動機因素評估影響甘比亞國民教育及技職訓練人員雇主貢獻度之研究

全文

(1)Assessment of Motivational Factors influencing Employer Contribution to the National Education and Technical Training Levy in the Gambia. by Abdoulie O. Jallow. A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION Major: International Workforce Education and Development. Advisor: Ted Shir-Tau Tsai, Ph.D.. National Taiwan Normal University Taipei, Taiwan June 2009.

(2) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First, I would like to recognize the opportunity provided to me by the two governments’ of the Gambia and Taiwan through the TaiwanICDF to pursue a Master’s Degree in Education, without which this work would not have been conceived. Sincere thanks to the National Training Authority and the Director General, Mr. OGM Nyang for the foresight shown in nominating my candidature for the program. Most grateful to my academic and thesis advisor Dr. Ted Shir-Tau Tsai for the support provided throughout the study period. Also sincere thanks to the other members of my thesis committee for their support and invaluable comments provided throughout the research process. Also to Dr. Lai, Program Director - International Workforce, Education and Development (IWED) and his entire academic and support staff. Of course, thanks to my graduate colleagues for their comments and useful suggestions during the study period. Particular thanks to Nerie and Agnela for their constructive criticisms. Special thanks to Mr. Hans Bekkers (Labour Market Information System Specialist) of The Netherlands for his professional advice and suggestions during the development of the research instrument. Also to Dr. Shieh-Hwa Lin for his insightful advice and support particularly during the data analyses stage. The statistical analysis and use of the SPSS software would not have been easy without his intervention in providing those thoughtful suggestions and comments. Finally, many thanks to my family for their patience and understanding accorded during these difficult times. Their moral support, love and affection have been the catalyst for the determination and commitment exhibited during the research period. Many thanks to my beloved parents for their unreserved prayers, blessings and love they forever cherished. I am what I am because of you, I love you all.. .

(3) . ABSTRACT Reforms to Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) have been widespread in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and have culminated in the creation of national training authorities, which are financially supported by various forms of employer based levy systems. Such levies have been reported to be problematic in most countries and the Gambia being no exception is currently engulfed in similar dilemma. The purpose of this study is to examine key motivational and de-motivating factors influencing employer contribution to the National Education and Technical Training Levy (NETTL) in the Gambia. A pilot study to test questionnaire item reliability coefficient using Cronbach’s alpha (α) value was carried out. The reliability coefficient values for the standardized items of the motivational factors (independent variable), de-motivating factors (independent variable) and employer contribution dimensions (dependent variable) were 0.924, 0.827 and 0.766 respectively. Validity of the question items were ensured through item content review by an expert in the field. The research results are presented in descriptive and inferential statistics. Both One-way ANOVA and Linear Regression analysis (Stepwise) were used during the analytical stage. Amongst the key research findings include (a) prior consultation during levy policy development and levy put in closed account (only accessible for training use) would motivate limited liability businesses to contribute to the levy. (b) a levy that can ensure a secure and sustainable means of funding skills development, would encourage businesses to willingly contribute to the levy. (c) managing directors of businesses were de-motivated and thus not willing to contribute to the levy because they perceived that it was purely of interest to government. (d) limited liability businesses would be only motivated to voluntarily contribute to the levy if a levy exemption policy is put in place. (e) limited liability businesses showed greater concern on accountability and transparency of the levy system than the Others businesses.. Key words: skills training and development, national training authorities, training levies, private sector, public sector, employer contribution and motivational factors.. I .

(4) . TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT..........................................................................................................................................I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. II LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... V LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................VI CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................1 Chapter Overview.............................................................................................................................1 Backgrounds of the Study ................................................................................................................1 Purposes of the Study .......................................................................................................................5 Questions of the Study .....................................................................................................................5 Significance of the Study .................................................................................................................6 Definitions of Terms.........................................................................................................................6 Delimitations and Limitations..........................................................................................................8 CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ......................................................................9 Chapter Overview.............................................................................................................................9 Background to TVET Reforms in SSA...........................................................................................9 Skills Development.........................................................................................................................10 Factors Influencing Financing Schemes for Skills Development................................................11 Financing Skills Development in Sub-Saharan Africa.................................................................13 Public Sector Commitment to Skills Training and Development ...............................................15 Private Sector Participation in Skills Training and Development...............................................15 Donor Support to Skills Training and Development....................................................................16 Funding Strategy for TVET ...........................................................................................................17 Training Authorities .......................................................................................................................18 Training Levies / Funds..................................................................................................................18 II .

