PUBLIC MANAGEMENT AS A CONCEPT FOR IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

New public management introduces a managerial approach to managing the public sector and administration from the perspective of human resources management. This approach assumes the adaptation of efficiency mechanisms and management methods and techniques used in the private sector to the conditions of managing public organizations. The model assumes effective implementation of public cost accounting, an approach based on achieving results, decentralization of management, wider consideration of public-private partnerships and extensive use of market mechanisms. This management model is intended to ensure the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of the organization, including the privatization of some public services.


Introduction
Public management is a sub-discipline of management sciences.She is interested in actors, structures, processes, mechanisms and resources related to creation and realizationpublic policiesand solving collective problems (e.g.municipalities).In terms of public management, four basic theoretical and methodological orientations are visible: 1. Political (use of power and control over resources to achieve public goals); 2. Legal (norms and rules for coordinating collective actions); 3. Economical (efficiency and effectiveness of public activities); 4. Management (tools and techniques for managing public affairs).
For example, as a scientific sub-discipline, it is characterized by theoretical and methodological pluralism, which makes it attractive for research, and at the same time is a source of problems with ensuring its conceptual identity and the clarity of its boundaries.The conceptual rooting of zp should be seen in the theoretical traditions related to scientific management, the doctrine of the rule of law, the model of classical administration, New Public Management, public co-management and neo-berism (Wider, Kożuch 2004).
Public management it always refers to the processes taking place in the public sphere, and concerns both the public sector as a whole and the activities of individual organizations and public institutions that are part of it.In its broadest sense, public management is the management of public affairs and includes the models of public administration, public management and governance.The essence of public management is the implementation of public programs, created in order to solve problems related to meeting social needs (Wołowiec, Szybowski, Bogacki 2019, p. 95-114) Public management comprises five spheres: • creating public policies; • regulating social and economic life with the use of classical instruments of power: do's and don'ts; • meeting the collective needs of citizens by providing them with public services; • ensuring the internal efficiency and capacity of public administration to effectively perform its tasks; • cooperation between entities participating in public management processes.
Public management can be interpreted as activities aimed at ensuring the effective functioning of the entire public sector, in the sense of ensuring the effectiveness of public organizations and institutions, through the proper use of resources at their disposal in the processes of achieving the set goals.The four meanings of public management include: • activity of public services and elected politicians (functional approach); • a set of management activities relating to public executive structures and processes carried out by these authorities; • management of public organizations or the system of public organizations; • sub-discipline of management science.
Public management, as opposed to administration, is a concept that includes activity and creativity.It is closely related to politics, law and civil society.Decision-making choices take into account not only economic efficiency, but also social and political reasons.A feature of modern public management is transparent cooperation and partnership of the public sector with the private sector and with the sector of social organizations (Sześciło, Mednis, Niziołek, Jakubek-Lalik 2014;Kożuch 2004;Bukowska, Karpiński, Kleer, Kożuch, Lech, Owsiak, Siwińska, Paradysz, Zubelewicz 2004).The managerial approach shows the similarity of the organizational features of public administration and the private sector (profit seeking organizations), as well as the non-governmental organizations / not-for-profit organizations, emphasizing the importance of professional management and efficiency (Wołowiec, Bogacki 2021, p. 95-108).

Good Governance Concept
The concept of good governance (good governance) was first introduced to its documents and aid programs by the World Bank in the early 1990s.This was related to the support programs for developing countries conducted by this institution and the response to the postulates to improve the effectiveness of their functioning in terms of achieving the assumed development goals.The ineffectiveness of this assistance was mainly related to the lack of adequate administrative capacity to properly use external financial assistance.This fact became an impulse to start a discussion on how to increase the administrative capacity and the quality of management as the most important element of support.Over time, the conditions related to the improvement of governance, i.e. the introduction of good governance principles to the practice of administration.It is worth noting that in the initial period, the basic reference for good governance were the issues of efficient and effective functioning of the administration, especially in terms of effective absorption of funds.It was important to improve the quality of management in institutions and to develop their state capacity.These areas were related to the main goals of development programs, including the improvement of macroeconomic conditions, reduction of poverty, social exclusion and the development of individual countries.
