Maestros and mythologies: some lockdown reflections

PurposeThe paper reflects upon the tendency of participants in the commercial real estate markets to give excess status to individuals in decision-making and to hold beliefs that are at best weakly supported empirically Design/methodology/approachThe paper is reflexive in nature, using experiential reflection to consider institutional processes in the real estate market It is important to use “methodology” correctly and not as a synonym of “method” FindingsUsing reflexive mode, the paper does not have “findings” as such: if the views expressed are accepted, then a research agenda to understand decision-making processes is implied Research limitations/implicationsThe nature of reflection is that it follows from the writer's experiential processes and interpretations The reader may come from a different stance Broadly accepting the propositions points to the need for a contextual analysis of decision-making processes in private real estate and consideration of the implications of privileging individual idiosyncratic decisions over analytic procedures Practical implicationsPrior research has demonstrated the lack of a back-testing culture in real estate that would allow empirical analysis of the consequences of “gut feel” decisions overriding modelled analysis;further, entrenched beliefs about the drivers of market performance might result in misallocation of resources Social implicationsResource allocation in commercial real estate has important consequences for land use and urban and regional development Originality/valueThe paper reflects the views and experience of the author based on over 30 years of research into commercial real estate