1

Austin Board of REALTORSAustin Board of REALTORSMember Relationship ProgramMember Relationship ProgramBoard of Directors PresentationBoard of Directors Presentation

October 24, 2011

2

Program ObjectivesProgram Objectives

Determine the relative strengths or weaknesses of the relationship with ABoR Members for 2011.

Evaluate the key elements used by REALTORS® to

assess the ABoR relationship, with emphasis on how the relationship can be improved.

Understand the differences between various segments of REALTORS

®.

3

MethodologyMethodology

Survey open August 22 – September 6, 2011.

1,008 completed surveys (13.4% response rate).

The results in this report have 95% accuracy ± 3% precision.

Association “benchmarks”:

50% “Excellent/Very good” Value60% “Excellent/Very good” Quality – adequate70% “Excellent/Very good” Quality – nearing best-in-classLoyalty profile: 30% Loyal, 50% Neutral, 20% Vulnerable

4

Evaluation ModelEvaluation Model

Member Loyalty

ABoR Value PriceImages

Member Behaviors

Customer Service

Products & Services

Multiple-Listing Service

Lock Box Service

SUPRA

Walk-In

Publications & Communicatio

ns

Professional Standards

Continuing Education

Political Advocacy

Weekly/Monthly Publications

Consumer Awareness

Code of Ethics

Dispute Resolution

E-mail Communication

Website

Telephone / E-mail

5

Reasons For Joining ABoR

Q1. Why do you choose to be a member of the Austin Board of REALTORS®?

For most members, there are a variety of reasons to join ABoR.

However, there is a segment (nearly 1 of 5 respondents) who only joined to have access to the MLS. This group’s loyalty to and engagement with the association may depend solely on the performance of the MLS.

38%

16%

12%

7%

5%

4%

22%

7%

10%

0%

38%

84%

85%

90%

91%

85%

78%

89%

58%

13%

13%

2%

4%

4%

10%

3%

23%

32%

0%

0%

1%

0%

2%

17%

3%

0%

0%

0%

0%

21%

9%

0%

0%

0%

1%

6%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

Member discounts

Networking

Access events/education

Keep abreast of issues

For information

Access suppliers/products

Support profession

Required

Access MLS

0% 1%-25% 26%-50% 51%-75% 76%-99% 100%

6

Overall ValueOverall Value

National Association of Realtors

Texas Association of Realtors

Austin Board of Realtors

N=484 N=496 N=509

Q2-Q4. Considering the overall quality of the NAR/TAR/ABoR products and services, as well as the cost, how would you rate the overall value you receive from NAR/TAR/ABoR? Would you say it is…?

N=1084 N=1085 N=1114N=961 N=958 N=995

7

Overall Value – Breakouts by CategoryOverall Value – Breakouts by Category

Q5. Why did you rate the overall value you receive from ABoR as you did (Fair, Poor responses)?

Most Common Responses

Cost and dues too high (73 responses; 40% of responses)

MLS issues (31 responses; 17% of responses)

ABoR does not listen to or represent its members (21 responses; 11% of responses)

Members only uses a few services, but pays for all of them (19 responses, 10% of responses)

Not innovative / outdated technology (14 responses; 8% of responses)

Too much wasteful spending (11 responses; 6% of responses)

Miscellaneous (8 responses; 4% of responses)

For those respondents who said Value is “Fair/Poor,” they were asked why they gave the low evaluation.

40% say it is because dues are too high. This is not surprising, as most associations see the same response. Members will never be completely happy with the dues they pay, it is up to the association to develop the Value around the products, services, and experiences it offers.

Outside of dues, members focus on issues with the MLS, not listening to or representing its members, members who use only a few services but are required to pay for all of them, a lack of innovation in the association, and too much wasteful spending.

8

Loyalty ProfileLoyalty Profile

N=508 N=133 N=125 N=121 N=129N=1128 N=593 N=278 N=166 N=91

All Respondents LSRs HSRs LSDRs HSDRs

N=943 N=583 N=161 N=147 N=52

9

Overall Value DriversOverall Value Drivers

Process Area Driver Strength

Dues 0.25

Education 0.15

Walk-In Customer Service 0.11

Publications & Communications 0.10

Problem Experience 0.08

MLS Features 0.08

Political Advocacy 0.06

Website 0.06

MLS Functionality 0.05

Professional Standards 0.05

Telephone/Email Customer Service Insignificant

SUPRA Lock Box Service Insignificant

As there are many reasons why a member chooses to join the association, so too are there many aspects of the relationship which have varying degrees of impact.

