THE POLITICS OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISES MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA

Okpata, Fidelis O.

Department Of Political Science

And Public Administration Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki

Abstract

This article examines the various dimensions of politics in the management of public enterprises in Nigeria. It notes that management of public enterprises in most African countries has been seriously bedridden and influenced by some political underpinning and other environment factors which in turn had slammed on the managerial efficiency and effectiveness of the public enterprises. It is against this background that the article suggests some strategies for effective management of Nigerian public enterprises.

INTRODUCTION

Management of public enterprises-in most African countries has been influenced by some political underpinnings and other environmental factors which in turn had slammed on the managerial efficiency and effectiveness of the public enterprises. Nigerians, having imbibed a wrong cultural value of exploiting public offices for personal gains, perceive a successful bureaucrat on the basis of wealth indices; thus, the wealth a public officer possesses becomes a measure of his managerial success, rather than his achievement of organizational set objectives (Druckers, 1967). This cultural value of looting public treasury, inform the nature of the influences of politics on the management of Nigerian public enterprises.

The main objective of this article is to examine the influence of politics in the management of Nigerian public enterprises. It also recommends ways of effective management of Nigerian public enterprises.

EMERGENCE OF PUBLIC ENTERPRISES MANAGEMENT: Historical Overview

The search for management rules and laws which if observed will result in effective managerial performance in all situation, has been going on for thousands of years (George, 1968) and management is defined in this context as the effective utilization and co-ordination of resources such as capital, plant material and labour to achieve defined objective in an economic organization. However, modern industrial management theory dates back from the introduction of factory system, but a rational approach to management, whether public or private, developed in the nineteenth century and came to be known as “scientific management”. Kary Marx in his vision of a society free from injustice arising from industrialization, believed that an orderly and just society could only be achieved of political and economic powers got into the hands of the (proletariat) working class, thus he maintained that since the measure of production and distribution constituted the foundation upon which the powers developed, they should be wrested from the (private) ruling class by the use of force, if that will achieve the goal. This revolutionary vision took him a step further…. And after several other revolutionary socialist trends, a pragmatic and purely economic approach was later adopted by government under its management and control, thus the state ownership of certain transport corporations and communication enterprises (Tokunbo, 1990).

The involvement and role of government in the development of a national economy is indeed very vital. Thus the idea of government involvement in business though the incorporation of its own enterprises, aimed at breaking the myth and monopoly of the private sector in economic activities, unformed the existence of public enterprises management in history. Besides, the activities immediately after the period of great depression (1929 – 1934), the role of the state in the economy was properly established and recognized after the Keynesian revolution. This involvement necessitated the institution of organs and/or agencies to safeguard as well perpetuate such role.

Public sector management came to assume significant proportion in response to the need for the state to criden its areas of intervention into private lives of citizens. It was a response to the demand of the social contract theorist of sixteenth century (Onyeisi, 1996). Meanwhile, Olewe (1993) asserted that the emergence of public enterprises development came as a desired to attain some broader developmental goals and a range of socio-economic objective, hence he described public enterprises as “Instruments of national policy”. The emergence of public sector managme4nt itself lends credence of the reflect analysis of the rationale behind its management and the role of the state system in the lives of members of different halt on state.

In history generally during the era of “Laissesfaring” the assumption that liberty is assumption that liberty in maximized if the socio-economic activities of private city as are minimally interfered with, signaled, the idea of state control of the economy m the medieval period. However, with the increasing complexity of society, exacerbated by the industrial revolution, it became imperative that state as the custodian of the “social contract” and repository of the “General will” should play important co-ordination role in the lives of the citizen so as to make these lisen even more meaningful to this end, came thoroughly the emergence of the state (public) enterprises.

Narain (1986) observed that public enterprises emerged in motive to amend the ills of and remedy the diseconomies of the private sector management and “could have strengthened to undertake the burden of economic development rather than the government carrying it”.

Training the methodical essence of the emergence of Public Enterprises Tukando (1986) asserted that state aimed institutions and corporations exist to save people by maintaining economic development, providing the framework for employment, generating investment and growth and providing healthcare, communication, transport and other infrastructure that are fundamental to a society and its economy.

