"Is Google a scraper?" That was the question at the center of news stories surrounding MIBOR's decision to tell a broker not to let Google index their site. The quick answer is "No" - there was no restrictive terms of service or limiting robots.txt file on the site, so technically Google did absolutely nothing wrong. But the question being asked ... that was the wrong question.

Finally, after the hype died down, the 'real' question started to emerge: "Should or could MLSs require that brokers not allow individual listing pages be indexed by search engines".  Since listings are given to brokers for advertisement, unless the seller opts out of online advertisement, since most consumers are searching for property online and search engines are an important part of online marketing, search engines will be an important component of giving listings the proper exposure and should be leveraged as much as possible. Also (and obviously) the MLS could probably make rules pertaining to an IDX feed but realistically not regarding the broker's own listings. But whether search engines should be allowed to index the sites is again the wrong question.

What's the real concern here? We've had IDX for some time - was it really just okay when it was invisible to search engines? Of course not. The real concern about 'data scraping' only comes from when the data is misused - that is, used for a purpose other than that intended by the homeowner when they provided the information to the real estate professional and by that professional when they added their own creative descriptions to the data to create the often copyrighted listing content.

What kind of misuse has there traditionally been? When a site is easy to scrape someone can come along and grab the listings in an automated way for display in an unauthorized location. Data can also be recompiled to create derivative products or to market back to the consumer. If the scraper adds an automated reverse telephone look up to scraped data, someone giving a real estate professional information to market their property one fine morning may find themselves called by moving companies and other service providers that very evening - and it reflects poorly on the real estate professional when that happens. So, the real question we need to ask ourselves is,  "How do we stop the misuse of data while not compromising the ability of the broker to market properties and promote the web sites on which the properties are located?"

Let's look at the type of requests consumers put into search engines. I believe that there has been a lot of hype about needing the whole address in the web page title and that individual addresses need their own website. Do consumers really expect to type in "100 Test Street in Testville, TN" and come back with a website? I don't think so - not at this point. We all know how the traffic comes in via web site search terms: "houses in Testville, TN" ... "Testville Tennessee real estate" ... "homes in Testville" "Subdivision Name in Testville". So, city, state and neighborhood/subdivision are obvious candidates  to allow a search engine to index. Key attributes might also be searched on - "lake view" etc. But the full address? Price? Bedrooms? Bathrooms? Square feet? Lot size?  I say, "ridiculous!" Are they needed for search engine optimization (SEO)? I believe the answer is an emphatic, "No". Since those bits of data don't help in the indexing of the listing by search engines for marketing of the property online BUT they are prone to misuse when programatically gathered (scraped) there is no reason why MLSs should not require that websites put anti-scraping mechanisms in place on those key items, while allowing search engines to programatically gather other information for the purpose of providing free links back to the web site.

But, anti-scraping begins at home. Less than 5% of MLS public sites have any anti-scraping in place to speak of - and good  measures are far more rare. But, I digress - before we launch into a tangent of anti-scraping tactics, we need to agree on a strategy for the level of protection required for the data to balance marketing with information security and privacy, and we must set policy that is reflected in contract terms pertaining not only to industry sites but to syndication endpoints as well.

Note - I've been traveling for more than a week and am writing this at o-dark-thirty in an airport parking lot - it's not my finest piece of writing - sorry! Hopefully I'm getting the ideas across anyway...

Clareity Consulting hopes that MLS executives and board members find this presentation about the MLS Mission Statement educational and useful when considering strategic planning activities. 

View the presentation here: http://www.callclareity.com/MLS-mission.cfm

Clareity Consulting has an MLS client who wanted to get the 'lay of the land' when it came to MLS public sites. Clareity called over 50 MLSs with public sites and asked a few questions of interest to our client - perhaps you will find the answers of interest as well:
 
Do you display sold/off market listings on your public site(s)? 
NO- 29        YES- 10        Considering- 13
 
Do you allow your brokers to display sold/off market listings on their sites?  
NO-17        YES- 21        Considering- 14
 
Do you display property address on your public facing web sites and online partner sites?
NO-4        YES- 36         Opt Out- 14

Visiting 94 public web sites, Clareity found that 93% displayed street address and 95% of those displaying addresses also displayed a map to the  listing.

