{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02381307296713125, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008906611015875383, 'mean_word_length': 5.345471742728778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Analysis of Organizational Dimensional Settings General Election Commissions in the 2017 Indonesian Law Number 7 on the Election

The existence of organizations is very important in the administration of elections. Setting various organizational dimensions adequately, is an important part of efforts to achieve organizational goals. Indonesian Law No.7 of 2017 concerning Elections, which replaces the three laws related to the election before was a dynamic effort towards an increasingly quality election. In this law, it is stipulated that the KPU is one of the organizations that organizes elections. The existence of various KPU organizational dimensions, both structural and contextual, in the law is one of the determinant factors for the effectiveness of achieving the KPU's objectives as an organization. With normative juridical research methods and library studies, this study concludes that Indonesian Law No. 7 of 2017 has included the arrangement of organizational dimensions, both structural and contextual dimensions. The structural dimensions include formalization, specialization, centralization, hierarchy of authority, standardization, complexity, professionalism, while the contextual dimensions include size, technology, goals, strategies and organizational culture and organizational environment. There are four dimensions of the organization that are fully regulated in the law, namely formalization, specialization, standardization, organization environment, organizational technology. The other dimensions are centralized, complexity, professionalism, size, environment and goals, strategies and organizational culture are not adequately regulated. There are several inconsistencies and obscurity in the arrangement, so this law needs to be revised including regarding the nature of the institution, the authority to make regulations, the minimum education requirements and the age of the election organizer. Keywords—strategy; organisation; organizational dimension;


INTRODUCTION
The general election in 2019 which is conducted simultaneously between the legislative elections and presidential elections, is a new experience for the government, election organizers and the people of Indonesia. From a regulatory perspective, the birth of Indonesian Law Number 17 of 2017 concerning General Elections which underlies all aspects of the current election implementation is present in response to various types of election problems. One of the crucial aspects in organizing any activity is the organization. Therefore, the regulation of various aspects of election organizers from time to time has always been the center of attention of decision makers and election stakeholders. Therefore, the arrangement of various dimensions of the organization of the General Election Commission (KPU) as one of the elements of election management in Law Number 7 of 2017 is very important in response to various inputs to the substance of the regulation in the previous law.
Practically, several issues that are always of concern include the duties and authority of the KPU and its ranks, integrity and neutrality, the level of decision making and the competence of the organizing apparatus. This shows that the importance of regulating the aspects of the organization of EMBs is regulated by law. In this context, according to Article 6 of Law Number 7 of 2017, the KPU consists of KPU, Provincial KPU, Regency / City KPU, PPK, PPS, PPLN, KPPS and KPPSLN.
Based on the perspective of organizational theory, the EMB as an organization is not only required to appear independently or independently, but also fulfill other aspects of the organization so that it can achieve its objectives effectively. Analysis of the election organizing organizations in this context becomes relevant, in line with the inherent organizational characteristics.
The hope for the future for election organizers is that they can emerge as organizations that meet very high public expectations. Elections that take place in a democratic manner are certainly a contributor that will determine the sustainability of Indonesia as a democracy. According to the organizational perspective, this will only be realized if the election organizers fully follow organizational rules. This includes the arrangement of various aspects of the organization that describe their characteristics as stated in the election law.
In this context, the analysis of the regulation of the KPU's organizational dimensions as one of the elements of the election organizer, which is regulated in Law Number 7 of 2017, becomes very important. This paper will describe, elaborate, and analyze the structural dimensions and contextual dimensions of KPU organizations as election organizers contained in the law.

A. Organization
From the perspective of social science in general, it is understood that humans cannot be perfect if they are not involved in social alliances called in the organization. Experts have defined many organizations depending on their point of view or focus of attention. Robbins argues that an organization is a socially conscious entity, with a relatively identifiable boundary, that functions are generally continuous basis to achieve a common goal or set of goals [1]. The organization was mentioned by Pfiffner and Presthus as 'the structuring of individuals and functions into productive relationships. Organization seeks a pattern of skills and responsibilities that will ensure coordination and unity of purpose through supervision' [2].
Narayanan and Nath define it as 'an arena where human beings come together to perform complex tasks soasfulfill common goal(s)' [3]. Some organizational characteristics according to James G. March and Herbert A. Simon as quoted by Henry include the organization 'are purposeful, complex human activities, have specialized and limited goals, are characterized by sustained cooperative activity, provide services and products to their environment, and are dependent upon exchanges with their environment' [4].
Although the characteristics of the KPU organization are independent, in the sense that they are free from the influence and intervention of any state institution including the government in carrying out their duties and authorities, but in the context of state administration and public policy he is more in the realm of implementing policy. With reference to Dwight Waldo's view that public administration is 'organization and management of man and material to achieve the purpose of government' [5], then it is clear that the KPU and its institutions up to the regional level are an integral part of the state organization in implementing public policies in the form of substantive area laws regarding electoral.