(5) . Funding Diversification..................................................................................................................19 Training Fund / Levy Management...............................................................................................20 Social Responsibility (Disadvantaged Groups) ............................................................................20 Conditions for Training Fund Success ..........................................................................................21 Levy Scheme Design and Implementation ...................................................................................21 Governance and Control.................................................................................................................22 Training Fund Sustainability..........................................................................................................23 Summary of Literature Review......................................................................................................24 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................27 Chapter Overview...........................................................................................................................27 Research Framework......................................................................................................................27 Research Variables and Dimensions .............................................................................................30 Research Hypotheses......................................................................................................................33 Methods of Data Collection ...........................................................................................................35 Instrumentation ...............................................................................................................................37 Population and Sampling Criteria..................................................................................................40 Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................................41 Research Procedure ........................................................................................................................41 CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ......................................................................45 Chapter Overview...........................................................................................................................45 Profile of Respondents ...................................................................................................................45 Motivational Factors.......................................................................................................................48 Analysis of Results for Hypothesis - H1 (Motivational Factors) ................................................52 Summary of Results for Hypothesis - H1 (Motivational Factors)................................................63 De-motivating Factors....................................................................................................................65 III .

(6) . Analysis of Results for Hypothesis - H2 (De-motivating Factors) ..............................................67 Summary of Results for Hypothesis – H2 (De-motivating Factors)............................................78 Employer Contribution Factors .....................................................................................................80 Analysis of Results for Hypothesis – H3 (Employer Contribution).............................................81 Summary of Results for Hypothesis – H3 (Employer Contribution)...........................................88 Analysis of Results for Hypothesis – H4 (Employer Contribution).............................................90 Summary of Results for Hypothesis – H4 (Employer Contribution).........................................100 Analysis of Results for Hypothesis – H5 (Employer Contribution)...........................................102 Summary of Results for Hypothesis – H5 (Employer Contribution).........................................106 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................107 Chapter Overview.........................................................................................................................107 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................107 Recommendations.........................................................................................................................113 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................118 APPENDICES.................................................................................................................................121 Appendix A: Employer Research Questionnaire........................................................................122 Appendix B: Questionnaire Covering Letter ..............................................................................128. . . IV .

(7) . LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1. Research framework........................................................................................................29 Figure 3.2. Research process flow chart ...........................................................................................43 . V .

(8) . LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. List of motivational factors variables and dimensions...................................................30 Table 3.2. List of de-motivating factors variables and dimensions.................................................32 Table 3.3. List of employer contribution dimensions ......................................................................33 Table 3.4. Distribution of the sample population by sector............................................................36 Table 3.5. Stratification and allocation of sample population for the Private Sector ....................36 Table 3.6. Reliability statistics for motivational factors (independent variables)..........................39 Table 3. 7. Reliability statistics for de-motivating factors (independent variables).......................39 Table 3.8. Reliability statistics on the dependent variables (employer contribution)....................39 Table 4. 1. Original distribution of respondents for the demographic dimensions ........................46 Table 4.2. Revised distribution of respondents for the demographic dimensions..........................48 Table 4.3. Motivational factor dimensions in descending order of the means measure ................49 Table 4.4. Significant motivational factor dimensions against registration status of business ...........................................................................................................................52 Table 4.5. Descriptive – significant motivational factor dimensions against registration status of business ............................................................................................................53 Table 4.6. Significant motivational factor dimensions against position in business......................56 Table 4. 7. Descriptives – significant motivational factor dimensions against position in business ...........................................................................................................................57 Table 4.8. Post hoc tests of significant motivational factors against position in business.............57 Table 4.9. Significant motivational factor dimensions against gender ...........................................59 Table 4. 10. Descriptives – significant motivational factor dimensions against gender................60 Table 4.11. Significant motivational factor dimensions against years of operation of business ...........................................................................................................................62 Table 4.12. Comparison of significant motivational factor dimensions against years of operation of business ......................................................................................................62 Table 4.13. Summary of findings for hypothesis - H1 .....................................................................64 VI .

