COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

Department of Economics

FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE OF MICRO AND SMALL

SCALE ENTERPRISE IN HARAMAYA WOREDA

FOR THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE BACHLOR OF DEGREE IN

ECONOMICS

BY: Abebe Kumelachew

ID-0832/07

Advisor: Sintayehu .G (Msc)

1
 HARAMAYA ETHIOPIA

JUNE, 2017

ABSTRACT
This research aims to investigate factors affecting the performance of MSEs with a special
emphasizes on three sectors of business enterprise(trade ,service and urban agriculture)and three
kebeles of Haramaya woreda (01,02,03(bate)) For the sake of achieving the objectives of this
study, questionnaires were analyzed using descriptive analyses. A number of issues related to
micro and small scale enterprises in Haramaya woreda. Furthermore, it emphasizes feasible
course of actions for the development and better performance of these enterprises in the
woreda. Multi stage sampling procedure was used to select sample respondents for this study. A
total of 65 sample respondents were selected for this study. Both primary and secondary data
were generated to achieve the objective of this study. Primary data was collected by using open
and close ended interview schedule from sample respondents and selected micro and small scale
enterprise for this study. Secondary data were gathered from published and unpublished
documents related to the subject matter. The collected data from the respondent was analyzed
using descriptive statistics such as percentage and were presented with the help of tabular and
chart form.

2
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Above all I would like to thank God for his presence with me in all ups and downs and in
addition I would like to gratefully acknowledge our advisor Sintayehu .G (Msc) for his
invaluable polite suggestion and comment about the paper. I also want to acknowledge our
friends Ashebir A , Andamlak D, Berhane T, for providing their computer skill and laptop for the
manuscript, editing and print out of this paper. Finally our pleasure to say thank you to all my
friends.

3
Contents
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.............................................................................................................................................................3
CHAPTER ONE.......................................................................................................................................................................6
1.INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY..........................................................................................................................................6
1.2.Statement of the problem...............................................................................................................................................7
1.3. Objectives of the study...................................................................................................................................................8
1.5. Significance of the study.................................................................................................................................................9
1.6. Scope and limitation of the Study................................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER TWO..................................................................................................................................................................... 11
2. LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................................................................11
2.1. Theoretical Literature Review.......................................................................................................................................11
2.2. The Role of Micro and Small Enterprise in Poverty Reduction......................................................................................13
2.3. Empirical Literature Review..........................................................................................................................................13
CHAPTER THREE.................................................................................................................................................................. 20
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................................................20
3.1. Description of study Area.............................................................................................................................................20
3.2. Sampling technique and sampling size.........................................................................................................................21
3.3. Types of data and method of Data collection...............................................................................................................23
3.3.1. Types and Sources of Data.........................................................................................................................................23
3.3.2. Method of Data Analysis...........................................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER FOUR................................................................................................................................................................... 25
4. RESULT AND DISCUTION..................................................................................................................................................25
4.1. Demographic characteristics of the household............................................................................................................25
Chapter five......................................................................................................................................................................... 42
5. conclusions and recommendations................................................................................................................................42
5.1. CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................................................................42
5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................................................44
6. REFERENCE...................................................................................................................................................................... 46
4
 APPENDIX A......................................................................................................................................................................... 47

CHAPTER ONE

1.INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The micro and small business sector is recognized as an integral component of economic
development and a crucial element in the effort to lift countries out of poverty (Wolfenson,
2007). The dynamic role of micro and small enterprises (MSEs) in developing countries as
engines through which the growth objectives of developing countries can be achieved has long
been recognized. It is estimated that MSEs employ 22% of the adult population in developing
countries (Fisseha, 2006)

In developing countries, MSEs by virtue of their size, capital investment and their capacity to
generate greater employment, have demonstrated their powerful propellant effect for rapid
economic growth. The MSE sector has also been instrumental in bringing about economic
transition by providing goods and services, which are of adequate quality and are reasonably
priced, to a large number of people, and by effectively using the skills and talents of a large
number of people without requiring high-level training, large sums of capital or sophisticated
technology (ILO, 2008).

5
 According to Mulhern (1995), MSEs exert a strong influence on the economies of all countries,
particularly in the developing countries. The MSEs have been a major engine in the economic

growth, innovation and technological progress. In Ethiopia; MSEs Sector is the second largest
employment-generating sector following agriculture (CSA, 2005). A national survey conducted
by Ethiopian Central Statistical Authority (CSA) in 2005 in 48 major towns indicates that nearly
585,000 and 3,000 operators engaged in micro and small scale manufacturing industries
respectively, which absorb about 740,000 labor forces. Accordingly, the whole labor force
engaged in the micro enterprises and small scale manufacturing industries is more than eight
folds (740,000 persons) to that of the medium and large scale manufacturing industries (90,000
persons). This is a contribution of 3.4% to GDP, 33% of the industrial sector’s contribution and
52% of the manufacturing sector’s contribution to the GDP of the year 2001 (CSA, 2005:34-35).

According to Carrier (2008) the MSEs are more fertile than their larger enterprises in terms of
innovation and development. The MSE sector is characterized by highly diversified activities
which can create job opportunities for a substantial segment of the population. This indicates that
the sector is a quick remedy for unemployment problem. To curb unemployment and facilitate
the environment for new job seekers and self-employment a direct intervention and support of
the government is crucial. Micro and small enterprise in Ethiopia are, however, confronted with
several factors that affect the performance of MSE. The major factors include financial problems,
lack of qualified employees, lack of proper financial records, marketing problems and lack of
work premises, etc. Besides, environmental factor affects the business which includes social,
economic, cultural, political, legal and technological factors. In addition there are also personal
attitudes or internal factors that affect the performance of MSE, which are related to the person’s
individual attitude, training and technical know-how (Werotew, 2010)

1.2.Statement of the problem

In most developing countries, MSEs face constraints both at start up phases and after their
establishment. In Africa, for example, the failure rate of MSEs is 85% out of 100 enterprises due
6
to lack of skills and access to capital (Fedahunsi, 1997). It is typical of MSEs in Africa to be
lacking in business skills and collateral to meet the existing lending criteria of financial
institutions. This created finance gap in most markets. The MSEs are able to source and obtain
finance mostly from informal sectors like friends and relatives while medium or large enterprises
obtain funds from

banks. This unequal access to finance by MSEs and medium and large enterprises has
undermined the role of MSEs in the economic development in African countries (World Bank,
2004).

