01Objectives
A long-standing real estate technology company had helped hundreds of thousands of agents succeed over several decades. The brand was trusted, the audience was loyal, and the business delivered differentiated content through a subscription model.
Yet pressure on growth was rising. Customer acquisition costs increased while lifetime value remained flat. Despite intense activity across marketing, product, engineering, and customer success, the economics did not materially improve.
The Chief Growth Officer oversaw most commercial and product functions. The early assumption was simple: if results were not moving, the product strategy likely needed refinement.
We were brought in under that premise.
02Challenges
Within weeks, it became clear that the issue extended beyond product strategy.
The organization was divided on a foundational question. Was the company primarily a media organization monetizing content, or a digital experience company whose software should directly help agents run and grow their businesses?
Both positions had strong advocates. Leaders who had built the company's historical success leaned toward media. Others, including board voices, believed long-term leverage would come from scalable technology.
Because the subscription model could support either identity, priorities shifted depending on who had influence at a given moment.
Every quarter, the same debate resurfaced.
03Decision
We redirected the discussion toward economics and customer outcomes. Instead of arguing about identity, we asked what agents cared about most in their daily professional lives. The answer was consistent: they wanted to grow their gross commission income, especially as industry pressure on commissions intensified.
This became the organizing principle.
The North Star principle
- If an initiative helped agents close more transactions or operate more effectively in the selling process, it deserved priority.
- If it did not, it moved down the list.
By introducing a single external measure, internal preferences lost authority. Leadership aligned around strengthening digital capabilities and experiences that could influence income in a direct and repeatable way.
04Execution
The North Star began influencing decisions almost immediately.
The company ran broad idea sessions and invited perspectives from across the organization. Suggestions were encouraged, but evaluated through a new lens: would this meaningfully help an agent earn more?
AI conversations became more grounded. Instead of pursuing technology for signaling value, teams debated practical applications, risks, and where automation would genuinely affect customer outcomes.
Growth programs started focusing on engagement patterns linked to productivity. Customer success emphasized workflows that translated into transactions rather than general awareness.
Over time, friction declined because disagreements were easier to resolve.
05What changed
Progress did not occur in a straight line.
In the first phase, the organization concluded that stronger product strategy and management capability was necessary. The company invested to build the right product team and managed a pipeline of ideas formally.
In the second phase, attention turned to execution reality. Engineering capacity had been diluted by requests from multiple stakeholders, many of which were not tied to customer priorities. The company began to tighten intake and improve alignment.
In the third phase, new initiatives surfaced, including large partnership ambitions and broad AI programs. Some of these efforts did not deliver. Leaders learned that scale advantages require clear use cases and realistic leverage, not aspiration.
These experiences reinforced the value of the North Star. Each cycle clarified what truly mattered and what did not.