NATURE AND DIMENSION OF POLITICS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF NIGERIAN PUBLIC ENTERPRISES

It has earlier been established that the role of government in the development of a nation’s economy and the involvement in business through ownership of enterprises is aimed at breaking the myth and monopoly of the private sector management through the provision of social and infrastructural facilities. Meanwhile, the concept of politics and its relation to the management of public enterprises is purely a governmental decision and thus operates with in the sphere of political (institutional) decisional making. It is purely a political process that involves decision of resource allocation. Decision making in itself has been recognized as the heart of organization and the process of administrative which also is political and the task of decision making pervades the political and administration process (Herbert Simon, 1967) Management of Public Enterprise operates at the framework of resource allocation and control which is basically political in essence, this is so because the task of decision making in respect of both human and material resources for goal attainment is essentially, a political process and is best conceived at the political sphere of any government. Thus public enterprises management is essentially a most sensitive developmental segment of any political and economic system.

Management of public enterprises deals with resource allocation, thus mangers who manage our public enterprises are human resource, their distribution (allocation) is purely political in nature hence politics has been defined as the study which deals with authoritative decision making in the allocation of societal value resources politics tries to ensure our people settle then difference and how resources are allocated through the institutionalization of decision-making process (Einston, 1960). Furthermore, management of Nigerian Public Enterprises is all about deciding public issues, for instance, the citing the funding and even its personnel management of public enterprise are all about power and resource sharing, hence Professor Hans Eulau (1963) emphasized on his definition of politics that “Politics is the Study of why men find if desirable to build government         and how and why he decides, on public issues”. Politics in concerned with the distributed of power, resources and that power shares, can best be expressed mathematically (Harris, 1979). It is to be noted that the management of Nigerian public enterprises is an aspect of the conduct of Nigerian government, which translates to institution decision making, involving certain values interests, aspirations and other factors. Raphael led credence to this when he defined politics as “the behaviour of groups and individuals in matters that are likely to affect the cause of government in various areas. If in exerting influence in other ways on those responsible for the CONDUCT OF GOVERNMENT”.

Alexander Hamilton (1938) Observed that

Government institutions of today could hardly be possible – certainly would not function effectively without an understanding of their managers and ways organization function towards public goals.

The concept of politics as given by Herold Liviswell and David Easton (1950) as
having to do with “who gets what, when and how” may give us some guides in the
decision of who manages our public enterprises for what? Having therefore established
from the foregoing, that there is a strong relationship between the concept of politics as
being concerned with resource allocation in public enterprises management, it is also an
established fact that the decision on such authoritative allocation is administrative which is
governmental and therefore factors in simple logic that politics of resource allocation
cannot be but rightly divorced from the entire business of public enterprises management
in Nigerian body politics.       

THE SCOPE OF POLITICS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF NIGERIAN PUBLIC

ENTERPRISES

Let me start by asserting that public enterprises presupposes accessibility benefit to the general public and government control in the term “Public services’. Meanwhile, there are three essential characteristics of the publicness” of our public enterprises:

1. Public purpose
2. Public ownership
3. Public control

The public purpose therefore is the very cove of public enterprises (Oleira1990:238). May l also the government who has the public control of our public enterprises in their political approach of         appointment of the caution from Carlson (1982). “The destiny of a business enterprises and industry or a nation, is directed by thesking and planning for its environment and location that is done by men who govern its affairs”

Meanwhile the scope and nature of political influence on the management of Nigerian public enterprises differences corporation to corporation, government to government and is indeed multi-dimensional and its significance on the development of our public enterprises is very alarming. The dimension of the political influence include such areas arises.

1. Recruitment/Appointment
2. Funding
3. Staff training & development
4. Management policies and techniques
5. Location of public enterprises
6. Intra-departmental role conflict

Location of Public Enterprises in Nigeria

One of the most common form is the determination of economic activities of public corporation on political considerations based on location of industries or corporations of all kinds, hence Olatunde (1980)

assets that “Other sources of inefficiency and ineffectiveness of our public enterprises, apart from irrational mismanagement practices, centre on the criteria used  in public corporation   choice and location. In these arrears political and ethnic considerations far outweigh those of economic rationality, environmental suitability and potentiality”.

According to him, many public enterprises set up in African countries…centred on the functions of the following:

1. location and allocation of resources
2. coordinating and control of human and non-human resources that are to be
3. transformed into corporations products and
4. the quality, quantity and proximity of the supply of raw materials which when
5. transformed becomes their products etc.

