Voting used to mean paper forms, ballot boxes, envelopes and someone spending hours counting the results.

That process still has its place. But for organisations with members, shareholders, employees or voters spread across different locations, a digital ballot system can make the process considerably easier to manage.

A digital ballot system allows eligible voters to receive, complete and submit a ballot electronically. Depending on the type of vote, the system may also manage voter eligibility, proxies, voting entitlements, candidate elections, preferences, deadlines, counting and reporting.

The technology itself is only one part of the equation.

A good digital ballot needs to answer some fairly fundamental governance questions:

Those questions matter far more than whether the ballot happens to be online.

What is a digital ballot system?

A digital ballot system is an electronic platform used to conduct a ballot, election or other formal voting process.

Instead of completing a paper ballot, a voter uses a computer, tablet or mobile device to access the ballot and submit their choices.

A digital ballot system can be relatively simple, such as an online poll, or highly structured, supporting formal elections and governance processes involving:

This is different from simply putting a question into an online survey tool.

A governance-grade ballot has to preserve the rules surrounding the vote, not just collect responses.

How does a digital ballot system work?

The exact process varies, but most professional digital ballots follow a similar sequence.

1. The organisation establishes the voting rules

Before the ballot is opened, the administrator needs to establish what is actually being voted on.

That might be:

The voting rules need to come from the organisation’s constitution, rules, legislation, meeting procedures or other applicable requirements.

This is one of the areas where organisations sometimes make a mistake. They start by choosing software before properly defining the voting process.

The better approach is to define the process first and then configure the technology around it.

2. The voter list is prepared

The organisation identifies who is entitled to vote.

Depending on the organisation, this may involve a membership database, shareholder register, employee list, strata roll or another authoritative record.

The system may need to determine:

Getting voter eligibility right is fundamental.

A technically secure ballot can still produce the wrong result if the wrong people are allowed to vote.

3. Voters receive secure access

Eligible voters are given access to the ballot.

This might be through a unique link, voting credentials or another authentication method appropriate to the ballot.

The objective is to make sure the person accessing the ballot is entitled to participate while avoiding unnecessary friction for legitimate voters.

For a secret or confidential ballot, the system also needs to separate the authentication process from the recorded voting choice where appropriate.

That distinction is critical.

Knowing who is entitled to vote is not necessarily the same as knowing how that person voted.

4. The ballot is presented

The voter is shown the questions, resolutions or candidates.

A digital ballot can support different voting methods, including:

For preferential voting, for example, a voter may be asked to rank candidates as 1, 2, 3 and so on.

The system then applies the configured counting rules rather than requiring an administrator to manually interpret every ballot.

5. The vote is submitted

Once the voter confirms their selections, the ballot is recorded.

A properly designed system should also enforce the rules established for the particular vote.

For example, it may prevent:

The exact controls depend on how the ballot has been configured.

6. Votes are counted

Once voting closes — or while a live meeting vote is taking place — the system can calculate the result.

For straightforward ballots, this may simply mean adding votes for and against.

More complicated elections can involve:

The important point is that the counting method should be determined by the applicable rules rather than by whatever happens to be easiest for the software.

7. Results and records are produced

After the vote, the organisation may need more than a winner or a percentage.

A properly managed digital ballot can produce records showing relevant information about the process, such as participation, voting outcomes and audit information.

For governance purposes, the ability to explain how the result was produced can be just as important as the result itself.

Digital ballot system vs online survey

The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are not necessarily the same thing.

An online survey is generally designed to collect opinions or information.

A formal digital ballot is designed to conduct a defined voting process.

Consider an organisation electing three committee members.

A basic survey could ask:

Which candidate do you prefer?

But a formal election may need to establish:

That is why governance organisations should be careful about treating general-purpose survey software as a substitute for a purpose-built voting system.

Why do organisations use digital ballot systems?

There are several practical reasons.

Easier participation

Members no longer necessarily need to attend a physical location simply to cast a vote.

This can be particularly useful when an organisation has members in different cities, states or countries.

For a company conducting a virtual or hybrid meeting, ASIC says the technology used must provide members as a whole with a reasonable opportunity to participate, including the ability to vote where voting is required.

Faster counting

Electronic votes can be counted automatically according to the configured rules.

This can significantly reduce manual administration for larger ballots.

It also reduces the risk of transcription errors associated with manually transferring results from paper forms into spreadsheets.

Better administration

A digital ballot can bring voter access, ballot configuration, counting and reporting into one controlled process.

