We sat down with the people who approve billions in commercial real estate deals to ask them one simple question: What separates good due diligence work from exceptional work?
Their answers might surprise you.
Mike McGeehan directs environmental and engineering risk at Citi. Damian Wach leads property-level risk management across PGIM's global portfolio. Neil Chandler oversees environmental compliance for Link Logistics' industrial real estate holdings. Jessica Crutchfield represents major lenders and property owners as environmental counsel at McRoberts & Hartis.
Collectively, they review thousands of ESA and PCA reports annually across billions in transactions. They see what works, what doesn't, and what makes certain consultants indispensable while others remain interchangeable.
Here's what they told us.
The Market Reality: Busier Than We've Been in Nearly Two Decades
Before diving into quality expectations, here's the context everyone wants to know: CMBS volume is on track to hit $125-130 billion this year—the highest since 2007.
Every panelist confirmed they're busier than last year. Deal volumes are up across lending, asset management, and legal services. Turnaround times are compressed to levels some haven't seen in their careers.
What this means: More work, tighter deadlines, and capacity constraints across the board. The firms thriving in this environment aren't just fast—they're strategic about how they deliver quality under pressure. The insights below are what separate those firms from everyone else fighting for capacity.
1. Bad News Early Beats Bad News Late (Every Single Time)
If there's one universal truth these leaders shared, it's this: They'd rather know about problems immediately than be surprised at closing.
Phase II recommendation discovered during fieldwork? Pick up the phone. Historical research uncovers an unexpected issue? Send the email now. Regional groundwater plume that might impact the deal? Don't wait until the report is finished.
Why this matters so much: These aren't academic exercises. Real money is moving, real deadlines exist, and real people need time to adjust deal structures, communicate with stakeholders, and make informed decisions.
The consultants who understand this—who treat early communication as a professional responsibility rather than an inconvenience—are the ones who solidify their reputation as a go-to for challenging assignments that require the most trust and expertise. The ones who bury surprises in executive summaries two weeks later? They wonder why relationships feel transactional.
2. Portfolio Consistency Is Where Good Firms Fail
Here's a scenario that drives major lenders crazy: Twenty similar properties. Same hotel chain. Same age. Same construction. One property condition assessment shows 25 immediate repairs. Another shows 3. The reaction isn't "interesting variance"—it's "I can't trust any of these reports."
When reviewers see this level of inconsistency, they start questioning everything. Is the engineer with 25 repairs being overly conservative? Is the one with 3 being dangerously passive? And more importantly—what are they missing in the other 18 reports?
The solution isn't complicated, but it requires discipline: Dedicated reviewers who understand client expectations and ensure consistent risk thresholds across every property in an assignment.
And here's something that might surprise you: In the eyes of major lenders, a portfolio isn't 200 properties. A portfolio is 3-4 properties. Even small assignments deserve portfolio-level quality control and summary matrices that help reviewers focus their time.
3. Identifying Problems Is Table Stakes. Understanding Implications Is Excellence.
There's a gap between competent technical work and work that earns gold stars from major institutional clients.
Competent work identifies the issue:
"Groundwater contamination present from an offsite case. Recommend allowing site access to responsible party."
Exceptional work thinks through the implications:
"Groundwater contamination identified, likely from offsite source based on site history and gradient. However, historical operations suggest potential contribution from subject property activities. Phase II needed to determine extent and source attribution, which will impact liability allocation and deal structure."
See the difference? One flags the REC. The other recognizes potential implications for the client in the transaction.
This is what separates consultants who are vendors from consultants who are partners. Partners help clients make decisions. Vendors just deliver information.
4. The Site Map Is Your First Impression (And Often Your Last)
When reviewers open an ESA, many of them look at the site map first—not the executive summary.
Why? Because a great site map tells the story visually. It shows:
- Every tank location (including that former gas station)
- Groundwater flow direction
- Features of concern
- Historical issues in context
- The relationship between site features and potential risks
When reviewers see a thoughtful, detailed site map, they know they're working with someone who understands due diligence. When they see a generic property boundary with two dots labeled "tanks," they brace themselves for what's coming in the rest of the report.
The site map is often the last thing prepared. It should be among the first things you perfect.
5. Volume Doesn't Excuse Inconsistency
The market is busier than it's been in nearly two decades. CMBS volume is on track to hit $125-130 billion this year—the highest since 2007. Everyone is working on compressed timelines with capacity constraints.
But here's what the biggest players in CRE told us: Busy doesn't excuse sloppy.
