

It creates a baseline of legitimacy of both party’s needs and minimizes the gamesmanship. The jockeying for the best maneuver to “win” is no longer the central goal.

The research on how much this mindset affects outcomes is remarkable.

In one political negotiation experiment (the most difficult type), it improved outcomes from 34% positive to 82% positive for both parties.

One caveat—this does not mean you just blindly trust the other person.

You should still retain the right to assess whether your opinions/beliefs are being considered and your expectations should remain high.

The right principles are always the eternal ones: Assume the best in people first and your success will improve. 

A recent article in Fast Company documented the tension many employees are feeling about returning to their physical offices.

As more employers push to get employees back in-house, the workers themselves are taking a harder stand.

An April 2021 survey found that 60% of women and 52% of men would quit if they weren’t allowed to continue working remotely at least part of the time.

It also revealed that 69% percent of men and 80% of women said that remote work options are among their top considerations when looking for a new job.

Why such strong pushback to return to the status quo?

Workers claim they’re more productive at home, it’s easier to blend work and life responsibilities, and they dread commuting.

Because the real estate industry has long been more progressive than their corporate counterparts in encouraging and equipping agents to work remotely, this is a great opportunity to capture some talented new agents.

Brand yourself as the “remote work leader” in your marketplace, and you’ll be well-positioned to attract those who are looking for remote employment options.

The more efficient you become in managing your time, the more tasks and commitments rush in to fill the empty spaces you’ve created.

This is the time management paradox, and it’s a challenge for every real estate leader.

According to author Dane Jenson, the “rushing in” part of the paradox comes from distractions.

Distractions are a particularly corrosive contributor to feeling overwhelmed because they prevent us from feeling that we are making progress against the sources of the pressure.

How do you keep distractions at bay?

Rely less on willpower and more on schedule structures.

When it comes to distraction, structure beats willpower every time.

Here are a few examples of structures that help hiring managers beat-back distractions while recruiting:

-putting your phone in silent mode with notifications off
-closing your office door while prospecting and putting up a “do-not-disturb” sign
-putting your laptop in airplane mode so incoming emails/texts are not received for a period of time
-doing your recruiting calls/work in a place other than your office (ex. a conference room)
-forcing existing agents to schedule their requests for help
-using forcing functions for accountability
-and anything else that creates physical barriers between you and potential distractions

The solution to the time management paradox is not becoming more efficient.

To win, you must prioritize the most important tasks, replace decisions with rules, and create structures to eliminate distractions.

For most people, time management is stressful because competing demands require difficult decisions to be made on the fly.

Continually facing decisions with important consequences and imperfect information can lead to what scientists call cognitive overload, in which the demands from the mental work outstrips our abilities to cope.

Cognitive overload both increases the likelihood that you will make errors and contributes significantly to feeling overwhelmed.

One way to reduce this stress is to replace these decisions with principles or rules.

High performers like Tim Ferriss frequently use this methodology:

I look for single decisions that remove hundreds of other decisions.

Here’s a quick way to integrate this idea into your recruiting routine.

You already know to set aside time for recruiting (a protected time block).

But instead of trying to figure out what to do during the time block on the fly, start each session with a pre-made task list of five or six items. (here’s an example of a pre-made recruiting task list).

By starting each session with a task list, you’ll be 20 minutes into productive recruiting with very little time/energy wasted on decision making.

After building some decision-free momentum, completing your session seems a lot less daunting.

The hope of time management is that if you become more efficient, you can make space to accommodate all the stuff you need to get done.

It’s a false hope because it’s like digging a hole at the beach: the bigger the hole, the more water that rushes in to fill it.

The only way to solve the problem is to limit the tasks that have a chance of making it into your schedule or onto your to-do list.

According to Dane Jenson, this means prioritizing better.

For tasks that are assigned to you, think in terms of priorities not time.

When a superior asks you to do something consider asking: “Where would you like me to prioritize this against x, y, and z?”

This accomplishes two things.

Second, it reframes the exchange from a binary choice to a collaborative discussion about what is most important.

But what about tasks/requests that are coming from other sources (ex. agents, customers, personal relationships)?

Have the same discussion in your own mind:

Where should I prioritize this request considering my goals, responsibilities, and time available?

Unless you learn (and have systems in place) to limit the number of tasks you engage, you’ll never win the time management game.

As Peter Drucker once said: Efficiency is doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things.

Author Dane Jenson describes the nagging feeling most real estate leaders experience every day.

A major source of stress for many is the pervasive feeling that there is never enough time.

As we become more efficient, we make room for even more tasks and feel even more pressure.

This feeling is not just anecdotal—it has been frequently documented by researchers.

For example, during the pandemic more than 70% of workers reported that working remotely saved them time (mostly by eliminating commuting and reducing business travel), and 50% said they were more productive.

So, what did most people do with the extra time? They worked more!

Despite the time saving and productivity gains, the average workday for remote workers has expanded by 30 minutes during the pandemic.

If you want to eliminate this negative feeling (and still be productive), you’ll need to look for solutions outside the traditional time-management philosophies.

We’ll be covering some of these ideas in the next few Insights.

But if you want to get a head start, read Dane Jenson’s outstanding article on this topic.

By far, the most common recruiting KPI in the real estate industry is net hires (# of agents recruited – # of agents lost).

It’s the quickest way to benchmark growth, but it makes the assumption that bigger is better.

But bigger is not better for many teams and offices.

More productive is better.

As one CEO recently told me:

We look at recruiting as an opportunity to upgrade our organization.

Every time we hire someone we ask: Who is this person going to replace?

By changing focus, this company grew their per person productivity by 14% over the last 12 months.

Recruiting is hard, and we sometimes make less-than-ideal hires.

Rather than hanging onto a mistake, we look for ways to swap out a low performer with someone who will likely make a better contribution.

Productivity KPIs are not new, but they are newcomers to most recruiting discussions.

Yesterday, we touched on the topic of boomerang hires.

These are agents who come back to your company after working for a competitor.

The evidence is mounting that following up with agents who defected may be worth the effort.

According to researchers, almost 25% of individuals who change jobs later regret it.

The number one reason cited for feeling regret is “they miss the people they used to work with.”

In addition, there may be less resistance to coming back than you imagine.

Over 70% of employees said they would return to a previous employer if the right opportunity arose.

While you will hire some people for a lifetime career, it’s not a reasonable expectation for most agents.

It’s better to recognize the natural ebb and flow of a professional relationship and see someone leaving as an opportunity for a boomerang hire at some point in the future.