In this context ethnic conflict occasioned by political smartness and under cutting, has remained one of the most serious unsolved problems of Nigeria in her food efforts towards achieving national unity integration. This political monster every manifest sitself in the practice where political decision and exercise of governmental authority deliberately favours certain geo-political area in the location and development of economic activities of the expense of others. Politics of regionalism influences and is seen manifested in the location of public institution as was the case of whether Enugu State University of Technology (ESUT) be relocated to Abakaliki in 1993 in opposed by the Enugu people; indeed the issue of the long period of accreditation of the medical programme of the Faculty of Health Sciences (ESUT) Abakaliki campus was occasioned by the same concept of wrong geo-political location or the zonal politics that characterized old Enugu State,which was covertly expressed by then SS to Dr. Onyema Ocheoha as to why funds work not made available for the accreditation of the University Medical Programme. The political influence on location of public enterprises can also manifest itself not only in location but also in the availability of resources for the substance and continuity of an existing enterprise, in which case, because the public enterprise is “wrongly” located it can indirectly be starved to death for intentional lack of an adequate note resources or infrastructural.

Indeed, such political overture has serious socio-economic and political implication on the level of our development became if not only enthrones dichotomy but also spoil system in public. Sector management and disenfranchises contain political regains from equitable distribution of agencies of national development. Balogun (1980) outlined the destructive effects of ethnic bias on the location of public enterprises towards achieving declared objective to include;

“Weakening of discipline          inability to agree on the most helpful operational methods and politics, mutual suspicious (rather than agreement), weakening of esprit de corps and inability to take long terms plan”.

Government control of management of public enterprises breeds all sorts of pol. discord and bad blood in form of nepotism and favouritism into the Nigerian public enterprises system (Onyekwere 1990).

Recruitment/Appointment

       As   a developmental deponent of our political and economic system the management of public enterprises in Nigeria must be approached with the most sensitive caution albeit     political process approaches towards goal attainment. It is in the realization of this that Banorogo (1983) posited that “public enterprise management is a profession and requires that administrative managers should possess certain kind of education knowledge skills and values as pre-requisite to effective performance in the job”. Banorgo’s assertion has become very instigative, given the managerial and administrative responsibilities of management which includes organizing and harmonizing the…Elements of the productive enterprise in the interest of economic ends, thus management is here perceived as a process, The effective utilization and co-ordination of resources such as capital, plant material and labour to achieve defined objective in an economic organization which George (1968) defined as management, underscored the need for professionals, if the management of our public enterprises will facilitate economic and social development, ft is also against this background that the lack of managerial expertise coupled with the inability to formulate management objective, devise plan and co-ordinate people and materials in a systematic fashion have often been attributed management failure in recent times.

Furthermore, if we realize that management of public enterprises occupies a crucial position in the economic development of our nation, then the performance and the composition of its management personnel should be of the highest grade. Meanwhile Balogun (1980) defined recruitment         as the process by which personnel or manpower resources are made available through appointment as in the case of Board members or Director of public enterprises. Contributing to the effect of politics on the recruitment process in government owned corporations, Olayinde (1980) observed”“There is also the hazard of the ever-increasing role of government as an entrepreneur with in adequate manpower resources yet had always determined the quality and quantity of manpower need in public organization”. From the quality and the quantity of personnel (Directors and General Managers) who manage our Nigerian public enterprises, one will appreciate the point Olayinde has made because of the increasing omnipotent role of our government which in recent times has engendered gross inefficient utilization of manpower resource, desired from the decision “he who pays the piper dictate the tune”.

According to Olatunde (1980), two features of the recruitment policies pursued in many African countries, which are also sources of inefficiency and ineffectiveness of public enterprises management, are:

1. The more-practices demand of professional qualifications from employees which are really needed for the performance of their job and
   1. The tendency towards recruiting more employees than are numerically needed in many “powerful” departments to the understaffing of other much needed personnel. The ex-Governor of River State, expressing concern over the political recruitment model in our public service, (1982) expressed regrets that:

“The River State Civil Service is inundated with people who are not only qualified, but are completely redundant, thus waste of many power resources on the state civil service”.