(9) . Table 4.14. De-motivating factor dimensions in descending order of the means measure ...........65 Table 4.15. Significant de-motivating factor dimensions against position in business .................68 Table 4. 16. Descriptive – significant de-motivating factor dimensions against position in business ...........................................................................................................................69 Table 4.17. Post Hoc Tests for significant de-motivating factor dimensions against position in business.......................................................................................................................70 Table 4.18. Significant de-motivating factor dimensions against gender.......................................73 Table 4.19. Descriptive – significant de-motivating factor dimensions against gender disposition .......................................................................................................................74 Table 4.20. Significant de-motivating factor dimensions against number of employees ..............76 Table 4.21. Descriptive – significant motivational factor dimensions against number of employees........................................................................................................................76 Table 4.22. Summary of results for hypothesis – H2 .......................................................................79 Table 4.23. Employer contribution dimensions in descending order of the means measure ........80 Table 4.24. Significant employer contribution factors against business registration.....................81 Table 4.25. Descriptives – significant employer contribution factors against business registration ......................................................................................................................81 Table 4.26. Significant employer contribution factors against position in business......................83 Table 4.27. Descriptive – significant employer contribution factors against position in business ...........................................................................................................................83 Table 4.28. Comparison of employer contribution factors against gender.....................................84 Table 4.29. Significant employer contribution factors against sector body membership..............86 Table 4.30. Descriptive – Significant employer contribution factors against sector body membership.....................................................................................................................86 Table 4.31. Summary of results for hypothesis – H3 .......................................................................88 Table 4.32. Regression summary - Business will voluntarily contribute to levy...........................90 Table 4.33. Regression coefficients – Business will voluntarily contribute to levy ......................90 Table 4.34. Regression summary – Business never anticipated in fulfilling its obligations .........91 VII .

(10) . Table 4.35. Regression analysis of variance – Business never anticipated in fulfilling its obligations.......................................................................................................................92 Table 4.36. Regression coefficients – Business never anticipated in fulfilling its obligations.......................................................................................................................92 Table 4.37. Regression summary – Business has no corporate social responsibility ....................94 Table 4.38. Regression analysis of variance – Business has no corporate social responsibility...94 Table 4.39. Regression coefficients – Business has no corporate social responsibility ................95 Table 4.40. Regression summary – An all inclusive contribution to the financing of skills training ............................................................................................................................96 Table 4.41. Regression analysis of variance – An all inclusive contribution to the financing of skills training..............................................................................................................97 Table 4.42. Regression coefficients – Business has no corporate social responsibility ................98 Table 4.43. Summary of results for hypothesis – H4 .....................................................................101 Table 4.44. Regression summary – Business has no corporate social responsibility ..................102 Table 4.45. Regression analysis of variance – Business has no corporate social responsibility.103 Table 4. 46. Regression Coefficients – Business has no corporate social responsibility ............103 Table 4.47. Regression summary –An all inclusive contribution to the financing of skills training ..........................................................................................................................104 Table 4.48. Regression analysis of variance – An all inclusive contribution to the financing of skills training............................................................................................................104 Table 4.49. Regression coefficients – An all inclusive contribution to the financing of skills training ..........................................................................................................................104 Table 4.50. Summary of results for hypothesis – H5 .....................................................................106 . VIII .

(11) . CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION Chapter Overview This chapter provides a general picture on TVET reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and the challenges posed by such reforms in most countries. This is followed by an assessment of the Gambia’s policy development geared towards creating the enabling environment for TVET reforms. A brief account of the development and collapse of the National Education and Technical Training Levy is also provided. The chapter then explores the objectives of the recently developed skills policy framework for the Gambia (NTA, 2006a) and the concerns outlined in the Consultancy Report (NTA, 2006b) following the launching of the policy document with a view to provide an overview of the current state of affairs in the Gambia. The chapter finally outlined the main questions of the research in relation to the motivational and de-motivating factors influencing employer contribution to the levy.. Backgrounds of the Study Since the 1990’s, SSA is witnessing an unprecedented era of change in reforms to Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET). The momentum to change could be attributable largely to the apparent increase in unemployment and general poverty levels amongst most sub Saharan African countries (Human Development Index Ranking, 2007-2008). It is often common to find in government strategic papers’ citation on skills development as alternative solution to poverty alleviation (Gambia Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: 2007-2011, 2006; Gambia Millennium Development Goals Report 2003; National Strategic Framework for Sustainable Development, 2002). Although it is strongly argued that reforms to skills development as a strategic tool are generally inherent with sustainability challenges. Despite the challenges, reforms to skills development in SSA have been growing steadily over the last two decades and have culminated in the development of various forms of National Skills Qualifications Frameworks (NSQF). However, majority of such reforms failed to succeed 1 .

