That gap is why so many CRE firms bought Salesforce and went back to spreadsheets. A brokerage needs buildings, suites and listing agreements as first-class records, four representation pipelines instead of one, and comps that appear the moment a deal closes. Twopir builds that model — natively, or around a CRE package where one fits. Inventory, deals, comps and commission on one architecture.
Trusted by 500+ organizations — including brokerages, owner-operators and investment managers building their operations on Salesforce with Twopir Consulting. The rail below carries both clients and the certified ecosystem partnerships we deliver with.
Built for Commercial Real Estate Operations
Almost every CRE firm that gave up on CRM gave up for the same reason: the model did not match the business. A commercial deal is about a building, not an account — and there are parties on both sides of it.
Out of the box there is no building, no suite, no listing agreement and no lease. Brokers end up putting a property name in the opportunity field and the square footage in a description — and every report after that is guesswork.
Closed lease and sale comps are the firm's most durable asset, and in most firms they are never captured. A deal closes, the terms are known by three people, and the next pitch is researched from a paid data provider instead of the firm's own history.
Vacant suites, asking rates, lease expiries and floor-by-floor occupancy are rebuilt by hand for every tour book and every owner report. The version a broker emails on Friday is out of date by Monday, and nobody can query it.
Brokers guard their deals, and default sharing lets them. Leadership cannot forecast, research cannot see what is in market, and when a producer leaves, the relationships and the pursuit history leave with them.
House split, inside broker, co-broker, referral, analyst share and marketing expenses are worked out in a spreadsheet after the fact. Invoices go out late, producers dispute them, and finance has no view of what is owed until it is.
A requirement comes in from a listing marketplace or a broker's contact and never gets matched against what the firm actually has available. The inventory that would have fitted it sits on a different broker's spreadsheet.
Twopir Consulting helps growing and mid-market companies solve complex CRM, integration, and business system challenges. In commercial real estate that starts with an unglamorous question: what are the records, and what owns what? Property, availability, listing, lease, sale, inquiry, deal, commission — get those relationships right and everything downstream becomes reportable. Get them wrong and no amount of automation rescues it.
There are two good answers and we will tell you which one fits. A CRE managed package gives you that model on day one: we implement, configure and extend Rethink, AscendixRE and Apto. A native build on Salesforce costs more to design and gives you exactly the objects your firm needs, with no vendor roadmap between you and a change. Firms with unusual asset classes, joint ventures or in-house asset management often need the second; most brokerages are better served by the first.
This page is one of four segments we architect differently. Brokerages selling homes belong on Salesforce for residential real estate; principals buying for their own balance sheet on Salesforce for real estate investment; debt and loan operations on Salesforce for mortgage & lending. The whole practice sits under Salesforce for real estate.
A tenant rep pursuit and a seller rep listing are not the same process, do not have the same stages, and do not produce the same record when they close. We model each one on its own path — and make closing the deal create the comp, rather than leaving it to someone's memory.
| Representation | Who you act for | Typical stages | Closing should create |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupier sideTenant Rep | An occupier looking for space | Prospect → Pursuit → Assignment → Survey & tours → RFP → Lease execution → Closed | A lease record and a lease comp, with the suite and rent schedule attached |
| Owner sideLandlord Rep | An owner leasing space in a building | Prospect → Proposal → Listing → RFP → Lease execution → Closed | A lease record, a lease comp, and the availability marked closed |
| Capital sideBuyer Rep | An investor or owner-occupier acquiring | Prospect → Identify acquisition → Underwrite → LOI/offers → Escrow & due diligence → Closed | A sale record and a sale comp carrying price, cap rate and parties |
| Capital sideSeller Rep | An owner disposing of an asset | Prospect → Proposal → Listing → LOI/offers → Escrow & due diligence → Closed | A sale record and a sale comp, plus the commission invoice |
| PitchListing Pursuit | Your own firm, competing for an assignment | Pursuit through to the assignment being won or lost | The listing agreement itself, typed exclusive or non-exclusive, lease or sale |
| Debt & equityCapital Markets | A borrower or sponsor sourcing financing | Sourcing across several capital sources, quoting, then closed by status | Quotes compared side by side and the winning terms recorded against the deal |
Stage names are configurable and every firm renames them. What matters architecturally is that the four types are separate paths on one deal record, that a deal can carry several properties when it needs to, and that closing writes the comp automatically instead of asking a broker to remember.
