Your Appointment Outcomes Are Costing You Deals
Part 2 of 2: Based on “The ISA Scoreboard: How Top Teams 2× Conversion with Real-Time Metrics & Pro Dispatch, a conversation between Daniel Keeton, Marissa Canario, and Gabe Cordova. Watch it here.
Gabe Cordova recently audited Robert Slack's database (1.9 million leads, which is kind of insane) and he finds something.
Since September 1st, they'd set over 3,000 appointments, and out of those, 791 had outcomes recorded—held, not held, whatever.
The other 60%? No outcome, no update, just nothing. Which means nobody knows what happened to most of their appointments after they got set.
The appointment black hole
Gabe says this isn't unusual.
"This was not a metric we were inspecting because you can't find it in Follow-up Boss. I've jumped into multiple people's accounts. I've seen this number as high as 98%. I had my first call with a big Zillow and Realtor.com team and they were at 100%. They weren't doing outcomes at all."
So most teams are just setting appointments and then losing track of them, with no visibility into whether they happened, whether they converted, or whether the lead needs to be reassigned.
It's kind of a disaster, actually.
Rescheduled and no-show appointments disappear without follow-up
Rescheduled leads get no follow-up automation or reassignment
A lead texts an hour before the appointment. Kid's sick, dog needs a vet, car won't start.
Whatever the reason (usually legitimate) they can't make it. Agent sees the text, says okay, and then moves on with their day.
No outcome logged, no automation triggered to get them rescheduled, no ISA reassignment.
Gabe found this pattern everywhere. "Most of those people who canceled or no-showed weren't getting the same love and attention as a brand new lead. Brand new leads were getting two or three calls a day for seven days. But people who rescheduled? Nothing."
It doesn't make sense because someone who already agreed to meet with you once is probably warmer than a fresh portal lead. But that's what happens when you don't have systems tracking this stuff.
No-shows fall into the void with zero contact attempts
Even worse are no-shows with no follow-up. The agent's waiting on the Zoom call or shows up to the house, and the lead doesn't appear.
Agent waits maybe 15 minutes, then bounces. And the lead?
Just falls into the void with no rescheduling attempt, no follow-up automation, nothing.
Could be the lead forgot, could be they got cold feet, could be a hundred different things. But without tracking the outcome, you'll never know and they'll never get contacted again.
Low held rates destroy agent trust in ISA appointments
Daniel Keeton's team obsesses over held rates, and there's a reason for that.
"If you're sending out a lot of appointments that are not turning into a held one, that's one of the fastest ways to lose trust from your agents to your ISAs. They might get frustrated."
A few years back, they had an ISA who was setting tons of appointments, like crushing the numbers. But his held rate was below 25%, so three out of four appointments would cancel, reschedule, or no-show.
Turned out he was just really good at getting people to say yes on the phone, almost too good at it, because he wasn't going deep enough into the why behind the appointment. He'd set it and move on without really qualifying whether the person was serious or just being polite.
So they analyzed 200 appointments—100 that held, 100 that didn't—and found some patterns, then built a process around it.
Agents have to respond within 5 minutes to the group text, they have to call the lead within 30 minutes, and they have to make another reach-out before the appointment happens.
Because what was happening before was the ISA would set it, intro everyone in a group text, and the agent would just respond "Okay, sounds good. See you there." The lead had zero connection with that agent, no social clout.
So when something better came up (or they just got nervous) they'd ghost—no call, no text, they just wouldn't show.
Different teams define and track appointments in completely different ways
These teams figured out pretty quickly that you need to define what counts as an appointment, otherwise everyone's tracking different things and the data becomes meaningless.
Separating consultations from showings reveals where leads drop off
Marissa Canario's team separates everything into consultations and appointments. The consultation is the initial meeting where they're explaining buyer agency, discussing the process, qualifying the lead.
The appointment is after that's done, when you're actually going to show them properties.
She explains it:
"Everything was getting logged as appointment and then I'm going, 'Wait, hold on a second, if we're having this many appointments, what's going on with the pendings?' That brought us to our next correlation. We've broken it apart. Appointment set counts as ready to go on showings. We've already completed this stage of the program."