That can make it easier for administrators to monitor participation and manage the ballot from opening through to final results.

Better auditability

A well-designed voting system should leave an appropriate record of the voting process.

This matters when an organisation needs to demonstrate that the ballot was conducted according to its rules.

Auditability does not mean exposing individual votes.

In a secret ballot, the system should preserve confidentiality while still maintaining sufficient records to demonstrate the integrity of the process.

Greater accessibility

Digital voting can allow eligible voters to participate using devices they already use.

However, simply putting a paper form on a website does not automatically make a ballot accessible.

Organisations should consider keyboard navigation, screen readers, clear instructions, sufficient contrast, understandable error messages and other accessibility requirements when designing the voting experience.

Are digital ballots legal in Australia?

There is no single Australian law that simply says all organisations may — or may not — use a “digital ballot system”.

The answer depends on the type of organisation and the particular vote.

Companies, for example, are governed by the Corporations Act 2001, alongside their constitutions and other applicable rules.

ASIC states that companies must follow the Corporations Act and either the replaceable rules or their constitution when conducting meetings and resolutions.

For virtual and hybrid company meetings, ASIC explains that members as a whole must have a reasonable opportunity to participate, and the technology used must be sufficient to allow members to vote where voting is required.

The Corporations Act also contains specific provisions dealing with how meetings can be conducted and how voting takes place, including sections 249R, 249RA, 249S and 250J.

Other organisations can be subject to completely different requirements.

For example, strata schemes are governed by state and territory legislation. In NSW, the government specifically provides for electronic voting in certain strata circumstances and states that pre-meeting electronic voting requires a resolution approving its use. It also says pre-meeting electronic voting cannot be used for an election of the strata committee.

So the right question is not:

“Is online voting legal?”

It is:

“Is this voting method permitted for this organisation, this meeting and this particular ballot?”

That is a much safer way to approach the issue.

What about Australian federal elections?

It is also worth separating organisational digital ballots from Australia’s federal electoral system.

The Australian Electoral Commission currently states that Australians cannot vote electronically in federal elections. The AEC explains that introducing electronic voting for federal elections would require legislative change.

That does not mean digital ballots cannot be used by companies, associations, unions, clubs, strata organisations or other bodies where their applicable rules permit electronic voting.

The legal framework is simply different.

What makes a digital ballot secure?

Security should be considered at several points in the voting process.

Secure voter access

The system should prevent unauthorised people from accessing the ballot.

Depending on the circumstances, this may involve unique voting links, credentials, authentication or other access controls.

Protection of voting data

Voting information and personal information should be protected against unauthorised access, alteration or disclosure.

This is particularly important because a voting platform may process names, email addresses, membership information and voting records.

Under the Australian Privacy Principles, organisations covered by the Privacy Act have obligations concerning the collection, use, disclosure and security of personal information. APP 11 specifically deals with security of personal information.

The OAIC’s current guidance also emphasises that organisations should consider whether the personal information they collect is reasonably necessary for their functions or activities.

Vote confidentiality

A secret ballot requires careful system design.

The organisation may need to know that a particular member was entitled to vote and that they participated, without allowing administrators or other parties to see how that individual voted.

This is one of the major differences between a formal voting system and an ordinary survey.

Protection against duplicate voting

The system should have a clear mechanism for enforcing the permitted number of votes per voter.

The appropriate mechanism depends on the voting rules.

Audit trails

A useful audit trail should provide evidence about the process without compromising ballot secrecy.

For example, an organisation may need to establish when voting opened and closed, which administrative actions occurred and how the final result was generated.

The exact records required will depend on the organisation and the type of ballot.

Common mistakes when implementing a digital ballot

Treating the technology as the governance process

Software cannot decide whether a particular voting procedure is valid.

The organisation still needs to establish the rules that apply to the vote.

Assuming one-person-one-vote always applies

That is not universal.

Some elections and resolutions use different voting entitlements, shareholdings, unit entitlements, proxies or other weighting mechanisms.

A digital ballot should be configured around the applicable rules.

Mixing voter identity with vote confidentiality

For some elections, administrators need to verify eligibility while preserving ballot secrecy.

Those are two separate requirements and should be designed separately.

Using an ordinary survey for a formal election

A survey tool may be perfectly adequate for an informal member poll.

It may be unsuitable for a formal election where eligibility, confidentiality, preferential voting, proxies or auditability matter.

Ignoring the governing documents

An organisation’s constitution, rules or applicable legislation may specify how voting must occur.

