Comparing Commercial Real Estate Brokerage Proposals in Alberta

1. Issue one decision brief

Give each brokerage the same property or requirement, objective, authority, timeline, confidentiality needs, available evidence and requested deliverables. Identify constraints and questions that must be answered.

A proposal based on different facts or an undisclosed scope assumption cannot be normalized later by comparing only price.

• Objective
• Scope
• Team
• Evidence
• Reach
• Reporting
• Compensation

2. Verify licensing, brokerage and proposed team

Confirm the brokerage and professionals through current RECA records. Identify the responsible broker, lead advisor, analysts, coordinators, media resources and local or sector specialists who will actually work on the mandate.

Distinguish employee, licensee, contractor, referral partner and cooperating brokerage roles. A logo or office list does not prove availability or responsibility.

3. Compare the strategy and evidence plan

For a property mandate, compare pricing or rent evidence, property-record preparation, audience, information tiers, launch sequence and decision gates. For an occupier or buyer mandate, compare requirement definition, inventory search, private outreach, tours, proposal analysis and diligence coordination.

Ask what is verified, owner-supplied, feed-derived, estimated or still missing. Unsupported confidence should not score as evidence.

4. Normalize production and marketing scope

Schedule photography, video, drone, plans, memorandum, financial analysis, website, listing feeds, advertising, direct outreach, signage, events, data room and updates. Record quantity, quality, timing, approval, licensing and third-party cost.

A service marked included may still have limits. A separate budget may provide more scope or simply shift costs; obtain enough detail to compare.

5. Compare cooperation and qualified reach

Ask how the brokerage will work with other brokerages, protect representation duties, distribute authorized information and identify likely buyers or tenants without overstating a database. Review conflict and referral disclosures.

Do not score a raw contact count as qualified demand. Evaluate segment relevance, evidence of outreach, response handling and reporting.

6. Compare reporting and accountability

Define reporting cadence, named owner, inquiry capture, qualification, tours, feedback, document access, offers, source attribution, correction handling and recommendations. Ask for examples with confidential information removed.

A dashboard is useful only when data definitions, completeness and decision ownership are clear.

7. Normalize compensation and owner costs

Use the proposed written method, calculation base, payment event, cooperation, GST, retainers, minimums, marketing costs, cancellation costs and post-expiry protection. Do not insert an assumed market rate.

Competition Bureau material emphasizes independent, competitive pricing. Commercially does not publish a standard fee or recommend matching another brokerage's terms.

8. Review duration, termination and information control

Compare start, exclusivity, expiry, extension, termination, protection period, active negotiations, committed costs, asset ownership, data return, privacy, removal of public marketing and surviving obligations.

RECA Rule 43 requires written termination provisions and signed written amendments. Counsel should review unusual or high-consequence terms.

9. Select against the complete mandate

Document the decision across strategy, evidence, team, execution capacity, relevant reach, service, communication, risk, compensation and fit. Record trade-offs rather than forcing a false total score.

This guide is educational and is not a procurement rule, legal review, fee benchmark, competition-law opinion or guarantee that any brokerage will obtain a particular result.