WASHINGTON, DC-The newest unemployment figures, released on Friday, did not exactly fill observers with brimming confidence, or for that matter, evoke feelings of doom and despair. The Labor Department reported that in August, the US economy added 169,000 jobs and the unemployment rate dropped to 7.3%. That is, more or less, the pace at which the economy has been adding jobs in this lackluster recovery—a rate that is too small to suggest the economy is moving forward with any real momentum but big enough to stave off fears of another slump.

In fact, the unemployment figures have become so routinely mediocre that they are no longer the economic story, as they once were during the depth of the Great Recession. Now they serve mainly to highlight a bigger story: how will--if at all--these new numbers impact the schedule by which the Federal Reserve will begin to scale back its quantitative easing?

There was no end to the guessing but the general consensus fall along the opinion voiced by Doug Duncan, chief economist of Fannie Mae, when the figures were released. He said that the unemployment numbers is in line with market expectations and the 7.3% unemployment rate—although the lowest reading since the end of 2008—masks a downbeat trend in the labor force participation rate. "Overall, the jobs report does not change our expectation that the Fed will begin to scale back its asset purchases later this month," he said in a prepared statement.

One possible reason that these recent unemployment numbers—which we should also note were accompanied by downward revisions of previous months' unemployment stats—are not expected to hold much sway with the Fed is that their importance has become oversized and greatly exaggerated.

This is not to say they are unimportant—clearly they are. However they are not the only metric, or possibly even the main one, by which the Fed and other economic-pulse takers make policy.

"It is easy to see why, for example, politicians dwell so much on unemployment numbers—they represent the pain of their constituents," David Johnson, principal of Strategic Vision, tells GlobeSt.com. "Consumers follow this number closely because it represents a visceral issue for them--their livelihood." It is the rare person these days who doesn't know anybody who has lost a job, Johnson says.

But there are other indicators that must be considered as well to form a holistic picture of the economy. Unfortunately for the commercial real estate industry, none of these indicators can exactly be labeled as robust.

Fannie Mae's Duncan, for example, points out that recent housing indicators have softened due to the spike in mortgage rates, as the market largely priced in the Fed's anticipated tapering. "Data from our National Housing Survey, to be released next week, is expected to show a leveling off of positive sentiment among consumers regarding housing," he also says.

And for the record, the recent unemployment numbers were not very positive for the CRE industry specifically, beyond just their general flaccidity.

Said Duncan: "Details were bearish for real estate—showing flat construction employment—confirming a deteriorating trend, as construction payrolls have posted a gain in only one month since April."

Other indicators, though, suggest otherwise, illustrating the necessity of gathering as many data point as possible.

Last month, for instance, the Architecture Billings Index saw a jump of more than a full point in July, indicating acceleration in the growth of design activity nationally. The ABI is leading economic indicator of construction activity, reflecting the approximate nine to twelve month lead time between architecture billings and construction spending. The July ABI score was 52.7, up from a mark of 51.6 in June. The new projects inquiry index was 66.7, up dramatically from the reading of 62.6 the previous month.

"There continues to be encouraging signs that the design and construction industry continues to improve," said AIA Chief Economist Kermit Baker, said when the numbers were released.