Heritage Realty Partners — Agent Portal Build vs. Buy Thesis
A 3-week strategy engagement that killed $340k of avoidable spend and scoped the right phase 1.
Impact
What changed.
$340k of avoidable spend identified
The 3-year TCO model surfaced $340k in spend tied to a commercial platform that would have required heavy customization to fit the brokerage. The decision to walk away paid for the entire engagement many times over.
Phase 1 scoped from 14 modules to 5
Working from real agent workflow data instead of assumed needs, phase 1 collapsed from 14 vendor-driven modules to 5 high-signal ones — CRM and commission tracking first, listing tools deferred.
Build kicked off with zero scope changes in sprint one
Because the thesis was grounded in interviews and TCO, the team moved into build 4 weeks later with full alignment — no scope drift, no late-stage second-guessing.
The challenge
Before
Heritage Realty Partners — a family-owned brokerage with around 80 agents — wanted to invest in a shared agent portal: CRM, listing pipeline, and commission tracking under one roof. They had three options on the table: build custom, buy an existing commercial platform, or accept the bundled software from a national chain that had been courting them. The founder was overwhelmed by vendor pitches, worried about a 5-year mistake, and unable to get a clean comparison from anyone with a stake in the outcome.
- Three competing options (build, buy, national chain bundle) with no unbiased comparison
- Vendor pitches stacked with feature lists but no TCO modeling
- No documented map of how the 80 agents actually worked day-to-day
- Commission tracking happening across spreadsheets and broker-of-record memory
- Listing pipeline visible only to the listing agent — no shared brokerage view
- Founder unable to confidently say what was a must-have vs. a nice-to-have
- Sunk-cost fear pushing toward the most expensive option by default
- No shared technical architecture position across the leadership team
The solution
What we built
We ran a 3-week Digital Strategy engagement built around evidence, not opinions. We interviewed 8 agents, 2 ops staff, and the broker-of-record, then mapped the real workflows underneath the brokerage — not the workflows the vendors assumed. We evaluated 4 commercial platforms against those documented requirements, and modeled a 3-year total cost of ownership for each option (build, buy, bundle). We delivered a written thesis with a clear recommendation: build phase 1 — CRM and commission tracking — on MSP-managed infrastructure, and defer the agent-facing listing tools to phase 2 once adoption was proven. The client moved forward with us on phase 1 with no scope changes in the first sprint.
Core workflow connections
How the system flows.
- Stakeholder Interview PlanAgent / Ops / Broker InterviewsWorkflow Map
- Requirement SynthesisMust-have vs. Nice-to-have MatrixDecision Criteria
- Vendor Evaluation: 4 PlatformsFeature FitIntegration CostLock-in Risk
- 3-Year TCO ModelBuild / Buy / Bundle ScenariosSensitivity Analysis
- Written ThesisPhased RoadmapPhase 1 Scope DefinitionArchitecture Recommendation
Process
How we built it.
Stakeholder Interview Plan → Agent / Ops / Broker Interviews → Workflow Map
Requirement Synthesis → Must-have vs. Nice-to-have Matrix → Decision Criteria
Vendor Evaluation: 4 Platforms → Feature Fit → Integration Cost → Lock-in Risk
3-Year TCO Model → Build / Buy / Bundle Scenarios → Sensitivity Analysis
Written Thesis → Phased Roadmap → Phase 1 Scope Definition → Architecture Recommendation
Start a project
Stuck on a build, buy, or bundle decision?
Our Digital Strategy engagements deliver written, evidence-backed theses — so leadership teams can make multi-year platform decisions with conviction.
No retainer lock-in · Month-to-month · Full transparency
More work
Up next.
A 2-week strategy engagement that killed a $400k SaaS build and redirected the firm into a productized service model.
AvioTech Aerospace Consulting — SaaS Pivot Thesis
From three Excel workbooks per project to one live job-costing system for a Cavite design-build firm.