Should Local and State Boards Purchase Opt-In Technology With Your Dues?
March 16, 2008 by Robyn HardyI would really like to get some feedback on this topic. This post comes from my observations of the Arizona Association of Realtors adopting Stewart Title's SureClose application and making it the transaction management tool of choice for their entire membership. It is an opt-in program so brokers don't "have" to use it. If they choose to sign on, the application is covered in their current dues structure...fine and dandy but what about those who already have a transaction management platform and don't want to switch? Will the association give them back that portion of their dues so they can pay their vendor of choice?
My personal opinion is that it is not the local or state board's position to "purchase/secure the option of" vendor services that will not be used by every broker and/or agent who is paying dues. The argument to me was: "What's the issue? Their dues is not being raised and they have an option to use it or not."
The issue to me is this, it is not just the solution that diverts the dues funds, it is also the marketing and internal association staff support that costs the association money. Every time a staff person has to pick up the phone to answer a question regarding the preferred solution, it costs the entire membership time and money.....If a broker chooses not to use the solution, their dues is going to support something they will never benefit from.
One argument that was raised at a Colorado Association meeting when SureClose was presented to their IT board of Brokers and Agents was that it is still known as a "Stewart Title" solution. Don't get me wrong, it is a very viable solution and stands on it's own as a premier transaction management platform but separating the "Stewart" from the "Application" is difficult for some brokers and even more difficult for some brokers to relay to their agents who have very tight relationships with other title vendors which also have transaction management platforms. I would have had a very hard time getting some of my agents to buy-in to a title branded solution no matter how many vendors they allow to access their system.
I could be totally wrong in my view of this. I feel a balanced approach would have the association negotiate with many vendors and offer several options to their members. Dues monies would be dispersed based on which vendor the broker/agent chooses...or simply stay out of the promotion of vendors and just do some great tech trainings showing the basic use of current trend solutions that brokers should be aware of.
Throw it back at me please!
E-mail this Print this
Posted in: Feedback General Real Estate Marketing Real Estate Technology Realtor Associations Specialty Services
Hi Robyn. Great issue for discussion.
For my part, it wasn't clear to me if the application, or a license to use it, was actually PURCHASED using member dues or if its use was more of a partnership arrangement (i.e., where the vendor provides access in exchange for other non-monetary concessions). I think I'd feel differently based on that arrangement.
If it was PURCHASED, then I would have hoped that a vendor "bake off" (i.e., via a vendor selection process) would have happened sometime prior with membership input. I'd still wish for that to be the case even if it was a partnership arrangement. However, for the latter, I tend to view it more leniently as a discretionary management decision which I bestow -- or later remove -- with my voting rights.
I understand the point made about member dues being consumed in either case for maintenance and support services. But I think I'm more lenient there, as well. I say that because I would be hard pressed to differentiate maintenance and support consumption of my dues between, say: the management's choice of transaction management system, web host provider, online marketing services, questions about Supra Key services, etc.
In any case, I would take exception to the branding issue. If the application is being adopted by the association as a standard for its members, I think it should be branded as an association tool and not sanctioned as a soft-sell for the vendor.
Like you, I'd be interested in reading other opinions on this point.
Post new comment