2027 edition · Research reviewed November 7, 2026
Charles Hawkins Co. is our 2027 editorial #1 for industrial landlord representation in the Nashville region. The decisive evidence is a dated owner-side assignment corroborated by the tenant’s brokerage, paired with current local industrial coverage. This is a firm comparison even though the legacy category uses “listing agent.” We compare five qualified brokerage options under all nine firm criteria and explain where each deserves an interview. The goal is a leasing plan that fits the property, not an unsupported claim about the fastest lease-up.
How we rank commercial real estate brokerage firms in Nashville–Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN
Our 2027 ranking uses the same nine-part methodology as our 2026 guides. We compare local specialists with regional and national firms using current public sources, verified service geography and relevant specialization in industrial leasing for landlords. We evaluate each candidate using these nine criteria:
- Experience and reputation
- Market knowledge and specialization
- Network and connections
- Technological capabilities
- Data transparency and accuracy
- Online presence and digital marketing
- Local and global reach
- Service range
- Innovation and customer focus
Using these criteria, we identify one #1 editorial recommendation for the assignment described below and compare other qualified options. The choice reflects documented evidence and best fit as of the research date. Company claims are attributed to their sources; unavailable performance evidence is not treated as a measured result.
OUR #1 RECOMMENDATION
#1 — Charles Hawkins Co.
For 2027, Charles Hawkins Co. is our #1 editorial recommendation among commercial real estate brokerage firms for industrial leasing for landlords in Nashville–Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin, TN.
Best fit: Local industrial landlord leasing
Our editorial #1 for industrial owners because the tenant-side broker independently identifies its June 2026 landlord assignment, reinforced by the firm’s explicit industrial brokerage service.
The shortlist at a glance
Our #1 choice and other specialists| Firm or broker | Best fit | Why selected |
|---|---|---|
| #1 Charles Hawkins Co. | Local industrial landlord leasing | The opposing-side brokerage confirms a 2026 landlord assignment and the firm explicitly offers industrial brokerage. |
| CBRE | Industrial prospecting and project marketing | Its current Nashville team explicitly provides landlord marketing and representation. |
| Colliers | Corridor-specific industrial campaigns | The team describes distinct local industrial specialties and territories. |
| Lee & Associates | Marketing industrial operating capabilities | Its local industrial leader documents landlord work. |
| Cushman & Wakefield | Warehouse leasing with development alternatives | The Nashville industrial practice includes owner and build-to-suit services. |
#1 — Charles Hawkins Co.: independently identified landlord role
The June 2026 AMS lease announcement from NAI identifies Clancy Hoban, Robert Stout, Kevin Irwin and Jackson Paisley of Charles Hawkins as the landlord representatives. NAI: AMS Solutions lease and representation sides, June 3, 2026 The firm’s brokerage practice separately includes industrial properties. Charles Hawkins Co.: brokerage services This combination supports our local owner-side #1. Ask the proposed team to explain the asset’s likely user groups and what would prevent those users from occupying it. One documented transaction establishes an assignment, not a market-wide performance record.
CBRE: an identified industrial marketing team
Will Goodman’s current profile names the Armstrong–Goodman team and explicitly describes industrial landlord representation, marketing and tenant services. CBRE: Will Goodman and Nashville industrial team We include CBRE for owners seeking an organized prospect and competitive-property comparison. Ask how broker outreach, direct occupier contact and tour feedback will be tracked. The owner should receive the reasoning behind changes in positioning, rather than only a count of marketing impressions.
Colliers: match the industrial specialist to the corridor
The Nashville team page separates industrial practitioners, including Jerry Miele’s owner/tenant practice and Bill Buckley’s southern I-65 work. Colliers: Nashville industrial specialists That is a useful comparison when the property’s location defines its competition. Ask the team to distinguish comparable buildings from superficially similar listings with different access or use constraints. Its broader geographic descriptions should not substitute for recent relevant examples near the asset.
Lee & Associates: an operational perspective on marketing
Rodrigues’ current Lee biography includes landlord representation and industrial practice leadership. Lee & Associates: Jim Rodrigues, SIOR We would compare its proposal for a building whose operating characteristics need a precise explanation to prospects. Ask what information should appear in the first marketing package and what must be verified before a tour. Make clear which improvements are necessary for usability and which are discretionary positioning choices.
Cushman & Wakefield: warehouse and development positioning
The local industrial practice describes owner services spanning warehouse/distribution facilities and build-to-suit requirements. Cushman & Wakefield: Nashville industrial advisers We include it where existing-building leasing competes with new supply or alternative delivery options. Require the proposal to explain how the property will be differentiated without treating planned amenities as completed. Confirm who has authority to discuss improvement allowances and other owner-funded commitments.
Assess the campaign and its limits
Request a written target-user profile, outreach schedule, reporting format and decision rule for revisiting terms. Separate asking rents from signed comparables and record material differences in delivery condition. Charles Hawkins leads because its owner role is corroborated and locally relevant; each alternative offers a different team or scope. None of the reviewed sources provides an audited comparative series for achieved rent, downtime or tenant credit quality. Those unknowns remain explicit in the nine evidence notes.