 

One of the highest rated sessions at Clareity's MLS Executive Workshop was the "Virtual Office Websites: Challenges and Opportunities" presentation. I've posted the presentation, along with some talking points here: http://www.callclareity.com/VirtualOfficeWebsites-2009.pdf

I have posted the results of Clareity's 8th Annual MLS Customer Satisfaction Survey on http://www.callclareity.com/ - linked right from the home page. This year, 178 MLSs (14 more than last year) completed the survey, representing 817,140 subscribers. 

Clareity’s Annual MLS Customer Satisfaction Survey is a valuable source of input for MLS executives when evaluating a vendor's service and system capabilities, but I encourage all clients to do their due diligence: there are many factors to consider in evaluating which MLS system is best for your specific organization - this is just one piece of the puzzle.  

When I help an MLS organization in their system selection process I always try to guess what the final selection outcome will be after I get back the proposals (but before the final demonstrations). Reflecting on the last three RFPs where my guess was incorrect over the past few months, the following were the reasons why:

* In the first RFP, I thought they would value performance and ease of use but they prioritized robust reporting and statistical outputs.

* In the second RFP, I thought they would prioritize price, system customization capability and overall system satisfaction but they made a surprising selection and couldn't really articulate why they went the way they did - but I don't second-guess clients.

* In the third RFP, I thought they would prioritize the 'partner fit' as the two finalists fielded very competitive systems at similar prices but their impression of the system overall was the most dominent factor in their decision.

I always try to make sure clients have the most thorough information at their fingertips to make a good business decision in an MLS system selection process, but how they will weigh that information and make a final decision is always interesting and the unexpected results fascinate me.

I’ve been looking at some of the “next generation” of consumer real estate search – beyond “natural language” search – this search includes commute time to jobs, cost of living preferences (insurance, entertainment, housing, utilities, etc.), distance to amenities (parks, grocery store, gyms, golf, airport, etc.), school information  and performance, crime/safety information, and other demographics (own/rent, age, occupation type, education, income, family size), neighborhood and property foreclosure information, as well as all the traditionally searchable MLS fields. Consumer sites are also starting to get more sophisticated about suggesting homes that are similar to others the consumer has displayed an interest in and ordering the search results on relevance to all of the aforementioned lifestyle and demographic criteria and weighting as indicated by the consumer.

In contrast, MLS is still mostly focused on searching and displaying the listing characteristics, and prospect searches are often displayed in order of price rather than on the more complicated criteria that consumers use to select neighborhoods and homes. I reflected on this limitation to some degree in my earlier blog post, “ Improving Prospecting Part 2 - Gesture and Intent and Beyond

Now, imagine the consumer goes through the effort of outlining their lifestyle and other non-listing-characteristic criteria on a web site and are presented with the carefully selected listings that match both their property characteristic criteria as well as all those other parameters. When they go to the real estate professional, that professional  has no way of inputting any of that into their MLS for search – let alone having a way (say, via RETS) to have all of that preference information flow automatically into the MLS from the consumer’s search site(s) to generate a search for their new prospect.

MLSs can’t get complacent about new property search capabilities and leave them to consumer oriented websites alone to implement. As I’ve described above, there’s a relationship between consumer search and professional search that will necessitate, at the very least, following in the use of these capabilities and implementing the means for consumer preference data to flow from system to system.  Or even better, real estate professional IT systems can lead those accessed by the consumer, allowing the professional to provide the consumer with additional professional-grade information and interpretation that helps maintain the real estate professional’s  value.

In advance of Clareity Consulting's sold out MLS Executive Workshop I asked MLS executives from around the country how they have either cut costs while maintaining the same level of service or kept costs the same while increasing the level of service they provided.

I received twenty-one great ideas that will be shared during the Workshop, and I'm sure others will come up during the Workshop itself.

One idea that I'm looking forward to discussing is 'unbundling' products and services to reduce costs to those that don't utilize much service.  I can see how this could reduce the cost for some people to belong to their local/regional MLS, especially those who cut back to the absolute basic MLS package. But I believe that the subscribers that would do this are doing wrong by both their industry and consumers by decreasing their own use of the information tools that  enhance their professionalism.  The whole industry can be painted with the broad brush of unprofessionalism based on the actions of these subscribers. Further, this decreases the buying power of the MLS for providing those professional-grade  tools that the subscribers need now more than ever to show value to the consumer.

I can see where unbundling makes sense - it seems logical that people should only pay for those resources they use - but I have those more strategic concerns. I am really looking foward to  the Workshop!  

