Half of all commercial bank appraisal reviews require revisions.
That’s not a quality problem. It’s an alignment problem.
Bank reviewers are frustrated.
“Did they even read the engagement letter?”
Appraisers are annoyed.
“Why are they nitpicking?”
Both sides are right.
And both sides are wrong.
Because both are losing time, trust and alignment.
How We Got Here
1. “Gotcha” reviewers created PTSD (Post-Traumatic Subject Disorder).
2. USPAP fear of mistakes created playing it safe reports.
3. Over reliance on templates.
4. Our education taught structure, not radical transparency.
5. Typing over old reports creates bleed-through errors.
It’s no wonder half the reports come back redlined.
Where It Gets Messy
Credibility isn’t a checkbox. It’s interpretation.
Was the scope sufficient for the intended use?
Were the approaches appropriate and supported?
Are assumptions reasonable?
The answers live in the gray.
The Opportunity Forward
At Realwired, we use the 1-3-1 Rule:
If you bring up a problem, come with three solutions, then choose one.
Solution 1: Standardized report formats by property type.
Very unlikely to happen. Also kills innovation.
Solution 2: Standardized shared bank and fee appraiser scorecards.
Reviewers rating appraisers and appraisers rating reviewers. Build mutual accountability with a NPS score.
Solution 3: Culture change. A new kind of education and leadership.
One where reviewers and appraisers have the courage to be honest, the space to ask questions and the trust to disagree productively.
My choice?
Solution 3. Every time.
Because the 50% problem isn’t fixed by systems.
It’s shared purpose. Candid dialogue. Real leadership.
Imagine protecting the bank’s risk while honoring the craft of valuation.
Maybe the 50% problem isn’t a metric to fix.
Maybe it’s an invitation to lead differently…together.