Later, they covered more and more new elements, of which two basic categories can be mentioned: 1. Political conditions related to the democratization of the state, respect for human rights, freedom of operation of non-governmental organizations, etc., 2. Additional economic conditions, most often related to the expectations of foreign investors.
Precise definition of the concept of good governance must be preceded by understanding and specifying the concept of governance.The World Bank defines the term governance as processes and institutions for making decisions and exercising power in a given country (or international organization).Many definitions of this concept apply governing to two dimensions: 1.The functioning of the administration and political authorities (at all levels of government) and; 2. Including interest groups as well as social and non-governmental organizations in the decision-making processes.
World Bank experts present the analyzed concept in terms of three elements, as: 1.The process of selecting, monitoring and exchanging governments, 2. Administrative capacity to formulate and implement public policies and ensure good quality public services, 3. Citizens' participation in the work of administrative institutions that manage social and economic policies.
Due to the fact that this is a fairly new concept, there are many definitions in the literature.They expose various components of good governance and describe its scope in a different way.However, when defining the scope of the concept of good governance, the following elements should always be included in the analysis: Government efficiency: the ability (potential) of public authorities and administration (at various levels of management) to implement public policies efficiently, fairly and economically (including adjusting the scale of public intervention to real social needs).This applies in particular to the provision of basic social services, raising the standard of living of inhabitants and eradicating poverty, ensuring economic development to fight poverty, guaranteeing equal opportunities for all citizens, developing human resources in society, ensuring social protection and employment policy, protecting nature and sustainable development, etc.An important element of the discussed component is to ensure appropriate qualifications of human resources in the public sector, appropriate regulatory competences.
Development of the economy: the ability to create high-quality economic policies that guarantee the functioning of the free market, macroeconomic stability, ensuring economic growth, etc.This element includes the observance and effective enforcement of property rights and concluded contracts, as well as the elimination of unnecessary administrative burdens hindering economic development ( including regulatory), and trade liberalization, openness to foreign investors, privatization of state-owned enterprises, ensuring an effective tax system and public debt policy, etc.
Democratization: transparency and transparency of the functioning of public authorities and administration, as well as the ability to involve citizens in administrative work, including social and non-governmental organizations, on the basis of appropriate representativeness and pluralism.The discussed component also covers the broadly understood democratization of management, respect for human rights, minority rights, accountability of public authorities and administration, ensuring social consensus and resolving conflicts between conflicting social interests.In addition, it includes decentralization and implementation of democratic principles at the local level, and civilian control of the armed forces (and the reduction of defense spending).The discussed aspect of good governance is related to ensuring political stability in the country, including ensuring peace and security for the inhabitants.
The World Bank has developed a list of basic indicators of good governance.The six main items are now used to assess countries' progress towards implementing the principles of good governance.Belong to them: 1. Voice and accountability: the scope of citizens' participation in the work of government institutions, the democratic election of the authorities, as well as freedom of expression and media, freedom of association, etc. 2. Political stability and non-violence: the likelihood of stable governance, the security of citizens, peace and countering terrorist threats.3. Government efficiency: the indicator relates to the administrative capacity of governments to effectively implement public policies and services (state capacity).4. Regulatory quality: concerns the formulation and implementation of regulations, mainly related to the development of the private sector in the economy.5. Rule of law: This indicator relates specifically to the conditions of economic activity, in particular respect for property, the enforceability of contracts, the efficiency of the police system and the judiciary.6.Control of corruption: the indicator mainly concerns the perception of corruption threats.In the White Paper European Governance, the Commission proposed five main criteria of good governance, which relate primarily to the functioning of European policies, but also concern the improvement of governance in the Member States: • Openness, consisting in the fact that administrative institutions should be as transparent as possible for citizens and the public, • Participation, as a broad public participation in administrative work, at all levels of public authorities (multilevel-partnership), as well as at all major stages of the implementation of public policies (i.e. during programming, implementation and monitoring).The Commission puts emphasis on the participation of social and non-governmental organizations in the work of the administration (the so-called civic dialogue) and representatives of employers and trade unions (the so-called social dialogue), • Accountability, which means a precise definition of the scope of responsibility of individual institutions, and in particular ensuring the separation of powers between the legislative and executive powers, • Effectiveness, relating to the improvement of state capacity in terms of effective, efficient (i.e.without undue delay) implementation of public policy objectives.The aforementioned criterion of good governance includes two additional principles: first, the principle of proportionality, which assumes that the instruments of providing services and public policies will be proportional to the assumed objectives, and thus implemented in an optimal and cost-effective manner; second, the principle of subsidiarity, according to which activities of a higher level of administration are only auxiliary to activities carried out at lower levels of management, and therefore do not replace them, • Coherence as an integration of management of various public policies, both European and national, as well as between different levels of public authorities (within the framework of a multi-level governance system: multilevel governance).Moreover, it concerns the integration of sectoral and territorial policies.The approach to good governance of the Dutch government also deserves attention, as it is close to the criteria applied by the Commission.