(12) . as a result of lack of commitment from potential stakeholders in meeting their financial obligations. Financing TVET deserves special attention in a global situation of shortages of public funds. Across a number of African countries, this new focus has resulted in the development of national training authorities (Johanson, 2001). The idea behind such authorities is that they represent the range of relevant stakeholders especially businesses and can move control of the training system out of the hands of the bureaucracy. It is believed that such a move makes provision of TVET more responsive to the needs of employers; hence encourage greater employer involvement in training. While, in some of the countries undertaking TVET reforms like the Gambia; financing is secured through the introduction of a levy system. Other countries try to delegate cost intensive practical training to the private sector. Reform’s to TVET in the Gambia was conceived in the national strategic paper (Vision 2020, 1996). The overall orientation of “Vision 2020” is articulated in its mission statement and it states that: "To transform The Gambia into a financial centre, a tourist paradise, a trading, exportoriented agricultural and manufacturing nation, thriving on free market policies and a vibrant private sector, sustained by a well-educated, trained, skilled, healthy, selfreliant and enterprising population and guaranteeing a well-balanced eco-system and a decent standard of living for one and all under a system of government based on the consent of the citizenry." It is apparent that skills development is indispensable if the Gambia is to attain its striving strategic plan, “Vision 2020”. It is therefore important to review government’s commitment to skills development with a view to assess the potential for attainment to this plan. In the “Vision 2020” strategic paper, a deliberate effort was made to outline the role of Education and Training under Human Resource Development (Part 1, section 4) as stated below: “Since independence in 1965, national development policies have been default focused on the development of human resources in the white collar and peripheral services to the detriment of the areas of Science, Technology, Agriculture and Industry, 2 .

(13) . particularly the Manufacturing sector. This focus has created a market failure, resulting in the importation of human capital, a dependence on expatriate manpower to manage the development of national productive resources with the result that no firm foundation has been laid over the past three decades to provide for sustainable development”. The paper went further by stating that: “Consequently, a proper diagnosis of the skills needed to realize the objectives of Vision 2020 is called for prior to formulating a curriculum that will ensure a capable human resource base to attain the set objectives. Objectives for education include increasing the accessibility of education to 90 per cent of the school-age population, a diversification of institutions to favour vocational and skilled based training, encouraged of entrepreneurship as a corner-stone of education and an overall enrichment of curricula and extra curricula activities to favourably induce the skillsmix of the population towards a 21st Century setting”. Three (3) years shortly after the promulgation of this paper, a bill was enacted and approved by Cabinet in 2002 for the establishment of an institution responsible for the management and supervision of skills development in the Gambia, now called the National Training Authority (NTA). Initially, the NTA had a subvention from government to maintain its operating costs whilst the National Education Levy was being amended to cater for the financing of skills development. The National Education and Technical Training Levy (NETTL) amendment bill was enacted in 2005. The levy was designed to collect 0.25% of annual turnover from businesses employing five (5) or more employees (Levy Amendment Bill, 2005). The NETTL Act was enforced in January 2007; however, it seized operations mid February as a result of an alleged private sector outcry. It is evident that The Gambia’s “Vision 2020” is committed to achieving its goals and objectives as clearly manifested in its Mission Statement and further buttressed by the long-term strategic plan for Human Resource Development. This commitment was further reiterated by government with the enactment of the NTA Act and the NETTL amendment Act to finance skills development in the Gambia.. 3 .