Outside of Dues, which routinely has the strongest impact on Value, nearly every experience a member can have with ABoR plays into their overall perception of Value.

Given this, there are many opportunities to leverage strengths and improve upon specific opportunities to continue to migrate members into stronger relationships.

10

Overall RatingsOverall Ratings

59% 61%

48%

23%

44%

31%

43%

54% 54%

63%

37%

18%

56%53%

67%

60%61%

74%

59%

42%

11%

77%

56%

40%

51%

75% 75%

61%

47%

69%

35%

52%

76%

53% 53%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Education Walk-In CS Pub & Comm MLS Features Prob. Exp. Website Pol. Adv. MLSFunctionality

Prof. Stds. Tele CS Email CS Lock Box

Excellent/Very good

With nearly every experience having an impact on a member’s strengthening relationship with ABoR, it should come of no surprise to see significant improvements in most areas from 2009 to 2011.

The largest jumps have come on the Website, Education, and Telephone/Email CS.

*Excellent, Very good, etc., scale does not apply to Problem Experience (% Yes).

11

Pricing - By SegmentPricing - By Segment

Q6. Relative to other professional service organizations with which you’ve had experience, would you say the prices and fees charged by ABOR are…?

Dues typically has the most impact on a member’s perception of Value and it is also common to see that members are relatively unhappy with the amount they are paying.

Members will never be truly happy with the price they pay to be a member. Rather than lowering dues, ABoR can decrease the “negativity” of this response by adding value elsewhere.

All Respondents LSRs HSRs LSDRs HSDRs

12

Annual DuesAnnual Dues

Q7. On an annual basis, how much do you currently pay for your ABoR services, including dues and technology fees, such as multiple-listings service and key-card access?

20% of members accurately stated that they pay between $1,001 - $1,200 in dues and technology fees. An additional 43% are in range, but 38% are on the extreme ends of the spectrum.

A majority of members should be paying between $1,001 - $1,200, but only 20% actually say they are paying this amount.

13

Reputation - ImagesReputation - Images

Q10a-f. How much do you agree or disagree with each statement regarding ABoR as a professional organization?

Strongly agree/Agree

An indirect measure of how member relationships are strengthened is in how they view the Reputation of the association.

With the significant improvements made in the various experiences a member can have, the Reputation has improved with them. This is in direct correlation with the Likelihood to Speak Positively about the association.

N/A

14

MLS Education DriversMLS Education Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Quality of materials used in the class 0.27

Course selection 0.19

Instructor’s knowledge 0.19

Instructor’s ability to engage students 0.18

Convenience of class times 0.17

Ease of registration Insig.

Convenience of class location Insig.

Classroom facilities Insig.

The drivers of the evaluation of Education vary depending on the type of course the member takes.

For the MLS training, the strongest driver is the Quality of Materials Used in the Class, followed by Course Selection, Instructor’s Knowledge, Instructor’s Ability to Engage Students, and Convenience of Class Times.

15

Overall Quality – MLS EducationOverall Quality – MLS Education

59%

40% 42%

52%45%

60%

51% 48%

59%61%57% 58%

72%64%

54%

69%

53%

69%

43%

62%

43%

53%48%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

OverallQuality

Quality ofclassroommaterials

Courseselection

Instructor'sknowledge

Instructor'sability toengagestudents

Convenienceof class times

Ease ofregistration

Convenienceof classlocation

Classroomfacilities

Excellent/Very good

Q34. How would you rate the overall quality of the education (i.e., continuing education, MCE, post licensure classes, MLS training) provided?

16

MCE Education DriversMCE Education Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Course selection 0.38

Instructor’s ability to engage students 0.30

Instructor’s knowledge 0.19

Convenience of class times 0.13

Quality of materials used in the class Insig.

Ease of registration Insig.

Convenience of class location Insig.

Classroom facilities Insig.

MCE Education is a slightly different story than MLS Education.

Course Selection has the most impact on how members evaluate the MCE program, followed by the Instructor (Ability to Engage & Knowledge) and the Convenience of Class Times.

17

Overall Quality – MCE EducationOverall Quality – MCE Education

59%

45%52%

60%

47%

63%

39%

62%65%58%

53%59%61%

56%63%

69%

57% 57%

74%

55%

70%

50% 52%

73%

59%53%

58%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

OverallQuality

Courseselection

Instructor'sability toengagestudents

Instructor'sknowledge

Convenienceof class times

Quality ofclassroommaterials

Ease ofregistration

Convenienceof classlocation

Classroomfacilities

Excellent/Very good

Q34. How would you rate the overall quality of the education (i.e., continuing education, MCE, post licensure classes, MLS training) provided?

