Realtors aren’t tuning out. They’re walking away.
And not because they don’t care, but because their boards stopped being relevant. What we’re witnessing isn’t an engagement problem. It’s a structural failure decades in the making.
In a recent column, BCREA CEO, Trevor Koot, offered a thoughtful reflection on Realtor engagement, calling on boards to move beyond measuring likes and email opens and to focus instead on building confidence through accountability. It is a worthwhile perspective and one that many in organized real estate will find familiar.
But in 2025, it does not go far enough.
Disengagement is no longer just a communications challenge or a cultural issue. It is the result of a decades-long shift in power, purpose and accountability. Realtor disengagement is not apathy. It is a rational response to institutional drift, and increasingly, to disenfranchisement.
Many boards no longer reflect the interests or realities of those they were designed to serve. As brokerages step in to fill the gap, the industry is witnessing not an engagement crisis, but a governance reckoning.
From shared purpose to structural drift: A timeline of disengagement
To understand this shift, we need to revisit how real estate boards in Ontario—and across North America—came to be.
Early 1900s: Local brokerages voluntarily share listing information, laying the groundwork for the MLS. Real estate boards emerge to formalize and manage this cooperation.
Mid-1900s: Boards provide essential services: access to listings, rules for cooperation, ethics enforcement, and education. Engagement is high because the board is indispensable to doing business.
1980s–2000s: Boards expand in size and scope. Education is centralized through provincial and national associations. Brokerages begin developing in-house training, marketing, and business systems. Member reliance on boards begins to decline.
2010–present: Technology platforms (Realtor.ca, Zillow, CRM tools, and transaction software) begin to replace board services. Engagement erodes. Boards respond with more communications, while doubling down on governance structures that often exclude meaningful member input.
This evolution did not occur maliciously, but its consequences are undeniable. The relationship between Realtors and boards has shifted from mutual dependency to administrative obligation. And many Realtors have taken note.
When the board becomes the barrier
The modern Realtor operates in a brokerage-first, tech-enabled environment. Today’s successful agents rely on CRM systems, internal coaching, national brand networks and private mastermind groups to drive their business. The board is no longer the center of professional development or collaboration.
Yet many boards continue to operate as if they are. They expand offerings, replicate services already available through brokerages and tightly control access to critical data and platforms. The result is not greater engagement. It is confusion, duplication and growing frustration with the cost and value of membership.
Control over data has become especially contentious. Realtors generate listing and transaction data. Brokerages carry the legal and operational risk. But boards maintain proprietary control over the MLS infrastructure and access rights, often without offering reciprocal business value. That tension is now driving brokerages to create their own exclusive listing networks, rebuilding the original function of the MLS, without the board as intermediary.
This movement is not about pre-marketing. It is about market control, built on data leverage. Brokerages are no longer waiting for boards to evolve. They are building their own ecosystems, with their own rules, governance, and strategy.
Boards did not lose engagement. They lost trust.
Koot is right—but not enough
Koot rightly argues that engagement should not be measured by metrics but by the confidence members have in their leadership. On this, we agree.
Where we differ is in the nature of the solution. Koot suggests we refine the meaning of engagement. I believe we must restructure the foundation that made engagement necessary in the first place. The problem is not that members aren’t participating. It is that they have been systematically excluded from power, decision-making and meaningful influence over the institutions that claim to represent them.
Boards were designed to serve practitioners. Increasingly, they serve themselves: defending process, legacy governance and institutional preservation at the expense of responsiveness and relevance.
Rebuilding legitimacy
The solution is not to “win back engagement.” It is to restore legitimacy. That will not be achieved through videos or newsletters. It will require:
- Returning the board to its core purpose: facilitating cooperation, not controlling it
- Sharing data governance with brokerages and practitioners who generate and are accountable for it
- Ending redundancy in services and refocusing on infrastructure and integrity
- Reforming board governance structures to allow direct REALTOR® influence in strategic decisions
Until this happens, Realtors will continue to seek out structures that better reflect their business needs. Some of these will be built by brokerages. Others may emerge through national consolidation or private enterprise. But they will not wait for legacy institutions to change on their own timeline.
The path forward
This is not a rejection of boards. It is a challenge to them. Those who acknowledge the need for structural reform will find themselves reinvigorated by members who want to participate in shaping the future.
Those that do not will gradually become optional; kept in place by bylaws, but outpaced by innovation and excluded from strategic relevance.
Koot ends his column by encouraging boards to think of engagement as a measure of confidence. I agree. But the truth is starker: Realtors are disengaging because their boards have made themselves unworthy of confidence.