B. Organizational Dimensions
According to Lubis, in an analysis of an organization it is often necessary to find out the characteristics of the organization first. Determination of characteristics can only be done if previously known organizational dimensions. Based on these dimensions an organization's characteristics can be formulated' [6]. According to him 'the organizational dimension consists of structural dimensions and contextual dimensions. The structural dimension consists of formalization, specialization, standardization, centralization, hierarchy of power (authority), complexity, professionalism and configuration. The contextual dimension consists of size, technology and organizational environment ' [6].
The organizational dimension according to the Daft consists of structural dimensions and contextual dimensions. Structural dimensions according to him 'provide labels to describe the internal characteristics of an organization. They create a basis for measuring and comparing organizations. It was further stated that the structural dimensions consist of 'formalization, specialization, standardization, hierarchy of authority, complexity, centralization, professionalism, dan personnel ratios. Furthermore, it was stated that 'contextual dimensions characterize the whole organization. Including its size, technology, environment, and goals. They describe the organizational setting that influences the structural dimensions. The contextual dimension consists of 'size, organizational technology, the environment, the organization's goals and strategy and an organization's culture' [7].
Each structural dimension is explained by Daft that 'Formalization pertains to the amount of written documentation in the organization [8]. Documentation includes procedures, job descriptions, regulations, and policy manuals. These written documents describe behavior and activities. Specialization is the degree to which organizational tasks are subdivided into separate jobs. Standardization is the extent to which similar work activities are performed in a uniform manner. Hierarchy of authority describes who reports to whom and the span of control for each manager. Complexity refers to the number of activities or subsystems within the organization. Complexity can be measured along three dimensions: vertical, horizontal, and spatial. Centralization refers to the hierarchical level that has authority to make a decision' [8].
It was further stated that 'professionalism is the level of formal education and training of employees. Professionalism is considered high when employees require long periods of training to hold jobs in the organization. Personnel ratios refer to the deployment of people to various functions and departments. Next, the contextual dimension is explained among other things 'Size is the organization's magnitude as reflected in the number of people in the organization. Organizational technology is the nature of the production subsystem, and it includes the actions and techniques used to change organizational inputs into outputs. The environment includes all elements outside the boundary of the organization' [8]. Based on Draft's view, it is clear that the existence of this structural and contextual dimension is very important to analyze the complete posture of the organization. Substantial analysis of the organization of the dimensions of this organization focuses on Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections as a product of state policy or public policy.

C. Election
Michael stated that there are several key elements of democracy, including recognition of rights for individuals, decision makers to the people, and representation, accountability [9]. In Huntington's formula, 'the definition of democracy based on elections is a minimal definition. Open, free and fair elections are the essence of democracy, an inevitable sinequanon' [10]. According to Michael's view, democratic government has several characteristics, among others, namely that they must be represented in the legislative process that makes those laws; The institutions of government are functions which are delineated, responsibilities are defined, and mechanisms for change, including elections, are prescribed [9]. In line with that, Budiardjo put forward the essential characteristics of a democratic state such as "the rule of law, free elections, and guarantees for democratic rights" [11].

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 343
As a political process, elections, relate to the existence of political parties which in Blondel's view are "parties are the main link between people and government in the contemporary world." Elections are the key mechanism of this link: they are only the way of the population that can support for a party rather than another' [10]. Regarding the election, Ball stated it as the means by which people choose and exercise some degree of control over their representatives [12].
There are three election objectives according to Surbakti [13], namely 'First, as a mechanism for selecting government leaders and alternative public policies. Second, as a mechanism to transfer conflicts of interest from the community to representative bodies of the people through elected people's representatives or through parties that win seats so that community integration is guaranteed. Third, it is a means of mobilizing and / or facilitating popular support for the state and government by participating in the political process.

III. METHODS
Based on the type and function, this research is included in what Marzuki mentioned as legal research or normative legal research or library law conducted by examining library material or mere secondary data, or library research and documentaries [14,15]. Research is conducted on documented information in the form of regulations so that it is commonly known as document analysis or content analysis. The technique used to analyze secondary data is content analysis.
Referring to the opinions of the experts and in accordance with the objectives of the study to examine the arrangement of various organizational dimensions contained in the law as policy content, the document that is the focus of this research is Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections.

A. Research Result
Profile For the first time, the KPU as an EMB in this law was named a non-structural institution, as stated in Article 8 Paragraph (4). Meanwhile, the Election Supervisory Board as referred to in Article 91 and the Election Honorary Council as referred to in Article 155 are not referred to as non-structural institutions.

