This organizational model attracts more derision than analysis today (cf. Osborne & Gaebler, 1992). In fact, it reflects an underlying metaphor of trustee and beneficiary (John Locke's metaphor for government) and involves a complex mix of high-trust and low-trust relationships, with the accompanying accounting rules reflecting digress of trust. Within the "Jesuitical corps" of the public service were many high-trust relationships (for example, in conventions of mutual consultation or action on the basic of word-of-mouth agreements across department), the costs of which were not accountingized. The implicit assumption is that such high-trust, non-costed behaviour lowers transaction costs within the public sector and makes it more efficient than it would be if each action had to be negotiated and costed on a low-trust basis. However, PPA also embodied many low-trust relationships , particularly in areas where the Jesuitical corps faced the corrupting forces of the world outside, notably the award of contracts, recruitment and staffing, as well as the handling of cash, where distrust prevailed and elaborate records had to be kept and audited.