National Association of Realtors Reviews

Cons

Long hours sometimes, but that is the nature of the job.

Cons

No cons from my vantage point

Cons

Membership has a large voice in company policies.

Cons

Since the current CEO took office years ago, this organization's management has been inconsistent, at best. Constant reorgs, high turnover (despite emphasis on having Best Place to Work status), controlled by volunteer leadership, ever changing priorities. Not an easy place to work, but NAR was always flexible in schedules and accommodating to employees' needs, as long as the work got done (which it did). But recently, management flipped from "We trust staff" to micromanaging and surveillance of staff's every move. Tracking devices on phones and laptops. Multiple calendars and spreadsheets requiring entry of your whereabouts each day. Charging staff $15 every time they forget their fob, which, for an organization that wastes millions of members' money, would be hilarious if not true. Total focus on insignificant minutiae while the important goes unaddressed. Pandering to the incapable and the unwilling, while the competent carry the load and become disenfranchised. Up is down, bad is good. Schizophrenia run amuck. Do yourself a favor - look elsewhere.

Cons

The work requires you to work nights and weekends

Cons

Senior Management has to be managed up to. Very out of touch with staff attitudes, employment trends, and they bite off more than they can chew. Not much upward mobility

Cons

tightening up the flexibity that existed in 2022 where employees were able use banked remote days in chunks. Now, tied to a weekly requirement of only three remote days, one being Wednesday.

Cons

They've pivoted post-pandemic to three days a week in the office, on a set schedule (you can't change your days week to week). Theoretically, they're tracking our key fobs, and will fire us if we fail to comply three times. We worked perfectly fine during the pandemic remotely, and many teams are completely distributed anyway, since there are two offices (one in Chicago, and one in DC), so when I come into the office, I can go weeks without talking to anyone in person. It's a waste of time and money. But, they want to protect their $40 million building investment, so they're subscribing to the 'sunk cost' fallacy. Projects move sloooooowly, unless the elected leadership demands something overnight. Then it's a fire drill and you better get it done, or else. There's no upward mobility. I've been here for years with overwhelmingly positive reviews, and there's nowhere for me to go. They've mentioned something like 'horizontal movement', to give me more responsibility, but there's no Director level positions that make sense for me (which would be the step up), and there are almost never those positions open, anyway. This is the case for almost everyone...it's a pretty flat organization. C-Suite->VP->Director->Manager. There's occasionally some specialists under the manager, but almost everyone has the manager title.

Cons

Since we are business' owners, the commissions are not constant.

Cons

Including interns in more staff projects would definitely be beneficial!