+ All Categories
Home > Documents > THE PROBLEM OF PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL …The establishment of parastatals is a popular strategy...

THE PROBLEM OF PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL …The establishment of parastatals is a popular strategy...

Date post: 30-Jan-2021
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
83
i ORLU, DAGOGO CORNELIUS REG. NO: PG/MBA/08/47300 THE PROBLEM ON PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL PARASTATALS IN NIGERIA, A STUDY OF NIGERIAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (NITEL) AND ITS SUBSIDIARY, NIGERIA MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (M-TEL) MANAGMENT A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT, FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS Webmaster Digitally Signed by Webmaster’s Name DN : CN = Webmaster’s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka OU = Innovation Centre APRIL, 2010
Transcript
  • i

    ORLU, DAGOGO CORNELIUS REG. NO: PG/MBA/08/47300

    PG/M. Sc/09/51723

    THE PROBLEM ON PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL PARASTATALS

    IN NIGERIA, A STUDY OF NIGERIAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (NITEL) AND ITS SUBSIDIARY, NIGERIA MOBILE

    TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (M-TEL)

    MANAGMENT

    A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT, FACULTY OF

    BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS

    Webmaster

    Digitally Signed by Webmaster’s Name

    DN : CN = Webmaster’s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka

    OU = Innovation Centre

    APRIL, 2010

  • ii

    THE PROBLEM ON PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL PARASTATALS IN NIGERIA, A STUDY

    OF NIGERIAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (NITEL) AND ITS SUBSIDIARY,

    NIGERIA MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (M-TEL)

    BY ORLU, DAGOGO CORNELIUS

    REG. NO: PG/MBA/08/47300

    BEING A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, IN

    PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF BUSINESS

    ADMINISTRATION (MBA) IN MANAGEMENT

    APRIL, 2010.

  • iii

    CERTIFICATION

    This is to certify this study: PROBLEMS ON PRIVATIZATION OF

    FEDERAL PARASTATALS IN NIGERIA; a study of NITEL AND ITS

    SUBSIDIARY M-TEL, carried out by Orlu Dagogo Cornelius

    PG/MBA/08/473000 under supervision, has satisfied the necessary

    requirements for the award of Master of Business Administration

    (MBA) degree in Management, University of Nigeria.

    By

    ORLU DAGOGO CORNELIUS

    Chief J.A. Ezeh Date Project Supervisor C.O. Chukwu Date Head, Department of Management

  • iv

  • v

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    The process of preparing this work was not an easy task.

    Nonetheless, some people contributed both financially, morally and

    socially towards its executions.

    First, I thank the Almighty God for His grace, mercy, love and

    kindness and more importantly for protecting me from all kinds of

    problems during the strenuous period of the study.

    My supervisor, Chief J.A. Eze who read the work and made inputs

    of immeasurable value, whose advise, patience and understanding

    obviously made for assiduous exploration. To him, I owe a lot of

    gratitude.

    My gratitude also goes to my Head of Department, C.O. Chukwu

    and to all lecturers in Management Department in particular and

    Business Administration in general.

    The financial burden of this work as well as my education have

    been fully borne by me through dedication, determination and above

    all, the grace of God.

    Also, my profound gratitude goes to Mr. Dakoru Wenika, Miss

    Okoli Nwakego and my entire family who aided me socially and morally

    for the completion of this programme.

    And finally to my colleagues in the graduate school; Okoli Charity

    N., Johnson Omi, Emmanuel Obijuru. Thank you for your supports at

    various times.

  • vi

    ABSTRACT

    The research work is aimed at studying the problems of privatization of

    Federal Parastatals with particular reference to NITEL and its subsidiary M-

    Tel. Many African countries including Nigeria embarked upon the

    establishment of Public Enterprises, managed and controlled by the

    government of each country. However, the problems of insufficient

    enterprise autonomy, defective capital structures resulting in heavy

    dependence on the national treasury for operational purposes, and

    economic depression of the nation, called for privatization of these public

    enterprises as a measure of reform to avoid total collapse of the system

    and grounding of the economy. Hence Privatization is a tool or reform for

    economic management of modern industrial economy.The objective of the

    study is to examine the reasons and basis for privatization, the effects, the

    types and problems of privatization of federal parastatals in Nigeria. The

    population of the study was made up of disengaged and retained staff of

    both NITEL and M-Tel in Rivers and Enugu States respectively. The sample

    size was determined using Yamani’s formular and Chi-square for testing of

    hypotheses. The survey research method was adopted in eliciting data

    from respondents for this study. The major findings are that, privatization

    exercises in Nigeria are prone to self inflicted complications, lack of

    transparency due to corruption that has remained the omnipresent

    obstacle that erodes every exercise in Nigeria. In meeting the above

    findings, the recommendations proposed for privatization exercise in

    Nigeria are; The privatization exercise should ensure the evolution and

    development of a near perfect policy, economic reformation and

    restructuring of Nigeria’s political economy. Finally, the federal government

    should have a proper labour policy to resolve terminal benefits matters in

    collective bargaining.

  • vii

    THE PROBLEM ON PRIVATIZATION OF FEDERAL

    PARASTATALS IN NIGERIA, A STUDY OF NIGERIAN

    TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (NITEL) AND ITS

    SUBSIDIARY, NIGERIA MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS

    LIMITED (M-TEL)

    BY ORLU, DAGOGO CORNELIUS REG. NO: PG/MBA/08/47300

    DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

    UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS

    APRIL, 2010.

  • viii

    CHAPTER ONE

    1.0 INTRODUCTION

    1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

    The federal government of Nigeria embarked on political,

    constitutional, banking, pension and economic reforms having sensed

    the economic depression of the nation. Privatization is one of the

    pivots of the economic reforms which the former (President Olusegun

    Obasanjo) was committed to during his tenure of democratic

    governance in Nigeria.

    The economic depression with its deep and severe

    consequences coupled with the revolution in the union of soviet

    socialist Republic (USSR) in the late 1930 led to a situation where

    government dabbled into running enterprises it had no business in.

    This became possible because private sector enterprises especially in

    Western Europe collapsed due to recession.

    Upon the attainment of independence, many African countries

    embarked on the establishment of public enterprises. At

    independence in 1960, Nigeria’s economy had a week industrial

    sector with near absence of basic infrastructure, inadequate capital

    and weak technological base. The public enterprises were established

    because the then economy was that of an agricultural sector

    producing largely primary products for exports.

    The oil boom of the 1970s helped the government to enter into

    ownership and control of economic activities. In view of this, the

  • ix

    provisions of Telecommunications facilities in the country which was

    restricted mainly to government business, enforcement of law and

    order and administration of the country prior to independence,

    became no longer restricted after independence because of

    development of trade, commerce, industries and private enterprises

    which commenced at a fast rate and required such services.

    However since independence, there has been a number of

    development plans for the expansion and modernization of

    Telecommunications Network Services.

    Under the first development plan, a total of 100,000 telephone

    services were installed besides other improvements like provision of

    large capacity cross-bar exchanges at Ikeja and Lagos Main land

    respectively. Constructions of radio routes to link 23 urban cities in

    the country including Ibaban, Kaduna, Sokoto, Kano, Jos, Maiduguri,

    Warri, Calabar among others and trunk dialing at urban centers were

    in progress. The implementation of this programme was dis-rupted

    by the civil war (1966 – 1969). At the end of civil war, the status of

    the first P & T (Post and Telecommunication) plan (1963 – 1968) was

    reviewed and the second national plant was launched in 1970. This

    enabled the government to improve on the existing

    telecommunications facilities by marginal investment in major and

    industrial areas and gradually extended to some rural and war

    affected areas.

    However, in order to correct some problems in the system,

    government under the contingency plan in 1977 increased telephone

  • x

    lines to 167,000 representing telephone density in the country to

    approximately 3 per 1000 population. In addition, the communication

    Ministry had a long-term plan for improvement of telecommunication

    facilities within the context of the 3rd development plan (1975 –

    1980) under which the new modern telephone exchanges with

    additional 84,000 lines were provided. At the end of this development

    plan in 1985, the year that marked the birth of NITEL Ltd, only

    207,276 telephone lines and 500 Telex lines were introduced into the

    network, thus bringing a total telephone lines in the system to

    220,000.

    But with the quest for effective and efficient communications

    services, Global System for Mobile Telecommunication was introduce

    to alleviate the problems being encountered under NITEL. Hence

    prior to the emergence of this Global System for Mobile

    Telecommunications (GSM) in the year 2001, the Analogue system

    (090) was the only mobile cellular telephone in Nigeria which was

    introduced in 1992 and its operation was under the supervision of

    NITEL, the then leading and dominant operator.

    Hence with the creation of M-tel in 1996, the responsibility of

    providing (090) services was shifted to M-tel which was basically a

    subsidiary to NITEL but operates independently of NITEL.

    Ironically, inspite of the huge investments in public enterprises

    in Nigeria, their services could not meet the demand of the populace.

    During the oil boom of the 1970s, nobody complained but with the

    dwindling of government revenue and global crisis, it became

  • xi

    imperative to remove those policies that fostered and encouraged the

    dominance of the public sector in the Nations economic life.

