Ranked Choice Voting, Part 2 of 2
Categorized as: Election Tips
Last month, part one of this two-part series provided an overview of ranked choice voting (RCV). This month we focus on how private-sector organizations can make the transition to RCV and lead the public sector into a better way of voting.
Private/Public Similarities
When deciding whether to adopt RCV for a private organization, the first question to ask is whether its benefits are exclusive to the public domain. To answer that, let’s consider how similar ballot configurations are within each sector. Most ballots—regardless of context—can be broadly categorized into one of three types of voting options:
- Single-seat plurality voting
This is where two or more individuals contest a single open position, such as for President. In plurality voting, the person who receives the most votes—even if that total does not constitute a majority—is declared the winner. - Multi-seat plurality voting
An example of multi-seat voting would be a Board of Directors election, where voters may select multiple candidates from a larger slate. Often, there is both a maximum and sometimes a minimum number of candidates a voter may choose. The candidates receiving the most votes—up to the number of open seats—are declared the winners. - Referendum voting
In the public sector, referendum voting might involve approving a bond measure to fund a municipal infrastructure project. In the private sector, it could involve approving a change to an organization’s bylaws. Instead of listing human names, these ballots present options such as Approve/Deny or Yes/No—in other words, binary (boolean) choices.
So there is nothing about ballot configuration, or voting options that would preclude adopting RCV.
Private/Public Differences
While there may be little difference in ballot structure, one major distinction is that private-sector elections are not politically charged. Granted, things can get heated in the private sector too—I spent 18+ years in an internationally recognized professional association, so I understand. But no one running for association president ever ran around-the-clock ads attacking their opponent in the days before voting.
The point is that the more politically charged an election is, the more closely it’s watched, and the more likely it is that voters will have strong opinions—well-informed or otherwise—about the candidates, enabling them to rank those candidates by preference. That also assumes your organization is fortunate enough to have more than two people willing to run for a volunteer leadership role in the first place.
This is likely the biggest factor in deciding whether your organization should adopt RCV. When only two candidates contest a single open seat, RCV adds no value. And in many private organizations, uncontested races with a single candidate are common. In such cases, RCV clearly makes no sense.
Change Management
If you’re fortunate enough to have a large enough candidate pool to make RCV worthwhile, there’s no reason not to adopt it. Because it’s likely to be new to many voters—except in countries where RCV is already common—some voter education is important. The ballot and its instructions are simple enough that most people could navigate them without preparation, but voter education helps prevent confusion or backlash from those who might otherwise feel caught off guard by the change.
Before voting begins, make sure your electorate understands that the ballot will use ranked choice voting, and that voters will be prompted to rank their selections in order of preference. This is where Skypunch can help. Before the election, you can direct voters to the Sample Ballot on this website and have them look at the “Board of Directors” position. There, they can see and interact with a ranked choice voting ballot so they’ll know what to expect before the real election begins.
Likewise, you may also direct voters to the Sample Ballot Results page. One of the nicest properties of the Skypunch results report is its transparency. It does not simply output the final results and expect the person reading the report to trust that everything was done properly. It spells out, step-by-step, for each round of counting, the logic that is being worked through to arrive at the results.
When questions arise—such as “What is a Droop quota?” or “What formula is being used during tabulation?”—you can refer voters to Ranked Choice Voting, an earlier blog post that explains each stage of the reporting process.
Let’s Change This
As the call to action in part one of this two-part series stated, RCV is not yet in widespread use, but we can change that. As a private-sector election administrator, you have the power to start the movement. In addition to providing immediate benefits to voters in your own organization, your adoption of RCV can help normalize it for public-sector elections as well.
Could ranked choice voting restore civility and maturity to our public discourse and campaigns? That’s a lofty ambition, but evidence says that it can. So let’s change this.
