AIM 2025: Friction Feud

Friction Feud: How Friction Between Marketing, Tech and Team Slows Leasing

Friction Feud was presented in a game show format to spotlight how disconnects between marketing technology and teams slow down leasing. Hosted by Shelly Steitz and featuring contestants Anne Baum and Brian Rosenblatt, the session used real audit data from over 100 property shops to surface and solve common challenges.

The session opened with a vivid metaphor: leasing is like running a race, and each pothole—representing tech or training friction—slows a prospect's momentum. The game had four themed rounds that mirrored stages in the leasing journey: digital presence, tech-to-team handoff, lead nurturing, and the consequences of friction.

Round 1 focused on optimizing a property's digital presence. Anne scored early by naming Google Business Profiles as a top friction point—89% of listings are incomplete. She noted that this impacts not only visibility but also generative search performance, with Google AI relying on complete profiles. Brian countered with reputation management, highlighting that 45% of properties have Google ratings below 4.0, negatively impacting search rankings and renter trust. He explained how renters dig deep—using Google, Reddit, OpenIgloo, Facebook groups, and even city permit databases—to research properties. A strong reputation online, across platforms, is key to building trust before a lead even submits a form. Other missed opportunities included underutilized social media, inconsistent data on ILS platforms, and neglected websites—all harming brand consistency.

Round 2 explored tech-to-team friction. Brian called out communication channel overload, where ILSs, AI bots, and CRMs bombard renters with conflicting messages. His team responded by mapping all communications to standardize and streamline the flow. They also opted for transparency—telling renters when they’re interacting with AI—and used real-time API integrations to personalize communication. Anne identified technical breakdowns as another pain point: calls routed incorrectly, lead forms not syncing to CRMs, and guest cards being dropped due to mismatched field requirements. She recommended tools like the free Flare Secret Shopper, marketing audits across 20+ platforms, and identifying a single data source of truth (in their case, the CRM) to reconcile discrepancies. Inconsistent tech usage across leasing teams was also cited as a hidden source of friction, making it harder to identify or fix issues.

Round 3 tackled how to optimize the handoff between marketing and leasing teams. Brian emphasized early, personalized lead nurturing, noting that only 50% of teams personalize their outreach. Simple changes like signing off with a name or referencing why the renter inquired can improve engagement. He advocated showing leasing agent bios (like Uber driver profiles) to build trust. He also mentioned that even missed phone calls—without an actual conversation—increase response rates by over 100%.

Anne added that understanding the prospect journey, especially during tours, is critical. 75% of leasing agents fail to encourage applications during tours. She drew a comparison to retail sales training (like credit card upselling at Banana Republic), emphasizing the importance of multiple touchpoints. She also cited that 52% of agents don’t personalize tour follow-up. Teams need playbooks and training to reinforce good habits, along with tour-to-app benchmarks (recommended: 30–40%) to track performance.

Brian returned with a double counter on tour flexibility. Only 38% of properties offer varied tour formats (e.g., video, virtual, self-guided), which is a missed opportunity given modern renters’ expectations. He reported that prospects who complete Matterport-style virtual tours are three times more likely to lease. Advertising those options consistently across platforms can significantly improve conversions.

Round 4 addressed the consequences of friction. Anne showed how bad data skews decision-making. For example, if 300 leads only show up as 100 in the CRM due to technical issues, a property may incorrectly assume they have a 15% conversion rate, when it’s actually 5%. Brian followed up with brand damage as a key long-term risk—bad experiences in one property impact perception across an entire portfolio. He emphasized that friction isn’t just operational—it erodes trust. Anne’s final counter was inefficient marketing spend: a 5% conversion rate may require 200 leads to secure 10 leases (at $10,000), while a frictionless journey might cost just $3,350 for the same outcome.

The final answer revealed was low property performance—not just fewer leads or leases, but increased turnover and decreased resident satisfaction.

In closing, Shelly offered tactical takeaways: regularly audit your customer journey, especially when onboarding new tech or properties; train your teams on how technology impacts the renter experience; and work closely with vendors to ensure integrations are functioning correctly. She encouraged the audience to use tools like Cadence’s Digital Curb Appeal Audit to identify breakdowns and start with just two properties—one high-performing, one underperforming—as a manageable way to begin.

The real winner of the game wasn’t Anne or Brian—it was the renter, the team, and the business, when friction is eliminated.