Should real estate require demonstrated competence before an agent represents the public?
I've been in real estate for 23 years, and I'm interested in a bigger industry question: do our licensing and supervision systems adequately establish that someone is ready to represent a consumer, or do we rely too heavily on knowledge-based education and exams?
I'm not arguing that agents receive no training. I've been researching this, and that assumption turned out to be wrong.
Illinois, where I practice, requires 75 hours of pre-license education, including applied coursework and case studies, plus 45 hours of post-license education. New brokers must be sponsored and there are additional managing-broker responsibilities before those post-license hours are completed.
Other states take different approaches. Colorado requires a high level of supervision for new brokers for two years. North Carolina uses provisional broker status.
But none of that completely answers the question I'm interested in:
Where do we determine that someone can actually do the job?
Pricing a property, evaluating an offer, explaining risk, dealing with inspection problems, navigating negotiations, handling emotional clients and knowing when you don't know something all require judgment.
My own experience is part of why I'm asking.
When I entered residential brokerage, I had already spent four years selling pre-construction for a developer. I completed my licensing education and passed the exam.
On my first outside transaction, I realized I didn't know how to write the contract.
An attorney met me at a coffee shop on a Sunday and walked me through it. After that, I voluntarily spent about a year following an experienced Realtor around because I knew I needed more experience.
Nobody required me to do that.
My current thinking is that some form of supervised real-world experience should be required before an agent represents clients on their own. Maybe that's an apprenticeship. Maybe there's a better model.
I'm not married to the solution. That's why I'm asking people who actually do this work.
For those of you who have been in the industry awhile:
What actually made you competent?
Was it coursework? A mentor? Brokerage training? Being supervised through transactions? Years of making mistakes and learning from them?
And if you could redesign entry into the profession, what would someone have to demonstrate before you trusted them to represent a consumer?
I'm especially interested in hearing from people who disagree with mandatory supervised training, or who work under a state system they think already handles this well.