Among the most important elements that should characterize good governance, he lists: • transparency of government institutions' activities, • openness of the administration to social organizations and conducting a systematic dialogue with these organizations, • the effectiveness of public policies, in particular targeting them to achieve specific goals, • the legitimacy of governments and administration, accountability to society and respect for the democratic separation of powers, • anti-corruption.Also in Poland, attempts were made to define and refine the concept of good governance.
Good governance it is the exercise of public power within the mutual relations of government, administration and society, characterized by openness, partnership, accountability, efficiency, effectiveness and coherence.This definition takes into account the participation in the exercise of power by three groups of entities: government, administration and society, because only their harmonious cooperation can ensure the effective implementation of the state's functions.By indicating the government, administration and society at the same time, it is possible to include the roles behind them in the definition of good governance -appropriately decisive and executive roles, as well as participation and cooperation in exercising power.Only properly shaped relations, based on the principles indicated in the definition, are able to ensure efficient implementation of the state's tasks.
Conclusions: principles of good governance (Hood 1995;Hood 1999;Clarke, Stuart 1997): • participation -all members society (citizens) participate in the governing process; participation may be direct or indirect (participation through representatives or institutions); • rule of law -governance is governed by and within limitslaws; are respectedhuman rights, in particular those relating to minorities; over compliancelawsimpartialpolice servicesand independentcourts; • Clarity -decisions are made and implemented in accordance with established principles and procedures; information about them is open, comprehensible presented and communicated to the persons whose decisions concern; • responding to needs -institutions that participate in governing take into account the needs of all stakeholders; the needs are satisfied as far as possible on a regular basis (or as soon as possible) as they arise; • consensus -due to the multiplicity of actors, points of view and individual and group interests, they are developed broadlyconsensusthat respond to the present and future needs of society as a whole; • equality and -all members of society have the ability (and the feeling that they can influence) the governing process; in particular, politically and economically weaker individuals and groups are involved in the governance process; • efficiency -the effects of governance respond to social needs, and are achieved at the best -from the point of view sustainable developmentandenvironmental protection -allocation of available resources; • responsibility -public institutions, private sectorand social organizations are responsible for their decisions and actions to the restsocietyand are particularly responsive to thesestakeholderson which they affect.

Concept and assumptions of new public management
Many traditional tools of public policy (economic and social) are becoming ineffective in the contemporary world.The traditional bureaucratic model derives from Weber's concept of rational administration.It is characterized by a clear division of roles, reliance on procedures, tight financial control, hierarchy and oversight by a central agency.Among the reasons for the emergence of the concept of New Public Management (NPM) is the ineffectiveness of the traditional Weberian administration.It was organized in a hierarchical manner, and only people with appropriate formal qualifications, such as higher education, could be members of the administrative apparatus.It is also emphasized that the vision of administration created by Max Weber assumed the apolitical nature of officials and their professionalism, but based on the aforementioned formal qualifications, and not necessarily on practical skills and their real usefulness.The activity of such an organizational structure was highly formalized and based on strictly defined rules regulated by legal norms with an emphasis on processes.Hence, this phenomenon came to be referred to as the operation of the administration under the principle of legalism (Supernat 2012;Kulesza 2004, p. 93;Peterts 1996;Hausner 2010;Kaufman, Kraaay, Mastruzzi 2010;Grindle 2004).
New Public Management can be described as a modern form of managerial approach to administration.It is characterized primarily by the marketization of public administration.New Public Management aims to ensure the effectiveness of public administration through the use of mechanisms known from the private sector.Some representatives of the science of administration or management indicate that this is only one of the models of public management, although it is widely used in practice.The growing interest in the NPM concept used in practice was supported by numerous scientific studies and a series of publications by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in the Public Management Service (PUMA) series.The OECD established a Public Management Committee, which elevated the NPM to the rank of a separate policy (Grindle 2004;Hood 2011, p. 22).