(14) . The levy is the life line for sustainability of skills development in the Gambia. The skills development strategy with its multitude of programmes, developed in line with the Education Sector Wide Approach Programme (SWAP) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG’s) will be redundant in the absence of a secure and stable financing mechanism. A national policy for the development of a system of national skills standards and qualifications for The Gambia, collectively known as the Gambia Skills Qualifications Framework (GSQF) was set out in 2006. This was supported by a four-man team of consultants recruited by the EU to support reforms to TVET in the Gambia. In November 2006, the GSQF was launched and became operational. It is proclaimed in the GSQF that skills standards and qualifications developed under this policy document are contextualised on the needs and realities of The Gambia by being a simple and sustainable system amongst others (NTA, 2006a). Although, Allais (2007) has argued that in most Sub-Saharan African countries where TVET reforms have taken place; the resultant structures, procedures and systems face serious risk of collapsing, due mainly to sustainability challenges. This view was further buttressed in the EU Consultancy report (NTA, 2006b), noting their serious concerns about Gambia’s ability to sustain the reform process, in particular to secure the necessary funding to lead skills improvement. This grim picture for TVET in the Gambia was further highlighted in a recent World Bank consultancy report (Johanson, 2008). He indicated that in TVET with reasonable expenditures on inputs such as teaching materials, consumable supplies and equipment maintenance, the proportions are around 50:50 or 60 salaries to 40% non-salary inputs. He however, indicated that in the Gambia the proportions apparently are skewed to salary inputs, with a ratio of 86.3% to 13.7% in 2006. Johanson (2008) further indicated that little capital investment has gone to TVET, as indicated with the fact that GTTI was unable to benefit under the World Bank-financed Third Education Project. In concluding, he noted that the investment gap for TVET in the Gambia is the highest of any level/type of education as the projected investment shortfalls were 55 percent for tertiary education, 83 percent to secondary education and 62 percent for basic education. Such imbalance requires urgent and immediate remedy from government if the role of skills development in “Vision 2020” is to be attained. 4 .

(15) . Purposes of the Study It is against the above background that the study seeks to examine the factors influencing employer contribution to the levy. The study specifically would assess (1) the motivational and de-motivating factors and employer contribution dimensions based on the demographic dimensions. (2) the influence of the motivational and de-motivating factors on employer contribution to the levy. The results of the study would provide government and other key stakeholders with useful guidelines and suggestions during future levy Act review. The study will highlight the motivational and de-motivating factors most applicable to the Gambian businesses influencing their willingness to contribute to the levy.. Questions of the Study There are five main questions to the study. The first three questions were designed to assess the independent and dependent variables based on the demographics dimensions. The fourth and fifth questions enquired on the influence motivational and de-motivating factors have on employer contribution dimensions. 1. Do motivational factors have any significant differences based on the demographic dimensions? 2. Do de-motivating factors have any significant difference based on the demographic dimensions? 3. Do employer contributions have any significant difference based on the demographic dimensions to the levy? 4. Do motivational factors influence employer contribution to the levy? 5. Do de-motivating factors influence employer contribution to the levy?. 5 .

(16) . Significance of the Study Skills development (TVET) typically as noted by McGrath (2000) has not been a fashionable area of study and that the bulk of researches done in SSA were funded by donors in the form of consultancies. From available literature there are very few attempts to assess the factors influencing employer contribution to a levy system through an empirical research process. It is hoped that the findings of the study will add on to the limited amount of empirical studies conducted in TVET in SSA. The study provides tangible guidelines to the government of the Gambia in developing appropriate strategies to influence employer contribution to the levy. It also defines appropriate roles of key stakeholders in particular the private sector and provide a realistic and workable mechanism that would encourage employer contribution to the levy in view of the current economic situation. The study will also identify those motivational and de-motivating factors applicable to the Gambia influencing employer contribution to the levy.. Definitions of Terms Gambia Skills Qualifications Framework (GSQF): an integrated system of nationally recognised qualifications and nationally endorsed skills standards for the recognition of technical and vocational skills, knowledge and competencies. Qualifications Framework: can be regarded as a coherent structure of standards, levels, qualifications and processes, developed and maintained in a quality assured manner, with the aim of improving, regularising and localising the attainment of occupational skills. It is therefore an important tool in improving the national economy. De-motivating Factors: major issues of concern to employers that would prevent them from contributing to the National Education and Technical Training Levy. Employer Contribution: is the annual contribution made by businesses into the levy fund at the Gambia Revenue Authority. 6 .

