Tag Archives: management insider

Best Practices, community associations, Management, Management Insider, Professional Development

Management Insider #5 – The Power of the Zero Invoice & Other Tips

Leave a comment

In Management Insider #4, we encouraged management companies to provide their managers with tools and support to help them communicate with their clients. This is especially important for newer managers who may not have had the opportunity to grow their emotional intelligence or general business acumen at this point in their careers.

Getting challenged by a client about your company’s practices or business model can be source of considerable anxiety, even for the most seasoned managers. A knowledge of contract specifications, the company’s business model, and business fundamentals can help a manager address challenging situations successfully. These interchanges can either go a long way in building and maintaining confidence and trust, or they can sow the seeds of distrust and discontent. Preparation is everything. And a little practical strategy doesn’t hurt, either!

Don’t Assume They Know

Clients want stuff done. The details are less important, like whether the work being requested is included in the scope of the management contract. Managers must be aware of their contractual responsibilities. But don’t assume the client is aware of them. Nine times out of ten, there’s no evil intent, just a lack of awareness.

The manager’s job is to communicate reality tactfully, yet clearly. The first answer should not be “no.” It is much better to agree that this task needs to be done, and then communicate the options to accomplish the task, even if that means additional billable hours.

Managers must also be aware of their limitations. They are not licensed to practice law. They are not trained as professional engineers, nor are they CPAs. True, managers may have high levels of expertise in certain areas, but they still cannot assume the liability that comes along with accepting responsibility for every task. Yet, clients may not be aware of this these distinctions. Our favorite line: “I would love to take care of this for you, but I don’t think you could afford me if I had a J.D, a P.E., or a CPA.”

Remember, the manager’s key competency is finding a way to get things done, not necessarily doing everything. Clients may forget that from time to time.

Be Prepared to Explain the Model

Helping managers to explain basic business concepts as applied to the management agreements can be useful to help everyone to get on the same page. Clients may raise an eyebrow about reimbursable and extra charges over and above the base management contract. The reality is, there are a few ways to approach pricing to get the compensation needed to run a company.

Imagine a contract for a repair where every condition cannot be known, such as façade renovation for a high rise building. The contractor has two basic options. He can provide a price based on specific quantities, plus line item pricing for specific repairs in the event the final quantity is greater than the base contract. From the client’s perspective, there is a risk the final cost will be more than the base contract. At the same time, they will only pay for the services that are provided.

On the other hand, if a client demanded a set price contract with no possibility for extra charges, the contractor will have no choice but to bid high to account for worst-case scenarios in order to provide a set price. While the client will know what their exposure is, they may well be paying for services not received.

Management contracts are similar. There can be many variables in the operation of an association. Long meetings, extra meetings, major project administration, and insurance claims can require significant time and effort. And yet, they may not happen. Special assessments, bylaw revisions and the like will require much more copying and postage expense than would more typical operations. Asking a management company to eat these costs is as short-sighted as asking a contractor to do work for free. Neither will be in business very long.

Under pressure, managers may respond defensively to questions about so-called “extra charges.” This is a natural reaction. Unfortunately, it also undermines both their and the client’s confidence and may begin to erode trust. Helping a manager to prepare for the question and to explain the business model can avoid unnecessary conflict and maintain the relationship.

The Zero Invoice

My mentor taught me about the power and utility of the “Zero Invoice.” The strategy is simple. When the manager performs a task outside the scope of the base management contract, an invoice is generated in accordance with the terms of the agreement. Let’s say a board meeting lasted four hours, and the contract allows for a maximum of two. Let’s say the contract calls for an hourly rate of $75 per hour. The invoice would clearly show the billable hours, but also include a notation of a courtesy discount of $150, resulting in a net due of $0. It could be either emailed to the board or included in the next board package as an informational item.

This is brilliant for a few reasons. First, it establishes or reinforces the value of the manager’s time. Second, it informs or reminds the board of the contract terms. As such, it can be issued after the manager provides advance notice, or as a tool to be that notice. Finally, it creates space for a healthy discussion to plan moving forward.