Traditional public management is rooted in the US civil service reforms of the nineteenth century, which first proposed a managerial approach to the organization of public service.Just like administration, management also carries similar content.Traditional public management assumes that public administration should focus on organizing, i.e. maximizing efficiency.Efficiency functions as the number one axiom on the scale of administration values.The new managerial approach to public administration first appeared in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand in the 1980s, and since the beginning of the 1990s it has gained its place in the United States.Similarly to the traditional managerial approach to public administration, it grew out of the drive to improve the functioning of the public sector.The general tendency to replace traditional public administration with public management occurs in many countries, but manifests itself in various forms.
An interesting classification was presented by Peters (Peters 1996), who distinguished and characterized four models of public management: • market government; • Participative Government; • Flexible Government; • Deregulated Government.
The basic assumptions of the new management model can be formulated in the following assumptions: • focus not on processes but on achieving results; • transition from traditional public administration towards a model that places much greater emphasis on the personal responsibility of managers; • the will to move away from classical bureaucracy towards creating more flexible conditions for employment, work and organization; • public administration should be deregulated, and employees should be created conditions for independent initiatives (postulate to free the management); -the administration should, in principle, be apolitical; • the goals set for the organization and for employees are clearly defined, and the scope of their implementation can be assessed using indicators.• the evaluation of public programs uses the 3Es principle: economy, efficiency and effectiveness; • some of the tasks performed by the public sector are subject to market assessment in the form of, for example, contracts; • there is pressure to limit the functions performed by public authorities through privatization.
New public management emphasizes on: • proper goal setting and performance monitoring, • financial management (efficiency), • setting service standards, • use of benchmarking solutions (the possibility of making comparisons on a sample of proven, good solutions) and modern human resource management.
New public management contributed to the strengthening of public administration by strengthening the ties between the political and administrative spheres and creating a citizen-friendly administration.The trends in public administration of the 1990s are reflected in the concept of Good Governance.Good management takes more account of the social context in reforming public administration, in particular with regard to reaching universal standards, such as professionalism, political neutrality, honesty, and avoiding conflicts of interest.In this case, the starting point is the assumption that the spheres of public administration and business are fundamentally different from each other, therefore the way they are organized and operated should be different (Kurdycka 1995, p. 112-121).The very concept of good governance includes a democratic and effective system of governance, effective public institutions, appropriate quality of public services and the ability to adapt to new social needs.Good governance requires public trust in government; without it, democracy is an empty slogan, limited only to certain procedures and conventions.
Good management takes into account the principles of transparency, personal honesty, high ethical standards, respect for the law, responsibility, accessibility and solidarity with citizens.At the same time, it ensures that people and companies that are influenced by both politics and the market achieve the greatest benefits (Dębicki 2003, p. 103;Vibert 2001, p. 5).
The concepts of new public management and good governance need not contradict.The optimal solution would be synergy, i.e. a combination of the effectiveness and efficiency of new public management and transparency, respect for the law and fairness of good management (Haunser 2001, p. 11).
Thus, there are fundamental differences between the three main models of public administration management.
The bureaucratic model characterized by a hierarchy and subordination of many units to one headquarters.The superior central office determines the responsibilities and jurisdictions of all units, equips them with resources and supervises their operation.In other words, the headquarters decide and impose the rules of the game on everyone.
New public management is a market model that recognizes the existence of independent and equal entities.Businesses, independent government agencies and individuals are self-employed.The relations between the entities are regulated by the contract.Effective rules of behavior that have withstood the test of competition and are generally recognized as binding, encourage the intensification and expansion of exchange.Good governance resembles a model of a network made up of companies, individuals, union members, government agencies, etc. Relationships between entities are governed by conventions.The highest organ of the hierarchical structure establishes the rules of the game and performs a supervisory function, but as a participant in a broader constitutional order it is also limited by these rules (Bełz 2011;Czaputowicz 2008).
