The Secret Standard?

I've been very fortunate over the last year to have had the opportunity to speak at various events and talk about some of the things I am passionate about.

Recently, the topic has usually been about data standards and RETS.

I've built both client and server  applications that use RETS. The aggregation of property data has been part of my job for over ten years. The company I work for relies on property data exchange to stay in business and be competitive.

There is one thing that would really help me build better applications for real estate professionals. Standardized data feeds.

I'm not alone. Recently Greg Robertson blogged about this need stating:

"I want to be able to write a killer real estate app and release it everywhere at once."

Bob Bemis stood up at the data standards panel at Inman Connect in San Francisco and questioned the panel about why a set of standard field names had been submitted by COVE to the Real Estate Standards Organization (RESO) and as yet, no additional work had been done. (Disclosure: I was one of the members of the panel and am an active member of RESO)

Numerous third-party developers come to RESO meetings to gain an understanding of RETS and how they can build the next great app. They often don’t come back. They are looking for something RESO alone has been unable to give them.

I am not on the RESO Board of Directors. I am not speaking on their behalf. I'm just a member of the community and have a passion for this.

With that disclosure out of the way, let me now say this: Most of the fingers are pointing in the wrong direction.

Let me blow your mind.

RETS includes, as part of the standard, a comprehensive list of standard field names and data types. This list is the definition of the standard data feed that is being demanded by vendors, developers and MLS's.

It already exists. Right here.

Wait a minute. If it already exists, how come everyone doesn't know about it?

You need to lay some blame at the feet of RESO and the RETS community. We haven't done a good job on communicating this particular fact. But you know what? There are an awful lot of vendor and MLS staff that participate in RETS that know this. It hasn't been a secret.

If a couple hundred technical people already know that a standard data schema exists, how come everyone isn’t using it?

Easy. ROI.

That's right, Return On Investment. How much is it going to cost and who's going to pay for it?

There are two possible ways I see the standard schema being implemented.

First: All of the MLS server vendors automagically transform the MLS data from its existing layout into the standardized layout when a client requests the data through RETS.

Second: All of the MLS's work with their vendors and convert their existing database into one that matches the standard.

Some assumptions:

• Across the country we are seeing an average of 5 or 6 property classes per MLS and then agent and office data.
• There are almost 800 MLS organizations in the country, right? Six MLS system vendors account for almost 95% of those 800.

The first option requires about 1,000 man hours from the vendor and maybe 100 from the MLS for assistance in data mapping and quality testing. For each MLS.

The MLS members don’t have to learn new input forms but you make compromises in the data mapping. Your current MLS data may not be a 100% match to the standard.

The second option is a whole new MLS conversion. New search layout, new input forms, new reports, new end-user training. This is far more expensive than the first option. And what about those special fields you need just in your market? They aren't in the standardized schema.

Neither option is particularly attractive, is it? Especially when you can't point to a quantifiable increase in revenue.

Pressure for standardized data exchange has continued to grow and is reaching a breaking point. Either we do this together or we'll start fracturing and go back in time to a point where everyone was requiring the use of their own proprietary data layouts and FTP.

We need to start taking those difficult steps towards implementing a standard schema. We need vendors, developers and MLS leadership to work together to make the compromises that will get us there.

In the meantime, maybe there is something we can do that would be less painful for everyone and still meet some of the pressing needs we all have.

IDX: a smaller list of standard fields that would be used for IDX sites could be implemented. This would be less likely to need any of the specialized local fields and would be easier to support. It is also a good step to a larger set of fields.

Mobile Apps: a simpler method for running searches or delivering listing data could be built. It could be designed to be small and fast to help mobile application developers.

Standard Names: we should all champion the use of standard names and help each other use them as much as possible.

Let's focus on our business cases and take some meaningful steps. We better do it fast.

The next RETS conference is September 27 - 29 in Chicago.

Comments

[Amy Geddes]

Thanks Rob - outstanding post as usual. What a concept, focusing on the business cases! Too many time I've seen RETS thrown to the geeks (you being that rare guy who can straddle the fence) and what we get back is something that "technically works" but doesn't solve the business problem.

I will be lurking at RETS this year - trying to pat attention to something I've been negligent about until I realized how critical it is to my company and our business!

[Rob Overman]

It is important to note that the great David Harris (http://twitter.com/davidcharris) is chair of the RESO R&D work group and the sole purpose of that group is the collection, review and support of real business cases.

[Kristen Carr]

I read this yesterday and had to let it sit for a while before commenting. I agree totally with most of what you've said (someone please note this day!!!). I know you, Rob, are aware but I'm not sure everyone else realizes how difficult any change can be for most of the MLSs and associations. While most agents are represented by the few large ones you can't forget all the small ones. They have no money now, staff time is stretched thin. What they have right now "works" for them, just like FTP worked for them for so long. I am all for moving standards forward but times are so rough right now. MLSs, brokers, agents want their listings to go from Point A to Point B without a headache, that's all.

I love your idea of managing smaller datasets. No it isn't quick, overnight standardization of all real estate information but it's something almost any MLS can handle with proper help from strong, service oriented vendors - both on the server and client side.

[Rob Overman]

Kristen, I think the small MLS organizations are the ones reaping the fewest benefits from the standard as it exists today. The knowledge, skill and time required to be productive with RETS right now is substantial. Most of the sub-500 member MLS's didn't even have RETS in production before NAR mandated compliance a couple years ago. I don't want to use the depressed market as an excuse to wait longer. We need to get ahead of it for once instead of always reacting after the fact.

[David harris]

Nice post Rob. You are a critical member of the r&d workgroup. I like the direction RESO is taking. The roi to retrofit your mls to a standard is nearly insurmountable. But if the standards making body can lead the way, RESO increases the roi of projects already planned. Follow our efforts on twitter at twitter.com/resord

David

[marsha stanton]

You have explained why MLSs havent, cant, or wont implement.

ROI is right. How much is it going to cost and who's going to pay for it? Why would an MLS implement with so much change and expense necessary? The MLS leadership and members typically dont want change. And definitely not the extra expense. Where exactly is the benefit to them? The ROI?

Out of the two options presented, 'automagically' has more potential for ROI. The MLS in theory could monetize, but the vendors have a natural market, driven by industry, consumers and other market needs. The MLS, without direct ROI, would need demand from their membership, which, for the most part, isnt there.

The fragmentation of the MLS markets doesnt help. For ROI, in some markets, multiple MLSs would have to standardize AND magi-consolidate.

Having a standard does not guarantee implementation. Being a tech nerd geek, Ive seen 'standards' not take. The successful evolve. Respond to change and the needs of the marketplace. That are cheaper, faster, superior, and that are not entrenched interests.

And that provide an opportunity for ROI.

Thanks for the thought provoking post.

[Rob Overman]

Thanks for the comment Marsha.

I'm feeling a change coming from MLS leadership. Everyone is looking for greater efficiencies across the board. MLS's are looking to improve their bottom line while providing more services to their membership.

Third-party services and products are how they are doing it. RETS and SSO are two technologies that are fundamental requirements to successful third-part integration.

I'm hoping that the pressures are finally working to bring this all together and focus everyone on hitting achievable goals.