According to a letter sent to MLSs and associations by NAR, "When associations use the Realtor Ecommerce Network, the burden of meeting the PCI security standards falls on NAR, the merchant, rather than the associations." This is incorrect and puts these organizations at risk.

For those not familiar with PCI compliance, If your organization accepts credit cards, there is a set of rules you need to be aware of called “PCI Data Security Standards”. PCI stands for “Payment Card Industry” and includes the five major credit card companies. These companies have all agreed that any company that stores, processes or transmits credit card or debit card data must comply with a rigorous set of information security guidelines.  By the end of 2007, any organization that accepts payment card transactions was supposed to be in compliance with the standards – and if not, the credit card companies (or the bank through which the cards are processed) could assess fines on non-compliant companies and even disallow further credit card transactions until PCI Data Security Standards compliance has been achieved.

To clarify this issue, I quote from the PCI Security Standards Council (https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/) site: "Does PCI DSS apply to merchants who use payment gateways to process transactions on their behalf, and thus never store, process or transmit cardholder data? PCI DSS requirements are applicable if a Primary Account Number (PAN) is stored, processed, or transmitted."

The key words here are "processed or transmitted". Let's say I had a web site that sold widgets and I linked out to Paypal when people checked out on my site. To be clear, when the user input their credit card information, the URL in their web browser said "http://www.paypal.com" and no portion of the checkout process involving the credit card involved my web site. In that scenario, my web site has nothing to do with the credit card information - the information is never input on my web site, processed or transmitted from my web site - everything happens at Paypal - so they are the only one that needs to be PCI compliant. If, for example, NAR were to fully host and audit the association management systems AND other credit card systems where credit card information is processed and transmitted, then they could be solely responsible for PCI compliance - just like the Paypal example. However, MLSs and Associations take credit cards often on paper or via email (electronic fax), via point of sale devices, and allow for the input/processing and transmission of the credit card information via a system that is located on their local area network. Therefore, it is the responsibility of such MLSs and Associations to attain their own PCI compliance.

PCI compliance is not easy to attain and maintain, but it's just part of doing business within the rules. My company, Clareity Consulting is working with a number of MLSs and Associations to help them attain PCI compliance - and our sister company, Clareity Security is the exclusive real estate industry reseller of McAfee Secure, which provides ongoing vulnerability scans required to fulfill the PCI requirements.

If you have management responsibility for such an organization and don't have your PCI compliance documentation in order, you may wish to consider moving forward on that quickly in 2009.
 

Clareity Security set the standard for real estate industry standard for login security over four years ago, introducing strong authentication to the industry. Strong authentication, also termed "multi-factor" authentication, involves two of the three following items: something you know (e.g. a password or PIN), something you have (e.g. a token, PDA or cell phone), or something you are (e.g. biometric information). Recently, some have promulgated the idea that "adaptive security" can replace strong authentication, implying that adaptive security is comparable in strength to strong authentication - this is simply misleading.

Adaptive authentication tries to detect abnormal use and then takes action when that abnormal use is detected. For example, if a user usually logs on from Detroit, Michigan and there is a logon attempt from Honolulu, Hawaii, the system would attempt to make an assessment of whether the logon was valid. That works great in the banking context, but it just doesn't apply in any significant way to MLS authentication security, where the most common problem is users intentionally sharing accounts within the same geographic area and even within the same office, where they would likely be using the same computer type and perhaps even the same IP address. MLS users also utilize a variety of computers to access the MLS - at customers' homes, at coffee shops, or sharing computers in broker offices - that makes it even more difficult for adaptive technology to reliably distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate logon attempts. To have MLSs interrogating users to try to distinguish between true "cheaters" and false positives – it's untenable.  It will anger legitimate users, and be a waste of staff time to boot!

Last year, Clareity Consulting reviewed security at an 1100 member MLS, evaluating the usage of 800 UserIDs used over the course of a day. Of the 800, 5 UserIDs would have been noted as suspicious behavior by adaptive authentication technology - logging on from five or more IP addresses during the day. However, more thorough review revealed that 3 of the 5 were legitimate uses - users using wireless cards and crossing cell tower boundaries or logging in from different client homes and their own office. In this evaluation, only 3 users had abnormal download amounts – two were not actually "cheaters", but one was and this correlated with the excessive login report. All of this illustrates the problem adaptive authentication has creating "false positives". Worse yet, over 150 of the 800 UserIDs were found to be sharing account information but were using three or fewer IP addresses during the day - the same rate as the non-abusers - and since system use times were short, it was extremely rare (<2%) that these users would have tripped the "simultaneous logins" alert. Some of the "cheaters" even only used a single IP address and a single computer during the day! They work together in the same office so they appear to be ONE user to adaptive authentication.  Is having a 60% false positive rate while letting more than 95% of the "cheaters" off the hook indicative of successful security technology? The answer is clearly, "No!"