It’s About Trust

When trust is present, relationships thrive. It takes time to build but is all too easy to lose. Fair or unfair, perception is always a major factor. Little interactions make or break trust, and eventually, relationships.

Training portfolio managers on the technical competencies of the job is critical. Preparing them for real-world business questions can be just as important. Get both right and build trust. Fail to do one of them, and trust may be eroded. Build up your people, build trust, and strong client relationships will follow.

Best Practices, community associations, condo associations, Cooperatives, Management, Management Insider

Management Insider #4 – Make it Personal

Leave a comment

Taking the human factor out of business can cause problems. Big problems.

What’s Going On?

There’s been an interesting trend in recent years in the Washington Metropolitan area. DC has a significant and growing number of community associations with on-site managers. Often, boards of directors have control over their compensation. The manager may be an employee of the association or of the management company as a pass-through expense.

On-site manager salaries, on the whole, have risen fairly significantly. Many boards seem happy to increase their budgets for salary increases. They may award year-end bonuses to recognize excellent service. Historically, community association managers have been generally undercompensated as compared to commercial and “residential” (rental) managers. So this direction is welcome and will help to attract and keep talent.

Interestingly, those same boards may be considerably less inclined to negotiate meaningful increases in management company fees, even when they are pleased with the performance of their portfolio manager. They know that the market is very competitive. Cheaper services are almost always available. This is a major factor in the commoditization in the management industry. The race to the bottom of low price can easily result in the failure cycle described in a recent blog on the subject.

So What?

There is a disconnect here. How can a company adequately compensate their managers and other personnel when they are unable to collect fees sufficient to do so? Clients set themselves up for portfolio manager and support staff turnover and never see their role in the problem.

Another result of all this over time has been that that portfolio managers are often supervising on-site managers who are frequently better compensated than they are. Things are upside down.

I saw this play out first hand. While working for my last management company, I served a portfolio of clients. As memory serves, when I left last year, my shortest client relationship was a little over 10 years. During contract renewal negotiations, two of them required that I be named specifically in the management contract. Yet, in one of those cases, they successfully negotiated a three-year contract with no increase in year one, and minimal increases in years two and three. With another client, we had an annual ritual every budget season. The Budget Committee Chair would semi-humorously express shock and horror at the thought of any proposed increase in management fees. Then he would say it was the management company’s problem to find a way to give me a raise. Fortunately, my other clients did not follow suit and were happy to pay reasonable increases for quality work.

Make It Personal

The lesson is this: When a person gets paid, there’s a direct correlation to value. When a company gets paid, the correlation gets lost. It gets corporate and theoretical. It stops being personal.

This is why some associations and wise management companies migrate management on-site where possible. With enough brains on-site, an association may not need redundant services or additional supervision (a.k.a. “full service management”). In this business model, management companies may sometimes generate less gross income, but their exposure to uncontrollable workload is mitigated. So while gross income may be less, the percentage of net profit increases. Done well, these contractual relationships can last longer than stressful, low profit, full service arrangements. The clients have more resources to compensate great on-site personnel who can best serve them. The key word here? Relationships.

But What if Full-Time On-Site Management Isn’t an Option?

There are other ways to establish healthy relationships, make it personal, and reinforce the cost/value connection. It might take a paradigm change and some creative thinking.

Option 1 – Dedicated Single Site: If a community does not have the facilities for an on-site office but the workload justifies the attention of a full-time or near full-time manager, assign a single manager to the property. Establish an office at the management company or nearby location. Don’t let logistics get in the way. Mobile apps and laptops make it possible to do a decent amount of work without formal office space.

Option 2 – Hybrid Approach: If an association has the logistical capability for an on-site office but not the workload to require a full-time, on-site, consider a hybrid approach. This was the model I created when I managed my first clients. I had either three part-time, on-site arrangements. I worked out of either two or three on-site offices on a standard schedule, subject to change in cases of emergency. I had to track my time and activity so that the clients knew they were getting what was promised. Time dedicated to each client at a base of operation on-site created a relationship of trust and accountability that I could not have achieved as a portfolio manager operating from offsite office. That was 1991. Cloud computing and other technology should make this option more viable now.