    The establishment of parastatals is a popular strategy used in

    developing Nations for notable reasons which includes; economic

    leadership, national security, social welfare, profit motives, effective

    control of resources, De-bureacratic efficiency etc.

    There are pertinent factors that account for the poor

    performance of these parastatals despite huge investment. According

    to Okeke (1985), such factors are lack of accountability, lack of profit

    motives, monopoly, over staffing, indiscipline, lack of coordination of

    staff level and partly politics.

    Other factors recorded by Mbanefo (1985) were failure to

    conflict objective, not flexible decision making, excessive wastage of

    resources, underutilization of assets, low activity, motivation, poor

    attitude to work and company affairs.

    Hayafu Deen (1985) also believes that over extended and

    cumbersome organizational structure, recruitments based on

    extraneous consideration instead of merits, no concrete performance

    target, parastatals used as vehicle for political patronages etc are

    some militating problems.

    1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

    We recognized that parastatals like Nigerian

    Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) and its subsidiary Nigerian

    Mobile Telecommunications Limited (M-TEL), Power Holding

  • xii

    Company of Nigeria (PHCN), Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), etc,

    occupied a pivotal position in the search for the Nation’s speedy

    economic development and self sufficiency. The Nation’s inability to

    achieve its development goals was partly as a result of the problems

    of these parastatals.

    Some of these problems are thus:

    - Mismanagement of funds

    - Heavy dependence on the national treasury for operational

    purposes as a result of defective capital

    - Mis use of power resulting in corruption and bureaucratic

    bottleneck

    The non-prevention of these long-lasting problems had indicated

    negatively on the nation’s economic performance.

    Since the first privatization of NITEL and M-Tel to Transnational

    Corporation of Nigeria Plc (Transcorp) had failed, the second phase

    of the privatization exercise already on ground should address the

    problems of effective privatization. In addition, the possible

    privatization malpractices of the first indigenization exercise should

    serve as safety belt for the implementation of privatization policy.

    Some of these malpractices include;

    - Few privileged people buying up most of the shares.

    - Partial privatization and not full (total) privatization thereby

    creating rooms for government and political intervention.

  • xiii

    - The Chief Executive Officers and Managing Directors were

    not appointed on merit but on political benefits.

    The research work attempts to examine the problem of the

    institutional framework for the guided privatization in terms of

    government transparency. It will attempt to restate the importance of

    the valuation of assets and investment in NITEL and M-TEL through

    the Bureau for public Enterprises (BPE).

    Since the Nigeria factor has been a major set back in the

    implementation of many laudable economic and political policies

    geared towards national development, this research would attempt to

    examine the success story of NITEL and M-TEL privatization in

    Nigeria. It will also examine the responses from people on the

    problem of economic activities of the nation.

    1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

    The objective of the study are as follows:

    i. To examine the problems of privatizing federal parastatals in

    the country.

    ii. To examine the institution frame work guiding effective

    privatization in terms of government transparency

    iii. To examine the effect of privatization on the labour market

    and employees of such parastatals.

  • xiv

    iv. To examine the type of privatization adopted by the

    government and her agencies that will suit the aspiration of

    the citizenry.

    v. To ascertain the faith of the retained staff of the parastatals

    after privatization.

    1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

    The research questions for this study are as follows:

    i. What are the problems on privatizing federal parastatals in

    the country?

    ii. What are the institutional frame work guiding privatizations

    in terns of government transparency?

    iii. What are the effects of privatization on the labour market

    and employees of the affected parastatals before and after

    the privatization?

    iv. What type of privatization exercise was adopted by the

    federal government and her agencies and how was it

    accepted by the citizenry?

    v. To what extent does the faith of the retained staff of the

    privatized parastatals be guaranteed in terms prompt

    payment of salary/allowance and out right dismissed for

    flimsy reason?

    HYPOTHESES

  • xv

    For the purpose of this study, the following assumptions will be

    subjected to critical text.

    Hypothesis 1

    Ho: There is positive correlation between privatization of federal

    parastatals and associated problems

    Hi: There is no positive correlation between privatization of federal

    parastatals and associated problems.

    Hypotheses 2

    Ho: The privatization exercise is not directly related to the due

    process as such lacks transparency.

    Hi: The privatization exercise is directly related to the due process

    as such does not lack transparency.

    Hypotheses 3

    Ho: The privatization has negative effect on the labor market as

    well as the employees.

    Hi: The privatization has positive effect on the labour market as

    well as the employees.

    Hypotheses 4

    H0: Ownership of the company partly by the federal government

    and partly by the private sector (partial privatization) is not the

    aspiration of the citizenry.

  • xvi

    Hi: Ownership of the company partly by the federal government

    and partly by the private sector (partial privatization) is the

    wish of the people.

    Hypotheses 5

    H0: The retained staff of the company are not well taken care of

    after privatization

    Hi: The retained staff of the company are well taken care of after

    privatization.

    1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

    The significance of the study can be viewed from the major

    standpoints: Practical and academic

    (a) Practical Significance

    This kind of study will assist in broadening understanding of the

    followings:

    - To employees of paratatals in general, it will expose the

    relationship existing between them and their employers,

    which will be of interest to them in their respective

    paratatals.

    - Specifically to retained staff of NITEL and M-TEL understudy;

    it will expose to a large extent the going-on in this

  • xvii

    organizations with regards to the relevant variables and

    comparative analysis of government actions over some

    relevant years.

    - To policy makers and regulators like BPE; it will present

    through its analysis that could assist them in enunciating

    polices that will not only have positive impact but also to

    remain relevant in the policy by performing such functions

    as proper guide lines for privatization and employees safety

    and protection in such manifestation.

    (b) Academic Significance

    (i) It will contribute to the enrichment of the literature on

    privatization and its associated problems.

    (ii) It will support ways (of interest to academics) based on the

    empirical evidence of enhancing the employment situation

    rather than out rightly lay off staff on the pretence of

    privatization which affects the economy.

    (iii) The study will serve as a body of reserved knowledge to be

    preferred to by researchers.

    1.6 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

    In researching the topic “Problem on Privatization of federal

    parastatals in Nigeria”, the researcher focused on strategies and due

    process used by the federal government and Bureau for public

  • xviii

    enterprises in privatizing NITEL and M-TEL. However, the

    privatization exercise is still in its infancy in Nigeria as such, detailed

    information on this study is lacking which makes the study difficult to

    adequately access the outcome of the exercise.

    In addition, the researcher does not claim to have identified all

    parameters used in the privatization exercise. This is as a result of

    some limitations which includes; time constraints, financial

    constraints and data constraints.

    1.7 DEFINITION OF TERMS

    NITEL: Nigerian Telecommunication Limited

    M-TEL: Nigerian Mobile Telecommunication Limited

    GSM: Global System for Mobile Communication

    BPE: Bureau for Public Enterprises

    Transcop: Transitional Corporation of Nigeria Plc.

    Privatization: Removing the government ownership of an

    organization to the private sector. (Comas C.D

    2005;20): The Pain and Gain of privatization.

  • xix

    REFERENCES

    Abdulkadun B. I.(1992) The multifunction telephone system. NITEL

    Journal Vol. 8 January/February 19

    Okeke, C. O. (1983:2-3) Restructuring the Nigerian Economy; “The

    place of privatization”, paper presented at the National Seminar

    on Privatization organized by the securities and exchange

    commission, Kanno.

  • xx

    M-Tel Journal July (2003), M-Tel news Vol.1, No. 2 .

    Mbanefor, A.C.I (1985:1-4) capital restructuring for successful

    privatization organized by the securities and exchange

    commission, Kano.

    Schellerberger, R. E.(1969:55-111) “Management Managerial Analysis

    (Homewood Illinois), Richard D-Irwin.

    Hayatu Deen (1985:1-3); “Performance Contract tools for public

    enterprises reform and restructuring” Paper presented at the

    National Workshop on the commercialization programme

    organized by TCP on April, 1985.

    CHAPTER TWO

    2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

    2.1 INTRODUCTION

  • xxi

    This chapter will essentially deal on various types of opinion

    expressed by different authors and researchers on federal

    government privatization exercises, achievements, problems and

    plans for future improvement. However, the chapter will in a proper

    perspective examine the view of authors on problems of privatization

    as it affects federal parastatals

    2.2 THEORETICAL REVIEW OF THE STUDY

    Privatization has been an important instrument of economic

    development since 1970s and has been at the forefront of economic

    policy of many countries, both developed and developing countries.

    Cook and Kirkpatric, 1988; “The policy objectives and motives

    for privatization varied between countries and have altered with

    times. In the case of the industrialized countries, in the early 1980s it

    could be argued that the dominant motive was an ideological one,

    with issues of economic efficiency assuming a significantly less

    important role.

    For developing countries, the public enterprises were looked

    upon for provision of utilities such as electricity, water, transportation

    etc. The public enterprises were seen as an important contributory

    factor of economic development as such, government financial

    support for the enterprises increased for social services are relegated

    to the background the development of the private sector. In late

    1970s, Public Enterprises accounted for one third of all international

    borrowing by developing countries and it was a source of concern

    (World Bank 1980).