When the same property gets a building construction date of 1985 in the ESA and 1992 in the PCA, it undermines credibility for the entire deliverable. When salient facts aren't aligned across reports on the same property, reviewers start wondering what else was missed.
Yes, multiple authors work on reports. Yes, timing is tight. Yes, portfolio assignments are complex.
The firms handling high-volume work consistently well have systems. They have quality checks. Most importantly, they have trusted technical minds tuned to their individual client’s needs (i.e. senior reviewers, relationship managers) who catch these issues before reports go out the door. They understand that their reputation is built (or destroyed) one report at a time.
6. Relationships Still Rule All
In an age of AI, automation, and efficiency tools, you might think relationships matter less.
The opposite is true.
Major institutional clients want dedicated coordinators—specific individuals they can build relationships with, who understand their expectations, who can be trusted to maintain consistency across all their work.
These aren't just project managers. They're trusted partners who know what keeps their clients up at night. They know that Citi needs concise adjacent property sections, not 10-page dissertations. They know that PGIM values engineering judgment and clear recommendations. They know that timing matters, but surprises matter more.
The question major players ask isn't "Which firm should we use?"—it's "Is [specific person] available?"
If you're a firm principal reading this, that should concern you. If you're a talented individual contributor, that should empower you. Either way, the relationship business hasn't changed—it's just evolved to reward trust, consistency, and genuine partnership over transactional service delivery.
7. Technology Is a Tool, Not a Replacement
AI came up in every conversation we had. Not because these leaders are afraid of it, but because they're figuring out where it fits.
Current reality: They're using AI for research, regulatory tracking, and data collection. They're finding it helpful for spotting patterns and digesting large amounts of information.
The red line: Accuracy cannot be compromised. Ever. Master service agreements still require human-level quality, and that's not changing.
What this means for consultants: Use technology to handle the mechanical parts of your work. Use AI for research. Use platforms that eliminate formatting friction and administrative overhead. Use tools that give you more time for the analysis and judgment that actually create value.
But don't confuse efficiency tools with replacements for professional expertise. The firms winning major institutional work are the ones using technology to do their best work faster—not using technology to replace their best work entirely.
The Bottom Line
After hours of conversation with leaders at Citi, PGIM, Link Logistics, and McRoberts & Hartis, a few truths became crystal clear:
Technical competence is the entry fee. Everyone can identify a REC. Not everyone can think through what it means for the deal.
Communication separates good from great. Early visibility into problems gives everyone time to make better decisions.
Consistency builds trust. One strong report is good. Twenty consistent reports build partnerships.
Relationships still matter most. The consultants who understand their clients' priorities and proactively address them are the ones who become indispensable.
The market is busy. Timelines are compressed. Technology is evolving. But the fundamentals that distinguish exceptional due diligence work from merely competent work haven't changed—and according to the people approving billions in deals, they probably never will.
Meeting These Expectations Takes More Than Good Intentions
The insights above are clear. The challenge? Delivering on them consistently when you're managing tight deadlines, multiple projects, and high client expectations.
Portfolio consistency requires dedicated reviewers and quality checks—but those reviewers are buried in formatting and version control.
Thinking through implications requires time and mental bandwidth—but your senior people spend hours on report mechanics instead of analysis.
Building relationships requires availability—but your team is drowning in administrative work.
This is exactly why we built Quire. We handle the mechanical parts of report creation—templates, formatting, organization, quality checks, portfolio summaries—so your team can focus on the high-value work these industry leaders described.
When you're not fighting with formatting and chasing down version conflicts, you have time to:
- Think through implications, not just identify issues
- Maintain consistency across portfolios with centralized review workflows
- Build those critical client relationships
- Focus on professional judgment instead of document assembly
Over 1.5 million reports have been created on Quire by hundreds of firms who understand that technology should enable better work, not replace it.
Want to Hear These Insights Directly from the Source?
We recorded the full conversation with Mike McGeehan (Citi), Damian Wach (PGIM Real Estate), Neil Chandler (Link Logistics), and Jessica Crutchfield (McRoberts & Hartis). They discussed market dynamics, portfolio challenges, technology adoption, and answered questions about everything from fee structures to building stronger client relationships.
Up Next: A QuireSide Chat on Digital Transformation
In December, we're sitting down with Dario Canal, Former Lead Product Manager of Multifamily Innovation at Fannie Mae, for a conversation about digital transformation strategies and lessons learned from leading technology change in the industry.
More details coming soon. Subscribe to receive your invitation →