(17) . Levy System: a mechanism instituted by law to collect funds from employers to support skills training and development programme. Motivational Factors: major issues of concern to employers that would encourage them to contribute to the National Education and Technical Training Levy. National Education and Technical Training Levy (NETTL): is a legislated instrument that requires all private companies employing five (5) or more employees to contribute 0.25% of their annual turnover to support skills training and development. Pay-roll Levy: is a legal assessment against an employee’s wage bill for contribution to a levy fund. Turn-over Levy: is a legal assessment against a company’s annual turnover as contribution to a levy fund. Public Sector: is that portion of society controlled by national, state or provincial, and local governments. Private Sector: part of national economy made up of, and resources owned by, private enterprises. It includes the personal sector (households) and corporate sector (firms), and is responsible for allocating most of the resources within an economy.. 7 .

(18) . Delimitations and Limitations The study received technical support from the National Training Authority to successful help administer the data collection process for the pilot study. A budget and staff were provided to the researcher for the administration of the data collection for both the pilot and field survey. This support was critical to the successful completion of the data collection process. A poor response rate (23%) encountered during the pilot study was attributed largely to the composition of the Mapping Studies of Industries (MSI) database. The researcher acquired a second population group from the Gambia Revenue Authority. This population group comprised only of businesses that had contributed to the levy during the past three (3) years (2007 – 2009). This change of population group was anticipated to significantly increase the response rate, but did not take into account of the non-levy contributors whose reasons for not contributing to the levy could be very enlightening. Only the views of the private sector businesses contributing into the levy were included in the study. A major limitation for this paper is the inability to generalise the findings from the research. Due to financial constraints, the study was only able to collect data from those businesses within the Banjul and Kombo St. Mary’s Region. Contribution to the levy has financial implications on businesses and such implications vary as a result of the regional differences in economic activities (NTA, 2008). Banjul and Kombo St. Mary’s are located in the hub of business activities in the Gambia and could be in a better position to contribute than those businesses in less economic active regions in the Gambia.. . 8 .

(19) . CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Chapter Overview This chapter provides an in-depth review of pertinent issues affecting sustainability of TVET reforms in Sub Saharan Africa (SSA). It first highlights why TVET reforms are widespread in SSA. The study further evaluates stakeholder (public sector, private sector, donor agencies etc.) commitment to skills training and development in the region. Various views on stakeholder roles and responsibilities are provided and how those roles are being shifted from one stakeholder to the other within the last three decades. Training authorities and training funds / levies are usually the by-products of TVET reforms. An in-depth assessment of the origins and objectives of these institutions and structures are outlined. An assessment of the sustainability challenges these structures faced are carefully discussed in detail. Finally, the study reviews Ziderman’s (2001) insightful contribution to this sector through a World Bank Consultancy. In that study, he outlined the critical success factors for a training levy / fund. These success factors are used in this research as the independent variables for the motivational and de-motivating factors.. Background to TVET Reforms in SSA Charles (2006) observed that vocational education and training is a key policy tool which the pioneer Tigers realised and applied very early. Responding to emergent economic opportunities or social challenges, such as unemployment; required that a special place should be given to vocational education and training. For example, Taiwan responded by building more than 80 vocational schools. All of the Asian Tigers realised that a strong education system, especially at the lower level should be ‘holistic and integrated’ and should link formal and informal learning as a part of the national strategy for economic well-being. Recently, reforms to TVET in most SSA countries came as a result of economic, social and political realities affecting our countries and peoples which include high unemployment rates, 9 .

