In recent years, many organizations have chosen to hold their meetings and votes online. Platforms such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams or Webex offer features for conducting polls and surveys, which at first glance may seem like a good alternative for remote voting.
On Zoom, for example, the host can create multiple-choice questions and share the results instantly; in Microsoft Teams, the integration with Forms allows quick polls to collect impressions or assess participant satisfaction. These types of surveys are perfect for making meetings more dynamic or gathering feedback, but they are not designed for processes with legal validity, as they do not guarantee voter identity or the integrity of the results.
Using Zoom, Teams or Webex for elections or formal meetings can jeopardize the validity of the results, leading to challenges and even invalidating key decisions for the entity. Solutions such as Kuorum allow you to digitize your organization's virtual meetings with legal and technical guarantees, avoiding improvised solutions.
Why Zoom, Teams, or Webex Polls Do Not Guarantee the Validity of the Vote
1. They do not comply with electronic identification regulations
International electronic identification regulations (such as the eIDAS in Europe or the ESIGN Act in the United States) establish that electronic identification processes must guarantee integrity, traceability and non-repudiation of authentication. Zoom, Teams, and Webex lack verification mechanisms that comply with these standards. Anyone can join using a shared link or an altered name, which compromises the authenticity of the vote and makes it impossible to certify voters’ identities or ensure that each member votes only once.
Organizations that use these video conferencing systems for their assemblies and wish to identify attendees legally often create a waiting room where participants show their ID documents to the camera one by one. While this workaround is creative, it is highly impractical and causes significant delays at the start of the sessions.
2. There is no immutable evidence
For a vote to have legal validity, there must be an immutable record of the entire process: who accessed it, when, by what authentication method, and what result was obtained. In a formal process such as a professional association election, an assembly, or a vote on bylaws, this evidence is essential
Zoom or Teams polls do not generate digitally signed records or minutes, making it impossible to prove the legitimacy of the results before a court in the event of a challenge.
3. The vote is not truly anonymous
Another common mistake is to assume that the “anonymized” polls in these tools guarantee the secrecy of the vote. In reality, they only partially anonymize the data, preventing the administrator from viewing it, but they do not protect it from external audits or access to the platform’s databases.
This means that, in the event of an audit, an expert could identify each person’s vote, thereby violating the principle of anonymity required in electoral processes.
In systems designed to comply with the law, such as Kuorum votes are encrypted using homomorphic cryptography, which prevents anyone, including auditors, from knowing their content, while maintaining a verifiable record that ensures the validity of the results.
4. Quorum calculation and accreditations
In meetings with legal validity, it is essential to verify who is present and who does or does not have the right to vote.
Neither Zoom nor Teams allow you to manage voter lists, record attendance, or automatically verify quorum. This forces organizers to perform manual checks, which increases the margin of error and makes it harder to validate the minutes afterward.
5. Vote delegations and weightings
Many professional associations and organizations include in their bylaws provisions for vote delegations or weightings based on the voter’s category (for example, full members, honorary members, or active practitioners).
Generic platforms do not offer any way to apply these rules automatically. As a result, any attempt to vote with delegations or weighted votes must be carried out outside the video call, fragmenting the process and reducing its coherence and legal security.
6. Automatic minutes and certifications
After the vote, it is essential to generate a document that certifies the results and the development of the session. This record must include the meeting details, the list of attendees, the agreements reached, and the electronic evidence required to support its authenticity.
Zoom or Teams cannot generate or digitally sign minutes nor can they timestamp results, which prevents these documents from having evidentiary value before third parties.
7. Usability in hybrid events
Although some organizations already hold their assemblies and board meetings entirely online, the trend is toward hybrid events, where part of the attendees are physically present in the meeting room and others join remotely. In these events, it is not possible to consolidate everyone’s votes efficiently. Tools like Kuorum distinguish between people attending in person and those joining remotely to display voting flows with or without video. This allows participants to vote in just a few seconds and see the results instantly on screen, regardless of how they attend.
8. Usefulness in the Periods Leading Up to the Assembly
The registration and attendance confirmation processes in tools like Zoom and Teams are designed for events without legal implications and can become complicated when organizing an assembly with delegated or early voting. Kuorum adds value not only during the voting process but also in the pre-assembly phase, including convening, attendance confirmation, and delegated voting. Thanks to its voter registry manager and email dispatch engine, it is possible to efficiently manage individuals, legal entities with one or more representatives, vote delegations, online and in-person attendance confirmations, and updates to registry data. Additionally, it offers administrative profiles with different roles that facilitate teamwork for organizers.
The Safe Alternative: Specialized Tools Like Kuorum
These features do not exist in general-purpose platforms, but they are fully integrated into specialized tools like Kuorum. For us, technology should be an ally of transparency and security.
That is why, at Kuorum we developed a platform specifically designed for professional associations, unions, societies and organizations to hold online votes and meetings with full legal validity.
We comply with electronic identification regulations in various countries, ensure the secure authentication of each participant, and use homomorphic encryption to protect the anonymity of the vote.
Our commitment to security and quality is supported by recognized certifications, such as ISO certifications and the National Security Scheme (CCN-CERT), ensuring that our processes and systems meet the highest international standards.
Additionally, Kuorum allows you to:
- Monitor attendance and quorum in real time.
- Automatically manage vote delegations and weightings.
- Generate certified and auditable minutes.
- Integrate voting in in-person, hybrid, or fully online meetings.
Thanks to these features, decisions made in a digital environment carry the same legal weight as if they had been held in person. In the event of a challenge, you also have the support of a team that has successfully navigated various legal processes.
Conclusion: Digitalization Is Not Improvisation
Holding a vote via Zoom or Teams may seem convenient, but it does not guarantee the legality or transparency of the process. If your goal is to digitalize your organization’s voting processes, the key is to do so with secure, verifiable tools specifically designed for that purpose.
With Kuorum, your institution can move toward a more efficient, modern, and fully legally compliant digital management system.
