In our series on Practical Ideas to Increase Voter Turnout, one of the ways that organizations are making it easier for voters to vote is to build a single-sign-on system that connects your members-only website with your online ballot. A single-sign-on system streamlines the online voting process by allowing voters to use familiar logins and passwords without having to memorize new information or enter a completely different system.

This helps cut down on things a voter has to keep track of and takes away a potential barrier to voting. An advanced online voting software provider (like Votenet, if we may be honest) will integrate with your organization’s association management system (AMS), connecting the voting process with the database of members and potential voters. That way voters can login through a familiar system and immediately connect with the electronic ballot.

According to Wikipedia, benefits of using a single sign-on system include:

• Reducing opportunities for phishing because users are not trained to enter password everywhere without thinking
• Reducing password fatigue from different user name and password combinations
• Reducing time spent re-entering passwords for the same identity
• Reducing IT costs due to lower number of IT help desk calls about passwords
• Security on all levels of entry/exit/access to systems without the inconvenience of re-prompting users
• Centralized reporting for compliance adherence as well as website traffic monitoring

The bottom line is that organizations need to reduce as many barriers to voting as possible, including the hoops voters need to jump through before voting. How do you streamline the voting process for your voters?

Many organizations think online voting is just for governance, but some organizations are using online voting to generate buzz in other departments.

A clever idea from the National Cooperative Business Association: they’ve created an online voting contest to ask attendees for their upcoming conference to vote on the speaker for the final breakout session at the NCBA Annual Meeting and Conference.

Speakers can nominate themselves via a written proposal or a video appeal, and they’ve opened the voting to anyone involved with cooperatives in the U.S. The winning speaker will receive complimentary full registration.

Has your organization used online voting as marketing for membership or events?

A recent article on MeetingsNet discussed the Top 10 Mistakes of Association Web Sites, highlighting a quote from usability expert Amy Schade.

“Nobody’s intention is to have a poorly designed Web site,” she said. “The crux of the problem is that you and your colleagues use the same information and the same lingo, and everything on your site makes perfect sense to you. But your users have a totally different mindset. You must engage with your users and do user testing.”

The same is definitely true for your homepage and other pages that pertain to your annual elections and other voting events. We see a lot of well-intentioned sites that  try to give voters the information and inspiration they need to Vote Now! Here are the most common ways (adopted from MeetingsNet’s list) they are missing the mark.

1. Mistake 1: Believing that voters read what you write
   When voters need information about voting, they don’t want to wade through paragraph after paragraph about candidates, deadlines, instructions, etc. They want nice, easy-to-read instructions as well as intuitive links to more information.
2. Mistake 3: Ignoring the user’s top questions
   As MeetingsNet points out, “Organizations often assume everyone knows who they are and what they do.” The same is true when it comes to association elections. Many association staffers think members know why it’s important to vote in elections and the critical decisions that their elected officials can make. It’s important for leaders in your community to hammer home the point that the association is a democracy, and that members’ voices count.  Read the rest of this entry →

If you’re reading this, you’re spending too much time indoors this summer, says Coca-Cola. The company is taking its America Is Your Park competition to a new level with innovative options to vote for your favorite American park while you’re enjoying the summer sunshine.

Last year Coca-Cola ran an online voting contest to determine which U.S. parks were the most popular, awarding a $100,000 grant to Bear Head Lake State Park for the top title of America’s Favorite Park after they received 1.6 million online votes.

But this year Coca-Cola is taking the voting outdoors. Voters get one point for voting online, but if they use a smartphone or tablet to check in via Facebook at their park, they get 5 points. Five more points are awarded if voters upload pictures of themselves and their families at the park.

Associations could implement this strategy in their competitions as well. They could use social media check-in technology such as Facebook or foursquare to let voters at a conference choose the best new product from the expo hall or the best presentation in the education sessions.

What other ways can your organization implement more interactive online voting techniques?

Our Guest Blogger, Leah Cohen Chatinover, is of counsel at Stanger & Arnold, LLP in West Hartford, Connecticut.  She represents nonprofit organizations of all types and can be reached at lchatinover@stangerlaw.com or through her website ct-nonprofitlaw.com. This article is not a substitute for legal advice, and you should contact your attorney with specific questions.

Part Two of Two. Read Part One here.