The contribution of small enterprises in creating job opportunities, poverty reduction and in the
development of our economy is vital. However, their contribution is very low in compared with
that of other countries due to financial problem, lack of qualified employees, lack of proper
financial records, marketing problems, infrastructural Constraints, lack of working premises and
raw materials. Lack of information about market opportunities and standards and regulations is
one of the underlying factors that hinder their performance (Mulu Gebreeyesus, 2009).

So, our study was proposed to investigate the factor affecting the performance MSEs in Hramaya
woreda. Since MSEs in Haramaya woreda are do not have easy access to the capital market
because of they mostly organized on priority basis and very small in size and their surplus ,which
can be utilized to repay loan are negligible , they often have a problem of rising capital,
infrastructural problem and this significantly constrain their choice of strategies Therefore, this
study was initiated to fill the current knowledge gap of how MSEs owners of Haramaya Woreda
rise their capital and government provide (business development service, public service,
financial service and infrastructural service) and to provide recent empirical evidences on
performance of MSEs in Haramaya Woreda that were not done in the study area.

7
 1.3. Objectives of the study
General Objective

The main objective of the study was to assess factors that affecting the performance of MSEs in
Haramaya woreda.

Specific Objectives

To assess the internal factors that affect development of MSEs.

To investigate the contextual factors that affect the performance of MSEs

To make recommendations on ways to correct these problems.

1.4. Basic research questions

What are the internal factors that influence the performance of MSEs?

What are the various contextual factors that affect the performance of the MSEs?

What type of recommendation to be recommended for the existing problem?

1.5. Significance of the study

The study focuses on factors that influence performance of micro and small business enterprise
in Haramaya Woreda. The outcome of this study was useful in providing useful information for
the owner of MSEs concerning problem facing MSEs and to develop strategies to minimize
those problems and suggest some possible solution with the factors influence MSEs, it may help
researcher who will study further on the issues.

The findings of this study was also help the policy makers and financial institutions how to
encourage establishing or expanding MSEs. It also enables them to know what kind(s) of
policies should be follow.

This study was used to know factors affecting performance of MSEs in the area. It was serve as
starting point for institutions and/or individuals who are interested to make further research. It
8
 was give direction for the researchers to identify factors affecting the performance of MSEs in
the area.

1.6. Scope and limitation of the Study

Though, there are several areas to cover by the study, due to certain constraints, the study limits
to Haramaya Woreda. Accordingly, the study does not deal with all MSEs in the Haramaya
Woreda. Instead of focus only on some group of MSEs of the woreda. By taking the problem of
time, budget/finance and other related materials in to consideration the study was give more
emphasis on factor affecting the performance of MSEs on Haramaya Woreda and only its
3kebeles (01, 02, 03(bate)) from Haramaya Woreda with 60 households.

Limitation of this study was difficult to get the relevant data due to unwillingness of the
respondents and lack of written materials related to MSEs in Haramaya Woreda. The other
limitation was most of the information we will get from respondents concerned with micro
enterprises are by oromic. To translate into the required instruction language (English) it will
take longer period.

9
 CHAPTER TWO

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Theoretical Literature Review

Definition of micro and small enterprises

According to Haylay, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) cover a wide spectrum of industries
and play an important role in both developed and developing countries. Ethiopia is no exception
and SMEs occupy a prominent position in the development of Ethiopian economy. Over the
years, the number of SMEs is growing from time to time. (Hailay, 2003).

The MSE sector everywhere is characterized by highly diversified activities which can create
employment opportunities for a substantial segment of the population. This implies that the
sector is a quick remedy for unemployment and poverty problem. The realization of a modest
standard of living through curbing unemployment and facilitating the environment for new job
seekers and self-employment requires a direct intervention and support of the government and
other concerned stakeholders (Mulugeta, 2011).

However, there is no single and universally acceptable definition of a small enterprise (Kayanula
and Quartey, 2000). This is so because the criteria and ways of categorizing enterprises as micro
and small from institution to institution and from country to country depending essentially on the
country’s level of development. Even within the same country, definitions also change overtime
10
due to changes in price levels, advances in technology or other considerations (Emma I. et al.,
2009).

United Nations Industrial Development Organizations (UNIDO) gives alternative definition for
developing countries. Accordingly, it defines micro enterprises as the business firms with less
than 5 employees and small enterprises as the business firms with 5-19 employees (UNIDO,
2002).

The United States of America, the Small Business Act issued in 1953 stated that, small business
is one which is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field of operation. The
act also further stated that, number of employees and sales volume as guideline in defining small
business (Major L. C. & Radwan N. S., 2010). In the same country, a committee for economic
development (CED) has explained that small business is characterized by at least two of the key
features: management is independent (usually the managers are owners), capital is supplied and
an individual or small group holds ownership and the area of operation is mainly local (workers
and owners are in one home country).

According to Kayanula and Quartey (2000) in Malawi, the official definition of enterprise sizes
is based on three criteria namely the level of capital investment, number of employees and
turnover. An enterprise is defined as small scale if it satisfies any two of the three criteria, that is,
it has a capital investment of USD 2,000 - USD 55,000, employing 5-20 people and with a
turnover of up to USD 110,000 (using 1992 official exchange rate).

Similarly, in Ethiopia there is no uniform definition at the national level to have a common
understanding of the MSE sector. Ministry of Trade and Industry (MoTI) and the Ethiopian
Central Statistics Authority (CSA) have defined MSEs separately. While the definition by MoTI
11
 uses capital investment, the CSA uses employment and favors capital intensive technologies as a
yardstick. The definition used by MoTI, which uses capital investment as a yardstick, has been
developed for formulating MSE development strategy in 1997 (MoTI, 1997).

According to the official definitions of MoTI, micro enterprises are businesses enterprises found
in all sectors of Ethiopian economy with a paid up capital (fixed assets) of not more than Birr
20,000, but excluding high technology consultancy firms and other high technology
establishments. Small enterprises are business enterprises with a paid up capital of more than
Birr 20,000 but not exceeding Birr 50,000 and excluding high technology consultancy firms and
other high technology establishments (MOTI, 1997).

