As my friend and partner Greg Robertson recently wrote, I attended the "NAR Influencer Summit" in Chicago last week. I too would like to thank Bennett Richardson, the new CMO/CCO for NAR, for the invitation. It was truly unexpected given how critical I have been of NAR and its new leadership.
I have a number of thoughts about the meeting, what I heard, the people I met, and what all of that signifies for NAR and the industry moving forward. Generally speaking, I concur with Greg:
At one point Nykia described herself as a “business doctor.” I thought that was apt. She described her patient, NAR. By NAR she meant the entire ecosystem: staff, leadership, brokers, and agents. She laid out what the patient needed to do to survive.
Where I think I disagree (and you will see this in our latest Industry Relations episode) is the extent of the sickness and the nature of the prescriptions. Greg thinks the patient needs to get sober, eat healthy, lose some weight. I think the patient needs significantly more.
For the TL;DR crowd and those not all that interested and those who aren't VIP, the topline is this: the charm offensive worked; I have a different view of the executive leadership at NAR, but what they have done to date is as yet merely symbolic. I remain optimistic but skeptical that they'll actually be able to cure the patient. That remains outside of what they can do.
Let's get into it.
Nykia Wright and the Executive Team
I think it's fair to say that I have been the biggest critic of Nykia Wright and the executive team at NAR. If there has been someone who has been harsher, I don't know who that is. Greg and I have had numerous fights about this exact issue on the podcast. I have had numerous arguments with friends about this.
I based that judgment on what I have seen from Wright and the team since she was named interim CEO in November of 2023.
From November of 2023 to August of 2024, when she was named as permanent CEO, Wright really didn't do very much. She hired a couple of new people (Sherry Chris as special advisor to the CEO, Jarrod Grasso as NAR's first-ever director of industry relations... which I made fun of since NAR was the industry for 100 years), a new general counsel and CFO. She cut 61 jobs in March, made some new hires across education and events, communications and marketing, and data and technology.
The big accomplishment was leading NAR through the negotiations to settle the Sitzer and Moehrl lawsuits in early 2024. And that was a disaster since she left the $2B club out in the cold. Granted, she was brand new and maybe did not fully understand how that will impact relationships between NAR and its biggest constituents... but hey, when you're the quarterback, you get the glory and the blame. At a minimum, I do not understand how Sherry Chris kept and keeps her job after that disastrous decision.
Since becoming permanent CEO, Wright has done more personnel changes, restructuring, hired a new Chief Data Officer (we'll get to this), released NAR's first-ever annual report, "solicited feedback" from over 100K members, and released a new three year strategic plan.
I criticized the hell out of that strategic plan.
In addition, in her media and conference appearances, I found Wright to be entirely fake and inauthentic. I thought the woman only knew corporatespeak and talking points. My impression was that she reminded me almost entirely of politicians and their PR spokescritters.
One of my reasons for criticizing Wright and thinking she was the wrong person is that NAR hired her specifically as a turnaround specialist. She herself said that's her specialty and her mission at NAR. Everyone who supported her said she's a turnaround artist. Fine--but a turnaround specialist in every business case I have ever read from Greg Brenneman at Continental Airlines to Lou Gerstner at IBM all moved fast. Typically getting a ton of shit done in the first 90 days, completely changing the company in the first year, then setting up year two and beyond as rebuilding. Wright moved far too slowly, and any "turnaround" that goes slowly is usually doomed to fail.
And frankly, someone with any stature and track record as a true turnaround specialist wouldn't take the job without the ability to actually do that job.
What this event did for me was to meet her in person and observe her firsthand. I also got to speak to her one-on-one as well, all off-the-record so that's between us.
I have to revise my opinion. As I often say, I have strong opinions weakly held. Present new evidence, and I am happy to change my mind.
Wright has real command presence. I don't know what else to call it, but it is something I have seen firsthand from every effective CEO I have met. There is a force of personality that these individuals just have, and it is impossible to put your finger on it. That is something I did not expect and could not perceive in public appearances. Dale Stinton had it; Bob Goldberg did not. Wright has it.
She is far smarter, far more perceptive, and far more thoughtful than I had believed from her actions to date. The corporatespeak remains, but perhaps she comes by it honestly.
I am prepared to say that Wright just might be the CEO NAR needs right now; I withhold judgment until I see what she actually accomplishes, but let me say that I do not believe failure would be due to her shortcomings as a leader.
The rest of the team is a significant upgrade as well.
Jon Waclawski, the new General Counsel, is a real upgrade from Katie Johnson. Katie was always nice to me, and I always liked her, but... I never thought she was a great lawyer. Waclawski simply comes across as a better lawyer, a better GC. That his experience is in the political law side of things might be a real asset for NAR as it goes forward. But either way, he strikes me as the kind of competent GC who can direct outside counsel more effectively than Johnson did.