18

Walk-In Customer Service DriversWalk-In Customer Service Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Pleasant Experience 0.41

Professionalism 0.26

Quick Greeting 0.18

Response Accuracy 0.15

Easily Understood Information Insig.

Consistency Insig.

Interestingly, the magnitude and ranked importance of each driver of Walk-In Customer Service is similar to 2009. This validates what the ABoR staff does well and what it should continue to do to maintain high ratings: Provide a Pleasant Experience, show Professionalism, Provide a Quick Greeting, and Provide Accurate Responses to Questions/Issues.

At this point, maintain is the key term. Further improvement to Walk-In Customer Service will require a significant investment for marginal return.

19

Overall Quality – Walk-In Customer ServiceOverall Quality – Walk-In Customer Service

61%54%

61%55% 55% 53%

74%71%

67%74% 72%

75%72% 71% 69% 71%

52%

71%72%76% 73%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Quality Pleasantexperience

Professionalism Quick greeting Responseaccuracy

Consistency Easily understoodinformation

Excellent/Very good

Q19. When you walk-in to the Austin Board of REALTORS, would you say the overall quality of customer service you receive from ABoR staff members is…?

20

Publications & Communications DriversPublications & Communications Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Coverage of Topics of Interest to the Local Real Estate Community 0.38

Informed about the Condition/Status of Local Market 0.30

Informed about ABoR Events 0.16

Informed about Critical Issues that Can Affect Your Business 0.16

Informed about What ABoR Can Do for You Insig.

There are two areas of particular interest that drive the overall evaluation of Publications and Communications in 2011: the Coverage of Topics of Interest to the Local Real Estate Community and Keeping Members Informed about the Condition/Status of the Local Market.

To a lesser extent, ABoR can improve the overall performance by focusing on Keeping Members Informed about ABoR Events and Critical Issues that Affect Your Business.

21

Overall Quality – Publications & Overall Quality – Publications & CommunicationsCommunications

48%

37% 34%

50%

37%

62%

53%49%

59% 57% 54%

67%60%

54%

36%

48%53%

46%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Quality Coverage of topics ofinterest

Informed aboutcondition/status of

local housing market

Informed aboutupcoming ABoR

events

Informed aboutcritical issuesaffecting your

business

Informed about whatABoR can do for you

Excellent/Very good

Q25. How would you rate the overall quality of publications and communications provided by ABoR?

22

MLXchange Functionality DriversMLXchange Functionality Drivers

Attributes MLXchange

Fusion MLS

Ease of Use 0.35 0.23

System Speed 0.18 0.32

Uninterrupted Service 0.10 0.19

Statistics Insig. 0.25

Search Features 0.21 Insig.

Client Gateway 0.09 Insig.

Comparative Market Analysis 0.07 Insig.

It is important to understand what drives the evaluation of each platform.

For the MLXchange, the strongest driver is its Ease of Use, followed by Search Features and System Speed. There are more aspects of Functionality which have an impact on the MLXchange.

For the Fusion MLS, there is more balance among the drivers with System Speed having the most impact, followed by Statistics, Ease of Use, and Uninterrupted Service.

23

Overall Functionality – MLXchange/Fusion MLSOverall Functionality – MLXchange/Fusion MLS

31%

19%27%

32% 29%

21% 19%

44%38% 40%40%

35%

44% 47%39%

45%

35% 32%

42%

53%

62%

44%40%

66%

40%44%

31% 29%32%25%

35% 36%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

OverallFunctionality

Ease of use System speed Providinguninterrupted

service

Statistics Searchfeatures

Client gateway Comparativemarket analysis

2008 2009 2011 - MLXchange 2011 - Fusion MLS

Excellent/Very good

Q12. Which MLS system do you primarily use? Q13. Thinking only about the multiple-listings service, how would you rate the overall quality of the MLS?

24

MLXchange Features DriversMLXchange Features Drivers

Attributes MLXchange

Fusion MLS

Data Integrity 0.37 0.39

Accuracy of Listing Information 0.09 0.61

Training Provided 0.32 Insig.

Accuracy of Tax Information 0.13 Insig.

Enforcement of Rules 0.09 Insig.

Similar to Functionality, the MLXchange offers a variety of drivers for Features, whereas Fusion MLS respondents were solely impacted by Accuracy of Listing Information and Data Integrity. No matter the platform, members continue to look for these two aspects as what can be improved to strengthen the quality of the platform.