What is worse is what happens when adaptive security thinks it has found a cheater. Typically the next step is to try to validate the user so they can get into the MLS right away (say, before their listing appointment) by asking them secret questions. This level of security isn't any better than standard password security since three things the user knows (username, password, question answers) isn't any better security than two things (username, password) and is just as easy to share among “organized cheaters”. In fact, once you understand that adaptive security isn't actually "strong" and often boils down to knowledge-based authentication, one must ask the question, "Can knowledge-based authentication be effective?" A study done by respected consultants Forrester Research (http://blogs.forrester.com/srm/2008/04/end-user-securi.html) says the answer is "No". If the adaptive system is allowed to go to the next level and suspend accounts - in a system doomed to false positives - one is treading in dangerous customer service territory. 

Taking this even further, protecting the web interface is just one part of the MLS authentication problem – subscribers (and cheaters) utilize PC-based software for  both attended and unattended downloads of information, use tools such as RETS, and are increasingly moving to wireless devices and even  interactive voice response (IVR). Most of the adaptive technologies are device dependent, and are not extensible to the many ways that real estate professionals currently access information or those ways that will surely become more prevalent in the future. How can it deal PDA or third party software or with unattended downloads? This is why Clareity determined that one of the most critical success factors for a strong authentication mechanism was ensuring that it was device and platform independent.

Even if one willfully ignores how adaptive authentication concept doesn't work for real estate industry use cases, the technology itself has not had a good security track record. The following article discusses how RSA's implementation was defeated back in 2007 - note that it remains defeated today:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2007/11/new_malware_defeats_sitekey_te.html

Some have pointed out that financial institutions use adaptive authentication – they are correct, but what they leave out is that banks are swiftly moving away from adaptive authentication alone and are moving to strong authentication mechanisms. Most people are familiar with initiatives such as Bank of America's SafePass, sending one time passwords to the cell phone via SMS text message.  Note that Clareity Security has the exclusive patent for the real estate industry for sending one-time passwords via SMS text messages. That's reflected in Clareity Security's deployment a few years ago of TEXT-pass, an authentication method that doesn't require tokens.

While some of the reporting capabilities inherent in adaptive authentication technologies have a place in a multi-layered authentication defense, adaptive security on its own is not strong authentication, and cannot be considered to provide a similarly high level of security - as would be required for MLSs considering data sharing or regionalization when one or more of the parties had already implemented strong authentication security.  Attempts to mislead or confuse the marketplace by stating that adaptive security has high value and is an actual alternative to strong authentication, are simply shameful. 
 

When Clareity Consulting facilitates Multiple Listing Service (MLS) strategic planning sessions, one agenda item is almost always to discuss the MLS Mission Statement. Sometimes the group just needs to be reminded of the Mission Statement, other times the group may want to discuss and change it, and sometimes the MLS doesn't have a Mission Statement at all and Clareity needs to work with them to develop it.

Mission Statements are very important for a complex company to have. These statements embody the organization’s purpose and values, define the stakeholders and what the organization will do for them. While some Mission Statements contain additional elements, those are the basics. Typically, a Mission Statement is both clear and brief. In the strategic planning context, it can serve as a guideline for evaluating the relevance and priority of both current and new initiatives. Without a clear understanding of the Mission Statement, it is much more difficult to discuss, frame, and gauge the relevance of strategies, let alone the specific lower level critical success factors, initiatives, tactics and action plans.     

Let’s look at a few actual MLS Mission Statements as examples.

[MLS Name] is the recognized source for reliable, integrated Real Estate information services for the [MLS Geography] area.

In this example, the customer is not clear. Other than defining a specific service activity, neither the purpose nor values are made clear.

To facilitate cooperation and compensation among its members through a common database of real estate information.