Option 3 – Quantify Portfolio Work: There is a solution for smaller associations that do not justify exclusive personnel or an on-site office. In some areas of the country, there is a management contract model that helps to quantify the work and foster a respect for it. In this model, fees are split into two components. Base financial and administrative services are one component. The other component is based on an estimate of management and administrative time dedicated to the service of that client each month. Quantifying the workload creates dialogue and opportunity for adjustments as needed. Of course, this requires that affected management company personnel track their time accurately and communicate the results with the client. An annual review creates the groundwork for a healthy, working partnership.

Sometimes It’s Simple

There may be missed opportunities to help clients appreciate the value of a manager’s time within the typical, set price management contract model. All set price contracts are based on an estimate of workload and contain a set of specifications to match. A client would never hire a contractor to paint their house and expect them to throw in the garage for free after the deal was done. Yet, frequently managers do not charge for extra services outside the terms of a base management contract. Failing to recognize and charge for billable services will ensure a manager’s time and value are neither fully appreciated nor respected.

There are typically two reasons for this: (1) They are unaware of the terms of the contract, and (2) they fear they will anger the client if they charge. First, management companies need to make sure their managers are aware of contract terms and communicate them in advance with clients. Then, they may need to give managers the magic words and support to help the clients understand the rationale behind the contract model. Help them communicate that they are not trying to “nickel and dime” the client. They are simply charging for time and effort not anticipated in the base contract. The service has value.

Remember the Goal

Whatever the solution, the ultimate concept is simple: A client should get what they pay for and pay for what they get. That means they must have an understanding and appreciation for the value of services provided. There must be a connection between cost and value.

All enduring business relationships must be mutually beneficial. Zero sum games have a short half life.  If the status quo isn’t working, blow it up and find a better solution. In the end, everyone wins.

Best Practices, community associations, condo associations, HOAs, Management, Management Insider

Management Insider #3 – Getting Off the Hamster Wheel

Leave a comment

Management Insider #2 provided a historical analysis of the current state of affairs. Armed with that knowledge and a deeper understanding of underlying issues, we are in a position to move towards solutions. Trust and perception of value are at the core of the downward press on management fees. Creating spaces where these two factors become strengths in the management-board relationship gets everyone off the hamster wheel of dissatisfaction.
There are no easy answers. Not every approach works in every situation. And there will be boards and management companies that don’t get it and never will. That’s OK. This blog is not for them.

  • System vs. Performance: I learned long ago that most boards assume that management problems are performance issues. Unless I figured out whether issues were actually a performance issue, a systems issue, or a combination of the two, everyone was asking and answering the wrong questions. The analysis must be case-specific. Every community is different. Dig deep into needs and expectations, and compare that reality to the resources in place to meet them. The right system with metrics and accountability puts people in a position to succeed. Outstanding performance can mask deficient systems. Management companies must resist the urge to tell clients they will take care of everything without fully appreciating the implication. Overpromising and oversimplification serve no one in the long run.
  • Enough with the Price Per Door Already: Management fees per unit per month are somewhat helpful to gauge costs, but it is an incomplete metric. Unit count can have little correlation with the work required to manage a community. Age of structure, type of construction, logistics, reserve funding, deferred maintenance, neighborhoods, internal demographics, and expectation for service will all play a part in the system and performance required to manage a community. I am floored when I hear of management companies who provide pricing without so much as a site visit, a meeting with a board, or a review of documents. Estimate the workload. Price it accordingly. A cookie-cutter approach can work for some clients. But without some analysis, there’s an awful lot left up to chance. Management companies that can explain the rationale behind their pricing and system set the table to earn respect and trust.
  • Value the Work: Set price contracts must assume a certain workload. Boards can have the unrealistic expectation that no matter what happens, the monthly management fee should cover it. That makes zero sense. Managers, fearing the wrath of their clients, are sometimes either unaware of contract terms or nervous about charging for extra work. Until those work hours and efforts are acknowledged, a manager’s time is not likely to be respected. Communicate in advance, explain the business model, agree to terms as needed, and change when appropriate.
  • Migrate Management On Site: A common complaint about portfolio managers is that they do not spend enough time or attention to their clients. This may be a system problem. Twenty-six years ago, my mentor Arthur Dubin advocated bringing management on site in an article for the Journal of Property Management. He said, “A growing number of condominium associations are choosing on-site management better serve the needs of the owners, residents, and boards of directors. This reallocation of resources has often proved successful in both cost efficiency and quality of service.” A quarter of a century of experience has proven him right. Boots on the ground and brains on site can be the most effective allocation of resources in many circumstances. Some creativity may be required. Even if the shift means association payroll increases while management fees decrease, everyone wins in the long run. Lower fees that result in higher total profits over several years with a happy client beat higher profits from unhappy clients that fire you after two years every time.