  • xxii

    In the ex- socialist countries, privatization had been seen as an

    important factor in the process of transition from a centrally planned

    to market oriented economy. While in the highly, centralized state in

    Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union, where the states sector has

    accounted for Gross Domestic Product (GDP), privatization has been

    seen as a means of creating a private sector economy. (Schwartz,

    1993)

    2.3 PROBLEMS OF THE PARASTATALS

    Inspite of huge investments in government parastatals, their

    services could not meet the demand of the people. The reason for

    the establishment of these parastatals were not adequately achieved

    due to lack of accountability, lack of profit motives, over staffing,

    indiscipline, lack of co-ordination of staff level and partly politics

    (Okeke, 1983).

    Other problems include; failure to conflict objectives, not

    flexible in decision making, excessive wastage of resources, under-

    utilization of assets, no appropriate capital structure, purposeless

    attitude to work and to company affairs (Mbanefo, 1985).

    Further problems include; over extended and cumbersome

    organizational structure, recruitments based on extraneous

    consideration instead of merit, no concrete performance target,

    parastatals used as vehicles for political patronage etc (Hayatu Deen,

    1985)

  • xxiii

    2.4 COMPETITION (MONOPOLY BROKEN): A properly

    implemented programme has the potential to promote productivity

    and profitability through the exposure of the parastatals to

    commercial discipline of the market.

    Competition is already hutting up with NITEL and its subsidiary

    MTEL with other telecommunication providers such as Reltel, MTN,

    GLO, ZAIN, STARCOM etc. Diversified range of products now dots the

    lines in paid adverts by these new entrants. It is expected that very

    soon service provision and delivery will be at door posts of customers

    and purchase of line and Sim cards will soon be over.

    Chisnall Peter M. (1989) stated that nearly every market can be

    divided into several sub-markets which have significant

    characteristics affecting demand sand supply. Instead of treating all

    customers the same way by offering identical range of products and

    levels of services, objective market research enables groups or

    clusters of customers or high net worth customers to be identified

    whose needs can be more adequately met through specific marketing

    attention. Telecommunication services have wide variety of products.

    There is the need to identified corporate customers, high net worth

    customers, rural customers and specialized agencies in order to meet

    their specific needs adequately.

    The customers of telecommunication services were in great

    expectation for the privatization of NITEL and its subsidiary M-Tel

    despite the competitive nature of the market in order to benefit from

    the followings:

  • xxiv

    Injection of efficiency in the telecommunication services

    provision.

    Deregulation and healthy competition

    Removal of monopoly

    Attraction of private and foreign capital

    Reduction in the need of government subvention and control

    Growth and development in the economy

    Availability of services for potential subscribers.

    New technology and equipment.

    2.5 POLITICAL DEFINITION OF PRIVATIZATION

    The term privatization did not gain wide circulation in politics

    until the late 1770s and early 1980s. With the rise of conservative

    government in Great Britain, United States and France, privatization

    has come primarily to mean two things.

    Any shift of activities or functions from the state to the

    private sector and more especially;

    Any shift of the production of good and services from the

    public to private.

    Besides directly producing services, government establish the

    legal frame work of societies and regulate social and economic life,

    and finance services that are privately produced and consumed.

    Shift from publicly to produced services may result not only

    from a deliberate government action, such as sale of assets, but also

    from the choices of individuals or firms that a government is un-

  • xxv

    willing or un-able to satisfy or control. In Nigeria and most other

    countries, private demand for education, health care, retirement

    income has out stripped public provision. As a result, private

    schooling, medical care and pensions have grown to relatively larger

    proportions.

    If one shifts attention from the sphere of production to the

    sphere of consumption, one may alternatively define privatization as

    the substitution of private goods for public goods. A public good in

    the economics sense, has two distinguished properties.

    One person’s consumption does not preclude another’s, and

    excluding any one from consumption is costly if not impossible.

    A prototype example is fresh air. A public good need not be produced

    by government.

    These forms of privatization vary in the extent to which they

    move ownership, finance and accountability out of the public sector.

    The spectrum of alternatives runs from total privatization (as in

    government disengagement from some policy domain) to partial

    privatization (Contracting out or vouchers). This is typical of Nigeria

    Telecommunications Limited (NITEL) and its subsidiary Nigeria Mobile

    Limited (M-TEL), where the government partially privatized these

    paratatals to the Transnational Corporation of Nigeria PLC

    (Transcorp) in 2006 with the share percentage of 51% to Transcorp

    and 49% to the government.

    The implication of partial privatization vary with its degree as it

    affects NITEL and M-Tel. In this case, the government may continue

  • xxvi

    to own but not to manage assets. It is easy to treat privatization

    purely as a question of domestic policy. But where the likely buyers

    are foreigners, privatization of state-owned enterprises often means

    denationalization, a transfer of control to foreign investors or

    managers. Since state ownership often originally came about in an

    act of national self assertion, privatization appears to be a retreat in

    the face of international presence. This was the obvious reason why

    NITEL and M-TEL were partially privatized to an indigenous company

    called Transcorp under the leadership of present Olusegun Obasanjo.

    2.6 FORMS (TYPES) OF PRIVATIZATION

    Though, privatization is an arrangement which brings about

    change in the ownership structure from the public to private hands.

    It involves the private participation in the management and operation

    of public enterprises. It is the vehicle for restructuring public

    enterprises, de-regulation and major economics reforms. If attracts

    foreign capital investment through core foreign investors, foreign

    equity participation and injection of new technology.

    There are two basic types or forms of privatization;

    Full privatization

    Partial privatization.

    2.6.1 FULL PRIVATIZATION:

    This is a privatization aims at achieving efficiency, increase

    productivity, economic growth, enhances per capital income and

    standard of living. Full privatization entails a carefully planned and

    systemically implemented programmes of government by way of with

  • xxvii

    drawal of full control of business enterprises in order to be effectively

    and efficiently ran by the private operator it has fully handed over

    ownership to.

    Professionals, policy makers and economic planners alike, tend

    to hold the view that the full privatization policy, guided or unguided

    can yield substantial benefits, in terms of greater efficiency, renewed

    investment, budgeting savings and the preservation of public finance

    (Obadan and Ayodele, 1998).

    2.6.2 PARTIAL PRIVATIZATION:

    Partial privatization in the context of guided privatization is

    explained as government carefully planned and systemically

    implemented programme of government partial with-drawal from the

    control of business enterprises which can be more effectively and

    efficiently run by the private operators.

    It was evidenced from the research conducted that NITEL and

    its subsidiary M-TEL were partially privatized. This shows that the

    federal government has 49% shares while Transcorp has 51%

    shares. This affected the operation of the company as such not fully

    autonomous. The structure and the objective of the company are not

    fully adhered and the objective of the company are not fully adhered

    to due to government influence. This resulted into un-precedented

    restructuring of the organization with better unachieved theoretical

    promises to move the company forward.

    Therefore, it is proper at this point to say that the management

    of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL were confused on whom to serve

  • xxviii

    (either Transcorp or Federal government). Partial privatization does

    not conform with the principles of “Unity of Command” where the

    subordinate must receive instructions from one boss only. As the

    saying goes, “You cannot serve two masters at the same time”.

    Once these parastatals are fully privatized in this third phase of

    the ongoing privatization exercise to be concluded within the first

    quarter of 2010, the new company will have a sense of direction. The

    organization structure, the vision and mission of the company will be

    consistently adhered to in all levels of the management of the

    organization in order to work towards achieving the desire objectives

    of the company.

    2.7 GOVERNMENT APPROACH TO PRIVATIZATION IN

    NIGERIA

    The first attempt to move forward a competitive market system

    was in 1986 with the introduction of the structural Adjustment

    Programme and the promulgation of the privatization and

    communication decree No. 25 of 1988. The Federal Government

    outlined the objectives to include improvement of the efficiency and

    reliability of the operations of the companies, reduction of their

    dependency on the national treasury for operation, promotion of

    share ownership by Nigerian in productive investment which were

    owned wholly or partially by the federal government. At the end of

    the process in 1992, a total of 89 companies were privatized. These

    include SEA TRAVEL, MOTOR ASSEMBLY, HOTELS and TOURISM,

  • xxix

    TEXTILE, TRANSPORTATION and a lot of others. The proceeds from

    the exercise amounted to N4.66 billion.

    The second phase of the privatization promises to be the

    biggest in Africa as it concerns major state owned National

    Corporation. In October 2006, the Bureau for public enterprises

    invited local and international investors to express interest in about

    37 state owned companies slated for privatization. These include;

    Daily Times of Nigeria, New Nigerian Newspaper, Nigerian

    Telecommunications Limited and its subsidiary Nigerian Mobile

    Telecommunications Limited, National Electric Power Authority,

    Rolling Mills, Nigeria Newsprint manufacturing company, Petroleum

    Refineries among others. Under the new programme, the

    government planned to sell 40% of its equity in the enterprises to

    strategic foreign investors through international open tenders. 20%

    will be sold to Nigerian investors through public share offers leaving

    the government with 40% shares. This pattern of share holding

    indicates colonization of the economy as such should be looked into.

    LEGAL FRAMEWORK: The Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE)

    Decree No 78 of 1993 which supercede the technical committee of

    privatization and commercialization (TCPC) Decree No 25 of 1988

    which formed the legal framework for the privatization. However,

    amendment is expected to be made to reflect the expected

    privatization exercise slated in the first quarter of 2010.