This one defines the customer as “members” – this is good, but it doesn’t differentiate between agents and brokers as customers, and not being clear about that can cause tensions on a board. It’s also defined the specific purpose the company will engage in – “to facilitate cooperation and compensation” and how it will accomplish that “through a common database of real estate information”. This is a fairly complete mission statement, based on the definition provided at the beginning of this article, but is it a good mission statement for today’s MLS? It doesn’t address the service and support provided by the MLS, or provide any context for the MLS’s public property listings site or other initiatives undertaken by this MLS. It’s okay to have a limited mission statement – but maybe this one needs to be revisited to encompass what is now clearly a larger mission.

The function of [MLS Name] is to provide to the shareholder and customer associations a basic core of MLS services that are dependable, efficient, and cost-effective and to encourage vendors to introduce into the [MLS Name] marketplace optional products that REALTORS® may choose to purchase.

Maybe a bit longer than a typical mission statement, but a lot has been said here. The customer is clearly defined as the Association. I’m not sure what happens when Association, broker, and agent interests are not aligned – that’s a situation that should be considered. The basic purpose from the previous example, cooperation and compensation, is implied, though not explicitly stated in “core of MLS services”. But, this mission statement is especially interesting because it makes it very clear the method and business model that will be used for non “core” MLS services – that these will be optional, for REALTOR® purchase. The site licenses many MLSs purchase for transaction management, digital document management, and other information products and services would clearly be out of bounds for this MLS – the Mission Statement has truly focused the activities of this group.

Let’s look at the next three Mission Statements together:

To develop, promote and provide the highest quality of real estate information, products and services to our members at a reasonable cost.

To provide our members the highest quality real estate information, products and services at a reasonable cost, so they may better serve the consumer.

The mission of [the MLS] is to provide state-of-the-art, cost effective and superior multiple listing services, information and programs to advance the professionalism and success of its customers.

The first one clearly identifies the customer again as the “member” as well as what is being provided “real estate information, products and services”. The business model made so clear in the previous example is not so clarified in this one. The “reasonable cost” is a nice touch – providing a condition that generates discussion and evaluation of cost (and value) for each initiative. The second example expands on the first, by adding a consumer-centric purpose that reflects the modern consumer-focused position that has started to gain favor in real estate industry discussion. The third example is in many ways very similar to the first, but worded very differently. The addition of advancing member professionalism and success is admirable.

To empower, support and educate our members to achieve their goals by providing cutting edge resources that improve and enhance their business and personal lives.

Since most MLS subscribers don’t use the range of tools provided by the MLS organization, there is value in the addition of support and education to this mission statement – this MLS clearly is focused not just on providing tools, but having them used. Improving and enhancing member business is a fine goal, though somewhat vague. I must admit to not understanding how or why the MLS is getting involved in the “personal lives” - I wish I had been at the meeting where this mission was developed! Most MLSs shy away from the term “cutting edge” because of the risk that is often associated with “cutting edge technology” and steer toward “excellent”, “best”, or as in previous examples, “highest quality”.

Let’s look at a very different Mission Statement:

 [MLS Name] is a real estate information and technology company that creates value for our shareholders by providing premier business solutions to real estate professionals.

This one has many of the previous elements, but adds a corporate touch, with its primary purpose to provide shareholder value. 

To preserve a REALTOR® owned information service that serves, always the good of the brokerage community at large. To continue to provide the most effective, user-friendly MLS system available to our community of agents, by constantly working toward improving and expanding our services and system, while always controlling the cost to the individual agent.

Slightly longer than most Mission Statements, this is somewhat unusual in its explicit nod to REALTOR® ownership, the bigger picture of the “good of the brokerage community at large”, and the need for a “user-friendly” MLS system. It is also explicit in defining the direction of the organization as providing services beyond the core. This is all good and useful guidance for a group trying to make decisions about MLS initiatives.

What is the mission of MLS organizations? Clearly, from the examples above, it varies. There isn’t really a right or wrong. Each organization can define its customers and the balance between customer subsets as it wishes. Some organizations see the mission as evolving, while others are focused on the core function of the MLS system. Different organizations strive for different amounts of greatness. Some focus on just systems, while others expand the mission to education and other services. Prioritizing operational parameters such as cost control, user-friendliness, and dependability in the Mission Statement are all fine choices as well.

It's always interesting to assist in the facilitation of MLS strategic planning sessions and review the Mission Statement for relevance to MLS present and planned future activities. When the mission statement is aligned with those activities,  there tends to be less arguing about the strategies, tactics and action plans that reflect the mission - and MLS management and decision-making benefits.
 