Thus, public administration should make greater use of market competition mechanisms where it delivers things and services, in order to achieve higher results.This applies, for example, to: privatization (outsourcing) consisting in buying from private organizations things and services cheaper and of higher quality than those for which it was previously responsible, you can also reorganize public administration units like private companies in order to obtain income from the sale of goods and services , create free competition in the market between public and private agencies.Public administrations should ensure that certain goods and services are offered, but need not necessarily offer them.There should be a network and interdependent, not a hierarchical system of service provision.Conditions must be created for public administration employees to show initiative and creativity in order to better serve consumers and achieve better results (empowering employees to get results).Empowerment is possible due to higher education of public sector employees, computerization, thanks to which they have more knowledge, it also fosters teamwork (Grindle 2004).
There are four main aspects of public sector management in NPM: • management in the public sector as administration, • management in the public sector as business management; • public sector management as policy making and implementation; • management in the public sector as people management.

NPM as a doctrine of public sector management and it's critical
As a management doctrine in the public sector, NPM has a definitely managerial character and focuses primarily on (Jeżowski 2002, p. 12): • marketization; • public partnership; • flattening of organizational structures; • efficiency and measurable achievements; • external audit, competent supervision and evaluation.
The NPM concept, as a result of the flattening and fragmentation of organizational structures and the decentralization of powers, is to ensure flexibility of the public sector and increase its efficiency.The new public management focuses on: service recipient -their needs and expectations, promoting competition between service providers, transferring control to the local community, decentralizing competences and introducing participatory management.The goal of NPM administration is to obtain results and to have control and accountability for the results.Effective operation requires combining the efforts of the public, private and non-governmental sectors to solve problems.The change in the paradigm of the functioning of public administration is also associated with the use in administration of specific organizational solutions known from the private sector.Also in this respect, market mechanisms are to replace the classic civil service system.There are three main aspects of changes in this respect.He distinguishes between: the problem of transition from the career system to the position system; introducing decentralization and privatization of recruitment; as well as the issue of departing from taking into account formal competences, towards increasing the importance of experience, real practical skills, as well as the so-called soft skills or interpersonal skills (Kwiatkowski 2011, p. 51-55).
The first public administration reforms implementing the assumptions of the NPM were carried out, inter alia, in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand.A little later, the NPM concept was transferred to other countries, often as an element of radical economic and administrative reforms.Examples include the United States, Ireland, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, as well as Hong Kong and Singapore.However, the method of its implementation was varied, because: • it was not always inspired by right-wing governments (for example in New Zealand, where the political initiative was on the side of leftwing parties), • the government did not always play the leading role in the preparation and implementation of reforms (e.g. in the USA, the main centers of change were state and local administration units), • not always the changes had a statutory basis, i.e. they were implemented in a centralized manner.
The implementation of the NPM concept consisted in such internal reforms in the organization of public administration as political and task decentralization, the reorganization of the structure of units or the introduction of a managerial method of management.The most important change in this respect was the transition to the contract and agency system.The first was for the purpose the separation of the role of the provider of public services (contractor) from their producer (principal -administration), while the latter was based on the idea of separating responsibility for the performance of tasks (operational aspect) from the process of making political decisions of public authorities (strategic aspect).In connection with the above, in practice, there were, inter alia, individual management contracts in public sector entities and executive agencies established to perform specific operational tasks (Marchewka-Bartkowiak 2016).The concept of new public management continues to evolve.This process is also a consequence of the criticism to which this model is subject.He is mainly accused of the fact that solutions used in the commercial sector are difficult to transfer to public administration due to the different end goals underlying their operation.Many difficulties are related to, among others with the measurement of the performance of public tasks, but also the resistance of the administration itself to accepting responsibility for the implementation of specific objectives.The politicization of administration is often an important barrier, which limits managers' ability to assume full management responsibility.The most important areas of criticism of the NPM concept concern the answers to the following questions: How to ashess the efficiency of administration (individual public units) not only in the economic sense, but understood as the ability to meet the changing social needs (individual groups of stakeholders) and who is to make such an assessment.
The answers to the above questions resulted in the next stage in the development of the NPM concept, defined as co-management or public governance (PG), which is closely related to the issue of civil society.Public governance focuses on issues such as stakeholder engagement, transparency and equal treatment, ethical and simply fair behavior, accountability and solidarity.This idea was first used in international institutions, incl.PG rules apply to the World Bank's support programs for developing countries, as well as to the development programs of the United Nations.At the same time, the OECD publishes public governance analyzes, supporting the implementation of good practices in individual countries with its recommendations.

