Corporate Leadership Disconnect Leaves Real Estate Agents Behind as Consolidators Gain Ground

Written by:

Rudi Davis

Date:

31 Jan 2026

Share

Share via Facebook

Share via Linkedin

Share via X

Copy to clipboard

A growing management gap between corporate leadership and field agents is reshaping the real estate industry, according to Bill Crespo, CEO and founder of Path2PRO Coaching. Many brokerage organizations are led by executives with no direct experience in real estate sales or managing agents, creating a disconnect that is opening the door for institutional consolidators to gain a stronger foothold.

Crespo, who has spent four decades in real estate as an agent, franchise owner, and corporate trainer, says this leadership vacuum is a key reason large corporate players are succeeding while traditional brokerages struggle. “If you have corporate America running from the top, some of these companies— not all, but the majority— have no idea what agents are going through out in the field,” Crespo says. “And if they do, they hire another corporate guy who’s never really sold out in the streets. So you have a perpetuation of poor training, poor leadership all the way down.”

The Structure Deficit

The root of the problem, Crespo explains, lies in how real estate companies recruit and develop managers. When brokers or franchises need leadership, they often hire from corporate ranks or promote top-producing agents who lack management training. This results in what Crespo calls an “unstructured” environment, missing the discipline that could actually help agents perform better.

“There is so little structure. From management to the individual agents, it is not corporate. It’s something else,” Crespo says. He points to three consistent weaknesses among agents: a lack of consistency, discipline, and focus. Nationally, this has led to low per-person productivity.

Real estate agents, as independent contractors, have broad autonomy over their schedules and activities. While this flexibility is appealing, Crespo says it often leads to paralysis rather than productivity. “If this were a corporate environment, you couldn’t do 90% of what the agents are doing every day. You’d have to have more structure,” he explains. “But because they’re 1099, they don’t have to show up or do anything unless they want to. So nothing happens until it closes.”

Why Consolidators Are Winning

Institutional players entering real estate are capitalizing on this lack of structure. These companies bring established systems, clear roles, and accountability, elements that help agents focus and improve results. Rather than emphasizing community or traditional agent relationships, they prioritize professionalism and operational discipline.

“The industry is being grabbed by big corporate people now, because they’re able to put some corporate structure into it,” Crespo notes. He argues that new agents will need to adapt to a more disciplined, corporate style to thrive. “It’s not about spending more money, it’s about learning to operate with more structure.”

Traditional brokerages face a dilemma. To recruit aggressively, they avoid imposing strict professional standards to prevent agents from leaving. Yet, delivering higher production depends on those very standards. “Management is afraid to lose the agent,” Crespo says. “But you’re allowing an agent to work in an office with no upfront revenue, only the opportunity to make significant income. If the manager doesn’t know how to recruit the right person and is afraid to tell them what they need to do, instead of creating a professional environment, you see low production.”

New Models for Development

Crespo’s Path2PRO Coaching is one response to the industry’s structure gap. The company uses a three-tiered development system, guiding agents from building daily consistency to leading teams and, eventually, to operating at what Crespo calls the “Boardroom CEO” level. At this stage, team leaders focus on leveraging systems and people to increase per-agent productivity.

The model draws inspiration from elite military training and high-level athletics. Crespo observed his daughters’ progress in competitive gymnastics, noting clear progression and accountability at each stage. “I saw them develop, and I thought, if we could develop agents like that, we could achieve incredible results,” he says.

What Comes Next

Whether the industry moves toward structured development programs or continues down the path of corporate consolidation will depend on how quickly traditional brokerages recognize the cost of their current management approach. The reluctance to impose structure in the name of agent autonomy is, in Crespo’s view, creating a competitive disadvantage rather than fostering loyalty.

As institutional players continue to expand, the gap between high-performing, well-supported agents and those left to navigate the industry on their own is likely to widen. For brokerages unwilling to adapt, the risk is clear: agents will gravitate toward organizations that offer the discipline, training, and support needed to succeed in today’s market. The winners will be those who acknowledge the management crisis and act decisively to close the gap.