Those are just a few perspectives and strategies to help both boards and management win. If a community has a pattern of dissatisfaction, there’s a reason. Dig a little deeper. Challenge your assumptions. Let’s begin to get off the hamster wheel.

community associations, Management Insider

Management Insider #2 – How We Got Here

Leave a comment

Sometimes managers entering the community association field have a hard time understanding some of the stressful dynamics of the business.  They hear that profit margins are tight.  They may wonder if their bosses are making excuses to justify low wages.  As I’ve stated before in the T-Rex Blog, management fees ARE artificially low.  A look into the past can help explain why.

Fortunately for me, my ex-boss and current mentor was there at the beginning of the early condominium boom, starting his career as a community association manager straight out of college in 1973.   When he walked me through the history of the industry, things started to fall into place.

The United States had its challenges in the ’70s.  Real estate agents wanted to sell and developers wanted to develop, but inflation and interest rates were high.  As the end of the decade loomed, mortgage rates reached into the double-digits.  The concept of converting apartments into condominium associations became appealing.  Enter the first condo boom.

Off The Rails…And We Didn’t Even Know It

This is where some of the persistent challenges that dog us today had their beginnings.  There were several factors:

  • Condominiums were sold as “carefree living.”  Someone else will take care of the grounds, the roofs, and the hallways…no worries! 
  • The transition from apartment house to condominium association shifted responsibility for interior living spaces from on-site staff to the unit owner.  Leasing activity and rent collection were no longer factors.  As a result, the site staffing typical of apartment complexes was either decreased or deleted altogether.
  • The same notion about decreased workload combined with the developer’s desire to keep condominium fees as low as possible led to a baseline of low management fees.
  • Early condominium documents sometimes treated professional management as an afterthought.  Like magic, multi-million dollar pieces of real estate that previously required professional management could now be administrated by volunteer boards with little or no management or real estate experience.

Hindsight being 20/20, in many ways we were set up for failure.

How Could They Have Known?

An Urban Land Institute lawyer and framer of early community association governing documents stood before us, a crowd of association managers and lawyers, at a CAI National Conference in the late nineties.  I still remember his words.  “As I stand before professional managers and attorneys serving community associations and working with the documents we wrote in those early years, I have one thing to say…we’re sorry!”  He explained that they were writing from scratch.   Lawyers need precedent.  They had to go all the way back to 14th-century English horse trail law to find something they could use to define common elements and their administration.

Indeed…who knew that community associations would become so complicated?  Who knew the world would become such a litigious place?  Who knew how legislated and regulated associations would become?  Who knew the promise of technology would result in an immediate gratification mindset? Who knew volunteers would want to do less over time? Who knew societal norms would decrease personal accountability and increase distrust of anyone in authority?  And finally, who would have imagined the current trend where courts would hold community associations responsible for members and residents’ civil rights, even though their governing documents provided no basis of authority to do anything substantial about it?

“I have great respect for the past. If you don’t know where you’ve come from, you don’t know where you’re going. I have respect for the past, but I’m a person of the moment. I’m here, and I do my best to be completely centered at the place I’m at, then I go forward to the next place.”