2.2. The Role of Micro and Small Enterprise in Poverty Reduction

Poverty in Ethiopia is widespread and remains a major challenge of sustainable development and
stability (Lutheran World Federation of Ethiopia, 2006 cited in Eshetu & Mammo, 2009). By
now, it is clear and agreeable that poverty, both in urban and/or rural areas, is all about lack of
basic needs, low or inadequate level of income and consumption, poor command over resources,
and high level of social exclusion, inequality and vulnerability. The role played by MSEs,
through the various socio-economic benefits emanating from the sector was found to be eminent
in the overall development effort and process of nations. In other words, by generating larger
volumes of employment as well as higher levels of income, the MSEs will not only have
contributed towards poverty reduction, but they will also have enhanced the welfare and standard
of living of the many in the society (Mukras,2003).

2.3. Empirical Literature Review

Size and Diversity of MSEs in Ethiopia

The sample survey, conducted in 48 major towns by the Central Statistical Authority (CSA), in
May 1997, showed that there were 584,913 informal sector activity operators and 2,731 small-
12
scale manufacturing industries, employing a total of 739,898 people. The survey revealed that a
micro enterprise on average engages one person, with the average annual operating surplus at
about Birr 1,300 ($162).

With regard to the diverse nature of activities in the informal sector (mainly micro enterprises),
the survey indicated that the majority of activity is concentrated in two main broad sectors:
namely, 47

per cent in manufacturing and 42 per cent in trade and services. The distribution of activities
among the rest of the MSEs is about 6 per cent in community and personal services, with the
remaining 5 per cent involved in the areas of agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing, mining
and quarrying, construction and transport activities. The part of the survey covering “Small-scale
Manufacturing Industries”, showed that the small manufacturing industries are mainly engaged
in the manufacture of food, fabricated metal, furniture and clothing. These sub-sectors constitute
more than 85 per cent of the surveyed small-scale manufacturing industries. (CSA, 1997)

Each small-scale manufacturing activity engages, on average, 3 persons per establishment

including the owner. The average annual wage per employee is Birr 1,914 ($239). The average
operating surplus per industry is Birr 18,934 ($2,368), which shows that income generated by
small manufacturing activities is much greater than that generated by operations in the informal
sector. The average capital per informal sector activity during the survey period was found to be
Birr 3,528 ($441), while the average capital per small-scale manufacturing industry was Birr
38,354 ($4,794) (CSA, 1997) (CSA, 1997).

Factors Affecting the Development of MSEs

Ishengoma and Kappel, 2006 categorized factors hindering the performance of Micro and small
enterprises into three, namely internal, external and inter firm (Ishengoma and Kappel, 2006b)
13
 Internal Factor

The internal factors, which hinder the normal functioning of MSEs, include: limited human
capital (the skills, schooling, technical know-how and motivation of employees), lack of working
capital, the utilization of obsolete technology and poor location.Regarding factors pertaining to
human capital, studies indicate that the majority of workers in informal enterprises are low
educated. Most of the operators acquired the skills through on-the-job training within the
informal sector or, as in the case of Africa, through informal apprenticeship systems; it is rare to
see those who obtained their skills through a formal training institution (Sethuraman, 1997)
Training in most cases tends to be supply-driven, and are rarely sensitive to the needs and
circumstances of those in this sector and this generally means their irrelevance. The cost in terms
of money and time may be too high. Sethuraman, 1997 emphasis that resources in the form of
training or other similar inputs, if allocated at all for the informal sector, tend to be so meager
that they are subject to rationing which means that many of those needing assistance are
disqualified through a process of screening based on different criteria. (e.g., minimum schooling
required for training, collateral for credit, etc.) They are subject to rationing which means that
many of those needing assistance are disqualified through a process of screening based on
different criteria. (e.g., minimum schooling required for training, collateral for credit, etc.)

Not having free access to the internal factors has no doubt its consequences on the informal
operators’ performance in the market. For instance in terms of poor location, the majority of
informal firms are home based which may limit their expansion, interaction with other
businesses, hence increased transaction costs and limited access to marketing information. Some
informal enterprises operate in temporary physical structures in open spaces or in public space
that are considered illegal or unauthorized, a situation that limits their access to public services:
sanitation, water and electricity.

14
 External Factor

Access to Financial Services

In most of developing countries, the majority of MSEs lack access to formal financial services.
Researches in this area evidenced that the informal firms start their business with their own
savings supplemented by borrowing from friends and relatives. Since most of the operators are
poor they start their business with very little capital. A few meet their capital requirements
through informal credit mechanisms which exist within their community, but rarely from the
formal sector institutions.

Credit from formal sources are not only governed by government regulations but often they also
form part of public sector monopoly, and hence administered by a bureaucracy that is generally
unfriendly to the poor, illiterates and semi-literates in the informal sector. Similar attitudes also
prevail in the private sector; the private banks for example rarely find it profitable to deal with
these units, though a few exceptions are emerging(Sethuraman, 1997).

According to Morrisson, 1995, between the years 1995 and 2004 only nine percent of informal
enterprises in Jamaica and ten percent in Tunisia had access to bank loans (Morrisson, 1995).
African countries also experienced similar circumstances for instance; only ten percent of
informal firms in Nigeria and four percent in Uganda had access to bank loans (Arimah, 2001).
The firms’ accessibility to funds from micro-finance institutions was much lower. Sometimes it
appears that it is more expensive to borrow from MFIs than formal financial institutions
(Ishengoma, 2004).

15
 Limited Access to Business Development Services

Business Development Services are designed to help micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises
overcome barriers to increased profitability, by improving their productivity and access to high
value markets. In this way, the sector can create and sustain productive, remunerative and good
quality jobs, as well as reduce poverty, and contribute to the development of the local economies.
The service include training, consultancy and advisory services, marketing assistance,
information, technology development and transfer, business linkage promotion, and linkages to
finance and financial services. However; since informal enterprises do not comply with
government regulations, the majority of them have no access to business development services
offered or coordinated by governments. Some of them are unaware that business development
services are offered while others are ignorant to its worth. Ishengoma and Kapple stated that
BDS providers do not market their services to small and informal enterprises appropriately,
assuming that these enterprises can not afford the services. It some cases the services offered are
of low quality or irrelevant to MSEs (Ishengoma and Kappel, 2006b).

