High managing agent turnover, yet quality remains high - how?

When I began in this investment game, I was always bumbed out that agent turnover is so high. You have a great property manager, almost by luck, and they leave a few months or years later and you've got a new one and you're left wondering ...I wonder if I just lost a superstar and got a dud?

After a while I realised that even though many of them didn't stay for long, most of them always seemed very competent and did a great job.

In particular I'm referring to two of the ones I use - Little Residential in Melbourne CBD and LJ Hooker Sunnybank Hills (Brisbane).

I'm wondering if there are any property managers that can chime in on this - what is it, as a company, that can be done to have consistently good people come through? Is it just the hiring process? Is it the people in charge? Company values? Process? Would be curious to hear from an insiders perspective.

I always get calls from competing agents asking if I want to move my property management portfolio and my answer is always the same "well, I used to have a great PM but they've gone and I've got a new one...how about you call back in 6 months to see if I still like them." and they always call back in 6 months and I'm like "nope, they're doing a great job, no reason to move."

 

The management is in the systems not the employees.

 

I had one leave before I even got a tenant and got a dud. Thankfully they have moved on and the team seems fine now.

In my limited experience most seem fairly good at least it is only a small % that are incompetent. Maybe it is the systems as xenia mentioned

 

I'd say you've been pretty lucky.

Before I was in the game I had my own properties with other PMs and none were like you describe. There would always be high turnover due to stress, maternity leave, suburb realignment, etc. Tried different agencies and got more of the same. Maybe it's just an Adelaide thing, I'm not sure. Got so fed up with there being no one good here, I started my own and do things differently.

 

I've only worked with the corporates on CRE - these have had well defined scopes and expectations as well as contractual portfolio wide obligations to their clients who expect consistency portfolio-wide not just a star on one or properties.

We'd have a few juniors who we would mentor up to pm status as well as some highly experienced bods as well.

@Xenia points out the importance of systems but i'd add training to the equation.

 

Commercial and residential are much different ball games.

 

Boy, we have dealt with a lot of PMs and agencies over the years. It's a tough job. PMs often get grief from tenants and owners and spend a lot of time putting out fires. I think the average young suburban PM sees property management as a stepping stone to sales where they don't have to deal with problems all day long and get a better phone and maybe a car and a desk in a nicer part of the office. Many of them don't make it past 6 months. In boom times, agency principals tend to disregard the management department and they go off the rails, which is silly because when sales get lean, it's the income from management that props up the office.

 

I just read this which is what you just mentioned about systems
Women are just as ambitious as men, unless companies hold them back

PM's are the meat in the sandwich tenants, LL's, Principals, receptionists

I was about to change PM's a while back after the service was slipping, no photos at inspections, exit/entry not up to standards. I must have been one of many to start pulling out and another senior PM was relocated to this office to take over. I stayed as I was happy with his abilities and knew I could go straight to the top with any queries but he knew there were issues and it was a lack of experience, leadership and also training. They were straight off the street entering the PM world, without some form of training or leadership you'd be mad to stay

 

I disagree. Systems are systems. Doesn't matter how robust a system is.
As long as there are humans, there are things that will get messed up.

The more experienced the human, the better quality of service.
I would expect that for commercial there would be a higher level of training required before they even let you in the door. Residential i've seen all sorts of muppets go in.

@Xenia, if its all about the systems, you could replace your entire staff with monkeys and be holidaying on some tropical island and managing them remotely.

I would say the quality is a result of stringent hiring processes - making sure the person is a right fit and giving them team members who have the drive to succeed - those who see it as "just a job" are given the flick. That said, those who see it as "just a job" can have their purpose too, they could be the social person who keeps everyone happy and balanced.

 

but isnt that a system?
And the next system would be training on understanding and following company procedures/policies. You need a "hit by the bus" safe company. so if anyone that gets hit by a bus the company keeps going

But i also agree the right person makes things a lot easier from the start

 

Ha ha
Good points

 

How much those same messed up humans without good systems?

Trained monkeys? Maybe? But they might not have the interpersonal skills required to be successful in the role.

You are right about the quality of the employee. But good employees with bad systems can struggle too. Good employees and good systems and your on a winner.

 

True
Whenever something goes wrong we look at whether systems have been followed, if not, why not, do they need better training or are they just disrespecting boundaries? I won't tolerate disrespect from anyone but other things need to be looked at before assuming this.

Systems are not fail proof, I screw them up, bin them and re-write them daily implementing new ideas, better ways of doing things, tighter control...

My monkeys need cutting edge stuff to follow.

Just kidding - most of my staff are way smarter than I am.

 

Just wanted to say, this post made my day. What an awesome result for you and you've helped me to create a great future vision. Thank you Jaybean
X

 

True. I was thinking of "systems" that Telstra and like employ where the employee follows a script and doesn't know what to do when it is outside those boundaries.

I prefer the use of guidelines - explanation of how things work and hire intelligent can do attitude staff who will implement it in their own unique way.

 

Oh hell no lol

 

I don't know about that
I've met some "PMs" (and I mean sure you have too) who definitely lack intelligence and/or interpersonal skills.

There was one I remember who notified me the tenant was leaving and they were going to advertise for a new tenant - tenant was scheduled to move out the following week - I asked what happened to the notice period... errr let me get back to you.

 

And much worse...

 

I might add, the guidelines that i write can be incorrect too (I'm only human ), but in my opinion, if I've trained the staff well, they will continually update those guidelines and make it better

 

In future, call them (don't email), and ask for their private email/phone number so that when they leave, you can follow them. Seriously. If you find a good property manager, don't let go of them!