Conceptualizing recruitment appointment employment as attracting the right applicant to occupy the right job position in an organization, presupposes that recruitment in the public enterprises must be properly planned with necessary regard to merit and professionalism. An aspect of the recruitment in the public enterprises that should be viewed very seriously, is the issue of appointing chief executive and Board of Director without necessary regard to merit, integrity, knowledge or experience; lien apart from the problem of measuring the individual integrity before appointment, there is a lot to be said in favour of stinking a balance between professionalism and extreme assiatenrism. On this, Olisa (1980) observed that:

Optimum performance and profitability of public corporation can also be impaired when staff recruitment is heavily influenced by politics… and apart from the negative effects of political influence, appointment of routine or professional staff workers of the corporation is more destructive, in a situation when board chairmen, members and top management staff are appointed on political grounds rather than experience or merit’

            Inyang (1977: 196) discussing on the quality of staff and its implication on the performance of staff observed that the relative quality of labour force was perhaps the most critical variable feature of its management, staff establishment policy and guidelines, especially as it related directly to the establishments political influence in recruitment selection and placement (promotion) can be perceived in the following areas in our public enterprises.

1. Lack of autonomy in certain areas of government bureaucratization e.g. quality and quantity of personnel over staffing or ill-equipped staff.
2. Son of the soil” syndrome, which breeds all sorts of indisciplinary acts and perception of obnoxious cultural values and ethnicity (Fatiregun, 1992).

            It is however a known truth that public enterprises management in Nigeria is closely tied to political or government control, especially when one realizes that the government has exclusive right of authoritative allocation of all her resources to the achievement of institutional objectives. Adebayo (1994) recognizing such strong tie between politics administration, still cautioned: “even though politics cannot always be separated from administration at that partisan politics be dept out ‘of administration and upon the assurance of tenure given to technical and expert personnel because the ghost of patronage and spoils of politics is still writing American public life”.

Political influence in the recruitment and personnel development of and personnel development of public enterprises management has indeed attracted various views and opinions of scholars in recent time. Okoli (1980) christened it the “democratization of public bureaucracy”, also observed that public Bureaucracy has been democratized through the principle of representation in the 1979 Nigerian constitution and therefore posited that:

“Democratization which involves subordination of the concept of technical qualification (merit system) to the concept of representation, violates the Weberian Ideal type of bureaucracy in all its essentials, and thus the rows public bureaucracy in Nigeria into the crises of legitimacy”.

Furthermore, it is a truism therefore arising from Okolie thesis, that politics of recruitment gates the effective functioning of ideal bureaucracy, it also enthrones spoil system in the working of our public administration, hence, Nigerian public offices and institutions have been saddled with mediocrities and technically unqualified personnel with the “include the bearer…..” syndrome. Further implication of this democratization of bureaucracy is that appointment by representation in puissance of the federal character principle more often than not, increase the chances of filling superior positions with lies qualified person and that is time of Board appointment in our Federal Institution. Meanwhile, if appointment is influenced by politics, in like appointing a relative to a position whether he possesses the qualification or not. This has been the bare of the economic development of Nigerian public enterprises management.

Staff Training &Development

Politics in the management of our public enterprises also manifests itself in staff development and promotion in our system, it has manifested in the “I M, relation clientalism, kindred ties and if you like ethnic chauvinism, thus evaluation of certain intercuts, candidates has been very subjective, saddled with caution; as emphasis in technical qualification and cognate experience in a given appraisal session would definitely place a particular officer (chief executive candidate) a disadvantaged position and in a tight corner, in near of the appointment/promotion of such candidate in the corporation. In the same way, the influence of a political appointee and the formal ascribed duties of a permanent secretary will also conflict thus efficiency and effectiveness will below, due toabnormal and informal relationship between the chief executive and other staff personnel of his corporation. The implication of this on organizational control and depth is that officers who represent sectional (interest) groups may be very difficult to control, especially if the superior does not belong to the sectional group, the efficiency of the organization may suffer, especially where certain positions are not filled by the “right people” from the “right states” (Okolie, 1980).