25

Overall Features – MLXchange/Fusion MLSOverall Features – MLXchange/Fusion MLS

40% 39% 38%

30%

43%37%

46%41%

51% 51% 49% 47%51%48%

55%60%

54%57%

52%

45%44%37%

45%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Features Data integrity Accuracy of listinginformation

System training Accuracy of taxinformation

Enforcement of rules& regulations

2008 2009 2011 - MLXchange 2011 - Fusion MLS

Excellent/Very good

Q15. How would you rate the features of the MLXchange multiple-listings service overall?

26

MLS-Related ServicesMLS-Related Services

29%

46%

33%36% 34%

43%43%

30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Mobile MLS ListHub Rate Plug Data Co-Op Mobile Edit Market Statistics

2009 2011

Excellent/Very good

Q15. How would you rate the features of the MLXchange multiple-listings service overall?

The Mobile MLS service received extremely low percentage of “Excellent/Very good” responses, with nearly 40% saying the service is “Fair/Poor.”

Rate Plug - 23% say it is “Fair/Poor.”

Data Co-Op - 29% say it is “Fair/Poor.”

Mobile Edit - 35% “Fair/Poor.”

27

Problem ExperienceProblem Experience

Q48-51. Have you experienced any type of problem during the past 6 months?...What was the nature of the problem?...Was the problem resolved to your satisfaction?...Could it have been resolved?

Could the Problem Have Been Resolved?

Was the Problem Resolved?

Experienced a ProblemTop 5 Problems

MLS issues (39 responses, 34% of responses)

Unethical members (14 responses, 12% of responses)

Rude staff / no follow up (13 responses, 11% of responses)

Fusion MLS & Mac integration (12 responses, 11% of responses)

Fees and charges (6 responses, 5% of responses)

28

Political Advocacy DriversPolitical Advocacy Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Transfer tax 0.70

Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure 0.19

Water Treatment Plant 4 0.11

Tax on short-term rentals Insig.

Sign ordinances Insig.

Tax on services Insig.

Over the past few years, the Transfer Tax has had the most impact on respondents’ perceptions of ABoR’s Political Advocacy efforts. That theme continues in 2011.

Secondary efforts that have an impact on the overall evaluation include the Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure (ECAD) and Water Treatment Plant 4.

29

Overall Quality – Political AdvocacyOverall Quality – Political Advocacy

44%40% 39%

43%

56%

65%

53% 51% 53% 50%

65%

30%

61%59%52%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Quality Transfer Tax EnergyConservation

Audit &Disclosure

Water TreatmentPlant 4

Short-TermRental Tax

Sign Ordinance Tax on Services

Excellent/Very good

Q41. How would you rate the overall quality of the ABoR’s political advocacy effort on behalf of the real estate industry and ABoR members?

30

Political Advocacy EffortsPolitical Advocacy Efforts

71% 73%

65%

74% 73%

64%

74%67%

76%72%

67% 65%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Support ABoR positions onpublic policy issues

ABoR addresses major industryissues

ABoR adequately addressesregional issues

ABoR provides opportunities toget involved in government

affairs issues

Strongly agree/Agree

31

Professional Standards DriversProfessional Standards Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Assistance with Code of Ethics Information 0.56

Appropriate Discipline 0.34

Professionally Resolving Disputes 0.10

Explaining the Complaint & Arbitration Process Insig.

Providing Mediation for Compensation Disputes Insig.

ABoR’s ability to assist members with Code of Ethics information has the most impact on the quality of Professional Standards in 2011.

Secondary drivers of quality include Administering Discipline Appropriate to the Nature of the Infraction and Resolving Disputes in a Professional Manner.

32

Overall Quality – Professional StandardsOverall Quality – Professional Standards

43% 46%

35%

45% 44%

53% 53% 53%51%

60%

52%57% 55%

59%

44%

56%53%46%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Quality Assistance with Codeof Ethics information

Appropriatediscipline

Professionallyresolving disputes

Explaining thecomplaint and

arbitration process

Providing mediationfor compensation

disputes

Excellent/Very good

Q46. How would you rate the overall quality of ABoR’s enforcement of Professional Standards for ABoR members?

33

Telephone/E-mail Customer Service

34

Overall Quality – Telephone vs. E-mailOverall Quality – Telephone vs. E-mail

Q23. Thinking about the most recent time you contacted ABoR about [this particular issue], how would you rate the overall quality of customer service provided?

