Taking pot-shots at agents is easy and fun, don't you think? After all, real estate agents are an easy target. Don't the polls say that we rank lower than car salesmen in terms of public perception? I think there are a lot of reasons why that is the case, and in some cases we do deserve the bad rap we get. But I think this is a typical case of people wanting to curse the darkness rather than lighting their own candle.

We live in a society where people are not responsible or accountable for their actions. Everyone wants to be protected from the choices they make. What's happening in mortgages is a perfect example. Now there is talk of a government bailout because lenders took risks that ended up actually being RISKY. Homeowners bought homes they couldn't afford, and lenders are taking a bath on loans they never should have made.

And now, people want the government to bail them out. What ever happened to personal, professional or corporate responsibility?

The complaints I hear about real estate agents often make me wonder the same thing. I don't mind when those complaints are targeted at the individual but when the whole industry gets tarred with the same brush, I don't think its particularly helpful. Because we are no different than other industries--we have our good and bad apples.

You can argue that the ratio of bad to good is too high, but it doesn't really matter. All that really matters is YOU and YOUR experience. If you are going to work with an agent, you want to hire a good one. One that meets your needs--whatever those are.

How do you find an agent like that? Quite simply, you look until you find one. Interview and be selective. Referrals and personal connections are great, but it's still important to interview any professional you hire to provide services for you, in order to make sure that the person is on the same page with you, and that you understand/are on board with each other's expectations. The referral or personal connection should get the agent an interview--it shouldn't be the end of the hiring process. I get a lot of feedback from people who hired their friend Phyllis's cousin JoeBob because he seemed like a nice guy, but after the fact they lamented that he didn't do much to protect their interests. I think it's too bad when people have an experience like that, but it just cements my philosophy that who you hire is incredibly important. Especially with hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line, and in a market that could best be described as "shaky."

Some say our industry needs to be better about policing its own ranks. This is probably true, but no one can seem to figure out how that should happen or who, exactly, ought to be responsible. Is it the state's responsibility? Maybe to an extent, but how much money do taxpayers want to spend on that kind of thing? After all, we are already highly regulated and subject to The Law of Agency that spells out how we are to interact with the public. And what sort of protection ought the government to provide? Should they spell out exactly what services ought to be provided for what level of compensation, in order to ensure everyone is getting value for the dollar? Is this even possible? So far, the government of the State of Washington has determined that this is not its role.

Brokers should be more selective in their hiring practices, and only hire agents that will provide excellent service. Except, that is not how the business model of the typical real estate brokerage works. I kind of hope that will change in the future, but historically and up to today, the brokerage business model works when they have more agents in an office, rather than fewer. Profitability for a broker means more agents doing fewer transactions, given that after a certain level, agents start costing the brokerage more than the broker is getting in fees, splits, etc.

Through the MLS's and REALTOR associations, we also have another avenue for self-policing, but as MLS's mainly focus on helping competitors cooperate in order to sell listings, their enforcement efforts mainly center around how we work with each other rather than how we work with the public. And as for the REALTOR thing...it's a trade group. It requires REALTORS to operate via specific standards of practice but doesn't spell out exactly what a REALTOR has to do to earn their commission.

So who will protect the consumer? Well, I think it is really up to consumers to protect themselves. Recognize that when you have decided to work with an agent, you have hired a professional to provide a service for you. It is between you and that professional to determine exactly what that service (or services) will be. No one else--not the state, not the brokers, not the MLS and not the REALTOR association--can truly determine what that agent has to do for his paycheck. Only you the consumer have that power. And my suggestion to any consumer is to hold your agent responsible for providing the service you want.

But you still have to find such an agent. Agents are not all the same. Being a licensee or even being a REALTOR doesn't necessarily mean you would want to hire that person. Experience is a plus, but it isn't just a matter of the amount of time in business or number of transactions completed. What kind of experience are we talking about? Some people who have been in the industry for years are out there providing bad or very little service for the dollar. And some newer agents are out there doing a bang up job, working hard for their clients because they don't know any other way to do business. So, it kind of depends.

To me, the biggest part of what drives the service you will get has to do with an agent's work ethic and personality. Real estate is a strange business in lots of ways, but one of the ways it is most strange is that it's a sales career that requires a high degree of detail orientation and the ability to put the client's needs before your own. These qualities are not always compatible. But, if you want to have a good experience with your agent, you need to find someone in whom they coexist.

Consumers also need to figure out what they want from their agent. Demand excellence and full service if that is what you want--but realize, excellence usually doesn't work cheap.

If you want a different kind of experience, you can have that too. Even though I prefer to be a full-service agent, I do recognize that there is a place for the lower level of service and lower level of compensation. For some people who prefer to do most of the work themselves, working with a service like Redfin might make a lot of sense. You can even represent yourself, if you think that is in your best interest. The system we currently have does allow people to make these kinds of choices, and I think having choices is good for everyone.

For those who choose full service, the main concern is to make sure that you get what you are paying for. It's like when you decide to take a trip. Depending on where you want to go, you can choose first class, business class or coach. Lots of people prefer coach, others prefer flying first class. Some people choose what kind of service they want based on the type of trip--first class for more difficult international flights, coach for short trips down the coast. Yes, you can get a cheaper fare to London, but to some, it's worth paying the additional first class fare to ride in comfort and make sure that the details are someone else's problem.

Others don't care about service or comfort, they just want to get to their destination as quickly as possible, and for them, coach is fine. There is room for all these models. What there is not room for, is a supposedly full service agent that does not earn their paycheck. That would be like buying a first class ticket to London, and ending up riding in coach to Fresno. Not only do you not end up where you wanted to be, you didn't even get any champagne before take-off!

Ultimately, we deserve to get what we pay for--whatever that may be. But often it is up to us to make sure that happens.

Because here is the ugly truth: the real estate industry cannot adequately protect consumers from bad agents. I do not think it ever will be able to, any more than the medical profession can protect consumers against all bad doctors, or the teaching profession against bad teachers, or the hairdressing industry against bad hairdressers, or the donut profession against bad donut makers. In my opinion, there is nothing I hate more than a bad donut or a bad dye job, and that is why I believe that donut shops and hairdressers are not all the same. Neither are real estate agents.

And this is why consumers MUST be selective about who they hire.