1) Organizational structural dimensions:
The "formalization" sub-dimension is contained in Article 7 Paragraph (1) concerning the work area which covers the entire territory of the Republic of Indonesia, Paragraph (2) the nature of its institutional duties continuously and Paragraph (3) which regulates the institutional nature of the KPU free from the influence of any party. In addition, there are also in Article 8 which consists of three verses concerning the position of the KPU and the institutional instruments below that are related to the state capital, province and regency / city, and the fourth paragraph concerning its position as a nonstructural institution.
In The "specialization" sub-dimension is contained in Article 11 which consists of three verses, regulating the duties of the Chairperson of the KPU, the Chairperson of the Provincial KPU and the Chairperson of the City / Regency KPU. In addition, it is also stated in Article 12 concerning 12 KPU duties, Article 13 (12 KPU authorities), Article 15 (12 Provincial KPU tasks), Article 16 (five provincial KPU authorities), Article 18 (12 City / Regency KPU tasks), and Article 19 (six authorities of the City / Regency KPU).
The "standardization" sub-dimension is illustrated by the necessity regulation as mandated by law to establish standardization in the form of KPU Regulations that provide standardization for various activities in the stages of election administration in Article 9 Paragraph (5)  The "authority hierarchy" dimension is regulated in Article 9 Paragraph (1) concerning the organizational structure of KPU, Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU, as well as Article 35 (three verses) concerning the inauguration of KPU members, Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPIs. Besides that, it is also written in Article 48 (three verses), Article 49 (two verses) and Article 50 (two verses) concerning the hierarchy of accountability and reporting.
The "complexity" sub-dimension is found in Article 6 regarding the composition of the KPU organization, Article 8 (four verses) concerning the position of the KPU in stages, and Article 9 (four verses) concerning the hierarchical nature of the organization and relations with the secretariat.

Arrangements
regarding the subdimension of "professionalism" are stated in Article 21 (two verses) which regulates, among other things, the requirements for the knowledge and expertise and education of members of the KPU, Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU. In addition, also in Article 72 which regulates, among other things, the minimum education requirements of members of the PPK, PPS, KPPS, PPLN and KPPSLN.

