Jillayne's Black Female Realtor Living In The Deep South

I decided to go ahead and write about this before going to St Simons. It was banging around in my head.

This is from the discussion on Bloodhound where Jillayne asks:

"One postmodern genius who died way too young, asked us to ponder what it really means to be free was Michele Foucault. This philosopher follows in the footsteps of Sartre and de Beavoir in asking questions about limits on freedom. For example, and putting this into the context of real estate, does a black female Realtor living in the deep south have the same kind of freedom to achieve excellence as a white male Realtor living in any city? Many would say yes, many would say no. What does Mike say and what is his perspective? It’s hard to crawl out of one’s skin and see things from another’s perspective. A postmodernist would admit this before trying to argue about freedom in general ways."

This is a great question. I will ignore the geographical zing and assume that racism is a reality all throughout the country. I will also say that seeing things from other's perspective is something I've always attempted to do, and although I'm white, I grew up poor and had my own obstacles to overcome which has made me sensitive to the struggle of African Americans in a predominantly white society -- not that I fully understand but I've understood overcoming handicaps.

The broad answer pertains to commonalities of being human. I will stick to freedom and excellence to avoid dilution of the message. In a broad philosophical sense, all humans should understand what freedom and excellence means to them, and certain principles can be applied to all nationalities and races. Freedom is an ultimate value in itself. To say that freedom is a value worth achieving doesn't mean that freedom is equal for all, or that total freedom exists. Post-modernism in many ways has usurped the Grand Ideas with social issues, attempting to show the weakness of grand ideas by reducing them to the Everyday social interactions that are complex. 

The idea of Freedom is weakened by the examples where freedom is limited -- by racism, by social structure, by government power, by ignorance, by sexual prejudice, on and on.

However, the grand idea of freedom is an idea and value in itself, applied to humans in general (I will speak only of humans, not animals, although I admire the wild horses). There may be people who say freedom is over-valued and that limited freedom is necessary for the orderly creation of a fair society. We have to as a society decide which freeoms we will give up in order to function as a whole. On the other hand there are limitations placed on humans by people who aren't concerned with civil society, but more with control and power. I will assume that everyone here is for the greatest amount of freedom possible within a open and fair society, and that dictatorships and other forms of power and control are contrary to the human value of freedom.

What about racism? Does racism limit the freedom of the black female realtor? Yes. Does this mean that the value of freedom is weakened and that the black female Realtor is less than human and should not value the idea of freedom as a Grand Idea? No. What it means is that all people have not yet embraced the grand idea of freedom. It proves the absolute necessity for humans to learn and embrace the grand ideas. If Condi Rice had not embraced the grand idea and forged forth, she never would have achieved what she has achieved.

The problem with getting bogged down in social issues at the expense of philosophy is that people begin to accept the futility of living with great priniciples that apply to all humans and get mired in the reductionism of special interests -- that certain groups are different and need special rules to live by. In the struggle to reach the perfect freedom, there are things that need to be done, laws against discrimination and such, but the individual should embrace the grand idea and act "as if", because society is changing all the time. Barack Ombama could be our next president, and he is acting "as if" racism will not hold him back -- he has to -- he has to embrace the grand ideas and move forward otherwise he'd be stuck in the social conundrum of a thousand different reasons why it can't happen.

The internet has been a geat boon for freedom and excellence because it gives a voice to those who never had a voice. The internet projects the black female Realtor's voice, her expertise, her intelligence, her personality, her service model, her ambition to achive excellence, and only the most die-hard racist will resist her. She follows the lead of Condi and Barack and Colin Powell and Barabara Braziel and all the other African Americans who are achieving with the power of the Grand Ideas in the face of all the reduced social complexities.

Does this mean the social complexities should be ignored? No. We must continue to recognize the realities and change them, but the guiding force will be the Grand Ideas, not the denigration of the Grand Ideas.

Response to Dave on Bloodhound

From my post on Bloodhound

Dave Shafer February 29th, 2008 2:51 pm

The problem is the last part of definition 2; “rather than empirical methods.” When you take out the empirical methods you are left with no anchor other than a perceived set of values on which to judge on. I think rather than try to set up a universal set of values to launch your logic from, it might be best to observe empirically and then build you logic from that point. At least it works for me!

__________________________

To make this practical and relate it to real estate, let's say X experiments with PPC ( this is not a knock of Louis or Google or any other PPC set-up, there are other reasons to use PPC) and the empirical evidence is that it works, you get leads.