Limited Market

The majority of informal enterprises target the low income market areas because of low entry
barriers. Enterprises in this market tend to compete for the same customers. The magnitude of
this hindrance is higher for those concentrated in one area as they tend to apply a copycat
strategy and thus produce similar products. This limits their growth potential and stability and is
one of the reasons why informal enterprises experience a relatively high instance of downfall.

16
 Poor Supply of Economic Infrastructure and Public Services

One of the desires of most participants in the informal sector is to save on costs and this includes
saving on rental; for them higher disposable income now is more important than a better quality
premises. They therefore prefer to operate either from homes or from other rent free locations
even if it means violation of existing regulations (Sethuraman, 1997). Since incomes of the
operators

depend significantly on where they do their business within the city, they choose to operate
closer to inner city or other locations despite the risks involved in violating the regulations where
purchasing power, and hence demand for their output, is concentrated.

Consequently, the majority of informal enterprises lack a decent location for their businesses.
Some of them are located in places with a limited supply or lack of public services and economic
infrastructure (for example, water and electricity, transport systems, telecommunication systems,
sanitation services). In comparison to residents/enterprises in middle or high-income
communities, informal firms with access to these services incur a relatively high cost per unit for
the service (Yu, 2002). On account of their small size they cannot afford to invest in private
public goods (Reinikka, 2002) or to buy services from private providers which would be more
expensive than sourcing from government suppliers (Ishengoma and Kappel, 2006b)A poor
economic infrastructure and limited access to public services increases the operating costs of
informal firms, limits their ability to meet quality standards (for example, hygiene standards in
restaurants), hinders their participation in linkage relationships and reduces their market and
customer base(Collier, 2002).

Inter-firm Factors

The Nature of Linkage Relationships

Most informal enterprises source raw materials from and/or supply finished goods to formal
firms either directly or through intermediate firms. Studies on the linkage between informal and

17
formal firms reviles informal enterprises are quite likely to have linkages with formal firms. But
the commercial relationship between informal enterprises and formal firms is likely to be
imbalanced and unregulated, although this may differs context to context (Che.M, 2005).

The most dominant nature of the linkage relationship between these two sectors in developing
countries is the one whereby formal enterprises supply inputs to informal enterprises. However,

this linkage is regarded as exploitative according to Arimah, 2001(Arimah, 2001). The forwards
linkage in which informal enterprises supplying formal ones which are believed to have a
positive effect on the performance of informal enterprise, are not very prominent in developing
countries. The imbalanced linkage of the sectors is among the factor that explain low
competency in the informal sector (Ishengoma and Kappel, 2006a).

Governance Structures

As a result of the inadequate capabilities of the informal enterprises and their weak legal status,
the majority of the firms involved in bilateral vertical linkages with formal enterprises, have
relatively low bargaining power. Consequently they will likely be exploited (Tokman, 1978) and
incur relatively high transaction costs. The point is that when there are different layers of
contractors such as original formal contractors, entrepreneurs and labourers, firms in the first
category accrue more profit, whilst those in the last category are highly exploited.

Weak Association

Formal business interests are represented in municipal governance through associations such as
chambers of commerce. Informal workers and their enterprises should be entitled to the same
expectation of having forums for the expression of their interests. However, few cities provide
the opportunity. The objective of a self-help business or employees association is to deliver
services to its members based on their needs and priorities. However, given the internal and
external factors that hindered the development of informal enterprise most of the time the sector
failed to establish a strong association that will stand for the benefits of its member. Many

18
 remain small, weak, and isolated and most are not recognized as legitimate worker organizations
by formal trade unions in their respective countries or by the international trade union movement
(Chen et al., 2002). The same is true for employees in the sector. Given the unlimited supply of
labor, workers association tends to have little bargaining a power (Ishengoma and Kappel,
2006a).

CHAPTER THREE

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Description of study Area

Location and Topography

Haramaya woreda is a Part of east Hararghe zone, it is borderd in the south by KurfaChele, on
the west by Kersa, on the north by Dire Dawa, on the east by Kombolcha and on the southeast by
the Harari region. Town include Haramaya and Bati. It has a latitude and longitude of 9◦ 24ꞌN
42⸰ 01ꞌE /9.400⸰N 42.017⸰E with an elevation ranges from 1400 to 2340 m.a.s.l. The 2007
national census reported the total population for this woreda of 271,018 of whom 138,282 were
men and 132,736 were women. (CSA 2007)

Economic activity

The main economic activity in the woreda is commerce (trading and catering service) and
manufacturing activity. The dominant manufacturing activity that account 70% of the total
number of manufacturing center pries in the woreda are grain mills and wood work. No large
19
 scale industrial activity is found in the woreda. The industrials are small scale and cottage
industries kike grain mills, wood and metal work shops, hollow block manufacturing, bakeries
and pastries (Haramaya woreda office administration, 2012).

Research design

A research design is the program that guides the researchers in the process of collecting,
analyzing and interpreting the data. The researcher used the descriptive form of research design
to provide

solutions to the research problems. Descriptive research involves gathering data that describe
events and then organizes, tabulates, depicts, and describes the data collection

We will use a cross sectional study design, because we will use descriptive data analysis and
standardized question to collect data.

3.2. Sampling technique and sampling size

This study used multi stage sampling procedure select sample households. In the first stage,
Haramaya woreda was selected purposively. And we select 3 kebele (01 02 and 03(bate))
randomly from Haramaya woreda. The respondents will be selected by systematic random
sampling techniques and the sample size will be determined by PPS from kebeles found in
Haramaya woreda.

In order to determine sample size from targeted population the study used slovin’s formula to
obtain sample size from 01, 02 and bate (03) kebeles. The number of respondents (association) in
the three kebeles i.e. 01, 02 and bate (03) are (446,389 and 354) respectively, which totally yields
1187 association groups. So using Slovin’s formula sample size is obtained as follows:

Determination of sample size is resolved by means of Slovin’s sampling formula with 90 percent
confidence level.

n=N/1+N (e)2 Where N is Number of target population

20
 e margin of error occurrence in social science, its value is 10%.

