Methods of making EMB decisions vary according to the model of electoral management, a country’s decision-making  culture  and  the  requirements  of the electoral law. Where the Governmental Model is used, EMBs rarely have ‘members’, and administration may be directed by the executive branch of government; thus the role of a governmental EMB may be as much one of proposing as determining action. Powers to determine policy and administrative issues may be delegated to the chief of the EMB secretariat by the government institution within which it is located.

For EMBs under the Independent Model and component independent EMBs under the Mixed Model, electoral law may specify some decision-making issues, such as the election of the chair, the decision-making powers of the EMB chair and/or members meeting in plenary, the requirements for majority or super- majority votes, the role of the chair in voting and the use of casting votes.

While some key aspects of decision-making may be covered by the electoral law, it is usual for the details of the EMB’s decision-making processes to be defined in standing orders or administrative procedures determined by the EMB members. Many use the normal standing orders employed in their country rather than create a unique set. Such documents may define a range of issues, including EMB members’ authorities, such as:

• the role of the chair;
• responsibilities for decision-making and the ability to delegate these;
• methods of calling EMB meetings;
• frequency of meetings;
• responsibility for meeting agendas;
• the processes of decision-making: proposals, rules of discussion, and types of voting and/or requirements for consensus;
• attendance at meetings and quorums;
• rights and roles of secretariat staff at meetings;
• invitations to outsiders to attend EMB meetings;
• taking, authenticating and issuing meeting minutes;
• method of issuing EMB policies and directions;
• methods of suspending or altering standing orders; and
• responsibilities for media conferences.