It has already been established that sequential choice does not result in proportional representation. The normal procedure in proportional representation is that lists, normally consisting of the same number of candidates as there are vacant seats, are advanced, and the number of candidates elected from each list is proportional to the number of votes the list receives. We now present another procedure using sequential choice. As with proportional representation, the same number of candidates as there are vacant seats stand for election together as a group; what is different here is that the same candidate can stand for election in more than one group. One of these lists is then to be elected using sequential choice. As all the members of the winning group are elected, there is no ranking of candidates in a particular order within the group; thus it would not be correct to use the term ‘list’ in this context.

Let us take an example in which the annual general meeting of a society has to elect a three-man committee using this method. There are three departments in the society, each of which seeks to have its own representatives elected. The departments are not of equal size; let us call them Large (L), Middle-sized (M) and Small (S). L puts forward four candidates: L1, L2, L3, L4; M puts forward three: M1, M2, M3, and S puts forward two: S1 and S2.

If the L faction assumes that it will gain an absolute majority, it can attempt to have the whole committee elected by putting forward groups such as L1L2L3, L1L2L4 or L2L3L4. If all members of the L faction rank these groups as number 1, 2 and 3 and turn out to be in the majority, then they will succeed in their aim: that is how sequential choice works.

Those who seek to have a broadly-based committee put forward the groups S1M1L1, S1M1L2, S2M2S1 and S2M2L2; others seek to have a proportional representation of the three departments and so put forward the groups M1L1L2, M1L1L3, M2L1L3, M1M2L1 and M2M3L1, and department S puts forward each of its two candidates (one man and one woman) in combinations alongside other candidates that can be expected to win broad support, i.e.: S1L1L2, S1L1L3, S1M1M2, S1M1M3, S2L1L2, S2L1L3, S2M1M2, S2M1M3.

Although only three candidates are to be elected, there are 20 candidate groups; in fact, with 9 candidates, there could be 84 (9!/6!3!=84). Thus, the number of candidate groups could be so great that it would be necessary to impose a limit in order to keep the election within manageable proportions.

Let us see how an election with these 20 candidate groups would take place with sequential choice. They could be presented as follows:

A voter who wants department L to have as much influence as possible in the committee could mark his ballot paper as follows:

Marking the ballot paper as follows would be aimed at having as broadly-based a committee as possible:

Marking as follows would best serve the purpose of having one of the S candidates elected:

This application of sequential choice has not been tried out.

Election of a chairman

If sequential choice is used for the election of candidate groups, it would be appropriate to elect the committee chairman at the same time. It could then happen that two candidate groups might emerge, composed of the same persons, but each with a different candidate for the position of chairman. Election to other committee positions could be handled in the same way.