N=1187 n= 1187/1+1187(0.1)2

e= 10% n=92

However, Due to shortage of time, scarcity of budget and availability of data sample size reduced
to 60 sample household from 92 actually calculated household, interviewees

Thus, sample size of respondents from each kebeles can be calculated as

Sample size from 01 =446*60/1187=22

Sample size from 02 = 389*60/1187=20

Sample size from 03 (bate) =354*60/1187=18

Table1: No of association of the respondents with their respective kebele

No Kebele No No of respondent Type of enterprise

association
1 01 389 20 Whole sailor and retailor
shop

2 02 446 22 Wood and metal work

3 03(bate) 352 18 Tailoring food cetering

21
 Total 3 1187 60

3.3. Types of data and method of Data collection

Both qualitative and quantitative data will be collected from primary and secondary sources to
identify factor affecting performance of MSE’s. Quantitative primary data will be collected using
MSE’s survey and their spouses will be asked about factor affecting performance of MSE’s and

related issues. Qualitative primary data will be collected using key informants where elderly and
knowledgeable people about the area will be asked on various issues relevant to the study. On the
other hand, secondary data will be obtained from published and unpublished sources.

3.3.1. Types and Sources of Data

We will use both primary and secondary data on factor affecting performance of MSE’s through
formal survey and informal survey from sample and informal. We will be use both primary and
secondary method of data collection in our research

22
 Primary Data

Formal Survey:

Primary data were collected through structured questionnaire from MSE’s.

Informal survey

Qualitative data will be gathered informal through FGD of that study area, the patterns
and types of activities of people in the study area and the behavior; etc. Qualitative data
will be gathered from informal survey such as informal discussion with key informants,
professionals, administrators, community leaders, etc.

Secondary data

Secondary data will be gathered through reviewing and through examination of

documents, reports and records of published and unpublished document.

3.3.2. Method of Data Analysis

In this study both quantitative and qualitative analysis will be undertaken. The study will mainly
use both descriptive inferential method of data analysis. The results will be displayed using
averages and percentages.

And also data collected from the sources cleaned, coded and entered in to SPSS and made ready
for analysis. Descriptive analysis (mean, minimum, maximum, frequency distribution) of main
data will be analyzed using SPSS. Qualitative data obtained through focused group and key
informants discussion was summarized, interpreted and narrated.

23
 CHAPTER FOUR

4. RESULT AND DISCUTION

The chapter deals about the findings based on the data which is collected from the Haramaya
woreda who are actually part of MSEs operators and includes into the sample size of the study
by using both primarily and secondary source of data. In this chapter the general and specific
objective of the study was answered based on the collected data.

4.1. Demographic characteristics of the household.

From the interviewer that we have conducted with MSE respondents. Finding of the study are
based on the analysis and discussion of the response of people who operator MSE in Haramaya
woreda.

Table2: Sex distribution of the household

Sex of Respondent Frequency Percent

Male 38 58.5
Female 27 41.5
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

Sex distribution is one of demographic characteristics and as we observed from the above graph
58.5% of owners of MSE in the woreda are male and 41.5% of MSE are females. From these we
conclude that males are more employed and engaged in activities of MSE than females.
 Table 3: Age distribution of the household

Age of respondent Frequency Percent

18-25 17 26.2
25-35 24 36.9
35-45 17 26.2
above 45 7 10.8
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

Age indicates proportion of respondent by dividing into different age regime/classification .From
the above graphs we concluded that 36.9% of owners of MSEs are between 25-35 years and both
between18-25 years and 35-45years are 26.2% equally and respondent above 45 years were
10.2%. We conclude from these most owners of micro and small business were person between
25 and 35 years age levels and respondent age 18-25 and 35-45years are the proportional in the
activity of business enterprise.

Table 4. Educational statuses of the household

Education status Frequency Percent

illiterates and informal Source:
7 10.8
own educators survey.
Elementary 18 27.7
high school 26 40.0
above 10 grade 14 21.5
Total 65 100.0

Skilled man power is important for development of one’s country because it is activity performed
and decision made by skilled man power that leads country to development. So education is key
demographic variable. As we observe from the above table 10.8% MSEs are illiterate and who
learned informal educations, 27.7% were learned elementary, 40 % were high school and 21.5%
were learned above 10 grade. Therefore, we understood from these, most respondents were high
school educators. The ratio of illiterate personnel was very less when compared to the other.

Table 5: Religion of the household head

 Religion of
respondent Frequency Percent
Muslim 34 52.3
Orthodox 21 32.3
Protestant 10 15.4
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

As we see from the above table 52.3% respondents were Muslim in religion and 32.3% of them
were Orthodox and protestant religion constitutes 15.4% of micro and small business operators
in the woreda.

Table 6: Marital status

Marital
status Frequency Percent
Married 50 72.3
Unmarried 10 20.0
Divorced 5 7.7
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

As we see from the above table 72.3 % MSEs Operators in the woreda were married, 20% of
them were unmarried. Divorced ratio of owners of small business in the town is less than all.

Table 7. Ethnicity of household head.

Ethnicity Frequency Percent

Oromo 50 76.9
Others 15 23.1
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.
 As we see from the above table 76.9% respondents were Oromo in ethnic and 23.1% other
ethnic such as Ahmara and Gurage.

Table 8:what type of business sector you are running

Type of sector
Frequency Percent
Service 20 30.8
Trade 27 41.5
urban agriculture 18 27.7
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

In the woreda 3 type of MSE sector were selected from 5 sectors due to scarcity of time and
budget. They are trade which includes wholesales shop and retailers shop, service includes
cafeteria, tailoring, barbers and urban agriculture which include dairy production and fruit
production and vegetable production. As indicated in the above table we select 41.5% of MSE in
the woreda are trade, 30.8% of MSE in the woreda are service and 27.7% of SME in the woreda
are urban agriculture.
Figure: Initial capital by which business started.

10000-20000; 33.8
20000-30000; 30.8

10000-20000; 22
20000-30000; 20 above 30000; 20 Frequency
Percent
5000-10000; 15.4
above 30000; 13
5000-10000; 10

Source: own survey.

