The Right Balance in Multifamily Operations
What’s the best combination of on-site vs. centralized staff, humans vs. bots to achieve optimal community performance? There isn’t one right answer, but there are specific concerns to take into consideration.
August is upon us, and that means our annual Top Property Management Companies ranking is out. This year’s top-ranked firms have largely experienced portfolio expansion, especially in the two-year window we use to overcome single-year anomalies. Occupancy has remained fairly stable, with the vast majority measuring between 93 and 97 percent. Many offer a variety of property types, across multiple regions. That’s pretty strong performance.
The ranking is consistently our most popular. In fact, it’s our most popular post every year, and I can understand why. Property management—community operations, communications, marketing—is a very sensitive part of the business. You’re dealing with people, their personal lives, their homes. That’s a vulnerable place to be. Which makes it all the more important to ensure you have the right people keeping the community running and interacting with your residents.
This in itself isn’t news, but now there are added challenges, like what responsibilities to cede to artificial intelligence and how much can be centralized in your home office or even a regional location. Centralization has come up before, and currently the pendulum has swung back in favor of it, as Gabriel Frank discusses in this month’s feature article, “Under One Roof: Should You Centralize Operations?”
What’s different now, though, is a greater awareness of the need for customization based on the portfolio and the residents. That can suggest a lot of trial and error in order to find the right strategy, but consideration for some specific concerns narrows down the options as you strive to make your operations more efficient while at the same time responsive to residents and providing growth opportunities to on-site staff, as Frank explains.
READ ALSO: AIM 2025 Conference Coverage and Apartmentalize Special Report
No matter what your approach, one thing that’s been coming up frequently as necessary for success is authenticity. We heard it at AIM, we heard it at Apartmentalize, we hear it again and again from marketing and operations experts. It can be tough to conceptualize maintaining a connection when you’re not actually there—or if the communication is through a bot. But even a remote connection can feel more intentional and honest if it’s approached in the right way. Personalization, responsiveness and ease of communication are some ways to achieve this, members of MHN’s Executive Council suggested in response to a query about “Strategies to Incorporate Authenticity Into Your Resident Communication.”
And it’s important to remember that just being on-site doesn’t automatically mean more connected. On-site staff actually run the risk of relating less effectively with the resident if they don’t seem genuine, concerned or like they’re taking a problem seriously. Training, guidelines and opportunities for resident feedback can help ensure this is happening.
How are you finding the right balance between on-site and centralized, humans and bots? I’d love to hear about it!