    2.8 IMPACT OF PRIVATIZATION ON THE MASSES

    The theory justifying privatization holds that it is desirable for

  • xxx

    its likely political effect in deflecting and reducing demand on the

    sates. In the 1970s, some critics suggested that the Western

    democracies were suffering from an overload of pressure responsible

    for excessive spending and poor economic performance. Within this

    frame work, privatization represents one of several policies

    encouraging a counter – revolution declining expectations. Privatizing

    government enterprises and public services in this view will re-direct

    aspirations into the market and encourage a more entrepreneurial

    consciousness.

    The political theory of privatization has several different over

    lapping elements.

    First, the partial privatization of government parastatals (NITEL

    and M-TEL) should have an employment relation. The advocates of

    privatization hope to divert employees’ wages and claims from the

    public treasury, with its vast capacity for taxing and borrowing, to

    private employees, who presumably will have more spines in resisting

    wage demand.

    Secondly, the advocates of privatization hope also for a

    privatization of beneficiary claims. Instead of matching out-side of

    government offices when things go wrong, the privatizers want them

    to direct their ire to private service providers. The analogies were

    mere theoretical following the ethics of privatization in Nigeria,

    especially as it affects the telecommunication industry where NITEL

    and its subsidiary M-TEL belong. The partial privatization of these

    parastatals (NITEL and M-TEL), were purely for personal and political

  • xxxi

    reason as such, the practical connotations for such privatization were

    not put into consideration.

    The global trends in this information age favours privatization,

    not partial privatization, but there has been eries of the partial

    privatization of NITEL and M-TEL. Some of the reasons asked for the

    clarion call for the privatization and NITEL and M-TEL include;

    Inefficiency of the organization

    Extensive spending and rip-offs

    Corruption, tribalism, favouritism, fraud and indiscipline.

    Over size labour

    Low returns on investment

    Political consideration of sitting of Base

    Transmission stations (BTS).

    Much as the advantages on privatization seem to hold, the social

    impact on the populace should not be under-estimated. Privatization

    will bring hike in price of services, tariff or product prices as the

    investors would want to recoup their cost of investment on record

    time.

    There was the possibility of under valuation of the assets of

    both NITEL and M-TEL which have been hard earned by tax-payers in

    a bid to gain undue advantage by the fraudulent minority company of

    Transcorp or rich few who hijacked the whole exercise to themselves

    knowing the numerous assets owned by these paratatals over the 36

    states and Abuja.

  • xxxii

    Privatization has definitely triggered a massive layout of

    workers which has constituted serious problems and un-employment.

    Out of the total staff strength of about 13,000 for both NITEL and M-

    TEL, about 10,000 staff were retrenched representing 77% keeping

    about 3,000 representing 23%. There is no pension scheme. Many

    people engaged in public service because of pension scheme dangled

    by the government.

    2.9 PROBLEMS OF PRIVATIZATION

    There were jubilations in almost every quarter when the news

    of privatization and acquisition of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL by

    Transcorp-broke out in 2006. People thought it was a wise decision

    taken by the Obasanjo’s administration and a step in the right

    direction. The share price of Transcorp immediately appreciated and

    people felt it was a good market for investment. Little did they know

    that Transcorp was wearing a good company’s mask on disguise

    under the shadow of President Olusegun Obasanjo.

    In late 2006 when NITEL and M-TEL were partially privatized,

    there were sweet testimonies and promises given by the Transcorp

    on the acquisition of the government parastatals. These testimonies

    later held on substance and faded like a block of ice dropped in a cup

    of worm water. Transcorp, rather than keeping to its promises,

    engaged in selling some of the assets of the acquired companies and

    also brought pains and agonies to the dis-engaged and re-engaged

    staff. Salaries and allowances have not been paid to the re-engaged

    staff for almost one and half years (1½ years) now. Payment of

  • xxxiii

    pensionable staff was forcefully tagged at five (5) years which was

    even paid with difficulties, tears and under strenuous exercise. This

    has brought NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL to partial closure as non-

    functional organizations.

    The problems of privatization cannot be over-emphasized.

    Comrade Nwagbara C. O, the then secretary general of the senior

    staff Association of Utilities, Statutory Corporations and government

    companies in the Guardian of August 4, 2005, raised an alarm over

    the strenuous effects of the national council of privatization to

    embark on due diligence with the prospective investors in the

    privatization exercise of NITEL and M-TEL, NICON and other

    parastatals.

    The association lamented that it is not in the public and

    national interest for the government to allow its citizens to suffer

    humiliation and deprivation as is now the fate of citizens of Nigerian

    working in the privatized Niger Dock Ltd, NITEL and M-TEL.

    According to him, “No true government of the people can sit around

    and oversee the destruction of its citizens. He expressed fear of

    dehumanizing labour relations, deprivations and humiliation awaiting

    Nigerians citizens as obtained now in privatized parastatals as the

    government rushes on the privatization”.

    There is no doubt that privatization will have impact on the

    employment mix through deliberate policies of downsizing,

    restructuring and retrenchments. Consequently more labour will be

  • xxxiv

    thrown into the un-employment market. Regrettably, no social

    benefits are attached to the un-employment in Nigeria.

    Some sectors of the Nigerian however, have expressed concern

    over privatization generally, considering the issues whether the

    process places the assets in the hands of those who can deliver the

    desired quality service without exploiting the poor, whether the

    exercise would not lead to loss of jobs which has already happened.

    Oddy E, President of the Senor Staff associations of Nigeria

    (NPA), has stated that, given the role of ports as the nations

    economic life wire, privatization will mean selling the gateway of

    Nigeria economy to foreigners. He emphasized that under a

    privatized port, the nation will be exposed to security risks since all

    sorts of good will be imported into the country.

    “Will, unbundling before its privatization make the difference?

    “A pertinent question asked on page 17 of the Nation Newspaper of

    February 1, 2010. It reads in parts: … “In line with the advice of the

    Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC), the Bureau of Public

    Enterprises (BPE) is adopting the un-bundling strategy to deal with

    the privatization challenges of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL. What

    this entails is the breaking down of NITEL into several units, with the

    aim of selling them as entities, as opposed to the usual wholesale

    strategy that had failed severally in the past.

    For the reasons that are peculiarly Nigerians, NITEL’s

    privatization has remained problematic, and with the controversy

  • xxxv

    trailing the latest over to unbundle the hitherto functional national

    carrier, no one is assured of a fruitful conclusion, the paper stressed.

    It is said in the last eight years or thereabout, and at every turn

    of events, the federal government has continued to commit very

    huge resources to the process designed to fail. For instance, when

    Orascom’s bid was rejected, Nigeria paid $800,000 to KPMG (a

    consulting firm) through the BPE (Bureau for public enterprises) for a

    due diligence examination and other handling charges. The point is,

    corruption is the only thing standing in the way of the privatization of

    NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL.

    As things stand, we support the “Unbundling Strategy” if it will

    not go the way of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN). It

    appears a reasonable option for obvious reasons. First, the core

    investors in communication may no longer find NITEL as attractive as

    it was eight years ago. Most of its equipment have become obsolete.”

    2.10 SELF INFLICTED COMPLICATION

    Strict compliance of both regulators and participants to the

    rules and time frames of 1999 privatization and commercialization Act

    and customary international privatization practices would had

    ensured the evolution and development of a near project policy and

    the economic reformation and restructuring of Nigeria’s economy.

    The expected trajectory of the entire privatization exercise

    immediately took a dangerous derailment after the first five years of

    implementation.

  • xxxvi

    By the twilight of the past administration in Nigeria, a plethora

    of discontentment on the exercise had reached fever pitches. A

    panoply of privatization controversies in Nigeria includes the

    entangled privatization exercise of NITEL and its subsidiary M-Tel,

    NEPA (PHCN), Power Sector Reforms, the Oil sector reforms

    particularly NNPC, the Ports reforms, the inability of 18 successor

    companies to Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHEN) to function,

    the sales of National Steel Companies (Ajaokuta Steel and Delta

    Steel) to Global Infrastructure, NAFCON, Eleme Petro-Chemicals, the

    draconian sale of Federal Government Properties in Lagos and Abuja

    considered by Patriotic Civil Servants to be the greatest economics

    heist of the 21st Century in Africa.

    The technical complications are direct consequences of several

    structural defects in the legal, policy and implementation frame works

    of the exercise. These defects are better understood by applying

    performance bench marks for the exercise. As accumulation of these

    complications continues to scupper the lofty objectives of the

    exercise, the axiomatic solution is for regulator to re-evaluate, re-

    engineer and enforce improved policies and implementation models,

    enhance legislative advocacy, regulation and compliance etc. The

    consensus among several stakeholders is that Nigerian privatization

    program requires several fundamental restructuring and

    improvement to argument and maximizes its impact on Nigeria

    2.11 REQUIRED REFORMS ON PRIVATIZATION.

  • xxxvii

    2.11.1 WORKABLE PRIVATIZATION MODEL: There are

    several models for privatization of public enterprises. However, the

    core investor (auction) model is synonymous with transition from

    state to market economy and not developing economics hence, it is

    the most susceptible to abuses. This model also involves the inclusion

    of other institutional supervision agencies such as the Securities and

    Exchange Commission and stock exchange.