As part of a thorough MLS selection process, I facilitate a number of MLS demonstrations every year for MLS clients. I'm always shocked when professional salespeople make basic mistakes and knock their company out of the running.

While it's part of my job to make sure that the decision makers account for all of the information gathered throughout the selection process rather than just how good the demo was, if a salesperson has thoroughly embarrassed themselves and made demo attendees ask the MLS staff, "Why was this vendor was even asked to present?" there's little I can do for the vendor when the final decision is being made.

Sometimes vendors have me come in to evaluate why their demos are not meeting with better response, and presentations can always be fine-tuned - but here are some helpful hints for a successful presentation:

• Prepare for your visit - know what integrations they want, public record availability and quality, mapping data layer availability and quality. Preparation shows you care and that your company is professional. Being able to say, "I researched this and found out..." always beats, "I'll have to look into that and get back to you".
• Another preparation tip - run through the demo before you go before the group. If you put in a few price ranges and keep getting a "No results found" or have to call someone to ask for a URL you can use for your demo, it looks bad.
• Never talk about how much successful your company is, unless you can relate it directly to customer benefits.
• Show the core system - the "post login" screen, searches, reports, hotsheets, CMA, listing maintenance. Show additional functions, from calculators to roster. If they have an interest, be prepared to show the mobile product, PC/Mac based product, and your IDX/VOW solutions, as well as key functions for MLS staff ... and whatever else is applicable to their interest. Time your demonstration so you can get to everything and still have some time for questions. Going the right speed - not to fast or too slow - can be difficult, but if the other vendors were able to do it, you should also be able to do so.
• Don't get buried in typing - or worse, just talk about features without showing them.
• Talk about each feature in terms of the benefits to the users - don't do a dry presentation of technology in terms of functions.

That's a starting point. I could probably go on all day - if you've been through enough demos I bet you could too!

 

As a part of the ongoing effort it takes to be a real estate IT and management consultant, I keep track of the competitive features of the many MLS systems, RETS servers, transaction management systems, compliance systems, membership systems, broker back-office systems, real estate listings web sites and various other systems that make up the universe of real estate industry IT.

Yesterday I performed some maintenance on my MLS list:

Starting Number of Features:	539
Features Removed (obsolete / less useful to track):	12
New Features Added:	26
Total Features:	553

Then I went through the list and updated all (at least most) of the vendors and systems, tracking which features each system has.

I still have another list of 'lesser' MLS system feature additions to merge into the big list, but that's going to have to wait until things quiet down again as the winter holidays approach. For now, the list will be good enough for my upcoming MLS Selection / RFP projects.

The long-term relevance of MLS organizations has been questioned at numerous conferences and on Internet sites over the past few years, but I believe these organizations are uniquely qualified and positioned to deliver technology and support needed by the industry. If we determine strategically what the MLSs need to provide to help the real estate professional service the modern consumer and participate in the real estate transaction of the future and we work vigilantly toward that end, the relevance of MLS organizations – and the value of real estate professionals - will no longer be questioned.

We all know that consumers are often coming to the table with more information than professionals. Even when that information is poor - like the original Zestimate - consumers think they are 'one-up' on the professional, and believe that the value of the professional is diminished. Our real estate professionals must differentiate by having clearly better, professional-grade tools, knowledge, and processes. Most brokers are not getting this done on their own, and our whole industry is painted with the broad brush of poor service and unjustified commissions.

Successful deployment of real estate information systems has typically been both the charter and strength of the MLS organization. However, there has been some tension because the MLS system (that has been the MLS organization's primary function) was chartered solely as a system to facilitate cooperation and compensation. Today's real estate systems need to go beyond that, including not just the MLS, but Public Records, Transaction Management, Forms, Digital Document Management, Lockbox systems, Showing scheduling management and feedback systems, listing syndication, professional-grade automated valuation modeling software, real estate customer relationship management and lead management - and  a bevy of other tools. There is also a great deal of additional information needed to provide professional services, including unlisted property information from homebuilders and FSBOs, mortgage and foreclosure information, environmental information, agent and property ratings,  as well as community, school, and demographic information. To be clear, I’m not talking about just providing a library of additional information – I’m talking about well-integrated tools and information that help the professional provide efficient and timely customer service, unparalleled capability in interpreting the plethora of property and population information available, and highly reliable and secure settlement processes. 

