When a loan officer does not adopt a new tool, the easy explanation is a lack of motivation. The more useful question is whether anyone has made the tool practical to use. In this Settling Scores conversation, cohosts Abdel Khawatmi of PRMG Got Mortgages and Eric Levin, cofounder of Model Match, examine how leadership, distraction and individual accountability shape mortgage business growth.
Episode originally published March 17, 2026. Archive recap added October 24, 2026.
Key takeaways: adoption needs more than access
- Leaders should explain the purpose, audience and next action behind a workflow.
- Providing software is different from making it usable within a branch.
- Pipeline work can crowd out learning and relationship development.
- A smaller set of clear choices can make execution easier.
- Regular reviews should examine both activity and results.
- Originators remain responsible for learning, participating and following through.
Start with the workflow, not a label
Eric opens the central discussion with a question prompted by conversations after a speaking engagement: does the mortgage industry have a motivation problem or a leadership problem? He challenges the habit of treating weak adoption as proof that people simply will not work.
Abdel answers by examining his own responsibilities. Before asking an originator, processor, loan officer assistant or administrator to change a task, he wants to understand why it matters. Who is the audience? What makes the task important? How does it connect with the next step?
That distinction matters because “use the platform” is not a complete instruction. A workable instruction identifies the situation, the action and the person responsible. Leaders cannot remove every obstacle, but they can avoid adding uncertainty to an already demanding day.
Corporate access is the beginning, not the finished system
Abdel describes a division of responsibility within his own organization. Corporate leadership provides access to tools and resources; local leadership then tests how those resources fit the branch’s people and work. He mentions Total Expert while explaining that access alone does not define a branch-specific process.
He also describes constructive conversations about why he uses one platform rather than another. The emphasis is on understanding the use case and improving the experience, rather than requiring activity for its own sake.
A suggested three-question implementation test
Before introducing a workflow, ask: what recurring problem does this solve, who completes each step, and what should happen afterward? If those answers are unclear, another training invitation may only spread the confusion. A short demonstration using an appropriate example can reveal missing handoffs before the process reaches the whole team.
The answers should fit the actual team. An originator working with an administrator has a different handoff from someone doing both roles. Documenting that difference helps keep a useful idea from becoming an instruction nobody can follow in their working environment.
Distraction can look like disengagement
One of Eric’s most useful examples begins with an assumption he later revisits. At an event, he sees audience members looking down at their phones during another speaker’s presentation. The behavior appears disconnected from the learning opportunity in front of them.
When he later asks what they were doing, the answer is pipeline management. They were working, but their immediate responsibilities were competing with the activity intended to help them improve their businesses.
The distinction changes the leadership question. Instead of asking only how to make people pay attention, ask what keeps pulling their attention away. A training block is difficult to protect if every routine file question still reaches the originator immediately.
As a suggested response, review which questions need urgent escalation and which can move through an established support channel. Protect client service while creating realistic learning time. The goal is not to ignore active loans; it is to reduce avoidable interruptions without leaving anyone unsupported.
Turn a tool into a clear handoff
Abdel gives several workflow examples: explaining how an application should be taken, using meeting transcription to support follow-up, keeping CRM conversations current and having administrators arrange referral-partner follow-up. His broader point is that leadership should help build the setup rather than leave every person to invent it.
A suggested handoff might work like this: after a referral-partner meeting, the originator confirms the agreed next step; an administrator updates the approved system and prepares the calendar invitation; the originator reviews the message and completes the personal follow-through.
The value is not simply that a task moved to someone else. Everyone can see what completion means. The referral partner receives a relevant response, and the originator does not have to reconstruct the conversation later.
Where recording or AI-assisted transcription is involved, use approved systems and follow organizational recording, privacy and compliance requirements. Review summaries for accuracy and keep confidential borrower information out of unapproved tools.
Fewer choices can support better execution
Eric raises another obstacle: options can become paralyzing. Providing many resources may feel supportive, but it can leave people deciding among tools instead of completing the work. His closing adoption framework emphasizes clarity, conviction, accountability and fewer options.
Applied practically, that means choosing a defined starting process rather than presenting every possible configuration. Explain why it was selected, demonstrate it and make the expected action visible. Leave room for useful feedback without turning each routine task into another platform-selection discussion.
For example, a team could test one approved method for recording meeting outcomes before considering additional automation. The immediate objective is a dependable handoff, not a more impressive technology collection. Adding features before people understand the basic process can hide the original problem.
Measure the process, then adjust it
Abdel describes reviewing business activity and results across weekly, monthly and longer periods. He also discusses using activity information to decide where coaching attention may be useful. The underlying lesson is to notice problems early rather than wait months to discover that a rollout is not working.
Measurement should support a conversation, not replace one. More calls do not automatically mean better conversations, and a short-term production change does not establish that one platform caused it. Ask what the team actually did, where the workflow stalled and what support would improve the next attempt.
A suggested compact review
Choose one activity measure, one service measure and one result to discuss together. For a follow-up process, those might be completed conversations, promised actions delivered and subsequent appointments. Use appropriate reporting periods and approved records. Then ask whether the process is becoming easier to execute consistently.