    2.11.2 ESTABLISHMENT OF ADDITIONAL SECTOR

    REGULATORY COMMISSION:

    The ultimate target of privatization, is to create and expand private

    markets. Sector regulation is one of the fulcrums of privatization

    considering the manpower handicap of the Bureau for public

    enterprises, the solution lies in establishing more sector regulators.

    This will enforce price control, free competition, service control,

    quantity and quality as in the case of the Nigeria communication

    commission for effective sector regulatory commission.

    2.11.3 IMPROVED POST PRIVATIZATION REGULATORY

    FRAMEWORK:

    With the absence of sector regulators and anti competition laws or

    commission, an effective post privatization regulatory and compliance

    framework should be put in place. In other jurisdiction, privatized

    firms are deprivatized and ownership and control reverted to the

    regulator once they failed to meet agreed bench mark with in specific

  • xxxviii

    time limits as in the case of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL Since the

    BPE is overwhelmed by several regulatory responsibilities, another

    sub commission must be established for this purposes. The senate

    and House committee on privatization can also be of immense value

    in compliance and regulation matters. Unfortunately, the senate

    committee and House of Representatives committees were severely

    compromised doing nothing proactive on privatization for four years.

    However, the federal Government of Nigeria must be hailed for

    the recent revocation of the sales of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL

    to Transcorp.

    2.11.4 ENACTING NIGERIA’S COMPETITION LAW: The full

    concept of privatization involves deregulation of public sector

    monopolies, involving of private enterprises, encouraging free

    competition with in a regulated framework to improve quality,

    quantity of services at reduced prices. Once companies are

    deregulated, there is a high tendency for it to operate as a private

    monopoly except it is controlled by specific competition or anti-trust

    laws. The lack of competition laws remains one of the major bones of

    privatization in Nigeria

    2.11.5 PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY: Since all the faulty or

    controversial decisions are made by Government Official in the

    exercise, the question arise as to who owes the responsibility and

    accountability to whom in the privatization scandals that have

    unfolded in recent yours. Can a regulator regulates itself or can one

  • xxxix

    be a judge in your own court? The national assembly that ought to

    check the excesses of our privatization seem to compromise in their

    functions or do not have enough information. Government can

    ensure public accountability of the entire exercise by passing a

    freedom of information bill and allowing the national assembly more

    supervisory roles. This will bring checks and balances in the functions

    and responsibilities of Government Official, stakeholder and affected

    enterprises.

    2.11.6 NON-AUDIT OR EVALUATION OF THE EXERCISE:

    Since 1999 when the privatization Act become law and with the BPE

    having privatized over 400 public enterprises. Nigerians have never

    been privileged to determine who sold what public enterprises; to

    whom was it sold, at what price and what is the performance record

    of the privatized firm. We have had snippets of congressional hearing

    of designated public enterprises as we saw of NITEL and M-Tel in

    2005. This none audit or evaluation of the exercise has only

    encouraged certain Government officials sabotaging the exercise to

    grow in confidence and statue while majority of the privatized public

    enterprise remain prostrate in un-necessary crises, NITEL/MTEL a

    practical example.

    2.11.7 LOSS OF EXPERIENCED MANPOWER: We have

    continued to witness frequent industrial squabbles in privatized public

    enterprises. The crux of retrenchment of employees of public Firms

    under-mines decades of man-power experience and waste of training

  • xl

    funds used to train staff of privatized firms. The result is the

    saturation of unemployment market and wanton waste of valuable

    experience and technical know how. None or late payment of

    retrenchment benefits has continued to generate frequent industrial

    squabbles as seen in NITEL, NAFCON etc. The proper labour policy to

    resolve terminal benefit matters is collective bargaining involving the

    BPE, the management of the public enterprises, the management of

    private firm, the employees union of the public enterprises, other

    professional consultant etc.

    2.12 SUMMARY OF REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE:

    The wind of privatization blew across our country (Nigeria) for

    some time as occasioned by the reforms being in place by the past

    and present administrations. While the reforms was however painful

    to others especially the employees of the affected state parastatals

    as in the case of NITEL and its subsidiary M-TEL. In changing the

    public-private mix in any type of economy, partial privatization will

    sometimes be less important than the emergence of new private

    business especially in Nigeria.

  • xli

    REFERENCE:

    A paper (2006) titled “Transcorp Acquires NITEL/M-TEL”

    July, 4.

    Comrade Nwagbara C.O (2005), The Guardian Newspaper,

    August 4

    Dike C. (2005). The wind of privatization

    Cook .P. and Kirkpatrick, C. (1988) Privatization in less

    Developed Countries, New York, Harvesters and

    wheat sheat

    M-TEL Journal February/March (2004) M-Tel New

    Vol2. No2.

    Obadan M and Ayodele A (1988), Improving Public Finance

    through reforms of states owned enterprises: A case

    of commercialization and privatization; Paper

    presented for NCEMA, as a training material on

    fiscal policy planning and Management, Ibadan,

    Nigeria, May, 2000

    Ralp D.S (1996) Strategic Management and Organizational

    Dynamics 2nd Ed. Pitman Publishing.

    Schwartz S. N. (1993:52) Finance Theory and Corporate

    Policy, London, Wesley Publishing Co.

    World Bank (1980:1-2) Bureaucrats in Business. The Economics

    and Politics of Government Ownership-Pamphlet

  • xlii

    CHAPTER THREE

    3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

    3.1 INTRODUCTION:

    Every researcher must as a matter of necessity, adopt a

    method that will help elicit the idea of the study under consideration.

    This chapter, therefore aims at assessing and picking the most

    appropriate research method that best suited for the purpose of the

    study.

    3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

    A research design is the programme that guides the

    investigator in the process of collecting, analyzing and interpreting

    observation. It serves as a road map or plan of action showing what

    and how the researcher will carryout step-by-step procedure of

    accomplishing the research endeavour.

    The research will employ both the survey and description

    research designs. These suit our purpose and are appropriate for this

    study. They nonetheless, are advantageous for assessing large and

    small populations especially when a small population is to be derived

    from a large one.

    3.3 POPULATION/SAMPLE SIZE

  • xliii

    Population is the identifiable total set of elements of interest

    being investigated by the researcher.

    The researcher will administer questionnaires and oral

    interviews on a population of about 600 comprising disengaged and

    re-engaged staff of NITEL and M-TEL draw from Rivers and Enugu

    States. For obvious constraints, not every member of the population

    could be reached. In view of this, these groups of staff from the two

    parastatals from two states were randomly chosen.

    3.4 SOURCE OF DATA

    The data for this study were collected from both primary and

    secondary sources.

    Primary data

    In collecting primary data, a questionnaire as a research instrument

    was draw up and randomly distributed with in the indicated areas of

    study. The questionnaire was designed in format that will give the

    best possible information required by the researcher from the

    respondents (NITEL/M-TEL staff of retained and disengaged). The

    data obtained from these questionnaire were basically relied upon

    and used in both the test and the analysis of the hypotheses.

    Secondary data

    Secondary data were collected by the researcher from textbooks,

    magazines, journals and newspaper where relevant for the study.

    3.5 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE:

  • xliv

    As can be inferred from above, the technique for gathering

    primary data is the simple probability sampling technique. The

    relevant respondents from each groups of the sample size are to be

    got using the stratified random method.

    SAMPLE METHOD

    The Yamani’s formular is used to determine the sample size

    since the population is known

    The formular is;

    n = __ N __

    1+Ne2

    Where n = Desired sample size

    N = Population of the study (estimated 600)

    e = limit of tolerable error square (using 10%)

    I = Theoretically constant.

    Assigning values to the formular;

    The sample size would be calculated thus;

    n = ____600_____ 1+600 x (1.0)2 n = 600 1+6 = 600 7 n = 85.714 n = 86

    3.6 PROCEDURE FOR DATA ANALYSIS

    The data would be analyzed with the aid of simple percentages

    and chi-square (x2)

  • xlv

    The percentage (%) would be used for this research because of

    its ability to transform questionnaire into values and attributes which

    were quantitative in nature. It would enable the researcher analyze

    the variables independently.

    The formulated Hypothesis would be tested using a non-

    parametric statistic called chi-square (X2) which would be used to

    calculate the expected frequency and the formular thus;

    Expected frequency = Row total-Column Total

    Grand Total

    The formular for calculating the chi-square (X2)

    X2 = (O-E)2

    Where O = Observed frequency

    E = Expected frequency

    O-E = Deviation

    (O-E)2 = Deviation square

    In addition, there is another consideration in the use of chi-square

    (X2) which is important. It is the assumption of a certain level of

    confidence or error margin. The degree of freedom which is its

    characteristic is calculated thus;

    df = (R-1) (C-1)

    Where

    df = Degree of freedom

    R = Number of rows

    C = Number of columns

    Rule guiding the use of chi-square.

