The Hardest Operational Problem in Property Management
Who should do what at your company?
It sounds like a simple question, but it might be the hardest operational problem in property management.
At RL Property Management, I’ve restructured our org chart more times than I can count. Every time we grew, the same issue kept popping up: people were overloaded, tasks were slipping through the cracks, and nobody was quite sure who was supposed to do what anymore.
It wasn’t a performance problem. These were smart, capable, hard-working people. The problem was the design of their roles.
Role design is about how work gets distributed across your team. Not who’s doing well or slacking off, but how the actual tasks are carved up, grouped, and assigned. And if you get this wrong (or let it go stale), the whole machine starts to grind.
Why Role Design Is So Hard
Here’s the thing about role design: it’s not a “set it and forget it” kind of problem.
Every time your company grows (even just by 10%) the way your team works starts to break down a little. The tasks that used to fit neatly into someone’s week now overflow. That leasing agent who was crushing it last quarter? Suddenly buried. The maintenance coordinator who used to stay ahead of the queue? Now falling behind.
It doesn’t matter how your org is structured - departmental, portfolio, pod, or some hybrid setup (here’s a breakdown of the pros and cons). The strain shows up eventually. Growth creates entropy. And when your roles aren’t built to absorb that, you end up in constant reactive mode.
This is why I use the term Role Design, because it’s not just about job titles or what’s on someone’s LinkedIn. It’s about how tasks are grouped, who’s accountable for what, and whether the system can absorb change without breaking.
Think of it like architecture. A good floor plan doesn’t just look clean on paper - it anticipates how people will actually move through the space. Same goes for your roles. If the design’s off, you’ll feel it in every hallway.
Symptoms of Ineffective (or Outdated) Role Design
So how do you know your role design might be the culprit?
Here are some common warning signs I’ve seen (and lived through):
Overloaded team members.
You’ve got smart people who care, but they’re drowning. Even their best weeks aren’t enough to stay caught up.Blurry accountability.
Nobody’s sure who owns what. Tasks get half-done or stalled because they’re “kind of” someone’s responsibility, but not really.Missed deadlines.
Important work (things everyone agrees are critical) keeps falling through the cracks. Not because no one cares, but because no one was clearly on the hook.The “blame game.”
When roles are vague, finger-pointing becomes the default. Everyone’s frustrated, and tensions start to simmer.Feeling overstaffed, but still behind.
This one’s sneaky. Payroll’s going up, but the work isn’t flowing faster. You’ve got bodies in seats, but not enough forward motion.Struggling to “give everyone a number.”
EOS folks will recognize this one. You want each person to have one or two clear, measurable outcomes they own - but with mushy roles, that’s almost impossible. (More on the “everyone has a number” idea here).
If you’re seeing two or more of these, it’s time to reexamine your structure. It’s not a people problem. It’s a design problem.
What Actually Works: 5 Principles of Role Design
Once you’ve spotted the problem, what’s the fix?
These are the five principles I’ve used (and reused) to improve our org structure at every growth stage. They’re not magic, but they work - and they scale.
A. Define Roles Narrowly (Specialists > Generalists)
The #1 mistake I see? Roles that are too broad. If someone’s job description looks like a junk drawer (a little bit of everything, none of it deeply related), you’re setting them up to fail.
The goal is to group tasks that naturally fit together and hand them off as a package. Fewer tasks per person, more alignment between those tasks.
Take leasing, for example. At RL, we’ve built a dedicated role for it: the Leasing Agent handles new listings, incoming renter inquiries, showings, and tenant screening. That’s it. They’re not doing move-ins, not handling maintenance calls, not answering owner emails. Just leasing.
This holds true no matter how your company is organized: portfolio, departmental, pod. Lean into specialists where you can. Let people get really good at a small number of related things. That’s where efficiency and accountability start to take root.
B. Set Capacity at 85%
Most operators overload their people. I get it… labor is expensive, and we want to stay lean. But here’s what that leads to: burnout, errors, churn.
We aim to design roles for 85% capacity during a typical week. That means the average team member can complete all their work (accurately and on time) and still have a buffer.
Why leave that 15%? Two big reasons:
Growth: When you add units, you don’t want to rehire every time. That buffer lets you absorb growth without immediate chaos.
Surge capacity: Peak season, surprise onboarding, someone’s on vacation… that slack buys you flexibility.
Think of it like a pit crew, not a factory line. (Here’s a great video that explains this concept better than I can.) Efficiency is good, but speed and resilience matter more.
C. Separate Inside and Outside Work
This one sounds obvious, but it’s easy to overlook: don’t split roles between inside and outside tasks.
If someone is doing office work and field work, they’re going to lose hours every day to context switching, travel time, and logistical chaos.
Let’s say your maintenance tech is also doing some leasing showings. Even if it’s just one or two per day, that’s several hours burned (mentally and physically) just shifting modes.
And it’s not just the time lost. It’s the mental drag. That feeling of being pulled in two directions every day? It adds up. You want focused, consistent workflows. Roles should live in one world or the other - not both.
D. Assign Numbers to Every Role
You’ve probably heard the EOS mantra: Everyone has a number. It’s a simple but powerful idea.
Each person on your team should have 1–2 numbers that reflect how well they’re doing in their role. These shouldn’t be arbitrary KPIs. They should tie directly into your business goals.
Some examples:
Leasing Agent: Days on market, # of showings per lease signed
Maintenance Coordinator: Work orders closed within X days
Bookkeeper: % of owner statements sent error-free and on time
If a role doesn’t have a number, ask why. Is it too vague? Is it a Frankenstein mashup of unrelated tasks? That’s a sign the role design itself might be off.
Accountability isn’t about micromanagement. It’s about clarity. Numbers give people a target and a way to know they’re winning.
E. Revisit Roles Often
Role design is not a one-and-done project.
Every 10–15% of growth, things shift. You add new services, bring on new tech, restructure teams - and suddenly, that beautifully balanced workload is out of whack.
I’ve had to revisit our org chart a dozen times over the years. Sometimes it’s a full redesign. Other times it’s just nudging a task from one role to another to keep things even.
The key is to treat it like system maintenance. Wait too long, and the inefficiencies compound. But if you build in regular checkpoints (say, quarterly or every time you cross a new door count milestone), it becomes manageable.
Think of it like changing the oil. Not glamorous, but if you skip it, the engine’s eventually going to seize.
Closing Thoughts
Role design isn’t sexy. It won’t get you likes on LinkedIn. But it might be the single biggest lever for reducing chaos and unlocking real scalability in your property management company.
I’ve learned (the hard way) that even great people can’t succeed in poorly designed roles. And the structure that worked at 200 doors probably won’t cut it at 400.
The good news? This is fixable. With a little intention, you can create roles that are focused, measurable, and built for growth.
Start small. Pick one overloaded role and tighten it up. You’ll be surprised how much smoother things run when the plumbing is set up right.
What’s one role in your org you know needs rethinking?