To perform every activities everyone should have initial capital .since different people engage on
different activities as well as their initial capital to perform the activities is different .As we see
from the above graph 15.4%( 10 respondent) of MSEs operators their initial capital were
between 5000-10000birr ,38.8%(22 respondent) of them responded that their initial capital were
between 10000-20000birr ,30.8%(20 respondent) of them were between 20000-30000 birr and
about 20% (13 respondent) of them were above 30000 birr and we conclude most of MSEs
operators in the woreda start the business with capitals of 10000birr -30000birr.

Figure; Source of finance to startup their business

Percent

personal saving
from family and friends
micro
personal saving; 24.6; finance institution
24.60%
use all source; 26.2; 26.20% use all source

from family and friends; 21.5; 21.50%

micro finance institution; 27.7; 27.70%

Source: own survey.

While running the business, gaining the source of funds or capital to finance the business has
influence on performance of the business .As we see observed from the above pie chart 24.6% of
owners of MSEs financed their business from personal saving trough Iqub /Iddir and saving in
bank, 27.7% of them from from getting loan from microfinance institution,21.5% were from the
help of family and friends and 26.2% of them used all sources in combination to finance their
business .we concluded that most owners of small business in the woreda financed their business
from microfinance institutions.

Initiation to start the business.

Most of MSEs have different objectives when they initiated to start some business .among the
objectives we have conducted from MSEs of Haramaya woreda is summarized in the following
table.

Table:9.Initiation to start their business

Frequency Percent
willing to earn
24 36.9
additional profit
desire for creating job
26 40.0
for survival
Dual purpose 15 23.1
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

As indicated on the above table 36.9% of MSEs in the woreda responded that initiation to start
small business were willing to earn additional profit and 40% of them started for a desire of
creating job for survival. Finally, 23.1% of owners of small business in the woreda responded
that they started their business for dual purpose.

.
 Table:10 System used to be successful in the market.

Frequency Percent
produce quality product or service 20 30.8
treat customers in good manner 11 16.9
sale at low price 16 24.6
use all means in combination 18 27.7
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

Modern economy is the world of competition .becoming successful competitor in the market is
one character ticks of a good marketer. However, the main question by using what means? from
the interview we have conducted in the woreda about 20 respondents (30.8% of MSEs operators
used a system of produce high quality product, 11 respondents (16.9) of them used a system of
treating customer in good manner and about 16 respondents (24.6%) of them used a system of
sale at low price of their product .finally about 27.7% of them used all means in combination.

Concept of performance

The performance of the industrial sector can possibly be measured by gross value of output,
which refers to the total output reduced during a time period. This means value added at factor
cost which is the difference between gross value of output and the value of intermediate inputs,
value added at current market price which is the sum of value added at factor cost and indirect
taxes less any subsidies, and value added per person employed in a given period of time (Haile,
1995).

This is an industry or sector wise performance measure. To measure a specific firm’s

performance; we can use its profitability, capacity utilization, debt – equity ratio and other
measures. In this study the researcher used the growth capacity and profitability.

Contribution of micro and small enterprise in different aspects

Table11: The benefit which gain from MSEs

Mention if you benefited from Number of Respondents

MSEs Yes % No %

Improved quality of house 10 15.33 42 84.67

Increase monthly income 53 81.5 12 18.5

Getting job satisfaction 29 44.6 36 55.4

Improved skill and knowledge 33 50.76 32 49.23

Start saving 18 27.6 47 72.3

Increase monthly consumption 26 40.0 39 60.0

Source: own survey.

From the above table we can see that all participants of MSEs are beneficiary. Most participants
of MSEs increase their monthly income (81.5% of respondents). About (50.75 %) of respondents
were improved their skill and knowledge. The others Getting job satisfaction (44.6%), Increase
monthly consumption (40%), starting to saving (27.6%), and improvement in quality of house
(15.33%) .Therefore, MSEs can easily change the life of lower income people.

Formation of MSEs under MSEs bureau

Micro and small scale enterprises are a kind of establishments with small capital investment and
use unsophisticated technology. Micro enterprises are those enterprises with startup capital of
less than birr 20,000 and use unsophisticated technology where small enterprises are those
establishments whose startup capital is less than birr 50,000 and do not use high level
technology.

In Haramaya woreda although, some small and micro enterprises as defined above have long
history of existence, But have got due consideration from the government. Now they are
considered and recognized as the commendable alternative for tacking unemployment and
reducing poverty.

The bureau of micro and small enterprises commenced its operation before 6yrs. Its main
objective is the formation of micro and small scale enterprises that will play the major role in the
reduction of unemployment and poverty. Gradual transformation of the traditional economy into
industrial economy by development of these enterprises into medium and large scale enterprises
is the other its main objective.

Factor affecting performance of micro and business enterprise in Haramaya woreda

MSEs have been unable to contribute substantially as needed to the economic development
particularly because of financial, infrastructural, managerial skills, and marketing problems.
These problems are still major problem to their development, lack of adequate finance and credit
has always been a major problem of Ethiopian small business. Small scale units do not have easy
access to the capital market, because they are mostly organized on proprietary partnership basis
and are very small in size. Haramaya woreda also had those problems that influence performance
of micro and small business enterprise.

Internal factor affecting performance of micro and small business enterprise

Managerial factor
Table12: Having managerial problem/not
 Yes or no Frequency Percent
No 18 27.7
yes
lack of strategic
24 36.9
business planning
lack of experience 16 24.6
lack of effective
7 10.8
communication
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

As we can understood from the above table18 out of 65 sample respondent (which account
for27.7%)had no managerial problem and 42 sample respondent( which account for72.3%) had
managerial problem among those problems 38.9% respondent were lack of strategic business
planning,24.6% respondent had no experience to run their business activity and10.8% had lack
of effective communication with their customer and suppliers. we concluded that most of
managerial problems of MSEs were lack of strategic business planning ,which hinders their
business development

It is argued from a theoretical perspective that management experience and continuous training
provide a particular entrepreneur with the necessary skills and competences needed for
successful entrepreneurship (Enock N., 2010:43).