Eric also distinguishes an isolated unsuccessful attempt from a repeated pattern. Leadership requires enough conviction to give a process a fair trial and enough openness to revise it when evidence points elsewhere. Changing direction thoughtfully is different from replacing a tool whenever results disappoint.
Do not roll out a process you cannot yet simplify
Near the close, Abdel describes testing a new organizational platform and seeing encouraging responses, while still holding back a full team handoff. He had not yet made the workflow sufficiently streamlined.
Eric connects that restraint with trust. Introducing a confusing process can make people less willing to engage when the next initiative arrives. Preparation therefore includes more than learning features; it includes making the task understandable for someone who did not design it.
A suggested readiness check is to ask a teammate to complete the process from the written instructions. Watch where clarification is needed. Improve those steps before expanding access. Abdel’s discussion of having existing standard operating procedures reinforces the value of making useful knowledge reusable.
Loan officers still own their part of growth
The conversation does not give originators a pass. Eric explicitly closes by saying accountability is not a one-way street. Leaders should create a usable process, but loan officers still need to learn it, participate and do the work.
That includes naming obstacles clearly. “This does not work” offers less help than explaining which step failed, what information was missing and what happened next. Constructive feedback gives leadership something it can test and improve.
For professionals evaluating a team, a useful suggested question is: can someone show me how support works in practice? Ask about training, operational handoffs, leadership access and how feedback changes a process. The Got Mortgages careers page provides an existing starting point for a conversation about team fit.
A local application: protect the work behind the appointment
For teams serving Ocean and Monmouth County, including Toms River and Eatontown, the lesson can be applied to the work surrounding a client or agent appointment. A suggested practice is to reserve preparation and follow-up time, not just the meeting itself.
If a consultation generates questions that require research, make the next action visible and identify its owner. If an originator is attending training, arrange appropriate coverage. Those are practical planning choices—not claims about how all local teams operate—and they connect growth time with the service clients still need.
A practical checklist: protect time for growth
The following suggested checklist translates the discussion into a manageable workflow review:
- Name one recurring obstacle. Choose a specific interruption or missed handoff.
- Explain the purpose. Identify who benefits and what completion should accomplish.
- Assign responsibilities. Separate preparation, review, communication and escalation.
- Test the process. Have the leader use it before asking the team to adopt it.
- Document the steps. Keep instructions short enough to use during real work.
- Protect practice time. Arrange appropriate coverage for routine questions.
- Review and refine. Examine execution and results, then agree on the next adjustment.
Eric frames efficiency around two possible goals: more business in the same time, or the same business in less time. Both help a team decide what improvement should mean before buying another tool. Start by choosing the goal, then ask whether the workflow supports it.
Frequently asked questions
Who hosts this Settling Scores episode?
Cohosts Abdel Khawatmi of PRMG Got Mortgages and Eric Levin, cofounder of Model Match, discuss leadership, technology adoption and loan officer accountability.
Is loan officer growth a leadership issue or an individual responsibility?
The episode emphasizes both. Leaders should explain and support a usable process, while originators remain responsible for learning it, participating and following through.
Why might a loan officer struggle to adopt a useful tool?
Possible obstacles discussed include unclear instructions, too many options and competing pipeline responsibilities. Low adoption alone does not explain which obstacle is present.
What should a leader do before introducing a platform?
Abdel emphasizes using, testing and simplifying the workflow first. A suggested next step is to document responsibilities and let a teammate test the instructions before a wider rollout.
What does the episode say about distracted conference attendees?
Eric describes learning that attendees looking at their phones were managing their pipelines. The example shifts the discussion from presumed disengagement to competing demands on attention.
How can fewer options help a mortgage team?
A defined starting process can reduce time spent choosing among tools. Eric pairs fewer options with clarity, conviction and accountability as a framework for adoption.
Can AI replace execution by a loan officer?
Eric says AI can help design a plan, but a person still has to execute it. Abdel describes meeting transcription, follow-up software and administrative support as examples of workflows leaders need to explain and set up.
How should a team evaluate a new workflow?
Review whether people can complete the steps, where handoffs fail and what results follow. Consider activity and service quality together rather than treating one metric as proof of success.
How can I contact Got Mortgages?
Call 973-536-0276 or visit GotMortgages.com. The Contact page and Build My Mortgage Plan page provide existing ways to begin a conversation.
Build a process people can actually use
The episode’s practical lesson is shared responsibility: leadership makes the work clearer, and originators turn that clarity into action. Start with one obstacle, create a dependable handoff and improve it through regular feedback.
To talk with PRMG Got Mortgages, call 973-536-0276, visit GotMortgages.com, contact the team or build your mortgage plan.
Explore more Mortgage Intel and Abdel Khawatmi’s profile. Explore more conversations at the Got Mortgages Podcast website.
Author: Abdel Khawatmi with PRMG Got Mortgages | 973-536-0276
This article is general mortgage information only. It is not a commitment to lend, a rate quote, or legal or tax advice. Loan approval, terms and pricing depend on a full application, credit review and property details, and market conditions change. Talk with a licensed loan officer and your own legal or tax professional about your situation. NMLS #1712023 | PRMG NMLS #75243.