  • xlvi

    There are two sets of figures that are relevant to the decision guiding

    the rule in the use of chi-square (X2). These two variables are the

    chi-square calculated value (X2) and the chi-square critical value

    (X2o). The rule in calculating the chi-square value (X2) and the chi-

    square critical value (X2o) are shown below;

    Reject Ho, if X2 > X2o

    Accept Hi, if X2 < X2o

    Where

    Ho = Null Hypothesis

    Hi = Alternative Hypothesis

    X2 = Calculated value of chi-square

    X20 = Critical value of chi-square

    > = Greater than

    < = Less than

    < = less than or equal to

    REFERENCES.

    Eboh E.C (1998) Social and Economic Research

    (Principles and methods) published by

    Academic publications and development

    Resources Ltd, Lagos.

    Eze, A.N. (1999); Practical approach to research

    Methods and statistics in Education,

    Management and Social Sciences. 1st Ed.

  • xlvii

    Onitsha, Onwubiko printing and packaging.

    Emmanuel Dibua etal (2003) Elements of business

    Statistics, Vol 1. Success publisher onitsha.

    Onwumere J.U (2009) Business and Economic; Research

    Methods, 2nd Ed.

    CHAPTER FOUR

    4.0 DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND

    INTERPRETATION.

    4.1 INTRODUCTION

  • xlviii

    In this chapter, all the data collected are analyzed and interpreted.

    The data were presented in tables, the researcher treated statements

    in the questionnaire separately and the responses worked out in

    percentages. From the analyses, it is hoped that it would be able to

    make some deductions which would either result in accepting or

    rejecting the hypotheses formulated in chapter one of the study.

    Chi-Square (X2) was used in testing of the hypotheses. This provides

    a means of comparing set of observed frequency (0) with the set of

    expected frequency (E).

    4.2 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

    In this chapter, the researcher analyses the various data

    collected from the respondents. A total of 86 questionnaire were

    distributed to both retained and disengaged staff of NITEL and MTEL

    in Enugu and River States. Out of these, 80 copies were properly

    answered and returned, three (3) copies were considered unsuitable

    for analytical purposes while three (3) copies were not returned.

    Table 4.1 below shows the population areas under study,

    proportion to the population in each area, number of questionnaire

    administered, numbers returned, numbers not returned, numbers

    considered unsuitable for analytical purposes and percentage

    represented.

  • xlix

    TABLE 4.1 DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRE

    Source: From NITEL/MT-TEL Zonal Personnel Offices, Enugu.

    TABLE 4.2 DISTRIBUTION AND RETURN RATE OF

    QUESIONNAIRE.

    S/NO Questionnaire No of respondents Percentage

    1 Returned 83 96.5

    2 Not Returned 3 3.5

    3 Not used 3 3.5

    4 Used 80 93.0

    Total distribution 86 100

    Source: From Field Investigation

    S/N Population Groups Estimated Population

    Number of Questionnaire

    Nos Returned

    Numbers Unreturned

    Nos Not Used

    Nos Used

    %

    01 Nitel Staff Retained, Enugu

    67 22 22 - 1 21 26.2

    02 Nitel Staff disengaged , Enugu

    202 17 16 1 1 15 18.8

    03 Nitel Staff Retained, Rivers

    87 16 15 1 - 15 18.8

    04 NitelStaff disengaged, Rivers

    191 13 12 1 - 12 15.0

    05 M-Tel Staff Retained, Enugu

    26 8 8 - - 8 10.0

    06 M-Tel Staff disengaged, Enugu

    11 4 4 - 1 3 5.0

    07 M-Tel Staff Retained, Rivers

    10 4 4 - - 4 3.7

    08 M-Tel Staff Disengaged, Rivers

    6 2 2 - - 2 2.5

    600 86 83 3 3 80 100

  • l

    Table 4.2 Illustrates that out of the total of 86 questionnaire

    distributed, 83 representing 96.5% were returned, 3 representing

    3.5% were not returned, 3 representing 3.5% were not suitable for

    used while 80 representing 93% were used in the analyses.

    TABLE 4.3 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO SEX

    S/NO Sex No of respondents Percentage

    1 Male 62 77.5

    2 Female 18 22.5

    Total 86 100

    Source: From Field Investigation

    Table 4.3, shows that 62 respondents (77.5%) were males while 18

    respondents were (22.5%) were female.

    Table 4.4 AGE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

    S/NO Age No of respondents Percentage

    1 20-25yrs 5 6.3

    2 26-35yrs 24 30.0

    3 36-45yrs 32 40.0

    4 46 years and

    above

    19 23.7

    Total 80 100

    Source: From Field Investigation

    Table 4.4 shows that 5 respondents (6.3%) were between 20-25yrs,

    24 respondents (30%) were between the age of 26-35yrs; 32

  • li

    respondents (40%) were between the age of 36-45years and 19

    respondents (23.7) were 46 years and above.

    TABLE 4.5 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS WORKING EXPERIENCE IN NITEL/MTEL

    S/N Years of work Experience

    No of respondents Percentage

    1 Less that 5 years 7 8.7

    2 Between 5 and 10years 13 16.3

    3 Between 10 and 20 years

    18 22.5

    4 Over 20 years 42 52.5

    Total 80 100

    Source: From Field Investigation

    Table 4.5 illustrate that 7 respondents(8.7%) have worked for

    between 1-5years in the parastatals, 13 respondents (16.3%) have

    worked for between 5-10years; 18 respondents (22.5%) have

    worked for between 10-20years in the parastatals and 42

    respondents (52.5%) have put in for more than 20years of service.

    Table 4.6 EDCUATIONAL QUALIFCATIONS OF RESPONDENTS

    S/NO Educational

    Qualification

    No of respondents Percentage

    1 WASC/GCE O/L 8 10.0

    2 OND/NCE/HSA 18 22.5

    3 HND/BSC/BA 34 42.5

    4 MBA/MSC/M.A 16 20.0

    Total 80 100

    Source: From Field Investigation

  • lii

    In table 4.6, it is shown that 8 respondents (10%) possessed

    WASC/GCE ’O’ Level; 18 respondent (22.5%) possessed

    OND/NCE/HSC; 34 respondents (42.5%) possessed HND/BSC/B.A; 16

    respondents (20%) possessed MBA/M.SC/M.A while 4 respondents

    (5%) possessed professional and other qualifications.

    Table 4.7 DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS RETAINED AND DISENGAGED

    STAFF.

    S/NO Parastatals No of respondents Percentage

    1 NITEL Retained 36 45

    2 NITEL Disengaged

    27 33.75

    3 M-tel Retained 12 15

    4 M-tel Disengaged 5 6.25

    Total 80 100 Source: from Field Investigation.

    Table 4.7 shows that a total of 36 respondents (45%) were from

    retained NITEL staff; 27 respondents (33.75%) were from dis-

    engaged NITEL staff; 12 respondents (15%) were from retained M-

    tel staff while 5 respondents (6.25%) were from dis-engaged M-tel

    staff.

    TABLE 4.8: RESPONDENT IN TO TWO GROUPS (RETAINED AND DIS-

    ENGAGED)

    Table for easy analyses s/n Group No of

    Respondent

    %

    1 Retained 48 60

    2 Disengaged 32 40

  • liii

    Total 80 100

    TABLE 4.8 RESPONDENTS IN TO TWO GROUP (RETAINED

    AND DISENGAGED) FOR EASY ANALYSES.

    S/NO Groups No of respondents Percentage

    1 Retained 48 60

    2 Disengaged 32 40

    Total 80 100

    Source: Field investigation

    Table 4.8, illustrate that 48 respondents (60%) were retained staff of

    both parastatals while 32 respondents (40%) came from the

    disengaged staff of both NITEL and M-tel.

    TABLE 4.9 RESPONDENTS REACTION ON WEATHER PROBLEMS

    ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PRIVATIZATION OF NITEL AND M-

    TEL.

    S/NO Responses No of respondents Total Percentage

    Retained Disengaged

    1 Strongly 25 15 40 50

  • liv

    Agree

    2 Agree 15 12 27 38.75

    3 Undecided 4 3 7 8.75

    4 Disagree 2 1 3 3.75

    5 Strongly

    Disagree

    2 1 3 3.75

    Total 48 32 80 100

    Source: Field investigation.

    Table 4.9 shows that a total of 40 respondents (50%) strongly agree

    that there are problems associated with NITEL and M-Tel

    privatization; 27 respondent (33.75%) agree; 7 respondents (8.75%)

    were undecided; 3 respondents (3.75%) disagree while 3

    respondents (3.75%) strongly disagree.

    TABLE 4.10 RESPONSES FROM PRIVATIZATION OF NITEL AND M-

    TEL NOT FOLLOWED DUE PROCESS AS SUCH LACKS

    TRANSPARENCY.

    S/NO Responses No of respondents Total Percentage

    Retained Disengaged

    1 Strongly Agree

    18 20 38 47.50

    2 Agree 22 9 31 38.75

    3 Undecided 1 - 1 1.25

    4 Disagree 4 2 6 7.500

    5 Strongly Disagree

    3 1 4 5.00

    Total 48 32 80 100

    Source: field investigation

  • lv

    Table 4.10 reveals that a total of 38 respondents (47.50%) strongly

    agree that the privatization of NITEL and M-Tel did not follow due

    process hence, lacks transparency; 31 respondents (38.75%) agree;

    1 respondent (1.25%) was undecided; 6 respondents (7.50%)

    disagree while 4 respondent (5%) strongly disagree.

