Online meeting voting process during virtual assemblies

Carrying out an online meeting voting process is an operational reality and, in many cases, a necessity. From associations to multinational companies, they are moving their assemblies to digital environments where decisions are made live, with participants connected from different locations.

But how do you actually vote within an online meeting? Not in abstract terms. Not asynchronously. But in real time, while the assembly is taking place. Because allowing online voting is one thing, and properly executing an online meeting voting process synchronized with the flow of a live session is something very different.

Preparation phase, the foundation of an online meeting voting process without errors

In any online meeting voting process, the preparation phase determines whether everything will work, or whether problems will start. Because once the meeting begins, there is no room for improvisation.

• Definition of the voter list and participant validation. To avoid errors that cannot be corrected later, such as invalid votes, participants without access, or even worse, people voting without the right to do so.
• Configuration of the vote before the assembly. At this stage, the type of vote is defined, simple, yes or no, multiple and or weighted, with different weight depending on the voter. The quorum, required majorities, voting duration, and everything that will determine whether the result is valid or not.
• Security and control before the start. Authentication cannot be superficial. It must ensure that each user is who they claim to be, and that they only vote once.

Access working properly. Credentials correctly sent. Devices ready.

Participant access, how to vote within the online meeting

The most common way to access a vote within an online meeting is through a direct link. The participant receives a unique link that takes them straight to the voting environment. It is fast and intuitive, but it must be properly secured to prevent unauthorized access. Another option is the use of personalized credentials. Here, each user logs in with a username and password, or even more robust systems such as multi factor authentication.

Then there is the most advanced model, direct integration with the meeting platform. In this case, the online meeting voting process becomes a natural extension of the assembly itself. There are no jumps between tools. The user is in the meeting, and votes from there. The voting does not interrupt the meeting. It becomes part of it.

And this has a direct impact. The easier it is to vote, the more people participate. The more people participate, the more representative the result is.

Vote collection, what happens while users are voting

While participants are voting, the system is working, validating, recording, protecting. It is engineering applied to trust. And one of the biggest challenges in any online meeting voting process is resolving the classic tension of knowing who has voted, without knowing what they voted for.

The solution is to completely separate identity and vote.

In Eligo, this principle is implemented through a model in which the voting preference is anonymized and encrypted directly on the user’s device at the moment it is cast, removing any link between voter and vote in accordance with the privacy principles of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR.

And it does this in real time.

Real time result display and vote closure

After the online meeting voting process is closed, results can be generated in two ways:

• Immediate, visible when the vote closes.
• Delayed, available after a later validation.

But there is something even more important than the result itself, and that is the ability to demonstrate how it was reached. This means that the entire process must be auditable. And not only the final result, but every step, access, participation, vote closure, and result generation.

Eligo’s platform records this information through logging systems that document every relevant action. In other words, it is capable of reconstructing the entire process without breaking anonymity.

And the reports generated after the vote can include digital signatures and time stamps, elements recognized under the European Union’s eIDAS Regulation, which guarantee the authenticity and integrity of electronic documents.

Best practices and real case with Eligo of live voting in complex corporate environments

In complex corporate or associative environments, where there are multiple participants, different levels of responsibility, and relevant decisions, applying best practices is non-negotiable.

First, clarity. Second, synchronization. Third, control. And fourth, technical robustness.

A clear example of how to apply these best practices can be found in the case of Afanias, a social organization in Spain that, in order to approve its budget, implemented a digital voting system integrated into the online meeting itself. Participants accessed through personalized links, cast their votes in real time, and the system automatically managed participation records, quorum control, and vote counting.

The organization was able to approve its budget with full guarantees, demonstrating the value of using specialized platforms for the online meeting voting process. If you also want to explore this possibility in your organization, you can contact Eligo here.

5 FAQs about the online meeting voting process