Bennet Richardson is a gigantic upgrade from whoever NAR used to have for marketing and communications. I don't even remember the person's name; I think the former CMO was a she? If that's all I know about her (?), and I am one of the more prominent commentators on NAR... well, draw your own conclusions.
Grasso is charming and smart, well-spoken. I still remain uncertain as to what "industry relations" means for NAR but the man appears competent.
The others were already there and I see no reason to downgrade Lawrence Yun, Mark Birschbach, or Shannon McGahn. This is the first time I met McGahn and she is smart, charming as hell, well-spoken, and is quite obviously a DC insider. You could hate on lobbyists and as a libertarian, I tend to do so. But if you were going to have a chief lobbyist, you could do a lot worse than McGahn.
So... the charm offensive worked on me as far as the executive leadership team goes. Wright and her immediate team are a significant upgrade from Goldberg and his team.
To borrow Greg's analogy, this medical team is better than the previous country doctor NAR had running the show.
The Strategic Plan
Since most of the event was centered around the various executives, starting with Wright herself, presenting the Three Year Strategic Plan... I must touch on that here.
I stand by my criticisms of the strategic plan from my previous post on the subject. It is entirely worthless as a strategic plan of any kind, and amounts to NAR's recognition of its irrelevance.
But because I got to ask questions of the executive team on that plan, I have further thoughts.
Not Nykia's Strategic Plan
First, while no one actually said so, my strong impression from the meeting is that this is not Nykia Wright's strategic plan. This is not what she and her team wants, and it is not what they would have written if they were allowed to do so.
In my previous post, I wrote this:
However, there was one real change made. As I laid out above, from NAR’s Value Proposition to Our Purpose to Our Commitments, it is 100% clear that NAR has completed the pivot from National Association OF Realtors to the National Association FOR Realtors. Bob Goldberg began the transformation; Nykia Wright has completed it.
I do not believe anymore that Nykia Wright has completed it. I think she was forced into it by NAR's bizarre and byzantine governance system.
NAR has always operated by committee. There are 96 committees at NAR in 2026. The strategic plan is the product of the 2026 Strategic Planning Committee (maybe the 2025 committee?) with 60 members. Many are staff and NAR leadership (President, President-Elect, etc.), but the bulk are just some REALTOR "at-large member." How such individuals are even qualified to do strategic planning is, of course, unexplained.
Once the sausage gets made in that committee, of course it has to go to the NAR Executive Committee and its 64 members.
All of them have had to drink the NAR Kool-Aid for years and years and have proven their loyalty to NAR for years in order to be named to a committee at all, never mind an important one like strategic planning.
There is simply no way in my mind that Nykia Wright could have pushed through an actual strategic plan that makes sense given that structure. No one could. I don't believe Trump could have pushed a strategic plan through with that committee structure, at least without using Seal Team Six and CIA black sites.
Nonetheless, there are three things worth pointing out, based on my new learning from the event.
NAR is Not Out of the MLS Business
The first is that apparently, NAR is not entirely out of the MLS business. I sure thought they were after NAR NXT of 2025; every MLS CEO and MLS board member I've spoken to since then are under the impression that NAR is out of the MLS business.
Apparently not. This is not found in the actual strategic plan on NAR's website, but it appears that NAR is looking to redo the MLS Policies and MLS Handbook to "de-risk" things. Not just for itself, but for MLSs and local Associations who can't afford to de-risk their own policies.
I think this is a giant blunder. As I pointed out to the executive team at the event, every single lawsuit against NAR has involved its control over MLS rules and policies. (Employment lawsuits or slip-and-falls, the usual things any company deals with, don't count.) It is only NAR's involvement in a "necessary utility" that gets the DOJ, the FTC, and plaintiff lawyers all up in a huff. If NAR were just a trade association pushing a Code of Ethics, there is no chance of an antitrust lawsuit.
The same goes for the local Association. If XYZ County Association of REALTORS was just doing education, professionalism, and lobbying, there is no antitrust risk involved. It is only because XYZ County Association of REALTORS owns and controls the XYZ County MLS that it gets into trouble.
Furthermore, it isn't as if the MLS has no recourse other than Daddy NARbucks. MLSs have their own trade association, CMLS. They have money and lawyers. They are more than capable of handling their own de-risking.
Sure, not every tiny rural MLS can. But the better answer after a $5 billion judgment is, "Hey, y'all are too small and need to merge with your biggest neighbor." The answer to small MLSs is not, "Well, let us see if we can't give you less risky rules" thereby ensuring that NAR remains involved and enmeshed with control over the MLS.
