Choosing a broker is one of the most important decisions a real estate leader can make. It’s not just a matter of division, tools, and logos. It’s important that the structure you operate within your company supports not only where your business has been, but where it’s going.
My Seattle-based team, now known as McConnell Group (formerly NK Team), has operated under a traditional brokerage model for many years. This was extremely helpful during a critical period of our company’s growth.
But as our organization grew, we began to ask more fundamental questions. This structure is consistent with how our business actually operates today, and where do we go next?
This question ultimately led us to move to a cloud-based mediation model.
This was not a repulsive decision. It is the result of a long-term evaluation of leadership influence, operational management, financial efficiency, and how modern real estate businesses grow at scale. If you’re thinking about taking your team to the next level, it’s helpful to consider what you can and cannot change by switching brokerages.
brand ownership
As the team grows, the leader’s responsibilities change as well. At a certain point, it’s not just about selling real estate. You run an organization with a hierarchy of operations, marketing, recruitment, training, and accountability.
In traditional mediation models, much of the leadership infrastructure is externalized. Culture, brand positioning, internal standards, and even growth incentives are often determined by intermediaries rather than intentionally built within the team.
Over time, your organization’s presence can become limited, not only to consumers but also to the agents you’re trying to attract and retain. Strong teams ultimately require the ability to fully own their identity, leadership structure, and long-term vision, no matter what happens at the intermediary level.
Its importance is growing as consolidation accelerates across industries. When brokerage firms merge or expand through acquisition, teams under the same umbrella can suddenly find themselves competing with each other for agents, visibility, and resources.
At scale, clarity in leadership becomes important. Owning your inner workings is not about ego or brand. It’s about durability.
Management and scale
One of the most often overlooked differences between traditional and cloud-based models is how they accommodate increased operations.
As an organization grows, so does its complexity. More agents means more contracting, marketing, compliance, systems, and leadership bandwidth needed to keep everything running smoothly.
What we’ve discovered is that cloud-based brokerages are structurally well suited to support this reality. They tend to offer centralized technology, flexible operational frameworks and systems that allow teams or single agents to build on top of the platform rather than work around it.
This only applies to large teams. Independent agents also benefit. The same technology, marketing systems, transactional support, and operational tools that help you scale your team are just as valuable to solopreneurs looking for efficiency, leverage, and margin.
In other words, many of the benefits traditionally associated with brick-and-mortar intermediaries can be achieved in a cloud-based environment without the same overhead or flexibility.
Financial integrity and long-term sustainability
Once a certain level of production is reached, financial adjustments cannot be ignored.
Traditional brokerage models often rely on fees, overrides, and structures that make sense when a business is small, but become inefficient as trading volumes increase. A closer look at the numbers reveals that economics and value delivered are no longer aligned.
A colleague of mine who runs a large team on the East Coast once described his own realization after reading his book at a traditional brokerage firm: “At some point, it felt like financial fraud.”
That stuck with me because I saw the same pattern in my team.
Cloud-based models tend to reward contributions differently. Revenue share structures, equity participation, and scalable economics are designed to align incentives with growth, rather than against it. The result is a model where leadership, recruiting, and operational excellence actually improve the bottom line, rather than hurting it.
That doesn’t mean traditional brokerages don’t serve a purpose. For new agents and teams just starting out, the built-in reliability and local structure is invaluable. However, as organizations reach a certain level of maturity, their calculations and strategies change.
Follow proven patterns
One of the strongest signals for us came from looking across the country.
Some of the most productive and sophisticated teams in the industry now operate within cloud-based brokerages. different markets. various business models. Same conclusion.
If successful, a clue will be left behind.
Seeing that high-performing organizations consistently choose structures that increase operational control, leadership leverage, and financial efficiency is worth noting as a data point rather than a trend.
Our decision was not to pursue something new. It was about aligning with a model that supports long-term growth, leadership development, and operational excellence without sacrificing culture, autonomy, or financial discipline.
Throughout this month, we are focusing on ‘New Mediation Strategies’. How securities companies operate in 2026 will be no different than before. From corporate giants to finicky indies, we map the new playing field and talk to brokerage leaders across the country about what’s working now and what’s next.
Sean McConnell leads Seattle-based McConnell Group (formerly NK Team), one of Washington state’s top performing real estate groups. You can connect with him on LinkedIn.
