The largest hybrid general meeting in professional soccer — implemented in a legally secure manner for BVB
9,000+ participants, legally compliant voting, and seamless integration of on-site and online processes.
Kunde:
Borussia Dortmund
Event:
Ausrichtung:
international
Häufigkeit:
1 x yearly
Lösungen:
- 9,000+ Total participants
- 2,000+ onsite
- 7,000+ digitally
- > 95% automated identity verification
CHALLENGE
A hybrid general meeting under the organizers’ control
In November 2025, Borussia Dortmund held its general meeting in a hybrid format for the first time. More than 9,000 members took part — over 2,000 on site and around 7,000 connected digitally.
Voting took place in parallel: on site via ballot papers and digitally via the platform. Both results were consolidated in real time and displayed immediately.
Participation was not just possible — it was fully controlled by the organizers. Each participant was verified in advance. Each vote was clearly assigned. Double voting was prevented.
At the same time, the entire process was carried out under heightened scrutiny. A presidential election was part of the event. Decisions not only had to be correct, but also fully transparent.
The outcome is reflected in the execution: no post-event corrections, no unresolved questions around voting rights, no conflicting results.
The key factor is not the size of the event. What matters is that all processes remained stable under real conditions.
General meetings in associations follow a different logic than traditional events. It is not about reach or presentation — it is about formal processes that must perform reliably under pressure.
SOLUTION
A process under time pressure and high political scrutiny
The project started on August 27, 2025, with less than three months remaining until the event. The starting point was clear: an existing general meeting had to be converted into a hybrid format. This meant more participants — but above all, greater complexity.
The first challenge was voting rights. Members had to be clearly identified and matched with the existing database. There could be no gaps in this process.
The second challenge was identity verification. Digital participants had to be reliably verified. To achieve this, identity documents were submitted and automatically checked. In around 95 percent of cases, verification was completed immediately. The remaining cases were reviewed manually.
The third challenge was the interaction between digital and physical participation.Participants were able to switch between formats. These transitions are where duplicate voting rights can arise if systems do not respond clearly.
The fourth challenge was process coordination. Votes were cast and counted manually on site, while digital voting took place in parallel. Both processes had to be consolidated without delay.
The fifth challenge was managing the event in real time. Contributions could be submitted in advance or live. Participants were connected via video call and integrated into the live stream. These interactions also had to be managed in real time.
The sixth challenge was the broader context of the event. The presidential election increased scrutiny and reduced tolerance for error.
This created a situation with multiple dependencies. Several systems were interconnected. Many processes ran simultaneously. There was no room for post-event adjustments.
In general meetings, issues rarely arise from isolated mistakes. They occur where processes intersect and are not clearly defined.
REGISTRATION & VALIDATION
From risk to controlled system logic
The transformation began with registration. A direct connection to the member database ensured that voting rights were verified in advance, eliminating a large part of manual coordination.
Identity verification was implemented in a structured and scalable way. Submitted identity documents were automatically assessed based on multiple criteria. In most cases, this led to immediate approval. Only a small number required manual review.
A key element was on-site entry. Membership cards were scanned and identities were verified again. At the same time, digital voting rights were actively managed: upon entering the hall, digital voting rights were deactivated; upon leaving, they were reactivated. This removed a typical point of failure — participants could not vote both on site and digitally at the same time.
The voting structure also evolved. Votes from the hall and from digital participants were consolidated in real time. Results were immediately available and no longer required post-event reconciliation.
At the same time, interaction was fully integrated into the process. Submitted contributions were handled in a structured way. Relevant participants were connected via video call and integrated into the live stream. This created a seamless link between digital participation and the physical event without disrupting the flow.
The impact is measurable. More than 9,000 participants were integrated into a single, consistent process. Around 95 percent of identity checks were automated. Double voting was technically prevented.
At the same time, operational workflows changed. Processes no longer required manual coordination. Decisions were immediately transparent, as they were defined and enforced by the system.
Participation itself also evolved. Digital participants could engage on equal terms. On-site participants were not given preferential treatment. Both groups followed the same rules.