Abubakar (1986) confirmed that, in a circumstance, where the heads of departments and divisions frequently owe their promotions or appointments to the discretion of the (chief executive) General management of a corporation, the latter invariably controls the promotions of the staff authoritatively or ethnically. Such policies or guidelines in staff development and management relations merely constituted instruments of managerial control and manipulation of staff workers. Instances of this politics (influence on staff development abound. For example, in Nigerian in the recent past the selective application of existing staff management established guideline, also introduced an intruding element of concentration of junior workers around some members shared common community or division or origin. A sample of the staff of the company distributed in terms of common community or divisional backward showed that comparatively, large number of workers more drawn from Afikpo (28), Ohafia (25), Udi (23), Umuahia (220), Owerri (17). Njikoka and Awgu (16) each and Nkanu (15). These divisional concentration were not accidental. It established rather feudal type of staff relationship between the officials acting as patrons and junior workers acting as clients. Under such clientalism distribution of inequalities often followed ascriptive lines, a constant feature in Nigerian bureaucracies, which negates Weberian formulation of technical competence or experience in promotion of staff personnel in public enterprises management (Inyang, 1976). It is a general knowledge in personnel management policy that promotions and staff development in as organization is treated as the exclusive preserve of management thus Cukuribo (1990:18) stated…. Except, as stated in procedural agreement with an enterprise management, it is management that lays down standards for promotion and appointment which normally include qualifications experience and other requirement which are exclusives of management for lien, staff promotion is management’s responsibility to up-grade staff to higher positions in a number that will provide the enterprise with the reward competence and reliable staff. This policy therefore aggress with the concept of staff development as an organizational effort, mined at helping employee acquire basic skills required for efficient execution of function, for which he is hired (Nwankwo, 1988).

Management Policies and Techniques

The management of public enterprise, as purely an aspect of public bureaucracy is highly technical and required specialized skill, following its ideological objective of achieving public Welfarisms; Barongo (1983) observed “Public Enterprises management is a profession and requires that managers should possess certain kind of skill and values as pre-requisite to effective performance in the job”.

Decision making technique according to Likert (1967) is a management technique, which if properly adopted most applied, can lead to management efficiency and vice-versa. Recognized as the heart of organization, decision process and technique in the management of business enterprise can be far-resolving because of certain values that make for rationality and irrational decisions. In considering management technique as an aspect of the politics of public enterprises management the emphasis is on the style of managerial leadership and management technique adopted in decision-making. Meanwhile, management, whether of human or material resources is basically the essence of any public organization whether in the public or private sector, and fundamental task for effectual goal attainment is in the approach or technique adopted. The implication of his by extension is that, management decision must always recognize the importance of balancing both personnel needs and aspirations in the determination and achievement of organizational goals as that informs the holistic understanding of the overall nature of an organizations operation by all involved.

Foremost in the politics of management technique is the lack of managerial autonomy of the Board of Director and managers of our public enterprises, especially as most of these directors, and mangers were often appointed on political grounds which occasions the extreme political pressures on management decisions. Political considerations informed some major decision in Nigerian public enterprises as opposed to the situations in some African counties enterprises enjoyed managerial autonomy…. (Onuohaetall995:114).

In the decision making process of public enterprises & these have generally been problem of administrative control and limit of authority as between the board and management, formulation of objectives and strategies; differentiating the powers of board of directors and authority of the management, Tokunbo (1990) posited that “under the laws governing public corporations and companies, a board is appointed to manage an undertaking while…the top management of an enterprise is represented by the chief executive (managing director or General manager) who normally is the chairman of executive Board staff and by extension of lien office, a member of the policy board . There is the tendency    for the chief executive after such appointment to set himself independent up the execution board and to develop a resentment to executive board’s decisions not supported by lien at Board meetings”.

Therefore lack of understanding of the relative position of the board chairmen and
chief executives have results to serious conflicts in decision-making process of public
enterprises management. The chief executive indeed, has no special power except where it
is provided for in the enabling law. In view of the conflicts and clashes in the performance
of duties and in the decision making process, there are occasions, where a chairman of a
policy Board the position and functions of the chief executive, thus the confusion
arising from the management technique is occasioned by the political influence of who is
appointed what & lack of qualified or experienced board members and with managers
technical skills in the management of our public enterprises. This also had unpinned on the
managerial and decision making techniques of the system (Ezani 1991). It is to be
understood here that whenever there is a confused management body in an established
public enterprises there is bound to be problem and such problem will mutually impinge on
the efficiency of the management. On this Haleye (200) observed that there two types of
management boards: the policy board and the executive board/the policy board consists of
members who are outside the management of the enterprise, with only chief executive as
member, the executive board consist of persons who are also heads of major
units/departments with the chief executive as its chairman, the main advantage of thisarrangement, he stated  is that the body responsible for policy making, is separated from the executive bond, management.     