For companies, ASIC specifically notes that organisations must follow the relevant requirements of the Corporations Act and their applicable governance rules.

Forgetting about accessibility

A technically functional ballot can still create problems for voters using assistive technology.

Accessibility should be considered during ballot design, not added as an afterthought.

Keeping more personal information than necessary

More data is not automatically better.

Organisations should understand what information the voting provider collects, why it is collected, how it is protected and how long it is retained.

The OAIC’s current APP guidance supports a data-minimisation approach to personal information collection.

Digital ballots for AGMs and meetings

Digital ballot systems are particularly useful when voting needs to happen during an AGM or other formal meeting.

A meeting voting system may allow participants to:

For companies using virtual meeting technology, ASIC expects members to have equivalent opportunities to participate as they would in an in-person meeting. It specifically states that technology used for virtual participation needs to allow members to vote.

That means an organisation should not think of the video conference and the voting system as necessarily being the same thing.

A meeting platform handles communication.

A voting platform handles the integrity of the vote.

The two can work together.

Digital ballot systems for elections

Elections can introduce another layer of complexity.

Suppose an association needs to elect five committee members from twelve candidates.

The election may involve:

A digital election platform can manage these steps within one controlled workflow.

Preferential voting is a good example.

Rather than simply selecting one candidate, voters may rank candidates in preference order. The system can then apply the specified counting methodology to determine the outcome.

The important thing is that the counting method must reflect the rules of the election. The software should implement the rules; it should not invent them.

What should you look for in a digital ballot system?

If you are comparing providers, don’t start with the feature list.

Start with the voting process.

Ask these questions.

1. Can the system enforce our eligibility rules?

A platform should be able to accommodate the way your organisation determines who can vote.

2. Can it handle our voting method?

Check whether you need:

3. How is voter identity separated from the vote?

This is particularly important for confidential elections.

Ask the provider to explain the process rather than relying on a generic claim that the system is “secure”.

4. What audit information is available?

Find out what records are produced and whether the organisation can explain the result after the ballot.

5. Where is voting data stored?

For Australian organisations, data location and cross-border disclosure can be relevant privacy considerations. APP 8 deals with cross-border disclosure of personal information.

6. What happens if something goes wrong?

Ask about:

A good provider should have a process for handling exceptions.

7. Can voters actually use it?

Test the ballot on desktop and mobile devices.

Where accessibility matters, test it with keyboard navigation and assistive technology as appropriate.

A secure ballot that legitimate voters cannot successfully complete is not a successful voting system.

How Vero Voting uses digital ballot technology

Vero Voting provides online voting and ballot services for organisations conducting elections, AGMs, member ballots and other formal voting processes.

The focus is not simply on collecting votes online. Vero supports the wider process, including voter management, ballot configuration, voting, counting and reporting.

For AGM voting, Vero supports online voting for resolutions and elections and can integrate voting with common virtual meeting platforms.

For elections, the platform can be configured for different organisational requirements, including board, committee, employee and association elections.

For organisations with more specialised requirements, Vero also provides customised voting workflows rather than forcing every ballot into the same template.

That distinction is useful.

A digital ballot should fit the organisation’s governance requirements — not the other way around.

Vero Voting is also currently ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certified and SOC 2 Type II audited, providing independent assurance around its information security controls and practices.

The future of digital voting is not simply “put it online”

The real advantage of digital ballots is not the absence of paper.

It is the ability to create a controlled voting process from eligibility through to the final result.

For organisations, that means thinking about four things together:

Participation. Can eligible people vote easily?

Integrity. Can the organisation trust that the result accurately reflects the permitted votes?

Confidentiality. Is sensitive voting information protected appropriately?

Auditability. Can the organisation explain and substantiate the result afterwards?

Get those four things right and the technology becomes useful rather than merely convenient.

Key takeaways

A digital ballot system is more than an online questionnaire. It is a structured electronic process for conducting ballots and elections.

The most important considerations are:

For Australian organisations, the best digital ballot system is not necessarily the one with the longest feature list.

It is the one that can faithfully reproduce the rules of the vote while making participation straightforward for the people entitled to take part.

If your organisation is planning an AGM, election, member ballot or other formal vote and you’re unsure how an online process should be structured, Vero Voting can help you work through the requirements and demonstrate how the voting process can be managed digitally.

Sources

The following are official Australian Government, regulator and legislation sources used to prepare this article:

Australian Securities & Investments Commission

Federal Register of Legislation

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner

Australian Electoral Commission

NSW Government