– Maya Angelou

Industry Trends

Community association management continues to mature.  I think of it as an adolescent – certainly more sophisticated than it was in its infancy, but not yet fully grown.  Business does what it does – big fish eat little fish.  As a result, national, regional, and even local companies acquire other companies to gain market share and leverage volume. At the very same time, technology makes it easier than ever before to start a management company with little overhead.  Whether company costs are minimized by volume or low overhead, the result is the same – a push to be “competitive” in the marketplace.  An unintended consequence is that a professional service became commoditized.  The industry accidentally devalued itself.  As Tom Peters would say, it’s a race to the bottom. 

It All Adds Up

So what have we learned?  Management companies operate in a space with an increasingly demanding client base.  They compete in a commoditized industry.  And they employ a workforce that may be poorly trained, under-supported and generally demotivated to one degree or another.  

Is all hope lost?  Sadly, for too many in the industry, yes.  In my travels and deep dive discussions around the country, I’ve felt their stress and heard their resignation.  I get it.  They’ve had the same concerns and expressed the same frustrations for the last twenty years or more.    

Light at The End of The Tunnel?

If the way it’s always been done doesn’t work, there’s a reason.  Get to the root and you can find a solution.  It requires thinking differently.  That makes unconsciousness a poor option.  It’s time to stop banging our heads against the wall. 

There are no easy answers.  However, there are a few practical strategies and perspectives that have turned things around for some.  These will be the subject in upcoming blogs.       

community associations, Management, Management Insider

Management Insider #1 – Helping the Marketplace

Leave a comment

As I near my one-year anniversary of launching Association Bridge as a full-time venture, I am realizing how much freedom I have to share information. For 30 years prior, I spoke in the voice of a community association manager.  The last 20 of those years were as an executive in the field.  During that time, whenever I commented on the management business, I am sure some people thought that I had an agenda.  In a recent conversation with a client, I had an Aha! moment.  I was able to explain the realities of the management business with absolutely no dog in the fight.  I was able to help that client perceive their reality clearly in a way I couldn’t before, or at least couldn’t quite as effectively.

One of the many ideas that came out of this month’s CAI Annual Conference had to do with the board-management company relationship.   Sy Syms, an iconic discount clothier came to mind.  He had a great company motto: “An educated consumer is our best customer.”  Well, Sy was right and it works in our space as well.  The more a community association board understands about the business of management, the better their odds of securing the services they need.  They stand a better chance of forging an effective partnership with a management company.

Education and Partnership

Yes, I said partnership.  The most satisfying and sustainable relationships are mutually beneficial to both parties.  A zero sum game is transactional, not relational. Elements of partnership are integral to any sustainable relationship.  Trust and confidence are fundamental.  Why would business relationships be any different?

I think that can be a challenge in the community association management marketplace for a few reasons. Hyper-competition and commoditization have resulted in artificially low fees. This is at the core of failure cycles that can inhibit the perception of value, respect, and ultimately, trust.   

The Aha! Moment

The moment I mentioned in the introduction was an Aha! moment for my client, which was why it was an Aha! moment for me.  This board had already recognized they needed on-site management to provide the level of service they expected.  But it did not stop them from expressing dissatisfaction over the performance of their community manager.  They noted he had nine clients and took too long to address concerns or give them adequate support.  They already knew he was overworked, but they didn’t see the fuller picture until I asked to see their financial statements. The interchange that followed went like this:

Me:  So your monthly management fee is $1,686.  That’s about $400 per week.  Let me tell you a little secret.  How much of that do you think goes towards your manager’s salary?

Board: (collective shrug)

Me:  Probably about $100, give or take.  So… how much time do you think $100 gets you each week?

Board: Ohhhhhh

Suddenly, everything made sense.

Solutions

Boards are going to have to go a little deeper.  Management companies are going to have to let their clients see what’s behind the curtain a little more.  When that happens, partnerships can happen.  Failure cycles can begin to transform into success cycles. 

This is the first of a new series of blogs.  My goal is to help community association volunteer leaders understand the management business.  I hope the insights into the challenges companies face and the opportunities that are available will help Board members to ask the right questions and make the best decisions when selecting and working with their management company.