Let's also say there is a real estate "philosophical" principle that states - "It is best to learn how to generate your own leads for the long term benefit of your business and to make you more independent." X doesn't know this principle, or knows it but decides it's not the gospel and wants to experiment with a different way.

X logically concludes, based on empirical evidence, since she is applying the empirical method first, then using logic, that PPC works and therefore proceeds to put time, money and effort into PPC.

Let's say the PPC provider goes out of business, or continues to raise the cost, because there is more competition for keywords, or the leads become weaker because home buyers are using other onlne methods as a portal to get information. Let's say X starts seeing a reduction of ROI and sees the competition getting ahead. X realizes she should do something different, but doesn't know what or how because she chose to ignore the principle, or didn't learn principles first.

What X could have done if she had learned the "philosophy" first is to apply a combination of effort into PPC and learning how to create her own leads by staying abreast of the different portals through which buyers are going.

The empirical method, in my estimation, must be subsumed under the over-arcing prinicples that hold true across the board -- the philosophy of real estate in the new online age.

Fire holes in this when ready.

A Season To Be Objective - Other Philosophers Welcomed

Modernism, or post-modernism, has little use for philosophy . Pragmatism is most people's mind bent. Tough-minded pragmatism has a lot going for it, but when it denigrates philosophy it might be acting a little too tough. Isn't philosopy that old-timey pursuit back when intellectuals talked endlessly and abstrusely about whether we really exist or just a bundle of impressions. What good did any of that talk do? It doesn't pay the rent, by God, and it doesn't bring the bacon (tofu?) home.

Others are more mystical about life, therefore philosophy is an illusory construct created by dead white European males to rule by reason and logic, or to confuse the issues with consistency -- there is nothing consistently true for mystics, and all the intellectualizing in the world won't reveal the mystical flow of The Great Unknown to the puny mind of reason -- it's intuitive, soft and open in spirit -- felt by those connected to the universal spirit.

One looks at "what works" as the only marker for value, and the other goes by "what feels right", what can be intuited as the marker of value. There are many variations of these two types of believers. And there are many who are mostly social, who don't think much at all about the larger issues of life; they want to belong and be accepted, and merely being a part of a group is fine with them. They might take a stand if it's to protect a friend or if they feel like their group is being threatened, but mostly they just want social comfort.

The second definition of philosophy from The Free Dictionary is -- 2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

The first definition is -- 1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.

Very few people live by, or hold ideas to the test of, a set of principles that they've forged through a consistent philosophy. They usually go by antecdotal evidence, snapshots of reality taken out of context, as their measure to make decisions. "I have a cousin who did this and got this result, and it seems to be working, therefore I need not worry further about placing this to the test of principles because it's working and that's enough." Or, some might say "This feels right, it's got the right amount of compassion, it's harmonic with my feelings, therefore it has to be good because I feel good about it." Still another might say, " Everyone in my group is choosing this, therefore it must be good; besides, who am I to go against the group -- if they all think it's good, it must be good."

Those who judge by objectivity and reason based on a set of principles are many times seen as naysayers who are trying to spoil the "new thing" -- they are called short-sighted, old-fashioned, un-enlightened, contrarians, mean (if the new thing is sufficiently PC), and all kinds of ugly names if the new thing is something that deeply connects emotionally with people.

Many people misunderstand the above second definition of philosophy. They tend to think principled people are arrogant, that those who judge objectively think they "have all the answers", that they aren't "open". Nothing could be further from the truth -- these things may be true of any one individual, but they don't apply necessarily to people who judge by strict criteria founded upon time-proven principles. The voice of reason may be a "party-pooper", but it's not a pooping for the sake of pooping, it's a love for finding the wisdom/truth in any given subject. It's not a declaration of absolute truth being found once and for all, it's a declaration of the SEARCH for truth, a popular or un-popular truth.

Then, you hear the cries "Truth is relative!" -- "Perception is Reality!". This is the problem. For all those who abhor philosophy, THIS "philosophy" is most prevalent. And, it's the most dangerous philosophy. The modern tendency to make truth dependent on group consensus has isloated objective thinkers even more than they've been islolated in the past. There is no place for them in the political process, there is little demand for them in the media because they are not taking an extreme position to meet the agenda of the particular media format, and most groups shun them because they are often disagreeable. Simply searching for the truth is annoying and boring to a lot of people.

