Case Study: University of Minnesota

The University of Minnesota is one of the largest universities in the United States with over 52,000 students, organized into multiple colleges and schools. Since adopting Simply Voting since 2013, and over 500 voting events have been run. 

The University of Minnesota’s Requirements & Challenges

They are running governance elections, resolution and ratification votes as well as surveys. A mix of student leaders and university staff are managing the voting events.

  • System Needs:
    • A universal access with standardization and an audit history
    • A visual aesthetic consistent with the university branding 
    • An efficient handling of the numerous events simultaneously

The Simply Voting’s Solution

Simply Voting offers a flexible and secure online voting platform for universities. The University of Minnesota opted for: 

  • Self-Service management,  training with a train-the trainer approach and continuous availability for advanced support
  • Voter Authentication integrated with campus single sign-on. This way, voters can access ballots using familiar university credentials
  • Voter Segmentation to categorize voters to present unique, custom ballots for different voter groups

The results

Today, the university staff and students praise the system’s ease of use and reliability. Simply Voting has become the University’s trusted voting platform for running transparent and efficient elections

Looking for an online voting platform to run your university election?

Feel free to reach out to us. We will be happy to provide a solution tailored to meet your requirements.

Understanding Preferential Voting

Preferential voting (or ranked choice voting) is a smart and democratic vote method that allows voters
to rank the candidates or options of an election from their first preference to their last preference rather
Preferential voting (or ranked choice voting) is a smart and democratic vote method that allows voters to rank the candidates or options of an election from their first preference to their last preference rather than just select their favorite. This method ensures that the final outcome better reflects the voter’s opinion, especially in elections with multiple candidates or options since they don’t have to pick just one favorite but also their second, third etc. preference while also minimizing run-offs. Moreover, this method allows voters to pick there favorite candidate without being scared of wasting their vote if their preferred candidate is less popular as their second preference will matter too. 

How does it work with Simply Voting?

When setting up a preferential election, the election organizer can decide how voters should rank the options for a vote to be accepted. Voters can be allowed to rank:

  • All options
  • Any number of options
  • At least x options
  • Up to x options
  • Exactly x options
  • Between x options and y options

The election organizer must also select one of the tabulation processes available to determine the winner(s).  

The 3 options Simply Voting offers are:

  • Borda Count

With Borda Count each rank is assigned a point value where, the number of points given to candidates for each ranking is determined by the number of candidates in the question. Thus, if there are five candidates then a candidate will receive five points each time they are ranked first, four for being ranked second, and so on, with a candidate receiving 1 point for being ranked last. Unranked candidates are given zero points.

To tabulate the results, all points are added up and the candidate(s) with most points wins. 

  • Single Transferable Vote / Instant Runoff Voting 

With STV/IRV, a quota is set for a candidate to be declared a winner. 

Quotas:

Simply Voting provides two methods for determining the quota in an election:

  • Droop Quota (Default): This method takes into account the total number of winners to calculate the quota. The formula ensures that as the number of available seats increases, the quota required for a candidate to be elected becomes smaller. This makes it easier for candidates to reach the threshold and get elected when more seats are up for grabs.
  • Enforced “50% + 1” Quota: This method sets the quota as a strict majority, 50% of the votes plus one, regardless of how many winners are to be elected. It does not adjust based on the number of available seats, making it a fixed and more stringent threshold.

Key Difference:

The Droop quota dynamically adjusts with the number of winners, lowering the barrier to election as more positions are available. In contrast, the “50% + 1” option maintains a fixed majority requirement, independent of the number of seats.

Tabulation:

Candidates meeting the quota with first-choice votes are elected. Surplus votes from elected candidates are transferred to next preferences at a fractional value. Lowest-ranked candidates are eliminated and their votes redistributed until all seats are filled. 

Click here to more details on STV.

  • Condorcet Ranked Pairs / Tideman

With the Condorcet method, each candidate is compared head-to-head against every other candidate. The winner is the one who beats all others in these one-on-one matchups. This method aims to find the most broadly supported candidate. 

Conclusion

Preferential voting brings clarity, fairness and flexibility to online elections. Paired with our intuitive online voting system, ranked choice voting becomes more accessible, transparent and easier to manage.

Ready to move to preferential voting? Click here to setup you election.