Makes sense with all the buyer agency changes that happened. You need to have the consultation before you can really start showing, so treating them as separate stages helps track where things are actually falling off.
Tightening qualification criteria from 12 months to 6 filters for quality
Daniel's team incentivizes face-to-face appointments. Virtual or phone only counts if the client's more than 60 miles from the office, and they have to have expressed interest in buying or selling in the next 6 months.
(Used to be 12 months, but they tightened it.)
They also disqualify certain scenarios. If someone offers their credit score and it's below 580, no appointment.
If they disclose they don't have a job, no appointment. These are things the ISA picks up during the conversation—the lead volunteers this information, so it's not like they're running credit checks on everyone.
Daniel says they tightened the timeline from 12 months to 6 because at one point they had more appointments going out than agents to take them. A good problem to have, I guess, but it also means you need to filter better for quality.
Setting up distinct appointment types excludes non-revenue activities from tracking
Gabe's team uses these appointment types in Follow-up Boss:
ISA Phone Consultation
ISA Zoom Consultation
First Showing (in person)
Additional Showing
Under Contract (walkthrough, photography, inspections—gets excluded from tracking)
That last one's important because you don't want your reports cluttered with appointments for photography or letting an inspector in, since those aren't revenue-generating appointments.
And the outcomes they track:
Met, Listed
Met, Nurture
Canceled by Lead
Canceled by Agent
Rescheduled
No Show
Having these outcomes set up means you can actually filter your reports and see where things are breaking down. Too many cancels by lead?
Maybe appointment quality is an issue. Too many no-shows?
Maybe agent follow-up isn't happening.
Texting agents after appointments drops no-outcome rate to 3%
Daniel's team gets down to 3% of appointments with no outcome, which is pretty remarkable. Their secret?
MaverickRE sends the agent a text after every appointment:
"Did you meet with [Lead Name]?"
1 - Yes
2 - No
They hit 1 or 2, and if it's 2, they get options asking if the lead canceled, rescheduled, or was a no-show. One text response and MaverickRE updates the CRM automatically, updates their tracking system, and triggers whatever automation needs to happen next.
Marissa explains why this matters:
"No matter what CRM you're using, we all get a little blind to notifications. You might have seven or eight notifications in any moment from your CRM. I liken it to being nose blind. The likelihood of me jumping in there as a salesperson? Minimal. The likelihood I'm going to answer a text? A thousand percent."
Which is accurate. Nobody's logging into their CRM after every appointment to update outcomes, but everyone responds to texts.
Pro Dispatch: The algorithm that routes based on conversion rate and capacity
Once you're setting quality appointments and tracking outcomes, you still need to figure out who gets them. Most teams use round-robin (next person in line) or first-to-claim (fastest fingers wins), and both have problems.
Round-robin gives appointments to whoever's next regardless of whether they're ready or the right fit. First-to-claim means your fastest clicker gets everything even if they already have too many leads or they're not the right agent for this particular appointment.
Daniel's team uses MaverickRE's Pro Dispatch instead, which considers conversion rate, current capacity, and qualifications all at once.
Highest converters see new appointments first regardless of total volume
The system ranks agents by efficiency—not total closings, but conversion percentage. So if April's been given 11 appointments and converted 3, that's roughly 27%.
She's going to see opportunities first because she's most likely to close them.
Makes more sense than giving them to whoever has the most closings overall, because that person might just be getting volume. You want the highest converter getting first shot at new appointments.
Rolling 30-day capacity limits prevent overloading struggling agents
Each agent has a capacity limit in a rolling 30-day period, usually 10 active leads. High converters can earn up to 15, while agents who are struggling get slowed down so they can focus on converting what they have.
Daniel says "If they have a high conversion, they can go up to 15. If they're struggling, we slow it down a little bit."
It seems obvious but most teams just keep feeding leads to everyone equally regardless of whether they're converting them or letting them die.
Matching appointments by language, location, and price range eliminates reassignments
The system matches appointments to agents based on location, appointment type (buyer vs seller vs investor), language requirements, price range, special certifications, even lead source. New agents start with lower price ranges and earn their way up.