Conclusions
New Public Management it is a management doctrine in public administration, characterized by the definition of results-oriented activities of public administration, the aim of which is to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the functioning of public administration.NPM introduces a managerial approach to public sector management, it is characterized by a departure from the principles of hierarchical organization, resignation from focusing attention on structures and procedures and regulations in favor of economic mechanisms in the organization of public administration and actions oriented at achieving results visible to the citizen.NPM arose as a result of criticism of Weber's model, i.e. bureaucratic administration.NPM is characterized by (Zawicki 2002): • changing the position of a public administration employee -from an official to a manager; • implementation of rules based on the analysis of the results achieved; • adopting a strategic orientation and introducing a market mechanism to the process of providing public services; • human resource management based on flexible employment, work and pay conditions; • remuneration of officials according to operational efficiency; • goals set for the organization and for employees are clearly defined, and the scope of their implementation can be assessed using indicators; • public administration bodies may perform their functions using external entities, e.g.private or non-governmental organizations; • market competition mechanisms are used in the process of providing services, e.g.outsourcing; • focusing the services offered by the administration on the customer; • depoliticization of management by separating public policy from operational management.
Efficiency of administration it is the ability to adapt to changes in the environment on an ongoing basis and to use the resources in a productive and economical way to achieve the adopted structure of goals.External factors influencing the efficiency of public administration: • state system • political regime (democratic or undemocratic); • form of government (parliamentary-cabinet, etc., republic or monarchy); • territorial structure (federal or unitary, local government, etc.) the concept of the state's relationship with society traditions of statehood administrative traditions in a given state legal system • internal and international political processes society (culture, values, mobility, etc.) Internal factors determining the effectiveness of public administration: • Division of labor (thanks to the specialization of activities); • Management authority (associated with the sense of responsibility)external, formal results from the possession of formal authority insignia, e.g.title, and internal, real, personal -associated with the authentic social acceptance of managers and superiors.Efficiency of public administration it is measured by the ratio of material inputs used to the activity achieved.The factors shaping the efficiency of public administration are: law, budget, human resources, structure and information.Public administration must systematically change and adapt to new conditions, acquire new skills and techniques in order to fully effectively fulfill its functions (Gaciarz 2004;Czaputowicz 2008).
Effectiveness in New Public Management is understood primarily as providing citizens with access to services of the highest possible quality, with a relatively low burden on the state budget at the cost of their provision.It should be added that in the discussed concept, the effectiveness of the activities of a given organizational unit does not depend on the level of its expenses or the amount of the budget, but on what has been achieved thanks to these expenses.So the emphasis is on the effects.The change in the paradigm of the functioning of public administration is also associated with the use in administration of specific organizational solutions known from the private sector.The very effectiveness of the administrative apparatus built in this way is to be served by the employment in public administration of people who can approach the tasks entrusted to them in an efficient and effective, as well as innovative and enterprising manner (this is achieved through the aforementioned practical requirements and the so-called soft features) Irregularities related to such a structure of the employment system in public administration are to be prevented by the aforementioned delegation of the recruitment procedure to independent and professional entities.The very effectiveness of the administrative apparatus built in this way is to be served by the employment in public administration of people who can approach the tasks entrusted to them in an efficient and effective, as well as innovative and enterprising manner (this is achieved through the aforementioned practical requirements and the so-called soft features) Irregularities related to such a structure of the employment system in public administration are to be prevented by the aforementioned delegation of the recruitment procedure to independent and professional entities.The very effectiveness of the administrative apparatus built in this way is to be served by the employment in public administration of people who can approach the tasks entrusted to them in an efficient and effective, as well as innovative and enterprising manner (this is achieved through the aforementioned practical requirements and the so-called soft features).
• Steering spread.• Distribution of decision-making powers.• Discipline.• Order-making unity: punishment, division of competences • Unity of management.• The subordination of the personal interest to the general interest.• Decent salary • Centralization and hierarchical structure.• Material and social order.• Staff integration.• Proper flow of information.• Initiative.• Staff-to-staff ratio • Non-financial incentives.