NAR Still Has No Answer to Professionalism
This came up when Bennett Richardson presented the new TV ads for NAR, and not from me or Greg. It was another attendee who pointed out that all this talk of "REALTORS do more" or "REALTORS are awesome" is completely undermined by the fact that there are a shitload of REALTORS who suck ass, are incompetent, are unethical, and remain REALTORS in good standing.
The best that NAR can do right now is to repeat empty sloganeering of the past and meaningless promises:
The REALTOR brand is meaningless because literally every person who helps consumers buy and sell real estate is a REALTOR out of necessity (see MLS above).
I believe that Nykia Wright and her team know what must be done to actually drive professionalism and to actually make the REALTOR brand meaningful again. They just can't do any of it because they don't have the authority.
NAR Pivoting to Americans?
Finally, I brought this up to Shannon McGahn. She did not have an answer ready which suggests to me that she and the team had not yet thought about it.
NAR's Strategic Plan says this:
I asked if this phrase and the all-important word "Americans" meant that NAR was returning to its origins as a fundamentally patriotic organization.
Today, and historically, NAR has been very much for foreign buyers. For example:
NAR policy supports the rights of foreign citizens to own U.S. real property, opposes laws/regulations that impede that the free flow of capital, urges resolution of the undocumented immigration issue, as well as enactment of visa reforms that encourage investment in U.S. real property for business or personal reasons.
And:
Foreign investors and immigrants who make a capital investment in real property and businesses that may help stimulate, stabilize, and strengthen real estate markets across the nation should be encouraged to invest and allowed to spend longer periods of time in the United States.
NAR has always supported foreign buyers because foreign buyers generate commission events. In the past, when housing affordability was not a full-blown crisis, fine. It isn't anymore.
This support for foreign buyers extends to supporting the right of illegals to own U.S. real estate:
In addition, resolving the status of undocumented residents already in the United States has the potential to boost the national and regional economies as those individuals are able to openly seek work, invest and purchase homes and property.
None of these policies is compatible with "advancing the right of Americans to own real estate." Not when young and of middle class Americans are getting priced out of homeownership.
My question to Shannon McGahn was whether the new Strategic Plan implies that NAR's advocacy efforts will shift to be more pro-American.
McGahn did not answer, though she did not answer very elegantly and eloquently. I hope that she and her team, along with the executive team and the elected leadership, will actually think about what "Americans" means and whether they truly are for Americans or for REALTOR commissions.
The Sickness in NAR
Let me wrap up, again by using Greg Robertson's excellent analogy: the doctor is in.
His take is that the doctor can only prescribe what the patient needs to do: stop drinking, lose weight, eat healthy. It is up to the patient to do as the doctor orders. Our difference of opinion is based strictly on what we believe the problem to be.
If NAR were merely overweight and unhealthy, then yes, Greg's take is the correct one. If, on the other hand, NAR were not merely unhealthy but suffering from lung cancer, then the prescription must be quite different.
If what the patient needs in order to survive is radiation, drastic surgery, and really painful but powerful chemotherapy... then the doctor can't just stop at, "Maybe hit the gym once in a while."
I believe that Wright and her team are fully capable of doing radiation, surgery, and chemotherapy. I think they know what the patient needs in order to survive, and I think they have the skills to cure the patient.
But the patient has to (1) realize just how sick he actually is, and (2) be willing to do whatever it takes to survive. I don't think NAR as an ecosystem believes it is really sick; by all appearances, seems to me that President Kevin Brown and NAR leadership thinks NAR just has hit a bit of a bumpy road, maybe needs to start eating healthy again, and everything will be fine. They appear to believe that NAR is fundamentally sound and there is no reason for concern.
The doctor's duty at that point is to tell the patient the truth about his condition. Doctor Wright cannot tell someone with terminal cancer that he just needs to lose weight. She has to tell him the prognosis for his condition.
As I write this, I do not believe she and her team have done that. To be fair to them, they are new. Nykia Wright is entirely new to the industry. She may still be diagnosing the patient, because she doesn't actually know whether the patient has terminal cancer or a bad cause of the flu. That is understandable, and I am willing to grant her and her team a bit more time to figure it out.
It may be that she has a prognosis, but she knows that the patient simply cannot accept the truth. She is waiting for the patient to have a heart attack or a stroke first so he is willing and able to accept the truth about his condition. That is also understandable, and I am willing to grant her and her team time.
Where I will continue to watch and hold the new team to account is in living up to the strategic plan that is already in place. Whether that plan was theirs or forced on them by elected leadership, they do have to execute against it... hopefully with their own strategic plan in mind for the day when the patient does realize how sick he actually is.
I hope to see the low-hanging fruit handled first: advocating for right of Americans to own real estate. Show me that—show all of us that—and perhaps there is good reason to trust the team going forward.
I wish the new executive team the best, they are the Wright medical team for the current situation, and I sincerely hope that NAR leadership gives them the power to fix the situation.
-rsh