Entrepreneur factors
Table13: having entrepreneur problem/not

Yes/no
Frequency Percent
No 20 30.8
Yes lack of motivation 19 29.2
lack of tolerance to work
20 30.8
hard
lack of information 6 9.2
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey
As we can understood from the above table 20 out of 65 sample respondent (which account for
30.8%) had no entrepreneur problem and 45 sample respondent (which account for 69.2%) had
entrepreneur problem among those problems 29.2% had lack of motivation of supportive sevice
and government, 30.8% were lack of tolerance to work hard with full confidence and self-esteem
and 9.2% were lack of getting new information concerning product they sell and purchase (trade
and service sector) and product that agricultural sector produce and sell. From this lack of
motivation were the major factors from the entrepreneur factors.

Contextual factor affecting performance of micro and small business enterprise

Marketing factor

Table14: Having marketing problem/not

Yes/no Frequency Percent

No 15 23.1
Yes lack of promotion to
21 32.3
attract potential users
poor customer
18 27.7
relationship
lack of market
11 16.9
information

Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.
As we can understood from the above table 15 out of 65 sample respondents (which account for
23.1%) had no marketing problem and 50 sample respondent (which account for 41.9%) had
marketing problem which accounted 32.3 % sample respondents had no enough promotion to
attract a potential users in the market ,27.7% respondents were poor customer relationship and
and 16.9 % were lack of market information to obtain new information about their product and
service. we conclude that most of marketing factors that affect micro enterprise in Haramaya
woreda were lack of promotion to attract potential users.

Financial factors

Table15: Having financial problem/not

Yes/no Frequency Percent

No 11 16.9
Yes Lack of awareness
28 43.1
about credit institution
high interest rate
26 40.0
charged by the bank
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

The major problem for micro and small-scale enterprise in all sector of Haramaya woreda is lack
of adequate finance. As the table mentioned above displayed 11 respondents out of 65
respondents (16.9%) responded that they had enough financial while, 54 respondents out of 65
respondents had scarcity of financial problems. Those problems as 28 respondents (43.1%)
responded that due to lack of awareness about credit association while, 26 respondents (40.0%)
responded that due to fear of high interest rate charged by the bank. we conclude that most of
MSEs operators in Haramaya woreda were lack of awareness about credit institution to get loan
from credit institution that base for their business expansion.

Working place factors

Table16: Having working place problem/not

Yes/no Frequency Percent

No 22 33.8
Yes absence of own promise 21 32.3
current working place is
13 20.0
not convenient
the rent of house is too
9 13.8
high
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

Working place is the basic for business operation. From the table above as 22 respondent out of
65 sample respondent (33.8%) had enough working place, while 43 respondent (66.2%) had no
enough Working place due to different factors, those factors are absence of own promises
responded by 21 respondent (32.3%), current working place is not convenient responded by 13
respondent (32.3%) while, 9 respondent (13.8%) said that due to rent of house is too high. From
this we concluded most working place factors in Haramaya woreda is due to lack of own
business place affect the performance of business enterprise due to this most MSEs were obliged
to stop their enterprise
Infrastructural factor

Table17: Having infrastructural problem/not

Yes/no Frequency Percent

no 19 29.2
yes insufficient water supply 13 20.0
lack of sufficient
10 15.4
transportation service
Both 19 29.2
Others 4 6.2
Total 65 100.0
Source: own survey.

Infrastructural factor was the major factor that affects performance of micro and small business
enterprise in Haramaya woreda from the table above 19 respondents out of 65 respondents
(29.2%), while 46 respondents (70.8%) had no enough infrastructures. Those problems as 13
respondents (20%) responded due to insufficient water supply (common factor in agricultural
sectors of 01 kebeles of Haramaya and rarely in a trade and service sectors of 02 and 03 (bate)
respectively) the other factor is due to lack of sufficient transportation service as responded by 10
respondent (15.4%) ,19 respondents (29.2%) had not both sufficient water and enough
transportation service and 4 respondents (6.2%)had other infrastructural problems like limited
access to basic facilities such as electricity, network and educations non continuous existence of
electricity. We concluded that most infrastructure factors of Haramaya woreda were due to
insufficient water supply and lack of sufficient transportation service.
 Chapter five

5. conclusions and recommendations

5.1. CONCLUSIONS

This research was conducted in haramaya woreda with the

prime intent of critically assessing the factors affecting the performance of MSE
operators engaged in textile and garment, food processing and metal and wood work
activities. Specifically, the study attempted to examine the sources of finance or funds
available for MSEs, to investigate contextual factors, to assess the internal factors and to
recommend possible solution to alleviate the problem of MSEs. Based on the objectives
and findings of the study, the following conclusions are worth drawn.

The main sources of startup and expansion finance or funds for most MSEs are personal
savings followed by iqub/idir, family and friends/relatives. The formal financial
institutions have not been able to meet the credit needs of the MSEs. Since there is high
interest rate and collateral requirement, most MSEs have been forced to use the informal
institutions for credit. But the supply of credit from the informal institutions is often so
limited to meet the credit needs of the MSEs. In some cases this problems may be the
inability of many operators to meet formal financial institutions requirements for example
business plan, governance systems and other accountability issues which are linked to
business risk. This shows that the studied operators accessed finance mainly from
informal sources.
The most important contextual factors identified are financial factors which include high
collateral requirement from banks and other lending institutions, shortage of working
capital, high interest rate charged by banks and other lending institutions, and too
complicated loan application procedures of banks and other lending institutions. The
workings premises factors include absence of own premises and the rent of house is too
high. Marketing factors include inadequacy of market, difficulty of searching new
market, lack of demand forecasting, lack of market information and absence of
relationship with an organization/association that conduct marketing research.
Infrastructural factors incorporate power interruptions, and lack of sufficient and quick
transportation service that hinder the business performance of all sectors.

Though, various governmental bodies designed various programs aimed at developing

MSEs sector. Most of the programs were not given the appropriate backing and as such
the impact of the programs could not be felt in the performance and competitiveness of
MSEs. This is mainly because of the fact that these programs or policies are not
effectively implemented in line with their intended objectives owing to various reasons.
According to the findings, the reason ranges from lack of visible commitment of some
governmental bodies to lack of regular integration between the MSEs operators and the
concerned bodies of the government.

The main internal factors identified were management factors which include poor
selection of associates in business, lack of strategic business planning, and costly and
inaccessible training facilities. Lastly, the major entrepreneurial factors include lack of
persistence and courage to take responsibility for one’s failure and absence of initiative to
assess ones strengths and weakness. In terms of the stated research hypothesis the
specific empirical findings emerged from the investigation that there exists significant
positive relationship between independent variables and dependent variable. Moreover,
the selected independent variables may significantly explain the variations in the
dependent variable in study area.