Whether we implement a CRE package or build natively, the same six areas decide whether brokers use the system. Adoption in CRE is won on inventory quality and lost on data entry.
The building as a first-class record, the suites inside it as children, and the listing agreement as a separate thing from the building itself — which is what makes marketing and inquiries attributable.
Four paths, their own stages, their own page sections, and a Kanban a managing broker can actually run a pipeline meeting from.
Turn the firm's own transaction history into its research asset — created at close, searchable on a map, and usable in the next pitch.
Gross fee in, every share out, invoice raised — calculated on the deal rather than rebuilt in a spreadsheet after the quarter has closed.
The documents a brokerage lives on, generated from live records instead of assembled by an analyst the night before.
If you already run a CRE package and it is not delivering, the problem is usually configuration and data, not the product. We audit before we recommend replacing anything.
Five stages, one continuous engagement. In CRE the make-or-break stage is the third one: if the inventory that lands in the system is incomplete, brokers go back to their spreadsheets in week two and never come back.
We map how deals are actually worked by service line, audit where inventory and comps live today, and find what brokers do outside the system and why.
We design the property, availability, listing, deal and commission model, then decide with you whether a CRE package supplies it or a native build is the better fit.
Buildings, suites, owners, historic comps and the contact database are cleaned, de-duplicated and loaded — because a system with thin inventory is a system brokers abandon.
Pipelines, comp automation, commission logic, document generation and the marketplace and e-signature integrations, rolled out service line by service line.
New markets, new asset classes, capital markets and property management extend the same architecture — with research and finance reporting off the same records.
What matters is which system owns each fact and which direction it moves. Below is how we normally set those boundaries in a CRE stack.
A Salesforce-native CRE CRM. Properties, spaces, deals and comps sync both ways with Buildout Showcase, and marketplace leads arrive as inquiries — so marketing and the CRM stop holding two versions of the same listing.
A CRE managed package built around the property, with availabilities, listings, leases and sales. Closing a deal writes the resulting lease, sale or listing through admin-configured field mappings — which is exactly the mechanism that keeps comps complete.
Inquiries from listing marketplaces land as requirement records against the listing they came from, then get scored against on-market inventory — so a requirement the firm can fill is matched instead of buried in a broker's inbox.
Tour books, offering memoranda, LOIs and listing agreements are generated from live property and deal data through Conga, Nintex DocGen or S-Docs, then routed for signature with the executed document returned to the deal.
Broker email and calendar activity is captured against the contact, property and deal without asking anyone to log a call. It is the single highest-leverage adoption integration in a CRE build, because it removes data entry rather than adding it.
Where research and marketing run campaigns in HubSpot while brokers transact in Salesforce, we set one owner for the contact record, sync engagement and lifecycle stage into Salesforce, and push closed deal value back so campaign reporting reflects fee earned, not opens.
Commission invoices and their line items carry into the accounting system with the deal, producer and split intact, so receivables reconcile against the pipeline instead of against a separate schedule maintained by hand.
Salesforce's own AI layer, which is only as useful as the records under it. On a clean property and comp model it can summarise a building's history, draft an owner update or surface which requirements match new availabilities — on a thin model it cannot do any of that.
These engagements come from across Twopir's real estate practice, each labelled with the segment it was delivered in. The architectural work is the same one either side of the residential and commercial line — unify the record, automate the handoffs, make the numbers reconcile.
Twopir Consulting transformed our real estate operations by unifying AML/KYC, inquiries, contracts, and commission tracking into a single Salesforce–Propertybase platform. Their API-driven approach automated workflows, reduced errors, and enabled real-time data synchronization. With improved visibility, collaboration, and compliance, we now operate faster, smarter, and with greater confidence.