Managerial policy, the quality and tenure of bond members even though vary from counting to county is another dimension of the politics of managing Nigeria public enterprises; A member of a policy board should have certain qualities, which must include integrity, good personal record in use community, ability, experience and specialized knowledge, to avoid introducing spoil system. Adamelekun (2002) warned against the practive of appointing civil servants in public enterprises boards, which according to him, undermines the board qualities because of introduction of civil service where into the enterprise that should be largely business oriented. The management policy on the tenure of board members should vary and to be within the range of four to six years term of office and to allow for experience gathering, while too largely term could generate problems. There is also need to ensure some degree of continuity in a borrowers.

Funding Of Public Enterprises

Funding of public enterprise has always been a critical issue, particularly because of the stung linkage between finance and. Funding of PEs is a fundamental issue on which depends the continued existence of most public or government owned corporations. In recent times, public enterprises have suffered from inadequate capital base and funding, arising initially from the observed of reliable feasibility studies.

Furthermore, mode of releasing funds to the PEs is another constraint to their proper development, this is because the amount of fund approved for a particular public enterprise may not altogether be made available within a given budgetary period due to the type of withdrawal opened to the organization under a system of periodic or quarterly allocations (Tokunbo, 1990).

The politicization of PEs funding, as a method of state control has indeed affected
the effectiveness of public enterprises and by extension regathered the reason that PEs are
created to-ensure state control of key profitable enterprises with a view to generating
revenues that will add to available national capital for development programmes and
projects. Politics of funding has indeed jettisoned effective PEs management in recent
times sine politics allocates resources and societal values. Such political control as
budgetary allocation to public” enterprises has over the years adversely affected managerial
productivity of our public organizations. Often, PEs management has suffered undue.
Financial deprivation, resulting from power relations between the supervising body and the
organization. Some ministries or supervising bodies to some PEs, may use financial control
to undermine the management of a given PE, all in the view of discrediting either the
policy board chairman or the chief executive of the public enterprises. It is therefore my
candid advise that government funding of PEs should be directly released from the annual
budgetary allocations as related to projects of PEs whose total cast and completion time
have/been properly assessed and for which funding over the required period can be
assuredly estimated.                                                                                                  ^:

SUGGESTED STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE PUBLIC ENTERPRISESMANAGEMENT

Public enterprises (PEs) as organizations that are set up as corporate bodies and as part of the government instruments for achieving entrepreneurial objectives, have a member of factors that prompted their development in the various countries where they existed and have certain justifications for their existence in order to achieve thesejustifications which have been seriously impaired by the politics of its management, thefollowing strategies have been proffered as the way forward:

• The administration/management of PEs be sacrosanct separated from the politics of other public service just as their creation. This will ensure its political and economic independence for the financing of other development programmes. The implication of this is that PEs as corporate bodies separated from that of the government that establishes them, should be surreptitiously accorded corporate body states with the statutes establishing them.
• Closely related to the first strategy is that the management of PEs should result to a distinct organization predicated on the need to borrow a leaf from private need to borrow a enterprises organization management. This stance is based in the premise that some private enterprise management principles and practices, can be transferred into the management of PEs with positive, results. This assumption again implicates the ideological orientation regarding the management of PEs for it will reposition the managers of PEs that the survival or continuity of our public enterprises depends on their ability and determination to succeed.
• The recruitment and/or appointment of both Board of directors and the personnel staff of PEs should be positively and critically reviewed, with a view to injecting life and viability in our various PEs. On this, the core principles of Weberian Ideal bureaucracy especially technical competence expertise and integrity of the personnel whether as Directors or chief executive of following merit system rather than spoil system arising from the principle of democratization in our public bureaucracy. To really achieve this strategy of improving on the management of our PEs, governmental influence on the appointments and recruitment of staff and Director in the PEs will minimally reduced.
• Strategic management policies and techniques be reviewed with certain functional reforms, if our PEs is to be made managerially effective. Policies affecting tenures, decision making techniques separation of the policy Board chairman from the person of the Chief Executive as well as allowing staff promotion and development the exclusive discretion of certain management staff be seriously reviewed and reformed. Management technique should adopt the participative approvals to ensure corporate management of the PEs.
• Government as the establishing body of all PEs, should always carry our feasibility research with objectivity of purpose in locating, allocating and financing of PEs. As self-financing enterprise, there must be in built mechanism for accountability and periodic self-auditing, for this will make the management of PEs to be more responsible and to ensure moral rectitude and personal integrity whenever appointed in the management board. The political method of compensating party faithful though touts with appointments into PE boards is nothing more than the underdevelopment of the PE management and should be avoided out rightly.
• Financing PE should be made more effective by adequately allocating enough funds to our PEs and thus ensuring proper release and utilization as budgeted. For it has been observed through research, that about one hundred percent of the respondent to a questionnaire used for the finance of public enterprises, listed in sufficient capital as the major problem facing public corporation budgetary allocation to PEs should be seriously tied to already assessed projects with time/period of completion assumed.