Excellent/Very good

Separate from Walk-In Customer Service is the perception members have of the level of service received over the phone and via email. 66% of respondents say the most recent contact they’ve had with an ABoR staff member was over the phone, 11% say it was via E-mail, and 4% Tech Helpline (n-size too small to analyze).

Given the lack of significant differences between perceptions of Telephone and E-mail Customer Service, the two were combined when examining attribute drivers.

35

Telephone/Email Customer Service DriversTelephone/Email Customer Service Drivers

Attributes Driver Strength

Responsiveness 0.28

Professionalism 0.27

Response Accuracy 0.15

Consistency 0.13

Knowledgeable Staff 0.09

No Multiple Transfers 0.07

Quick Pick-Up Insig.

When a member contacts ABoR by phone or e-mail, the top two aspects of the communication which have the most impact on a member’s Customer Service experience are Responsiveness and Professionalism.

Secondary drivers include Response Accuracy, Consistency of Response, Staff Knowledge, and Reducing Transfers.

36

Overall Quality – Telephone/E-mail CSOverall Quality – Telephone/E-mail CS

54% 51%58%

52% 50%43% 43%

65%

57%64%

76%73%

77%73% 70%

74%68% 67%

54% 55%55%

65%67%70%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Quality Responsiveness Professionalism Responseaccuracy

Consistency Knowledgeablestaff

No multipletransfers

Quick pick-up

Excellent/Very good

Q23. Thinking about the most recent time you contacted ABoR about [this particular issue], how would you rate the overall quality of customer service provided?

The main reason why members call/email in to customer service is for a membership inquiry (MLS, publications, billing; 55%), followed by information on the lock box (29%), and education (19%).

The performance of ABoR’s staff has had the largest overall jump from 2008 to 2011, now nearing 80% “Excellent/Very good.” The reason for this area not being a significant driver of Value is the low variance on high performance.

37

Improvements & SuggestionsImprovements & Suggestions

Q53. In your opinion, what is the most important thing ABoR could do to improve the quality of the products and services it provides to you?

Most Common Responses

Improve the MLS platform (181 responses, 22% of responses)

Decrease fees or have a tiered fees system (130 responses, 16% of responses)

More technological innovation (52 responses, 7% of responses)

More interaction and communication with members (51 responses, 6% of responses)

More variety or difficult courses , more online courses (42 responses, 5% of responses)

Improve Fusion MLS and Mac integration (37 responses, 5% of responses)

Improved integration with mobile devices (36 responses, 5% of responses)

Better represent the needs of the members (32 responses, 4% of responses)

Need better headquarters location or satellite offices (24 responses, 3% of responses)

Offer fewer services (16 responses, 2% of responses)

Nearly one of five respondents say the most important thing ABoR could do to improve the quality of the products and services is to improve the MLS platform.

The second-most frequent suggestion for improvement is to decrease fees or offer a tiered-fees system.

A smaller percentage of suggestions revolve around more innovation, more interaction/communication with members, and course selection.

38

Conclusions & RecommendationsConclusions & Recommendations

1. Relationships continue to improve.

A. Perception of Value is increasing;

B. Likelihood to Speak Positively is increasing – association Reputation is stronger.

2. How to continue upward trends?

A. Dues – “quick fix” – not recommended

B. Education

a. Importance of MLS training to MLS Ease of Use;

b. Instructors are the course strengths;

c. Convenience of times/locations

i. Weeknight/weekend offering? 20% interest – is it enough?

ii. More webinars for “anytime” convenience?

iii. Take MLS training to the larger offices?

C. Customer Service – minimum requirement

D. Publications & Communications

a. Focus on balancing Quality and Quantity

b. Additional channels are tempting, but only if it adds value. Too many times it makes communication repetitious and thus decreases readership rates.

39

Conclusions & RecommendationsConclusions & Recommendations

E. Multiple-Listing Service

a. Pilot-test members say Fusion MLS performs better than MLXchange:

i. Ease of Use

ii. Speed

iii. Uninterrupted Service

b. Next steps? Communication is critical.

F. Problems – could unresolved problems have been resolved?

G. Political Advocacy

a. Transfer Tax

b. Energy Conservation Audit & Disclosure

c. Water Treatment Plant 4

H. General concern with a lack of innovation – “meeting members’ needs”

40

Next Steps…Next Steps…

1. Connect PowerPoint to verbatims.

2. Is any more information needed?

3. What are your takeaways?

4. Management team strategic planning.

A. What has worked and is showing in the results?

B. What hasn’t been as effective? Why?

5. Communication of results – good and bad.

6. Taking action.