Automating lead management and document workflows to accelerate deal closures.
CRE firms don't struggle because they lack software. They struggle because the data model underneath inventory, deals, comps and commission was never designed for a property-centred business.
We implement Rethink, AscendixRE and Apto, and we build natively on Salesforce. Because we are not reselling any of them, the recommendation comes from your asset classes, service lines and reporting needs rather than from our licence economics.
Comp capture is the one thing a CRE system does that gets more valuable every year. We wire it into deal close, check the conditions that cause it to fail silently, and backfill history so the comp set is useful on day one rather than in year three.
Brokers will not adopt a system that exposes their relationships to the desk next door. Getting the firm its pipeline without taking a producer's confidentiality is a permission-model design problem, and we solve it before go-live rather than after the first complaint.
Pursuit, assignment, transaction, comp, invoice and collection are one connected system with one source of truth. That is what makes a weighted fee forecast credible and a producer statement something nobody has to dispute.
New markets, new asset classes, a capital markets desk or an in-house property management arm should extend the architecture rather than trigger a rebuild. What you launch should still be the right shape three service lines from now.
Only after the CRE model is built on it. Salesforce ships with accounts, contacts and opportunities — a model designed for B2B selling, where one company buys one thing. Commercial real estate needs buildings, the suites inside them, listing agreements, leases, sales and comps, with parties on both sides of a deal. That model either comes from a CRE managed package or it is designed and built as custom objects. Both are real options; what does not work is trying to run a tenant rep pursuit on a standard opportunity.
Buy the package when your service lines are mainstream brokerage — tenant, landlord, buyer and seller rep on office, industrial, retail or land — because the model, the stacking plan and the comp automation already exist and you are paying for years of domain work. Build natively when the business has something the packages do not model: unusual asset classes, joint-venture ownership structures, in-house asset or property management, or reporting that has to consolidate with a fund accounting system. We scope both in the diagnostic and give you the cost and trade-off of each.
By making the comp a by-product of closing the deal rather than a separate task. When a deal is marked closed, the terms already on it — property, suite, parties, price or rent, dates — are written into a comp record. The detail that decides whether this works in practice is the failure condition: if the property or the suite is blank at the moment of close, no comp is created and nobody is told. We configure the comp mapping, then add the validation that stops a deal closing without the fields the comp depends on.
With a permission model, not a policy. The usual design keeps deal records private to the producer and their team while making the aggregate visible: leadership sees pipeline, stage and weighted fee across the firm without seeing every note and every contact. Research and marketing get access to inventory and comps, which is what they actually need, rather than to live pursuits. Designing that split before go-live is what stops a firm-visibility mandate turning into brokers keeping a shadow spreadsheet.
Yes. The gross deal value and the gross fee sit on the deal, and each share — house, inside broker, co-broker, analyst, referral — is a separate record against it, along with expense lines. The invoice is raised from the same data with line items and an approval step. One caution worth knowing before you scope: in some CRE packages commission is an upper-tier feature rather than part of the base product, so what a package includes is worth confirming against your edition before it becomes an assumption in the plan.
Yes, and it is usually the highest-value part of the project. The work is less about loading rows than about resolving identity: the same building appearing five times under four spellings, suites parented to the wrong property, owners recorded as free text rather than companies. We de-duplicate against address and geocode, load buildings before suites and owners before buildings, and validate a sample against what the brokers know before the full load. Note that in some CRE packages deleting a property cascades to its suites, so the sequencing matters more than it looks.
Audit before you replace. In our experience low adoption in an existing CRE org almost always traces to three things: the inventory is incomplete so brokers cannot trust it, email and calendar capture was never switched on so the system demands manual logging, and the page layouts ask for fields nobody has at the time they are asked. All three are fixable inside the product you already own, for a fraction of a replatform. We will tell you if the package genuinely is the wrong fit — but that is the less common finding.
Twopir Consulting builds the property-centred architecture commercial real estate firms run on — natively on Salesforce or around a CRE package — so inventory, pipelines, comps and commission finally reconcile.
Speak with a team that understands CRE data models, comps & commission