Spanish-speaking appointments go to Spanish-speaking agents, and cash offer deals go to agents with that certification.
Marissa points out how much time this saves: "How much time is wasted when we send a Spanish speaker to someone who isn't and then we have to dial back and reassign? It loses trust with the client and the agent. Same thing with luxury. Do you want someone who's only ever sold two houses taking a $4 million deal? That can happen. And so that way we're not pulling back from someone either because it still feels like a takeaway."
Top converters get 10 seconds before opportunities move to the next qualified agent
An ISA sets an appointment, and the system identifies all qualified agents (right location, right specialty, capacity remaining). It ranks them by conversion rate, then the highest converter sees it first for 10 seconds.
If they don't claim it, it goes to the next person, and eventually reaches the most available, most qualified agent.
Daniel says it takes away accusations of favoritism. "You like this agent, you like that agent. Somebody might be like, 'I need more leads.' With this system, it doesn't play favorites. It literally gives the opportunity based on performance. If you want more and you want to have an earlier crack at the lead? Convert the leads more."
Real-time visibility replaced spreadsheet chasing for team leaders and ISAs
When these teams got Maverick's tracking and routing in place, a few things changed.
Team leaders stopped chasing spreadsheets and got real-time visibility into who's doing what. They could see exactly where coaching was needed without having to listen to hours of call recordings manually.
Distribution became fair and objective, which agents actually appreciated because it removed the favoritism question.
ISAs finally saw what happened to their appointments. They could track whether they held, whether they converted, and where things were breaking down.
It gave them visibility into their actual impact instead of just setting appointments and wondering.
Agents started getting appointments that matched their skills and capacity. Text-based outcome tracking meant they didn't have to log in anywhere, and they had a clear path to earning more opportunities by converting better.
Gabe notes that ISAs loved this, actually. "They were frustrated too, setting appointments with no visibility into what happened next. With proper tracking, they could finally see their impact."
Makes sense, since nobody likes working blind.
Rescheduled appointments are warmer than fresh portal leads
Daniel said something interesting during the webinar. "The low-hanging fruit gets our attention, but we need to shift our brain: what IS the low-hanging fruit? It's not the new lead that raises their hand to see the first house. It's the one we set last week that we don't know what happened with it. That's where you can plug those holes, increase your conversions, increase your ROI, lower your cost per closing."
We've been conditioned to obsess over speed-to-lead, and yes, it matters. But what about speed to reschedule? Speed to outcome? Speed to follow-up after no-shows?
Nobody's tracking that, even though those leads are probably warmer than fresh portal leads.
Marissa adds: "Once you're a user of proper tracking, you can no longer overlook it. For years we thought we knew. We had no idea. Our best guess was not even close."
Better tracking doubled conversion rates and added $44,000 per agent
If you're not obsessing over appointment outcomes, you're losing deals, maybe a lot of them.
When these teams fixed it, conversion rates jumped from 1.2% to 2.8%, which is 16 times more appointments. GCI went up $44,000 per agent on average.
Agents started trusting ISAs more because held rates went up. ISAs stuck around longer because they could see their impact.
Team leaders got hours back every week from not chasing data.
You probably don't need more leads, you just need to convert the appointments you're already setting.
Marissa said it pretty well: "It was like we had been lighting bags of money on fire for years. Once we could see what was actually happening, we couldn't unsee it."
The question isn't whether you can afford to implement better tracking and routing. It's how much longer you can afford not to.
Stop losing deals in the appointment black hole
If you're like most teams, 60-98% of your appointments have no outcome recorded. That means you're losing warm leads who already agreed to meet with you—leads that are more valuable than fresh portal contacts.
MaverickRE solves this with:
Automated text-based outcome tracking that gets you to 3% no-outcome rates (not 60%)
Pro Dispatch routing that matches appointments to your highest converters by language, location, and specialty
Real-time visibility that replaces spreadsheet chasing and gives ISAs the impact tracking they deserve
Teams using MaverickRE saw conversion rates jump from 1.2% to 2.8% and added an average of $44,000 per agent in GCI.
👉 You don't always need more leads. You need to convert the appointments you're already setting. See how proper tracking turns missed opportunities into closed deals.