If the MLS organization is not re-chartered, re-missioned, and re-branded more generically as providers of information systems for organized real estate, we will continue to see pushback against the MLS organization offering systems that don't solely address cooperation and compensation. I know that some of you have mission statements that are already broadened – I see them when facilitating strategic planning sessions – but in most cases your board doesn’t even know the mission statement and understand its broader implications, and if they do, your members certainly don’t. If our industry doesn't reposition its MLS organizations or find some other means of improving the toolset and processes of the real estate professional in an organized, consistent manner, our industry will continue to lose its value perception with the consumer. And, as ex-NAR president and broker Bill Chee said to me back in 2002, "The lion really coming over the hill is the consumer."

This technical effort of which I speak must be executed in concert another effort, working with our trade associations, as well as ARELLO and state licensing organizations - working in concert at every level, we need to change what it is to be a real estate professional. Too long have some members driven their industry toward the lowest common denominator. Some brokers will keep a whole market in the stone ages on digital document management and transaction management ruining any possibility of cooperation in the electronic transaction of the future so they can have a six month technology advantage over one of their competitors. And, most MLSs recognize that less than 20% of subscribers use the bulk of tools the MLS already makes available to them -- and better is not required of those subscribers. Henry Ford, automotive pioneer, once said, "If I'd asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." Can our industry thrive if being driven by these people?

I'm not ignorant of the tensions it would cause if real estate organizations started trying to tell independent professionals what to do, and I'm also aware that many real estate associations are incented to keep barriers to entry low and membership numbers high. But there needs to be more of a balance between listening to members and leadership in defining our industry, if we want it to thrive.  David Charron recently asked me, “If 75% of the ... folks that surf real estate are using functionality that is not provided by the MLS or the broker, what does that tell us?” What does that tell us about our industry’s relevance, about our part in the real estate conversation? Lamplighters … typesetters … movie projectionists - none of those professionals or professional organizations were protected by resisting the future. Industry leaders aren’t doing their members and subscribers a favor by letting our industry be driven by those that want to maintain the status quo. We can’t be afraid of the future and, as Alan Kay of Apple computer once said, “The best way to predict the future is to invent it.”

Look at how libraries are being reinvented. Look at how the insurance industry reinvented their independent agents as “financial planners”. To sustain - or even improve - the long term value of the real estate professional, real estate industry leaders must redefine the profession, and MLS leaders must envision, build or license, maintain and support the new real estate information systems, requiring that technology vendors adopt standards and interoperate, providing real estate professionals with professional grade tools, integrating better with tools already fielded by brokers. Those could be the challenges our industry takes head-on, via organized efforts at national, regional and local levels.

I see many industry news articles, blog posts and speakers at conferences saying the MLS – or even the whole industry - is irrelevant, that it should be gone in a few years, that there's no future for it.  I disagree. I have a vision of the future of our industry and for the MLS - both the system and the organization - that is more vibrant than ever. Can we attain that vision? Can "organized real estate" actually organize to get the job done? Can we re-charter, re-mission and re-brand the MLS? I don’t believe our industry can afford to fail in redefining and creating an exciting future for itself. I don’t believe we can sit back and let outsiders take control of the real estate conversation and create the future of our industry. The effort wouldn't be easy, but that's the leadership challenge I put before you.

It’s time once again to register for Clareity’s Annual MLS Executive Workshop, which will be held March 5-6, 2009 at the Scottsdale Plaza Resort in Scottsdale, Arizona. Optional afternoon outings and a cocktail reception will be held the day before, so plan to arrive on March 4th! Many of you have urged us to keep the workshop small and that means turning away late registrants - so please go to the website and register - http://www.callclareity.com/MLSWorkshop/.

Who should attend? Anyone that will be involved in selecting a new MLS system, managing an MLS system, or building an MLS system will benefit from this conference. This workshop is not for MLS vendors or other suppliers.

As we do every year, the agenda will be finalized in the two months before the Workshop, to ensure that we don't discuss "old news" and only the most current topics will be discussed. If you have a specific topic you feel is a "must", please let us know so we can add it to the agenda. Like last year, even topics that aren't covered in formal sessions can be addressed at the "Open Session" at the end of day two.

When asked, "What did you like best about the workshop?", we heard some nice kudos including:

• The great topics and content
• Knowledgeable speakers
• No fluff or sales
• The informative panel discussions
• The opportunity to network
• Ease of communication and interaction

Every year we have to turn people away when we run out of space - so please go to the website and register:

http://www.callclareity.com/MLSWorkshop/

Also, please book your hotel early to guarantee a room at the event hotel – the Scottsdale Plaza Resort. More information is available on our web site - ask for the Clareity group rate.