Feedback shows increased acceptance of digital participation. The ability to participate regardless of location was seen as a meaningful extension of existing structures.
From a strategic perspective, this case highlights a clear development. General meetings become more complex as soon as digital participation is introduced. Without clear process logic, uncertainty arises.
A different approach was taken here. Processes were not only digitized, but clearly defined and systematically connected. This not only reduces errors — it also eliminates ambiguity during execution.
Ergebnis
Skalierte Demokratie und operative Beherrschbarkeit
Die Ergebnisse dieser Umsetzung lassen sich nicht bloß mit klassischen Performance-KPIs beschreiben.
Es geht nicht primär um Teilnehmerzahlen oder Engagement-Raten.
Vielmehr zeigen die Resultate, welche strukturellen Effekte durch die hybride Durchführung entstanden sind –
auf Teilnahme, Entscheidungsprozesse und die Legitimität der Ergebnisse.
Die Demokratie unter realen Bedingungen wurde gestärkt:
1. Massive Ausweitung demokratischer Teilnahme
Durch die hybride Umsetzung konnten deutlich mehr Mitglieder teilnehmen als zuvor.
Die digitalen Teilnehmer übertrafen die Vor-Ort-Teilnehmer signifikant – um einen Faktor >3.
2. Verschiebung von Machtverhältnissen
Erstmals konnten auch Mitglieder abstimmen, die zuvor faktisch ausgeschlossen waren – etwa durch räumliche, zeitliche oder persönliche Einschränkungen.
Die Beteiligung wurde damit breiter und repräsentativer.
3. Neue Qualität von Entscheidungen
Die Abstimmungsergebnisse spiegelten eine deutlich breitere Mitgliederbasis wider.
Damit steigt nicht nur die Beteiligung, sondern auch die Aussagekraft und Akzeptanz der Entscheidungen.
4. Operative Stabilität trotz hoher Komplexität
Trotz tausender gleichzeitiger Teilnehmer lief der Prozess stabil.
Es gab keine Mehrfachabstimmungen und keine rechtlichen Beanstandungen – ein zentraler Faktor für die Legitimität der Ergebnisse.
5. Hoher Automatisierungsgrad bei gleichzeitiger Kontrollfähigkeit
Ein Großteil der Abläufe lief automatisiert im Hintergrund.
Gleichzeitig blieben kritische Prozesse jederzeit steuerbar und konnten bei Bedarf manuell abgesichert werden.
Das eigentliche Ergebnis dieser Umsetzung ist daher nicht einfach die erfolgreiche Durchführung eines Events,
sondern die Etablierung eines skalierbaren, rechtssicheren demokratischen Prozesses unter hybriden Bedingungen.
Einordnung
Vom Event-Tool zur kritischen Infrastruktur
Wir haben hier exemplarisch gezeigt, warum die Einordnung solcher Lösungen als „Event-App“ zu kurz greift.
Im vorliegenden Fall fungiert talque als:
- Integrationsschicht zwischen bestehenden Systemen
- Kontrollsystem für Zugriffs- und Abstimmungslogiken
- Orchestrierungsebene für hybride Prozesse
- Governance-Infrastruktur für demokratische Entscheidungen
Damit verschiebt sich die Rolle von einer operativen Lösung hin zu einem strategischen Bestandteil der Organisationsarchitektur.
Technologie dient hier nicht dazu, Prozesse lediglich zu digitalisieren, sondern die Porzesse beherrschbar, skalierbar und rechtssicher zu machen.
Fazit
Die zentrale Erkenntnis dieser Case Study: Der Erfolg hybrider Großformate hängt nicht an Features, sondern an der Fähigkeit, komplexe Zustände konsistent zu modellieren und zu kontrollieren.
Borussia Dortmund hat kein Tool implementiert, sondern ein System eingeführt, das demokratische Prozesse unter digitalen Bedingungen überhaupt erst ermöglicht.
Alles andere – Livestream, Voting, App – ist Oberfläche.
