Activist Codes vs Tags (and Source Codes too)

​@nicholas becker tagging you as you may get some good tips and tricks here re Tags and Activist Codes! 

Hi ​@jeff the age old question! I hope this helps you decide on when to use an AC vs. Tag (and when to use both). Short answer: pick based on inputs (where/how the data will be applied), portability (does it need to travel across committees for organizations that have chapters or affiliates or into automations), and reporting rollups. Then layer Tags as metadata when you need extra context.

This decision “tree” is something that I’ve found useful over the years when this question comes up:

Use Activist Codes when you need…

• Form inputs or automated outcomes. Activist Codes can be applied/unapplied by Automations and can be set by actions coming in from Online Actions forms.
• Cross-committee sharing. For federated/chapter models, Codes support Scope so the same definition can be shared to other committees, with options for each committee to apply/view.
• Campaign rollups. If you use Campaigns holistically, you can attach a Campaign to an Activist Code so activity rolls up for reporting and searching across teams and time.
• Clear, discrete outcomes. Treat Activist Codes like verbs or statuses (e.g., Attended, Completed Training, Opted In to SMS, Pledged to Volunteer).

Think “this is an outcome I may set automatically, share across org units, and include in campaign-level reporting.”

Use Tags when you need…

• Flexible metadata. Tags are a lightweight, hierarchical way to add context (topic, role, audience, geography, program, etc.).
• Local application inside the database. Tags are applied in EveryAction (not on Online Action forms).
• Broader surfaces to label. You can tag People, Events, Activist Codes (for extra metadata about the code’s intent), and Phone Numbers (new—great for number-level notes like language or sourcing)
• Hierarchies for organization. Use nested tags (e.g., Events → Conference → Speaker).

Think “this is descriptive metadata I’ll apply and use for slicing, organizing, or enriching other objects.”

Use both together when…

• You want a single outcome + richer context.
  • Example: Code = Completed Volunteer Orientation; Tags = Program: Field, Cohort: 2025-Q2, Region: South.
• You want to keep the code list stable, while evolving the taxonomy via tags.

I hope this helps!

Best,

Torvic

One thing I think is helpful in thinking through the distinction between tags and activist codes is to think about how they can be applied and, even more relevant, who or what can apply them.

Tags can be added and edited by staff and volunteers using both Minivan and Virtual Phonebank. So in thinking about tags, think about information that 1)staff and volunteers would benefit from seeing during outreach 2) you are comfortable with staff and volunteers seeing during outreach 3) Your are comfortable with volunteers and staff adding and editing this information.

Conversely, while you can design scripts to add activist codes in minivan and virtual phonebank, and you can allow volunteers and staff to see activist codes if you wish, they do NOT have the same ability to edit those codes. That makes activist codes more secure. 

Additionally, activist codes can be applied and removed through the use of automation. So, as an example, when a support attends 5 events within 365 days you want to code them as a “super event attender”, activist code is the better tool for that since automation can do it for you.

Similarly, an activist code can be applied during form submission, so specific interest of you supports are best captured as activist codes since you can automatically capture those codes at the time of form submission.  

Finally, email preferences should be coded as activist codes, since those can than flow onto the self-service portal.

The TL:DR is this: when thinking about what should be an activist code vs tag, think first about how that information is going to enter into the system, second who should be able to edit it, and third where will it be used