The question now is not whether Realtors will return to their boards. The question is whether boards are willing to return to Realtors.
As a REALTOR® and member of the leadership team at RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Group, Brandon Reay brings a multifaceted background in real estate practice, policy, and governance. Before stepping into brokerage leadership, Brandon spent several years in organized real estate, contributing to strategic initiatives and advocacy efforts with CREA and OREA, and various Chambers of Commerce. His work has included shaping housing policy, supporting regulatory reform, and improving REALTOR® engagement across the country.
Brandon’s approach blends hands-on brokerage experience with a systems-level understanding of how policy, market forces, and professional standards intersect. He is known for helping professionals navigate evolving market conditions and advocating for higher standards within the industry. In addition to his leadership role, he remains an active REALTOR® focused on agent development, business strategy, and client service.
Brandon regularly contributes commentary on market trends to media outlets and industry publications and has served as a spokesperson on housing issues in Ottawa. He is also a frequent speaker at real estate events, offering data-driven insights on brokerage strategy, professionalism, and the future of the industry.
He holds a Master of Business Administration from the Sprott School of Business. Brandon lives in Ottawa, where he remains closely involved in local policy discussions on housing affordability and real estate governance.
Great write up and so true
This article resonates all the way to Ontario. The feeling mutual.
This article is bang on! I only hope our board representatives and staff read this. Whereas I believed strongly in our board, confidence has eroded and I no longer see the need for the extra fees.
So many agents all paying the masters that do not serve them or the public.
I say we get rid of the boards and start over.
But how?????
Excellent points made –
So many agents all paying the masters that do not serve them or the public.
I say we get rid of the boards and start over.
But how?????
Some great points here Brandon! Very thought provoking. I sit on our local board (Kelowna BC) and we are working to better engage our members. Thank you
In Ontarioand couldn’t agree more!
What we’re seeing in Ontario is exactly that — a breakdown of trust. At the heart of the issue is a persistent need by the boards to control rather than facilitate. Instead of fostering collaboration and transparency, we’re watching a system tighten its grip, and now it’s all coming to a head.
For me, the final nail in the coffin was the introduction of the MANDATORY Ontario Realtors Wellness Plan. Dictatorship in the making.
Orea has its stink all over this. AND OUR BOARDS ALLOWED IT.
BUT SO DID OUR BROKERAGES.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NO ONE ABOVE REALTORS IS WITHOUT FAULT.
AND YES REALTORS ALLOWED IT TO HAPPEN.
For me the Toronto Board has acted more like Reco than any help or support
Great article, sadly this is just scratching the service of a massive problem. Regionals and national associations forget who provides the information which creates all the data. Realtor.ca now has adds yet there is no net benefit to agents who have created the data, CREA, NAR and national governments are lobbied by the likes of Zillow and there counter parts to establish regulations on how realtors list and market homes to support their business models, not the clients they service or the realtors business. Boards and governments do what they do best create bureaucracy in the name of better service, this is where organized real estate is at, boards growing for them selves not for those they serve.
Right now real estate is a house of cards.
But hey … Orea is saving them, they now have medical insurance to save the day.
Lololololololololololololol
If you want to see this actually unfolding in real time , you only need to look at the FVREB . This article describes this Board.
There is no accountability , hiding behind everything is confidential or operational. The worst governance I have seen .
Ignoring the members ,highjacking our members meeting . In a recent governance review they were described as dysfunctional and often
suffering from self inflicted wounds.
Best example the FVREB has an internal BOD HRT complaint .
Nothing going on at this Board is assisting the members .
Are we asking the right questions? Many may be frustrated with bureaucracy, but what do our clients think? I have a daughter in Toronto getting all of her information from non-CREA apps.
All bureaucratic organizations grow exponentially every year until the people push back. I played in a Friday night recreational soccer league that started out with a leaflet of rules. In less than 10 years, that leaflet is now 4 or 5 inches thick. When I started in the business in 1971, many property owners argued not to list on MLS They objected because they claimed that all we would do is wait for someone else to sell their home. We had to sell the idea of MLS. We often listed exclusively, and we were just as often successful at selling our own listings, and I still am.
What purpose do the boards serve? I am not sure! Paid CREA for 40 years, and I do not even know where their office is or what they do, except REALTOR.CA, and they have spun that off now. OREA’s CE classes are nothing but a money grab. Oh, and what do Pit Bull and other American liberal talking heads know about selling houses? Why are board dues going to pay these people large fees when the US government is hurting Canadians? I messaged TREB 5 times about who is paying for these people to come and tell us their sob story at a real estate conference. The whole thing makes my stomach turn, and personally, if I were part of this decision, I would be ashamed of myself.