CONCLUSION

The involvement and role of government in the development of natural economy and the incorporation of its our business enterprise aimed at breaking the myth and monopoly of the private sector in economic activities, had been observed as the essence of public enterprises. However, the management of these PEs which has been bedridden by negative political and environmental influences has been surveyed and highlighted. These political influences, which hitherto had manifested itself with their negative implications, had been fully discussed which included: The politics of locations of PEs. Recruitment/appointment method management policies and techniques and funding. Their implications to the development of effective management of PEs have also been x-rayed.

The conclusion of this work was preceded with suggested strategies for improved management of our PEs which brought to fore, alternative approaches to the negative political influences and other social factors which when awarded, will chance effective management of Nigerian PEs especially in this dawn of 21^s1 century.

REFERENCES

Abubukar, S. M. and Edoh, T. (1986) (eds) Nigeria: A Republic in Ruins. Lagos: GaskujaCorporation Ltd.

Achebe, C. A. (1983) The Trouble with Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Company Ltd.

Adebayo, Augustin (1994) Principles and Practice of Public Administration in Nigeria. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd.

Alexander, Hamilton (1978) “The Place of Public Enterprises in the Economy” Annals of Public Co-operative Economy.

Balogun, M. J. (1980) Management Efficiency in Public Sector. Ife: University Of Ife Press, Ltd.

Breham, M. R. (1970) Problems of Public Sector Management. Lagos: Lanual Pub. Co. Ltd P. 1.

Carlson Dickson (1982) Increasing Management Efficiency and Effectiveness. New York: Adision Wesley Publishing Company.

Carly, Heyel (1980) Encyclopedia of Management New York: Fed Vannostrumid Reinhold Company.

Chester, Bernard T. (1980) The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge Mass: Harvard University.

Daily Star, August, 1982: The Dark Spots in Civil Service.

Daily Star, July 24, 1984: Civil Service Undated with Redundant State.

Daily Times, June 20, 1986: The Sociology of our Public Administration.

Drucker, P. E. (1967) The Effective Executive, London: Harperd Row.

Drucker, Peter E. (1977) People and Performances. London: Heineman Ltd.

Elliot Jacques (1977) A General Theory of Bureaucracy. London: Heineman.

Fatiregun,  E. O. (1982) “Recruitment, Selection and Placement” in A. D. Yahaya (ed). A Book of Readings, ASCON, Nigeria.

Hampton, R. D. (1981) Contemporary Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Herbert, Simon (1976) Administrative BehaviourA Study of Decision Making Process in Administrative Organization. New York: Macmillan Press.

Inyang, E. E. (1986) “Personnel Management Crises in Nigerian”inNwosu, H. N. (ed)
(1985) Problems of “Nigerian administration. Enugu: Fourth Dimensions
Publishers.      

Murray, D. J. (ed) (1978) Studies in Nigerian Administration. London: Hutchinson and¹ Company Ltd.

Nwachukwu, C. C. (1988) Management Theory and Practice, London: Nocho Publishing Co.

Nwanne, O. (1970) “Public Corporations and Sate Owned Companies in Nigeria”,Quarterly Journal of Administration.

Ohia, C. C. (1984) Causes of Inefficiency in Public Enterprises in Nigeria. Unpublished B.Sc. Work, UNN.

Okoh, F. (1988) Democratization of Public Bureaucracy. A Paper Presented in the National Conference, Units.

Olatunde, O. (1980) Performances of Nigerian Public Corporation. Enugu: Fourth Dimensions Publishers Ltd.

Olewe, S. N. (1993) Development Admin in Africa. Port-Harcourt: CorareVonlve.

Onah, F. O. (1995) Pathologies of Manpower Planning and Development: The Local Government Experience. Journal of Local Government Administration in Nigeria.

Onyishi T. (1996) Managing Public Programme and Enterprise. Mimeograph, UNN.

Tokunbo (1990) Public Enterprises: The Nigerian Experience. Longos: Lantan Books Publication, Ltd.