> Perhaps it's just some custom that's been passed down
I'm sure they have tested ads without photos, or with photos of something other than people, and found that photos of attractive smiling real estate agents work best.
If it surprises you that this works, I recommend reading Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini. He is a psychologist who has spent years not just studying persuasion in laboratory settings, but "going undercover", taking courses and even doing jobs in all kinds of persuasion professions - door-to-door salespeople, fund-raisers, recruiters, advertisers, etc. He noted hundreds of techniques that he was taught, or that he learned or observed, and categorized them into six principles of persuasion, each forming a chapter of the book.
The book is useful to entrepreneurs who need to market their startups, and useful to humans, who need to understand the techniques that are being used by sales people and marketers of all kinds. I recommend it to everyone. (In case you're worried, Cialdini doesn't recommend unethical techniques, though he does describe some so that you know what to watch out for.)
> I'm sure they have tested ads without photos, or with photos of something other than people, and found that photos of attractive smiling real estate agents work best.
Describing real estate agents as people who use empirical study in their marketing efforts doesn't match with my experience. The industry is full of "do it because that's what we always do" attitudes regarding the marketing of homes. Zillow's research seems to back this up - agent headshot ads performed way worse than anything else (http://www.zillow.com/blog/the-top-and-bottom-performing-ads...).
Real estate isn't quite as simple as just the listing ads. There are tons of things a real estate agent can be good at that make their ad quality irrelevant.
There are probably things they could do that would have a bigger effect than the ad quality. But as long as those ads have some effect, and faces improve them, they'll keep doing it.
Doctors and lawyers often put their faces in ads, too. It looks like people want to see the person they're buying a service from.
I was surprised because if it was tried in the UK, I'm pretty sure it would not work at all. Estate agents show pictures of houses they're selling/sold. Never a picture of their face.
So there seems to be something different in our culture there.
Isn't is customary to put your photo on your CV in the UK? Why is it shocking to have the faces of your realtor when you have the faces of future employees?
(I am not sure if this is an out-dated tradition, but I remember applying for study abroad they wanted a photo with that application as well.)
Yes, but not consciously.
> Perhaps it's just some custom that's been passed down
I'm sure they have tested ads without photos, or with photos of something other than people, and found that photos of attractive smiling real estate agents work best.
If it surprises you that this works, I recommend reading Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini. He is a psychologist who has spent years not just studying persuasion in laboratory settings, but "going undercover", taking courses and even doing jobs in all kinds of persuasion professions - door-to-door salespeople, fund-raisers, recruiters, advertisers, etc. He noted hundreds of techniques that he was taught, or that he learned or observed, and categorized them into six principles of persuasion, each forming a chapter of the book.
The book is useful to entrepreneurs who need to market their startups, and useful to humans, who need to understand the techniques that are being used by sales people and marketers of all kinds. I recommend it to everyone. (In case you're worried, Cialdini doesn't recommend unethical techniques, though he does describe some so that you know what to watch out for.)