    TABLE 4.11: RESPONSES ON THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF

    PRIVATIZATION ON THE LABOUR MARKET AND THE EMPLOYEES

    S/N Responses No of respondents Total Percentage

    Retained Disengaged

    1 Greatly affected

    20 13 33 41.25

    2 Affected 20 15 35 43.75

    3 Undecided 3 1 4 5

    4 Not affected

    5 2 7 8.75

    5 Not greatly affected

    - 1 1 1.25

    Total 48 32 80 100

    Source: from field investigation.

    Table 4.11 reveals that a total of 33 respondents (41.25%) strongly

    agree that privatization has negative impacts on the labour market

    and on the employees of the privatized parastatals (NITEL and M-

    Tel); 35 respondents (43.75%) agree; 4 respondents (5%) were

    undecided; 7 respondents (8.75%) disagree while 1 respondent

    (1.25%) strongly disagree.

  • lvi

    TABLE 4.12: RESPONSES ON PARTIAL PRIVATIZATION THAT

    DOES NOT OBEY THE RULE OF UNITY OF COMMAND IS NOT

    THE ASPIRATION OF THE MASSES

    S/N Responses No of respondents Total Percentage

    Retained Disengaged

    1 Strongly agree

    17 10 27 33.75

    2 Agree 20 18 38 47.50

    3 Undecided 3 - 3 3.75

    4 Disagree 5 2 7 8.75

    5 Strongly disagree

    3 2 5 6.75

    Total 48 32 80 100

    Source: from field investigation.

    Table 4.12 shows that 27 respondents (33.75%) strongly agree that

    the masses never aspired for partial privatization that does not obey

    the rule of unity of command; 38 respondents (47.50%) agree; 3

    respondents (3.75%) were undecided; 7 respondents (8.75%)

    disagree while 5 respondents (6.25%) strongly disagree.

    TABLE 4.13: RESPONSES ON THE RETAINED AND

    DISENGAGED STAFF NOT WELL TAKEN CARE OF AFTER

    PRIVATIZATION.

    S/N Responses No of respondents Total Percentage

    Retained Disengaged

    1 Strongly agree 24 19 43 53.75

    2 Agree 20 12 32 40

    3 Undecided - 1 1 1.25

    4 Disagree 2 - 2 2.50

  • lvii

    5 Strongly disagree

    2 - 2 2.50

    Total 48 32 80 100

    Source: from field investigation.

    Table 4.13 show that 43 respondents (53.75%) strongly agree that

    the retained and disengaged staff of NITEL and M-Tel were not

    properly taken care of after the privatization; 32 respondent (40%)

    agree; 1 respondent (1.250%) disagree while 2 while 2 respondents

    (2.50%) strongly disagree.

    4.3 TESTING OF HYPOTHESES

    HYPOTHESES 1

    Ho: There is positive correlation between privatization of federal

    paratatals and its associated problems.

    Hi: There is no positive correlation between privatization of federal

    parastatals and associated problems.

    To test this Hypotheses, table 4.9 will be used.

    Chi-square contingency table. S/N Responses No of respondents Total

    Retained Staff O E

    Disengaged Staff O E

    1 Strongly agree 25 (24) 15 (16) 40

    2 Agree 15 (16.2) 12 (10.8) 27

    3 Undecided 4 (4.2) 3 (2.8) 7

    4 Disagree 2 (1.8) 1 (1.2) 3

    5 Strongly disagree 2 (1.8) 1 (1.2) 3

    Total 48 32 80

    E=nr nc n where E= Expected frequency

    nr = Row total

  • lviii

    nc= Column total

    n = Grand total = 80

    Using a 5% level of significance and degree of freedom given:

    df = (Row-1) (column-1)

    = (5-1) (2-1)

    4x1 = 4

    Then the critical value of (Xo2)__ 9.5.

    To test the hypotheses, the decision rules are;

    Reject the Null (Ho) hypotheses if the calculated value of the test

    statistics is greater than the critical value of 9.5 but accept it (Ho) if

    Xo2 > X2 cal.

    Chi-square: X2 = ∑(O-E)2

    E

    Chi-square table

    S/N O E O-E (O-E) (O-E)2 E

    1 25 24 1 1 0.04

    2 15 16.2 -1.2 1.44 0.09

    3 4 4.2 -0.2 0.04 0.01

    4 2 1.8 0.2 0.04 0.02

    5 2 1.8 0.2 0.04 0.02

    6 15 16 -1 1 0.06

    7 12 10.8 1.2 1.44 0.13

    8 3 2.8 0.2 0.04 0.01

    9 1 1.2 -0.2 0.04 0.03

    10 1 1.2 -0.2 0.04 0.03

  • lix

    X2 0.44

    Thus, since the critical value Xo2 (9.5) is greater than the calculated

    value X2(0.44), we accept the Ho and accordingly reject Hi. We

    conclude by accepting the Null hypotheses, therefore that there are

    positive correlations between privatization and its associated

    problems.

    TEST OF HYPOTHESES 2

    Ho: Privatization exercise does not follow due process as such lacks

    transparency.

    Hi: Privatization exercise on NITEl and M-Tel followed due process

    as such does not lack transparency.

    To test this hypotheses, table 4.10 will be used

    Chi-square contingency table Responses No of respondents Total

    Retained Staff O E

    Disengaged Staff O E

    Strongly agree 18 (22.8) 20 (15.2) 38

    Agree 22 (18.6) 9 (12.4) 31

    Undecided 1 (0.6) - (0.4) 1

    Disagree 4 (3.6) 2 (2.4) 6

    Strongly disagree 3 (2.4) 1 (1.6) 4

    Total 48 32 80

    E= nr nc n

    Using a 5% level of significance and degree of freedom

    Given; df = (Row-1) (column -1)

    (5-1) 2-1)

    4x1 = 4

  • lx

    Thus, the critical value of (X2o) = 9.5

    To test our hypotheses, the decision rules are;

    Reject the Null (Ho) hypotheses if the calculated value of the test

    statistics is greater than the critical value of 9.5, but accept it (Ho) if

    X2o > X2 calculated.

    Chi-square: X2 = ∑(O-E)2

    E

    Chi-square table S/N O E O-E (O-E) (O-E)2

    E

    1 18 22.8 -4.8 23.04 1.01

    2 22 18.6 3.4 11.56 0.62

    3 1 0.6 0.4 0.16 0.27

    4 4 3.6 0.4 0.16 0.04

    5 3 2.4 0.6 0.36 0.15

    6 20 15.2 4.8 23.04 1.52

    7 9 12.4 -3.4 11.56 0.93

    8 - 0.4 -0.4 0.16 0.40

    9 2 2.4 -0.4 0.16 0.07

    10 1 1.6 -0.6 0.36 0.23

    X2 5.24

    Thus, since the X2o (9.5) is greater than the X2 (5.24) the calculated

    value, we accept Ho and accordingly reject Hi. We conclude by

    accepting the Null hypotheses, therefore, that the privatization

    exercise does not follows due process as such, lacks transparency.

    TEST HYPOTHESES 3

    Ho: Privatization has negative effect on the labour market and the

    employees of the privatized parastatals.

    HI: Privatization has no negative effect on the labour market and the

  • lxi

    employees.

    To test this hypotheses, table 4.11 will be used

    Chi-Square contingency table

    Responses Respondents Total

    Retained Staff O E

    Disengaged Staff O E

    Strongly Agree 20

    (19.8)

    13 (13.2)

    33

    Agree 20 (21) 15 (14) 35

    Undecided 3

    (2.4)

    1 1.6) 4

    Disagree 5

    (4.2)

    2

    (2.8)

    7

    Strongly Disagree -

    (0.6)

    1

    (0.4)

    1

    48 32 80

    E= ncnr

    n

    Using a 5% level of significance and degree of freedom given;

    df (Row-1) (Column-1)

    (5-1) (2-1)

    4 X 1 = 4.

    Critical value of (XO2 )= 9.5

    To test our hypotheses, the decision rules are;

  • lxii

    Reject the Null (Ho) hypotheses if the calculated value of the test

    statistics is greater than the critical value of 9.5, but accept it (H0) IF

    X 02 > X2 calculated.

    Chi-square; x2 = Σ (0-E)2 E

    Chi- square table

    S/N 0 E 0-E (0-E)2 (O-E)2 E

    1 20 19.8 0.2 0.04 0.002

    2 20 21 -1 1 0.048

    3 3 2.4 0.6 0.36 0.15

    4 5 4.2 08 0.64 0.152

    5 0 0.6 -0.6 0.36 0.6

    6 13 13.2 -0.2 0.04 0.003

    7 15 14 1 1 0.071

    8 1 1.6 -0.6 0.36 0.225

    9 2 2.8 -0.8 0.64 0.229

    10 1 04 0.6 0.36 0.9

    Х2 2.38

    Thus, since the x02 (9.5) is greater than the x2 (2.38) the calculated

    value, we accept the Ho and accordingly reject Hi. We conclude by

    accepting the Null hypotheses therefore, that privatization has

    negative effects on the labour market and the employees.

