IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/ilojbs/0011.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Nitel To Ntel: Understanding Autonomy And Capacity Issues In Nigeria'S Telecommunications Privatization

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Transfer of State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) to private hands is a public management st strategy that has gained considerable followership in the 21 century governance. Divergent views have been advanced about privatization's inherent ability to boost efficiency and reduce wasteful psyche of SOEs. Nigeria's tortuous privatisation of the state owned telecommunications outfit (NITEL) and its subsidiaries which recently culminated in the transfer to the NATCOM consortium after over a decade of convoluted attempts leave much to be desired. This spate of unsuccessful takeovers has thrown up the issue of professional competence in the privatisation process. This paper is an attempt at interrogating factors behind the apparent inability to stick to a reasonable turnaround—time to forestall inevitable loss of value of NITEL. It also questions its capacity to skillfully deliver taking into cognisance the need to operate with some level of . independence /Autonomy. This is in addition to criticisms of non-performance of about eighty percent of enterprises privatized by the BPE. To achieve these objectives, the paper quantatively affirms a hypothesized notion about the relationship between Autonomy and Capacity to deliver on NITEL's privatisation. As the new owners of NITEL takes over, the paper makes recommendations targeted at fine tuning the process in the area of Autonomy and Capacity issues to avert any further “reverse waves”. The mixed method approach is adopted in this paper. The quantitative section has relied on the Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 to process the responses to information provided via questionnaires and interviews elicited from within the top brass of the BPE and a broad spectrum of other stakeholders. The Spearman's rho was used to show relationship between the variable of Autonomy and Capacity. The qualitative part used the reflective narrative method of analysis to complement the primary data.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibrahim O., SALAWU, & Abdullahi, ALABI, & Rashida Oyoru, ADAMU,, 2016. "From Nitel To Ntel: Understanding Autonomy And Capacity Issues In Nigeria'S Telecommunications Privatization," Ilorin Journal of Business and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ilorin, vol. 18(2), pages 215-234, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:ilojbs:0011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://fssunilorinedu.org/ijbss/2016%20Volume%2018%20Number%202/2016%20IJBSS%20N0%202_42-61.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levine, Ross & Zervos, Sara, 1996. "Stock Market Development and Long-Run Growth," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 10(2), pages 323-339, May.
    2. Megginson, William L & Nash, Robert C & van Randenborgh, Matthias, 1994. "The Financial and Operating Performance of Newly Privatized Firms: An International Empirical Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(2), pages 403-452, June.
    3. Birdsall, Nancy & Nellis, John, 2003. "Winners and Losers: Assessing the Distributional Impact of Privatization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1617-1633, October.
    4. Eytan Sheshinski & Luis F. López-Calva, 2003. "Privatization and Its Benefits: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 49(3), pages 429-459.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alberto Chong & Florencio de, 2003. "The Truth about Privatization in Latin America," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm436, Yale School of Management.
    2. Carmen M. Reinhart & Franziska L. Ohnsorge & Kenneth S. Rogoff & M. Ayhan Kose, 2022. "The Aftermath of Debt Surges," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 637-663, August.
    3. Sebastian Galiani & Paul Gertler & Ernesto Schargrodsky, 2005. "Water for Life: The Impact of the Privatization of Water Services on Child Mortality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 83-120, February.
    4. Laura Cabeza García & Silvia Gómez Ansón, 2012. "What Drives the Operating Performance of Privatised Firms?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Christian Wolf & Michael G. Pollitt, 2008. "Privatising national oil companies: Assessing the impact on firm performance," Working Papers EPRG 0805, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    6. J. David Brown & John Earle & Almos Telegdy, 2005. "Does Privatization Hurt Workers? Lessons from Comprehensive Manufacturing Firm Panel Data in Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine," CERT Discussion Papers 0509, Centre for Economic Reform and Transformation, Heriot Watt University.
    7. Khan, Iram, 2006. "Public vs. private sector : an examination of neo-liberal ideology," MPRA Paper 13443, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Oliver Tiemann & Jonas Schreyögg, 2012. "Changes in hospital efficiency after privatization," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 310-326, December.
    9. David Parker & Colin Kirkpatrick, 2005. "Privatisation in Developing Countries: A Review of the Evidence and the Policy Lessons," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 513-541.
    10. Estrin, Saul & Pelletier, Adeline, 2016. "Privatisation in Developing Countries: What Are the Lessons of Recent Experience?," IZA Discussion Papers 10297, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Boubakri, Narjess & Guedhami, Omrane & Kwok, Chuck C.Y. & Wang, He (Helen), 2019. "Is privatization a socially responsible reform?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 129-151.
    12. Nguyen Van Tan & Trinh Quoc Trung, 2019. "Has Equitization Actually Led to Improve Firm Performance in a Transition Economy?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(3), pages 402-418, March.
    13. J. DavidBrown & JohnS. Earle & Álmos Telegdy, 2010. "Employment and Wage Effects of Privatisation: Evidence from Hungary, Romania, Russia and Ukraine," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(545), pages 683-708, June.
    14. Estrin, Saul & Pelletier, Adeline, 2018. "Privatization in developing countries: what are the lessons of recent experience?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87348, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Knyazeva, Anzhela & Knyazeva, Diana & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2013. "Ownership change, institutional development and performance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2605-2627.
    16. Mauricio Garrón B. & Carlos Gustavo Machicado & Katherina Capra, 2003. "Privatization in Bolivia: The Impact on Firm Performance," Research Department Publications 3154, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    17. Galyna Grygorenko & Stefan Lutz, 2007. "Firm performance and privatization in Ukraine," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 253-266, September.
    18. João M. Pinto & Mário Coutinho dos Santos & Pedro Verga Matos, 2021. "Contracting Out Public Transit Services: An Incentive Performance-Based Approach," Working Papers de Economia (Economics Working Papers) 02, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
    19. Sumit K. Majumdar, 2008. "Why Privatize? The Decline of Public Ownership in India and its Impact on Industrial Performance," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 9(2), pages 293-336, September.
    20. Beatriz Cuadrado-Ballesteros & Noemí Peña-Miguel, 2018. "The Socioeconomic Consequences of Privatization: An Empirical Analysis for Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 163-183, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:ilojbs:0011. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Daniel Akanbi (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.