What Real Estate Agents May Look for in a Brokerage Beyond Commission Splits and Brand Recognition
Written by Will Jones
The relationship between real estate agents and their brokerages can be unusually independent. According to the National Association of REALTORS®, 86% of REALTORS® were independent contractors at their firms, while the median tenure with a current firm was six years. Those figures do not explain why agents stay or leave, but they suggest that many professionals build considerable independence while maintaining relatively long relationships with their brokerages.
For an established agent, that can make changing firms a more complicated decision than comparing commission splits. Clients, referral relationships, working routines, technology, and a personal reputation may already be well established. A competing brokerage may therefore need to demonstrate what it could contribute to an agent’s career beyond compensation or brand recognition alone.
Technology provides one way to consider that value. The National Association of REALTORS®’ 2025 Technology Survey found that 38% of respondents agreed and 29% strongly agreed that their brokerage provided all the technology tools they needed. Meanwhile, 34% reported spending between $50 and $250 per month on technology for their individual real estate businesses. The findings do not identify what determines brokerage loyalty, but they show that agents may be combining resources provided by their firms with investments of their own.
The broader question is harder to measure. An independent contractor may still look to a brokerage for practical support, professional development, accessible leadership, or a working environment that suits the way they want to operate. None of those considerations necessarily replaces compensation. They may, however, form part of how an agent evaluates what a brokerage adds to a business that is already largely self-directed.
Rachel El Shamy, owner of Sage Space Real Estate in Austin, Texas, believes that question deserves more attention. Drawing on her experience building what she explains as an all-women brokerage, she views agents as entrepreneurs who need room to develop their own businesses. “You are like small businesses within a business,” she says. For El Shamy, that makes the brokerage’s contribution worth examining beyond commission structures alone.
El Shamy believes practical support can also shape how agents view a brokerage and has dedicated her career to guiding other agents through mentorship. She also points to technology, transaction coordination, and simpler fee structures, along with resources that can help agents manage and grow their businesses more independently.
Culture is more difficult to measure, but El Shamy believes it can still influence how an agent experiences a brokerage. She sees community as one reason an established agent might consider a move, particularly if the new environment feels more collaborative. At Sage Space, she says that means creating space for agents to support one another rather than manage every situation alone.
She frames that idea through ordinary working moments. If she is away and a client needs to view a property, El Shamy says another agent may step in. “There’s no problem for them to just go and open doors for my clients and vice versa,” she explains. She sees that kind of informal coverage as one way colleagues can make flexibility and independence easier to manage in practice.
El Shamy also believes culture can be visible in how leaders respond when something goes wrong. She recalls helping an experienced agent correct an error in a listing and focusing on the solution rather than the mistake itself. According to El Shamy, the agent appreciated being able to resolve the problem without feeling more discouraged. The example is anecdotal, but it illustrates the type of environment El Shamy says she is trying to create.
She is equally clear that the model may not suit everyone. El Shamy explains Sage Space as more self-guided and believes an agent seeking a highly structured schedule of courses and requirements might prefer another brokerage. For her, the point is not that one culture is universally better, but that a brokerage can be clearer about what kind of working experience it intends to provide.
Commission, technology, training, and brand recognition may all remain relevant considerations. El Shamy’s perspective adds another question: What does the brokerage contribute to an agent’s everyday experience of building a career?
Her view is that community, accessible support, and collaboration can form part of that answer. For some agents, the brokerage that feels worth joining may be the one that makes its value visible in how people actually work together, rather than relying on compensation or name recognition alone.
