  A committee's decisions on more than two alternatives much depend on the
adopted voting method, and so does the distribution of power among the
committee members. We investigate how different aggregation methods such as
plurality runoff, Borda count, or Copeland rule map asymmetric numbers of
seats, shares, voting weights, etc. to influence on outcomes when preferences
vary. A generalization of the Penrose-Banzhaf power index is proposed and
applied to the IMF Executive Board's election of a Managing Director, extending
a priori voting power analysis from binary simple voting games to choice in
weighted committees.