Yet, the world will be lost without objective, reasonable thinkers, and I think in the middle of the extremes a "silent majority" still exists years after Spiro Agnew (I think he coined that phrase) who hunger for leaders who will avoid the partisan pulls to extremes in order to pursue the truth. It's in the fearless search for truth that all progress and real change lies. What we see this political season is the culmination of partisan politics and truth by consensus with the largest number of adherents to a brand of "truth" the winner.

Failure to develop and live by principles, to look long-term and think objectively has infected every walk of life, and it's infected the real estate profession, with the pragmatic toughies yelling "Whatever works" as they look no further than next month, and with the "It feels right, so it must be good" crowd embracing every fluffy notion in their "unbearable lightness of being". Then the social butterflies who flit from popular group to popular group oblivious to purpose or meaning.

Where do I fall (let's keep this fair)? I have fallen in all of them from time to time, but I struggle daily to be objective. It's a goal I've set for myself -- to search for the truth, unpopular or not. I have to.

A lot of bloated writing here to get to a simple point: I believe it's vitally important to be objective and look at every issue, every new site offering, every controversy, every new marketing idea, every ethical challenge, every group direction, every business model, through long term vision, guided by a set of ideas that spring from freedom and excellence. Freedom to excercise your mind and control your destiny, and excellence in the performance of that freedom.

The last five years, since I got my broker's license and went independent, I've relished every moment of freedom -not to say that everyone must be a broker and start their own company, just find the route to independence (at least I've found it rewarding). I've also worked hard to understand all I can understand about the art of providing service. I may not be the most technologically savvy, but I'll match what I've learned about service and my service performance with anyone. 

I think it's two keys to happiness in this profession. The thrill of being independent, free to innovate, to change on a dime if called for, is exhilerating - and to strive for excellence. I've recently decided to use my space here on this blog to quietly write about what I see as the principles and disciplines necessary to succeed (as I see it, of course) in this new way of doing things that includes some old ways. I probably won't be breaking any news stories or announcing new gadgets -- there are other blogs that are better at that. I want to carve a niche of philosophizing. A real estate philosopher, if you will. LOL -- it suits my nature much better -- to sit quietly in my corner and write about "stuff".

Over and Over I Need To Be Reminded

I periodically have to stop and remind myself of the importance of communication when dealing with clients. 90% of the problems between clients and agents could be resolved with good communication.

One important reason people want to use agents for RE transactions is so they don't have to worry. If someone has a full time job and they are selling or buying a home, they want an agent to handle situations, forestall problems AND to communicate this on a regular basis. It gives clients confidence when you give a detailed report of what is going on and what is being done. Email is good for this but phone calls help even more. 

Even if a house is not selling, a listing agent can save a listing by giving honest information on a regular basis -- not making excuses but letting the seller know what is going on and letting them know you are creatively thinking about the home and how to sell it. Clients want and need reassurance, plus it strengthens the relationship and when tough subjects need to be addressed it's easier to address them rather than avoid them.

Also clients love information, statistics, trends, numbers showing you are on the top of what's happening. Gaining the confidence of a client puts you in a partnership relationship where you are both working together toward a goal.

Another thing is clients need to relieve frustration when the stress of a real estate transaction mounts -- being the sounding board is helpful, it keeps stress from becoming anxiety or anger.

And, it's simple. You just report what you're doing, and inform. If I had to pick a complaint that comes up most often when someone is expressing displeasure with a previous agent, lack of communication is number one.

Not for the contest, just tipping my hat

The most powerful marketing Idea I’ve heard on Bloodhound lately is to create a separate blog for listings. I’m in the process of giving area information, one area at a time on my home buyer’s website/blog with plenty of links to pertinent information.

But the idea of creating a blog for each listing is something that didn’t dawn on me. To tell the story of the listing. The 455 50^th Street Blog! My provider allows categories, so I can create as many blogs as I want to create and delete them when it sells.

The possibilities are many – you could even have the owners write a guest post, you could fully explain the area surrounding the listing, you can place powerful photos highlighting the strong points; you can have one post that gives demographics, one post that gives comparables, and if it’s an older home like many in Savannah, one post that gives the history. You can highlight in one post all the improvements, in one post talk about its energy efficiency, on and on.

It’s a lot of work but it would be powerful and sellers would love it. Talk about rich content and Google love! It would distinguish the home and it would place it in a great position to compete in a tough market.

I have two new listings coming up and I’m going to try this. There may be objections I haven’t thought of, but I believe it would be worth the effort.