Statutory Alternatives

In our example (see previous post), Playball’s attorney tired to implement the statutory exceptions to the requirement that directors meet in person. These exceptions can be easily adapted as modern technology progresses and should be incorporated into an organization’s bylaws.

Statutes typically allow meetings to be conducted by any means of communication as long as everyone may simultaneously hear each other.

Statutes typically also permit a board to act by unanimous written consent, if each director signs a consent describing the action to be taken. A director may compel a meeting to discuss an issue simply by withholding consent.

Combining the formality of a unanimous written consent with the simplicity of e-mail, an organization may circulate the proposed resolution as a formal consent attached to an e-mail. The organization must then collect all of the directors’ signatures. In many states, the consent may be signed electronically – \\John H. Smith\\ – for example, and delivered electronically – as a PDF attached to an e-mail.

The distinction between a formal consent attached to an e-mail, and an e-mailed poll of the board may seem inconsequential. But, note three important differences: (1) all directors must vote unanimously (2) the directors must receive a complete description of the proposed resolution and (3) they must “sign” the consent. Read the rest of this entry →

Our Guest Blogger, Leah Cohen Chatinover, is of counsel at Stanger & Arnold, LLP in West Hartford, Connecticut.  She represents nonprofit organizations of all types and can be reached at lchatinover@stangerlaw.com or through her website ct-nonprofitlaw.com. This article is not a substitute for legal advice, and you should contact your attorney with specific questions.

Part One of Two

E-mail, Facebook, Twitter . . .  the diverse modes of electronic communication have exploded over recent years. We are now able to communicate faster, cheaper and with more people simultaneously than ever before.

To busy nonprofit directors, whose schedules make board meetings seem like a luxury, a new trend in nonprofit governance has surfaced that may run afoul of the law – “voting” by e-mail.

This seems like the perfect solution. An issue or opportunity arises that calls for quick response. Directors are reluctant to attend extra meetings. Why not circulate an e-mail, ascertain that there is general agreement and take action?

The ease and speed of e-mail voting is seductively simple. But, this practice is a trap because a board that relies on e-mail voting fails to comply with legal requirements for a proper vote and exposes its decisions to attack. Nonprofit corporate statutes typically provide for board action to be taken either at a meeting (including a meeting by phone or video conference) or by unanimous written consent. Since an e-mail vote technically does not fit either category, a court could consider an e-mail vote nothing more than informal action, which is not legally valid. Even more likely, an attorney representing a nonprofit organization in a loan transaction might not be able to issue the “opinion of counsel” typically required by a lender. This could delay or derail an entire deal.

Let’s take an example. . . Read the rest of this entry →

The competitors in the Final Round of the 2011 March Mayhem were tense… who would take away the title of Best Resource for members of the Association of Corporate Counsel? Would it be the organization’s In-House Jobline that provided the best member benefit, or did ACC’s Annual Meeting rise to the top?

Echoing the NBA’s March Madness tournament playoffs, this spring ACC asked members to vote for their favorite resources and member benefits. Members could also fill out brackets that pitted 16 of the association’s member benefits against each other to see which resources garnered the most votes. Eight members with the best brackets won Aprizes such as gift certificates for ACC products, services and events — and the grand prize winner even received a basketball signed by the ACC staff.

All we can say is brilliant… simply brilliant. This case study is one of the best examples we’ve seen of ways to both engage members and showcase member benefits. ACC started the project in 2010, and members demanded its return in 2011. Because ACC released the results slowly over 10 days, they built up more and more excitement for the competition and engaged members over an extended period. In addition, the project engaged the staff at all levels and allowed the friendly competition to make everyone smile.

From an article about March Mayhem in Associations Now magazine:

ACC also created a video to promote the tournament, with staff playing the roles of various ACC resources and explaining their purpose. A cross-functional team worked on their own time to produce the video and make plans for the tournament. “When we did the videotaping, we kind of tried to do it all in one day, and the office was buzzing because people were really having a lot of fun with it. They couldn’t wait to get in and film their segment,” says [ACC Director of Membership Marketing Jim] Way. “And it just seemed like it was a big side benefit of the project that I didn’t anticipate, the actual enthusiasm and participation of our staff.”

It’s hard to top a voting March Mayhem tournament to determine the best association resources — but what other things have you heard about to engage members in an online voting event?