Many organizations still depend on email polls, public online surveys, or informal decision-making on communication platforms. However, these tools have apparent limitations.
The pace of business is accelerating, and success today depends on how fast and flexibly a company can respond. Companies and institutions are increasingly required to make rapid decisions, but without ignoring the voices of investors, employees, or broader leadership teams. The more involved employees or local residents feel in the process, the more likely they will align with the final decisions. Shared responsibility fosters loyalty and satisfaction.
Managers need a voting application to empower more stakeholders to voice their opinions. However, such a tool must meet strict internal policies or comply with applicable legislation. In addition, pressure for transparency from the public and investors is mounting.
Even with all the benefits of shared responsibility, there must still be a final decision-maker. That decision should be backed by clear, auditable data on how the vote went. When leadership can present solid results, it strengthens its authority.
That’s why companies and institutions continue to vote, but their methods vary. Email voting, public online polls, and informal messaging-based decisions are still happening daily.
These tools, however, fall short in several key areas: their results are not secure or auditable, and they typically can’t be tailored to the needs of a specific organization. As a result, more companies are choosing to build custom voting applications—or at least tailor off-the-shelf ones to suit their needs.
Security First: Who Has Access to Your Employee Data?
The main driver for implementing custom voting systems is protecting sensitive data. Internal votes in organizations often deal with highly confidential matters, such as board elections, acquisition approvals, budgets, or internal policy changes. Public tools like Google Forms frequently fail to meet internal regulations or legal standards.
Using public tools such as Google Forms or Microsoft Teams polls comes with risks:
- No proof of integrity – Responses can be duplicated, altered, or shared without authorization.
- External data storage—Sensitive information may be accessible to third parties. These concerns are justified, especially with free tools like Google Forms.
- No voter authentication—Many platforms can’t verify whether an authorized person cast the vote. Where authentication is required by internal policies or law, public tools are not an option.
It depends on what’s at stake. You might use Google Forms to gauge employee satisfaction, but not to approve multi-million-euro investments.
Credible Results: Can You Prove How the Voting Went?
Once voting ends, you may need to demonstrate how the process was conducted, even years later. An auditor or regulatory body might request records if the vote was tied to investments or funding allocation. In some cases, even law enforcement could get involved. Archiving voting results often requires strict rules, and public platforms can’t adapt.
These tools might let you export data and view summaries, but you can’t verify past results with certainty.
Tailored Voting: One Size Doesn’t Fit All
Each organization has different needs. Key requirements often include weighing votes by seniority, enabling multi-stage voting, or combining in-person and remote participation. Public tools don’t offer this level of customization.
A custom voting app allows companies and institutions to:
- Set various voting formats – anonymous, named, single-round, or multi-round.
- Customize access rights – limit access by department, board membership, or role.
- Automate result analysis – generate clear reports and statistics.
Legal & Regulatory Compliance: Are You Meeting the Rules?
Strict voting and decision-making laws govern some sectors. For example:
- Corporations must allow shareholder voting in line with legislation.
- Public institutions require transparent, trackable decision processes.
- Universities have election processes defined in academic charters.
In such cases, public tools are simply not sufficient. Public institutions, in particular, must submit voting records in a standardized format—something online platforms don’t support. When public money is involved, transparent reporting becomes even more critical. Failing to provide mandated reports can result in financial penalties or funding loss.
Easy Integration: How Voting Apps Streamline Your Work
Public voting tools are attractive because they’re quick to deploy. Tools embedded in platforms like Slack or Microsoft Teams offer convenience without importing contacts. But when a company uses a standalone, custom-built voting app, it gets the best of both worlds—speed, simplicity, reliability, and security.
If your organization often makes important decisions through voting, it’s worth considering whether your current system is effective, reliable, and secure enough.
If you need a better solution, our Minion team in Jablonec has developed Arbitron, a secure, reliable voting app that meets all the abovementioned needs.
.png)
.jpg)
