The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics

, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 369–389 | Cite as

Real Estate Brokerage Earnings: The Role of Choice of Compensation Scheme

Article

Abstract

One of the more interesting characteristics about the real estate brokerage industry is that workers are presented with a choice regarding the sort of compensation scheme under which they want to work. An overwhelming majority of workers choose what is referred to as a commission split scheme in which the salesperson splits any commission that they earn with a supervising broker that they generally are required to work under. In this case the firm provides office support and administrative services to the salesperson and, in return, the salesperson must split any commissions that they earn with the firm. Under the alternative compensation scheme, workers pay a substantial up-front “desk” fee to the firm and then are allowed to keep 100% of any commissions that they earn. In spite of the large volume of research on the determinants of real estate salesperson earnings, to our knowledge there are no studies analyzing the choice of compensation scheme and its impact on the earnings of real estate salespersons. This study uses data from the 2001 and 2003 Membership Surveys of the National Association of REALTORs® to analyze the impact of the real estate salespersons’ choice of compensation scheme on their earnings.

Keywords

Real estate brokerage Determinants of earnings Sample selection bias 

References

  1. Abelson, M., Kacmar, K., & Jackofsky, E. (1990). Factors influencing real estate brokerage sales staff performance. Journal of Real Estate Research, 5(2), 265–276.Google Scholar
  2. Benjamin, J., Jud, G. D., & Sirmans, G. S. (2000). What do we know about real estate brokerage? Journal of Real Estate Research, 20(1–2), 5–30.Google Scholar
  3. Carroll, T. M., & Clauretie, T. M. (2000). A note on the earnings of real estate salespersons and others in the financial services industry. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 21(3), 315–323. doi:10.1023/A:1012060021241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Colwell, P. F., & Marshall, D. W. (1986). Market share in the real estate brokerage industry. AREUEA Journal, 14(4), 583–599.Google Scholar
  5. Crellin, G. E., Frew, J. R., & Jud, G. D. (1988). The earnings of REALTORS® some empirical evidence. Journal of Real Estate Research, 3(2), 69–78.Google Scholar
  6. Follain, J. R., Lutes, T., & Meier, D. A. (1987). Why do some real estate salespeople earn more than others? Journal of Real Estate Research, 2(1), 73–81.Google Scholar
  7. Frew, J. R., & Jud, G. D. (1986). The value of a real estate franchise. AREUEA Journal, 14(2), 374–383.Google Scholar
  8. Glower, M., & Hendershott, P. J. (1988). The determinants of REALTOR® income. Journal of Real Estate Research, 3(2), 53–68.Google Scholar
  9. Goldfeld, S. M., & Quandt, R. E. (1972). Non-linear methods in econometrics. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  10. Goldfeld, S. M., & Quandt, R. E. (1973). The estimation of structural shifts by switching regressions. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 4(2), 475–485.Google Scholar
  11. Heckman, J. J. (1976a). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5(4), 120–137.Google Scholar
  12. Heckman, J. J. (1976b). Simultaneous equations models with continuous and discrete endogenous variables and structural shifts. In S. M. Goldfeld & R. E. Quandt (Eds.), Studies in non-linear estimation. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  13. Jud, G. D., & Winkler, D. T. (1998). The earnings of real estate salespersons and others in the financial services industry. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 17(3), 279–291. doi:10.1023/A:1007733125056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jud, G. D., Rogers, R. C., & Crellin, G. E. (1994). Franchising and real estate brokerage. Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 8(1), 87–93. doi:10.1007/BF01098918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee, L. F., Maddala, G. S., Trost, R. P. (1979). Testing for structural change by D-Methods in switching simultaneous equation models. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association (Business and Economics Section), pp. 461–64.Google Scholar
  16. Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge, Mass: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mincer, J. (1970). The distribution of labor incomes: a survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 8(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  18. Sirmans, G. S., & Swicegood, P. G. (1997). Determinants of real estate licensee income. Journal of Real Estate Research, 14(2), 137–154.Google Scholar
  19. Sirmans, G. S., & Swicegood, P. G. (2000). Determining real estate licensee income. Journal of Real Estate Research, 20(1), 189–204.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Insurance, Legal Studies, and Real EstateUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations