Publisher’s Note: Don’t raise the barrier — raise the profession

A recent story has caused a lot of discussion, especially on social media, and it’s a debate that seems to come up every few years in our industry.

Should a college or university degree be required to sell real estate?

I’ve argued both sides of this question over the years. Early in my career, I was firmly in the camp of raising the barrier to entry. Make it harder to become an agent. Require more education. Raise the professionalism of the industry by making fewer people eligible to join it.

I’ve changed my mind.

Not because I don’t think we should raise the bar. I absolutely do. I just no longer think the way to do it is by making it significantly harder to get into the profession.

One of the things I’ve enjoyed most about spending well over a decade in this industry is seeing the incredible variety of people who find their way into it. I’ve met teachers, firefighters, accountants, salespeople, factory workers, stay-at-home parents and new immigrants. I’ve met people who entered real estate after losing a job, and others who simply couldn’t see a future where they were. Some have gone on to build extraordinary businesses.

That has always struck me as one of the beautiful things about real estate.

There are few professions left where someone without a prestigious degree, without family connections and without much money can build something remarkable almost entirely on merit. Real estate is still one of them, and I’d hate to lose that.

“The professions we admire don’t define themselves by the minimum requirements to enter them. They define themselves by the standards they set for people throughout their careers. Government determines who is allowed to practise. The profession determines what it means to become exceptional.”

Of course, that isn’t the whole story. Most people who enter the business won’t still be here five years later. That’s true today and it would probably still be true if we required a college degree. This is a difficult profession, and no amount of classroom education changes that.

What strikes me is how much emphasis we place on the education someone receives before they’re licensed, while comparatively little attention is paid to how they develop over the next 20 or 30 years. Licensing education is important, but it’s also meant to be the minimum standard. It’s the floor, not the ceiling.

I think one of the mistakes we’ve made as an industry is looking to licensing requirements to solve what is really a professional development problem.

Government has an important role to play. It should determine the minimum standard someone must meet before they’re allowed to represent the public. That’s exactly what licensing is supposed to do.

But government has never been responsible for defining excellence.

The professions we admire don’t define themselves by the minimum requirements to enter them. They define themselves by the standards they set for people throughout their careers. Government determines who is allowed to practise. The profession determines what it means to become exceptional.

That, to me, is where the conversation should begin.

Rather than asking how we make it harder to become an agent, perhaps we should be asking how we become much better at developing professionals after they are licensed.

When I got my licence in Ontario, there was an articling period. At least that’s what we called it. In reality, it was just two additional courses that had to be completed within the first two years.

In my case, I actually took the commercial course before I took residential transactions because that was the course available first. So there I was, licensed and legally able to help people buy and sell homes before I had completed the course on residential transactions. I hadn’t yet completed real estate law either.

Ontario has since improved that process, but I still don’t think we’ve solved the underlying issue.

If we’re going to call it articling, then it should resemble articling.

I’ve seen brokerages that do an incredible job developing new agents. Every agreement is reviewed. Difficult situations become teaching moments. New agents are supervised, challenged and gradually trusted with more responsibility. I’ve also seen brokerages where the broker couldn’t tell you much about half the agents in the office beyond the fact they were licensed there.

Both satisfy the regulatory requirements.

Only one is actually developing professionals.

Which brings me to what I think is the bigger opportunity.

Real estate doesn’t really have a professional progression model.

Most professions don’t stop developing people once they’re licensed. They build pathways that encourage people to keep learning, improving and eventually becoming masters of their craft. Apprentices become journeypersons. Journeypersons become masters. Doctors progress through residency. Professional speakers can earn the Certified Speaking Professional designation after years of demonstrated excellence, consistently high client evaluations and peer review.

In real estate, we essentially say, “Congratulations, you’re licensed. Now go compete against someone who’s been doing this for 30 years.”

I’ve always thought that’s a strange way to build a profession.

“What I do know is that Realtor is one of the strongest brands in Canadian real estate. Yet if you stopped 10 consumers on the street and asked them what distinguishes a Realtor from a real estate agent, I suspect many would struggle to answer.”

What if becoming licensed wasn’t viewed as the moment someone had arrived, but as the moment their professional development truly began?

Imagine if a newly licensed professional spent their first two years as an Apprentice Realtor, working under meaningful supervision while demonstrating competency in real-world transactions. At the end of that period, after meeting a professional standard, they would earn the title Realtor. Later, through additional education, demonstrated competence and experience, they might become a Senior Realtor. Eventually, after years of exceptional practice, peer review, client references, continuing education, an exemplary disciplinary record and meaningful contributions to the profession, a small percentage might earn the title Master Realtor.

Perhaps those aren’t the right names. That’s a discussion for the profession to have.

But I do think the profession is missing the ladder.

The industry already has plenty of ways to recognize production. We celebrate top teams, top commissions, top percentages and top recruiters. Those achievements deserve recognition.

I’m just not sure we do enough to recognize mastery.

If a progression model like this is ever going to have credibility, it has to come from the profession itself. It would require leadership from CREA, provincial associations, educators, brokerages and regulators. Most importantly, it should be built independently of whatever licensing requirements happen to exist in any one province. Licensing is government’s responsibility. Defining excellence should be ours.

Will it ever happen? I honestly don’t know.

What I do know is that Realtor is one of the strongest brands in Canadian real estate. Yet if you stopped 10 consumers on the street and asked them what distinguishes a Realtor from a real estate agent, I suspect many would struggle to answer. To most people, the two terms have become almost interchangeable.

I think that’s a missed opportunity.

If our goal really is to raise the bar, perhaps the answer isn’t making it harder to become a real estate professional. Perhaps it’s building a profession where people continue to earn the public’s trust throughout their careers. A profession where excellence is recognized, mastery is celebrated and the title Realtor comes to represent something consumers immediately understand: not simply someone who met the minimum standard to become licensed, but someone committed to a lifetime of becoming better at serving their clients.

The post Publisher’s Note: Don’t raise the barrier — raise the profession appeared first on REM.