    TEST OF HYPOTHESES 4

  • lxiii

    H0: Partial privatization that does not obey the law of unity of

    command is not the aspiration of the masses.

    Hi: Partial privatization is the aspiration of the masses.

    To test this hypotheses, table 4.12 will be used.

    Chi-square contingency table.

    Responses Respondents Total

    Retained staff O E Disengaged Staff

    O E

    Strongly Agree 17

    (16.2)

    10 (10.8) 27

    Agree 20

    (22.8)

    18 (15.2) 38

    Undecided 3 (1.8) 0 (1.2) 3

    Disagree 5 (4.2) 2 (2.8) 7

    Strongly

    Disagree

    3 (3) 2 (2) 5

    48 32 80

    E = nc nr n.

    Using a 5% level of significance and degree of freedom given;

    df = (Row – 1) (column – 1)

    = (5 – 1) (2 – 1)

    = 4 x 1 = 4

  • lxiv

    Critical value of ( xo2) = 9.5

    To test our hypotheses, the decision rules are; reject the Null (Ho)

    hypotheses if the calculated value of the test statistics is greater than

    the critical value of 9.5, but accept it (Ho) if xo2 > x2 calculated

    Chi-square, X2 = Σ (O-E)2 E

    S/N 0 E 0-E (0-E)2 (0-E)2 E

    1 17 16.2 0.8 0.64 0.04

    2 20 22.8 -2.8 7.84 0.34

    3 3 1.8 1.2 1.44 0.8

    4 5 4.2 0.8 0.64 0.15

    5 3 3 0 0 0

    6 10 10.8 -0.8 0.64 0.06

    7 18 15.2 2.8 7.84 0.52

    8 0 1.2 -1.2 1.44 1.2

    9 2 2.8 -0.8 0.64 0.23

    10 2 2 0 0 0

    Х2 3.34

    Thus, since the xo2 (9.5) is greater than the x2 (3.34) the calculated

    value, we accept the Ho and accordingly reject Hi. We conclude by

  • lxv

    accepting the Null hypotheses, therefore, that the partial privatization

    is the aspiration of the masses.

    TEST OF HYPOTHESES 5.

    Ho: Both retained and disengaged staff of the company were not

    Well taken care of after the privatization

    Hi: Both retained and disengaged staff of the parastatals were well

    taken care of after the privatization to test this hypotheses,

    table 4.13 will be used.

    Chi-square contingency table.

    Responses Respondents Total

    Retained staff O E Disengaged Staff

    O E

    Strongly Agree 24

    (25.8)

    19 (17.2) 43

    Agree 20

    (19.2)

    12 (12.8) 32

    Undecided - (0.6) 1 (0.4) 1

    Disagree 2 (1.2) - (0.8) 2

    Strongly

    Disagree

    2 (1.2) - (0.8) 2

    48 32 80

    E = nc nr

  • lxvi

    n.

    Using the 5% level of significance and degree of freedom given;

    df = (Row – 1) (column-1)

    = (5-1) (2-1) = 4x1 = 4.

    The critical value of (x02) = 9.5

    To test our hypotheses, the decision rules are; reject the Null (H0)

    hypotheses if the calculated value of the test statistics is greater than

    the critical value of 9.5 but accept it (H0) if x02 > x2 calculated

    Chi-square: x2 = Σ (10-E)2 E

    Chi-square table.

    S/N 0 E 0-E (0-E)2 (0-E)2 E

    1 24 25-8 -1.8 3.24 0.13

    2 20 19.2 0.8 0.64 0.03

    3 0 0.6 -0.6 0.36 0.6

    4 2 1.2 0.8 0.64 0.53

    5 2 1.2 0.8 0.64 0.53

  • lxvii

    6 19 17.2 1.8 3.24 0.19

    7 12 12.8 -0.8 0.64 0.05

    8 1 0.4 0.6 0.36 0.9

    9 0 0.8 -0.8 0.64 0.8

    10 0 0.8 -0.8 0.64 0.8

    Х2 4.56

    Thus, since the xo2 (9.5) which is the critical value is greater than the

    calculated value x2 (4.56), we accept the Null (H0) hypotheses and

    accordingly reject the alternate (Hi) hypotheses. We conclude by

    accepting the Null hypotheses, therefore, that the retained and the

    disengaged staff of the parastatals were not well taken care of after

    the privatization.

    CHAPTER FIVE

    5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATION AND

    CONCLUSION

    5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:

  • lxviii

    It has been analytically proved that privatization remains one of

    the major reforms Mechanism in every ailing economy of a country or

    Parastatal. This reform is associated with problems which help in

    making the exercise ineffective if not properly checked.

    In this research work, attempt was made to seriously examine

    the problems on privatization of federal parastatals with particular

    reference to NITEL and its subsidiary M-Tel, with chosen population

    figures in River and Enugu States respectively.

    In order to achieve the objective of this study, some research

    questions were formulated. Consequently, the questions in the

    questionnaire were based on these research questions which were

    eventually distributed. Having known the population of the study

    through the two chosen states, the sample size was determined

    using a sample method of “Yamani’s formular” which also determined

    the number of questionnaire to be distributed.

    A total of eighty six (86) questionnaire were distributed to both

    disengaged and re-engaged staff of NITEL and M-TEL in both Rivers

    and Enugu States. Out of which, eighty three (83) respondents were

    returned. In Enugu State with 50 respondents and Rivers State with

  • lxix

    33 respondents returned respectively. It might also interest us to

    know that the respondents study included sexes, ages and

    educational qualifications.

    Various sample techniques were contributively used in this

    study. Among them are the “Yamani’s formular”, simple percentage

    and the non-parametric statistics called chi-square.

    The data used in this study were collected through primary and

    secondary sources. The questionnaire were analyzed using simple

    percentages while the hypotheses were tested using non- parametric

    statistic called chi-square at 5% (0.05) level of significance.

    At the end the exercise of this study, the following findings

    were made:

    1. The respondents agreed that the privatization exercise

    embarked upon by the federal government on NITEL and M-

    TEL was a reform in a right direction.

    2. The respondents also strongly agreed that though, like a toad

    that likes water but not water, they like the privatization reform

    but not partial privatization.

  • lxx

    3. The respondents are aware of the militating problems

    associated with the privatization of NITEL and M-TEL but

    argued that some of these problems are self inflicted

    complications which ought to be addressed properly.

    4. Obviously, the respondents agreed that the privatization

    exercise does not follow-due process as such, lacked

    transparency. This argument was based on corruption that has

    remained the omnipresent obstacle that erodes every exercise

    in the country

    5. The respondents argued that the privatization has resulted in

    the saturation of the un-employment market and wanton waste

    of valuable experience and technical know how.

    6. The retrained and disengaged staff of there parastatals are not

    well taken care of after privatization. This is because, there is

    no proper labour policy to resolve terminal benefits matters in

    collective bargaining.

    7. Another finding of the study indicates that government

    parastatals like NITEL and M-TEL are of more economic burden

    to the government, hence privatization.

  • lxxi

    8. Though, the respondents strongly agreed that privatization of

    NITEL and M-TEL will enhance greater accountability and

    development of better management practice. It raise apartment

    question, who privatizes the public sector? Can a regulator

    regulates itself or can one be a judge in your court?

    9. Another finding also indicates that privatization will raise

    financial resources that will be channeled to development of

    infrastructure. Considering $750m sales of NITEL and M-TEL to

    Transcorp, how much was paid if actually money was paid and

    to whom? This tells us the level of corruption in the country

    and under development.

    10. The respondents strongly agreed that the privatization motive

    in Nigeria’ is to enable the money barons to buy the public

    enterprises and not for economic restructuring

    5.2 RECOMMENDATION

    Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations

    are therefore made to improve the problems on privatization of

    federal parastatals.

  • lxxii

    1. There should be strict compliance of both regulators and

    participants to the rules and time frames of the 1999

    privatization and commercialization act and customary

    international privatization practices that will ensure the

    evolution and development of a near perfect policy and the

    economic reformation and restructuring of Nigeria’s political

    economy.

    2. Since corruption has made privatization not to follow due

    process or being transparent, the EFCC and ICPC should audit,

    investigate and prosecute from 1999 to date any public officer

    of government official for economic sabotage or crime arising

    out of privatization.

    3. The federal Government or the labour Ministry should have a

    proper labour policy to resolve terminal benefit matters in

    collective bargaining involving the BPE, the management of the

    public enterprises, the management of the private firm, the

    employees union of the public enterprises, other professional

    consultants etc.

  • lxxiii

    4. It is pertinent to know that no manager likes serving two

    masters at a time. Serving two masters at a time does not obey

    the rule of unity of command stated by Henri Fayol in his

    fourteen principles of administration. Therefore, partial

    privatization should be ruled out but policies and rules be made

    to check the privatized firm.

    5. Since the crux of retrenchment of employees of parastatals

    undermines decades of manpower experience and waste of

    training funds, the privatization agencies should pre-condition

    the minds of staff for viable entrepreneurship with possible

    orientation before retrenchment as to make retrenched staff

    self employed.

    5.3 CONCLUSION

    With ca


Recommended