Finally, the study has further identified that the different influences in which each of the
 factors under study have in different categories of the business. The research clearly
illustrates that, even if the degree of those critical factors in food processing sector
slightly differ from the factors that are critical to textile and garment, and wood and metal
work sectors, most of the factors are considerably common for three sectors. It has been
noted that the contextual factors are prevalent to the businesses such as financial,
workings premises, marketing and infrastructure had very high effects on the
performance of MSEs compared to other factors in the research area.

5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS

Suggestion for corrective and complementary measures to enhance the potential performance of
MSEs is essential. Such recommendation demands an in-depth analysis of the influence of
different factors regarding the sector. Based on finding and conclusion of the study, the following
recommendations are forwarded.

 All the concerned organizations should give due attention /consideration and support for the
enterprises especially the funding institutions should relax its loan provision conditions. This is
the major problem that the enterprises are facing that limits their operation and expansion. By
looking at their prospects and previous status /performance, the funding institutions should
provide the funds for the enterprises.
 Marketing factor is explanatory factor for most problems faced by the studied MSEs .There for,
it is necessary to solve this deep rooted problem. some of the way of doing so can be; providing
selling and display places in area close to working area and linking the MSEs with other private
contractor working within or around Haramaya woreda to make the operator able to secure
market opportunity.

 The production or areas of business on which the enterprises are engaged should be directed
towards the demand of the people. Production should be demand oriented and differentiated on
the basis of market research. This is because most of the enterprises are engaged on the
production of the same type of goods or commodities. And hence it will improve the marketing
difficulties and offer better market opportunities for the enterprises.
  There should be proper interconnection or interrelation between the enterprises. This will create
an opportunity for the enterprises to share experiences and for improved performance of the
sector as a whole.
 The concerned organizations should undertake follow up and continuous guidance for the
enterprises. They should also solve their problems at each stage of their operation. They should
also provide appropriate technology and technical knowhow through training

6. REFERENCE

Carrier, C., (2008).Intrapreneurship in large firms and SMEs: A Comparative study, International
Small Business Journal,12(3):11-23.
Emma .I.Okoyeand Akamoibi, Ndidika .L (2009) .Repositioning and Micro Small Enterprises
(MSEs) in Orumba south L.G.A. of Anambra state. Multidisciplinary Journal of Research
Development, 12 (3):1-9
Fadahunsi , O. (1997) . “The Challenge of Promoting Entrepreneurship and Small Business: The
Common Wealth Expreance.” Small and Medium Enterprises Development: Policies,
Programmes and Prospects, WAMDEVN.
Fisseha y. (1992).‘ Small Scale Enterprises in Lesotho: Summary of a Country Wide Survey’.
Gemini Technical Report NO.14, Washington D.C. Development Alternatives Inc.
International Labor Organization (ILO) .(2008). Profile of Employment and Poverty in Africa.
Report on Ethiopia, Nigeria, Ghana, Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda. East Africa Multidisciplinary
Advisor Team (EAMAT). Geneva, ILO Publications.
Kayanula , D. and Quartey , P.(2000). The policy Environment For Promoting Small and
Medium-Sized Enterprises in Ghana and Malawi.
Major L. Clark and Radwan N. Saade. (2010: 2-19). The Role of Small Business in Economic
Development The United States: From The end of Korean War (1953) to the Present, a working
paper, office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration.
Mulhern D. (1995).Entrepreneurship and Management. Journal of Small Business Management,
25(3):92.
MuluGebreeyesus. (2009). Innovation and Microenterprises Growth in Ethiopia. Word Institute
for Development, Economic Research, United Nations University, No.51.
Mulugeta Yohanes Firasew. (2011). The Livelihoods Reality of Micro and Small Enterprise
Operators: Evidences from Woreda One of Lideta Sub City, Addis Ababa.
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).(2002). Rural Enterprise
Development Support Project. Entrepreneurial Skills for group based SMEs.
Werotew BezabihAssefa. (2010): Enterpreneurship: An Engine for Sustainable Growth
Development Prosperity and Good Governance ;Genius Training and Consultancy Service,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

APPENDIX A
QUESTIONAIRE
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
BA PROGRAM
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
Dear respondent
I am graduate student in the department of economics, Haramaya Univresity currently, I am
under taking research entitled factors affecting the performance of micro and small scale
enterprise in Haramaya woreda. You are one of the respondents selected to participate on the
study, please assist me in giving correct and complete information to present representative
finding on the current status of the factors affecting the performance of micro and small scale
enterprise in the Haramaya woreda . Your participation is entirely voluntary and the
questionnaire is completely unonyems.
Finally, I confirm you that the information thnat you share me will be kept confidential and
only used for academic purpose.

Sincerely
Abebe
Kumelachew
INSTRUCTION
 No need of writing your name
 For likert scale type statements and multiple choice questions indicate your answers with
a check mark () in the appropriate block.
SECTION 2 GENERAL INFORMATION ON BUSINESS ENTERPRISES
1. sex of the respondent A) male B) female
2. age of the respondent A) 18-25 B). 25-35 C)35-45 D). above 45
3. education status A). literate B). illiterate C). high school D). above grade 10
4. religion of the respondent A). orthodox B). Muslim C). protestant D). others
5. marital status A). married B). un married C). divorced
6. what type of the business sector you are running A). service B). trade C). urban
agriculture
7. what is initiation to start to your business A). willing to earn additional profit B). desire
for creating job for survival C). dual purpose
8. what is the method to be success A). produce quality product B). treat customers in good
manner C). sale at lower price D). use all means in combination
9. is there entrepreneur problem A). YES B). NO
10. if your answer is yes list the problems

………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………..
11. is there marketing problem A). YES B). NO
12. if your answer is yes list the problems

………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………
13. is there financial problems A). YES B). NO
14. if your answer is yes list the problems
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………….
15. is there a problem in your work place A). YES B). NO
16. If your answer is yes list the problems
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………..
17. is there infrastructural problem A). YES B). NO
18. if your answer is yes list the problems
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………..