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 343
The "technology organization" sub-dimension is regulated in Article 168 with two verses on the electoral system that uses an open proportional system for the election of DPR and DPRD members as well as many representative district systems for the election of DPD members. In addition, it is regulated in In other words, it is clear that Law Number 7 of 2017 is changing rather than changing the three laws. However, in the consideration there is not a single clause that states that the three laws are inadequate so that they need to be replaced. Concerning letter only mentions that the three laws need to be put together and simplified into one law. Similarly, the explanation of this law in section I. General only stated that the establishment of this law was based on efforts to simplify and harmonize, and combine the electoral arrangements contained in the three laws.
One thing that distinguishes all the previous laws related to the characteristics of the KPU organization as the organizer of the election is about its institutional position. In Article 8 Paragraph (4) it is stated that KPU, Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU are located as non-structural institutions. This term as a non-structural institution is not found in all previous electoral laws. The structural organization according to the Explanation of Article 8 Paragraph (4) of Law Number 7 of 2017 is an institution formed because of the urgency of a particular task that cannot be accommodated in the form of government / state institutions. The State Administration Agency (2015) defines it as an independent institution that is formed based on legislation to carry out certain tasks because the nature of its duties cannot be accommodated in the form of existing ministries / institutions, where institutional membership involves elements outside the government and its existence is financed by state budget.
Meanwhile, the Election Supervisory Board/Bawaslu and the Election Honorary Council/DKPP which together with the KPU according to the provisions of Article 1 number 7 are institutions that hold elections as a unitary function of election administration, in the provisions governing their institutions, namely Article 91 and Article 155 are not named as a nonstructural institution. In terms of organizational regulation, of course this is something that is not contributive to the effectiveness of the organization. The confusion of naming the type / nature of state administering institutions as important as this from the perspective of state administration is certainly something that will more or less interfere with organizational performance.
Quantitatively seen from the number of articles, the most structural arrangement of organizational dimensions is the subdimension of "formalization" which is as many as 43 articles, so that the ratio to all articles is 7,5 %) and to the number of articles of KPU is 11,5 %. "Professionalization", namely two articles (0,34%) and (0,53%). Completely can be seen in the following   Setting the "formalization" subdimension that is more than the others can be understood in relation to the important elements that should be present in the organization. The institutional structure that is hierarchically arranged in harmony with the government structure from the center / national, namely the KPU to the lowest level, namely the Voting Organizing Group (KPPS) is an important factor for the running of the information flow top down and bottom up, effective coordination and efforts to build organizational cohesiveness. Similarly, the assertion that the KPU is a nonstructural institution is an important part of the existence and identity of the organization, because since it was formed in 2002 as an independent institution with no political party members, this law has been explicitly referred to as a nonstructural institution.
Likewise, it is very important for a detailed arrangement of the duties, authorities and responsibilities of the KPU and its ranks to the lowest level. This can be a guarantee for the organizers / implementers to carry out electoral work calmly without being overshadowed by the fear of being accused of abuse of authority. Regulations regarding the authority to form legal products in the form of regulations and decisions as well as clarity about funds and finances for the administration of elections are also very important for the success of holding elections. Another important aspect that is regulated in great detail is about criminal provisions because as a consequence of the rule of law there are signs that must be carefully considered by the election organizers.
There is a contextual context, the most regulated is the subdimension of "organizational technology" which is 23 articles so that the ratio of all articles is 4,01% and the number of articles regarding the KPU is 6,18%. The least are the subdimensions of "goals, strategies and organizational culture", 1 article (0,17 %) and 0,26 %. Completely can be seen in the following   Setting contextual dimensions in the form of subdimensions "organizational technology" in a greater number than the other sub-dimensions can be interpreted that the legislators pay more attention to the aspects of the process of various stages of elections. This is crucial for the success of the overall election objectives. In detail, each element of each stage of the election is arranged in such a way that it becomes a technical guide for those who are interested, especially the election implementers at various levels and participants of the election.
Based on the perspective of organizational theory, there are ambiguities and inconsistencies among them regarding the provisions of Article 75 paragraph (3) which states that Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU are authorized to determine "decisions" based on KPU rules and decisions. The authority of the KPU to form KPU regulations and KPU's decisions is regulated in Article 75 (1). In other words, the Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU are not authorized to form regulations but only form decisions in carrying out their duties and authorities as stipulated in Article 75 Paragraph (3). However, Article 16 letter a state the authority of the Provincial KPU is to determine the election schedule in the province, which sees the nature of the charge more precisely in the form of regulations, not decisions because in it, among others, contains a number of norms. Similarly, the same thing is regulated regarding the authority of Regency / City KPU in Article 19 letter a.
With regard to the mechanism of decision making and the type / form of product of organizational policy at each level of election organizers, the process of making decisions at each level of election organizers horizontally and their links vertically requires adequate arrangements for the creation of organizational effectiveness. Likewise, it is very important that there is firmness in the form / type of product of organizational policy which is the authority of each level of the organizer, whether it is only regulation (regeling), decision (beschikking) only or covers both. Clarity of the form / type of organizational policy that is part of its authority will very clearly determine the effectiveness of the organization.
Referring to the perspective of the organizational dimension, there is things that have the potential to become problems, with regard to formal education qualifications and competencies at least members of the KPU, Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU. As stipulated in Article 21 Paragraph (1) letter f, the requirement to become a member / commissioner of the KPU and Provincial KPU is the lowest undergraduate / strata 1 (S-1) without looking at the field of scholarship, and the lowest is high school or equivalent for KPU Regency City. Indeed, there are other requirements as stipulated in letter e that candidates must have knowledge and expertise related to the administration of elections, constitutionality and party. Explanation of the letter states that the candidate is prioritized to have the ability to conduct elections, both in the fields of political science, law and management, and this is evidenced by a series of tests. This is different from the requirement to become a member of another independent commission / institution, for example the KPK as mentioned in Article 29 letter d of Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission. The provision states that the requirement is a diploma in law degree or other scholars who have expertise and at least 15 years of experience in the fields of law, economics, finance or banking.
Thus, it is clear that from the subdimension of "professionalism" in this institution requires certain fields of science or specific relevant knowledge and experience according to the core business of the institution concerned with a minimum level of education at the bachelor level. In this context, Nanus has reminded that "various external forces have formed 21st century organizations with eight characteristics, including that the workforce mainly consists of employees who have extensive knowledge and high skills" [8]. Thus, it is clear that the current and future challenges of the KPU are the availability of members who are qualified for education that are relevant to electoral tasks.

V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the discussion above, it can be concluded that Law Number 7 of 2017 contains several organizational dimensions, both including structural and contextual dimensions. The structural dimensions include formalization, specialization, centralization, standardization, hierarchy of authority, complexity, professionalism, while the contextual dimensions include organizational size, organizational technology, goals, strategies and organizational culture and organizational environment.
There are two structural dimensions of the organization that are sufficiently contained in the law, namely formalization, specialization and standardization compared to other dimensions. There are two contextual dimensions that are quite adequate, namely organizational technology and organizational environment. There are several inconsistencies related to the regulation of the EMB so that it has the potential for less effective organizational goals.
This research recommends that Law Number 7 of 2017 be improved to better accommodate several organizational dimensions whose arrangements are inadequate. Among them are related to the dimensions of "professionalism" namely the level of education and the suitability of the field of science, and "centralization" namely the process, form, and type of organizational decisions.