Thanks again for the many kind words and I look forward to seeing you next March!

If you require immediate assistance or have questions about the workshop, please contact Gregg’s assistant, Stacy Pritchard (Stacy.Pritchard@CallClareity.com or 480-444-2087).

"Which MLS system is the best?" Clients perpetually ask me that question, and it also regularly comes up on email lists and in web-based discussions.

To some extent, the question is a bit silly – akin to asking someone, "What’s the best place to eat in town?" Of course no two people agree on what restaurant is the best – they have different cuisine preferences, tastes, service requirements and budgets. One person will have a good experience at a restaurant and recommend it, while another will go to the same restaurant - maybe on an 'off' night - and have a bad experience and subsequently warn people away. We’ve got to recognize that answering the MLS question is similarly difficult.

Most vendors have both very happy customers and unhappy ones, as well as a number that are between those extremes. When one asks the "Which MLS system is the best?" question on a email group or web site, you will likely get answers from both extremes – and it’s just not that helpful. Every year Clareity Consulting performs a survey of MLS Customer Satisfaction (e.g. http://www.callclareity.com/7thAnnualMLSCustomerSatisfactionSurvey.pdf) to try to provide a more comprehensive answer to how each MLS vendor is doing – but while you have to take reference checking and customer satisfaction into account in such a system selection decision, the experience of others is not necessarily the best or only predictor of your own experience.

What differentiates the MLS options, really? At a high level, system and service. After all, MLS vendors are Application Service Providers (ASP) – they provide both system and service, and need to be evaluated on both. Service may seem easy to evaluate, but it can be difficult to measure. If the vendor is providing support to staff or MLS subscribers, what call center metrics can they share with you? How much service will they provide in customizing the system to your specific needs and how will they respond to ongoing enhancement requests? The “company fit” and relationship that your MLS will have the vendor can sometimes be difficult to gauge in advance. As for the system, sometimes things we take for granted, such as speed, reliability/accuracy, and uptime may not be a given, at least not these days. Each system also has a unique feature set for the web-based system as well as for PC-based software, PDA, or voice interface – we have to answer the question, “What would your subscribers be giving up if they were moved to a new system and what would they gain?” The MLS staff also has to consider how much functionality there is in the system to help them provide a high level of service to subscribers – this may includes features like listing compliance workflows, easy to use robust RETS / data feed setup, and features providing staff with direct control over many aspects of the system. There are other considerations these days as well – for example if your market is considering a data share, how much experience does the vendor have implementing them and what is their track record? Finally, though the vendors are generally very cost competitive, sometimes cost enters the equation. I always advise clients to choose the system they really want over a system they don’t want nearly as much but with which they could save some money. I don’t think any MLS ever regretted selecting a great system that they could afford, but I know of plenty that regretted going with the lesser preferred system to save money.

Changing systems is hard for MLS staff and subscribers alike, and it isn’t something to do lightly. I typically perform an extensive member survey as part of the selection process, and more than once in the past year clients have seen such high levels of satisfaction with their current system that they’ve decided there was no way a new system would provide enough benefit to justify moving to it. Of course, you have to find a good balance of listening and leading – if all MLS executives did was listen to subscribers, we may still be using books! Also, thoroughly evaluating the benefits of moving to a new MLS system involves rigorous work, and building a robust Request for Proposal (RFP) and evaluating the proposals obtained from qualified vendors as part of an MLS Selection Process is one of the more complex services my company provides.

Which MLS system is the best? Honestly, there’s no one answer that’s true for every potential customer. Only with rigorous evaluation of your system and service needs and comparing those needs to the capabilities, system, and services provided by each vendor can I even begin to know which vendors may be good to include in an RFP – let alone have some sense of the answer the final question: “Which MLS system might be best for your MLS?”  When I’m involved in a selection process, my goal is to make sure that all of the appropriate information needed to support the decision has been gathered and presented clearly so that the MLS leadership (board of directors, committee, task force, etc.) can easily answer the question for themselves.

Check this out! RETS IQ RETS Library™ is a Java API that allows simple access to RETS servers. The API is designed to allow developers to connect to RETS servers and execute searches, photo downloads, metadata requests and updates without having to deal with the nuts and bolts of the RETS protocol.

Mind the license.