(20) . escalating rural and urban poverty, increasing HIV/Aids in communities etc. It is a generally held belief that investing in technical and vocational education and training contributes to the formation of human capital, which supposedly facilitates technological change and international competitiveness (UNEVOC, 1996). This might have motivated most governments to develop strategies targeted to improve skills development for self-employment and economic growth as in the case of the Gambia “Vision 2020”. Green (1997) noted that in most high income western countries, the nation-state remains the main locus of decision making over areas of social policy, including education. However, in low income countries where the influence of multilateral and donor agencies has been increasing since the 1980’s through the mechanism of conditional lending (Tikly, 2001), decisions on policy issues has mainly been internationally directed. At the second International Congress on Technical Vocational Education in Seoul, Korea in 1999, it was agreed that TVET must be the master key that can alleviate poverty, promote peace, conserve the environment, improve the quality of life for all and help achieve sustainable development. Bhuwanee, (2004) reporting on a study across four SSA countries (Ghana, Tanzania, Mauritius, and Zimbabwe) concluded that there is no doubt that TVET is one of the major keys to national development in the whole of SSA.. Skills Development According to McGrath (2002), skills development has undergone a major shift in theory, practice and policy since the 1990, noting that there are two broad elements to this shift. First, the translation of ‘international best practice’ has brought about significant understandings for those involved in training in the SSA. Secondly, the training agenda in SSA has been dramatically changed at the same time by the direct and indirect impacts of new economic policies and trends affecting SSA. Skills are now seen as an important part of education’s role in labour force/market preparation. This has resulted to the emphasis in problem-solving, communication, teamwork and other core skills. Even in technical areas there has been growing attention to the softer elements of design. According to Held et al. (1999), skills development has been identified as one of the few elements of public policy that can form part of a strategy for responding to 10 .

(21) . globalisation. Greenhalgh (2001) highlighted that growth, trade performance and unemployment history can be improved by policies to promote skill acquisition. In the Gambia, there has been an attempt to structure technical vocational education and training under a skills qualifications framework as a direct response to labour force development and globalisation.. Factors Influencing Financing Schemes for Skills Development National training systems and their financing systems are contingent of the historical and political development of every individual state. Therefore the appropriate mixture of instruments for financing skills development will not be the same at all times and all places. These mixtures of instruments are dependent of several factors including governance culture, political, cultural and economical circumstances. Below is a revisit to the six factors affecting the financing of skills development as outlined by UNEVOC in 1996: The structure and the size of the economy The extent to which the state can share the cost of training with other partners is directly linked to the structure of the economy. In a low-income economy, the potential benefits of the levy-based system (payroll levy) are limited due primarily to the impossibility of initiating an accumulation process unlike in middle-income and high-income states. This reality might have led to the initiation of an annual turnover levy in the Gambia. Although the percentage contribution imposed might have negative effect on businesses particularly during periods of economic meltdown. If a business is not making profits but rather experiencing losses, levying such a business on turnover could result to drastic circumstances. The economic policy The role of the State in the economy has an influence on financing policies. In many countries, financial diversification forms part of a broader response to an unprecedented fiscal crisis. Taxation becomes a sensitive issue in a process of economic liberalization, when resource allocation is increasingly meant to be driven by market signals. Currently in the Gambia, the use of levy-based financing system for skills development is being questioned as another form of taxation. 11 .

(22) . The maturity of social partners’ involved in training The performance of a given financing system will very much depend on the attitude of individuals and employers regarding training (UNEVOC, 1996). The reform of the financing system requires, as much as possible, a wide consensus between all of the partners involved: government, employers, workers, students, parents, public training institutions and the public at large. Making social partners aware of the associated incentives and the potential impact of training on labour productivity may call for intensive and long periods of consultation. Reforming the financing principles can also be part of a proactive long-term government strategy. The state of relationships between the partners involved It is obviously difficult to manage a training system under a highly conflicting situation. Such situations are hardly conducive to positive dialogue and are more likely to lead to hostile confrontation. Approach to this type of situations can be very tricky, but an extreme option according to UNEVOC (1996) will be to exclude certain parties from the governing body of the funds. The draw backs for excluding key partners could be very costly to the training system thus requiring a thorough examination. The lack of communication and consultation between providers and firms as highlighted by Bennett (2002) is a serious cause for concern in the Gambia. Institutional capacity to enforce, manage and control the system To ensure effectiveness, financial diversification policies must benefit from a strong institutional framework. This is especially the case for levy systems that require a reliable administrative machinery to ensure that tax recovery is effective. In the Gambia, the turnover levy is annually collected by the Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA), whose main mandate are to collect taxes and revenue for the government under the Department of State for Finance and Economic Affairs (DoSFEA). Until now, it is not known whether appropriate assessment instruments required to smoothen the assessment process are in place. However, a list of businesses contributing to the levy over the last three (3) years obtained from the GRA compared to other business databases (e.g. MSI 2008), showed a big gap between the two databases i.e. businesses that have not paid into the levy for one reason or the other over the last three years. 12 .

(23) . The objectives of the financing system The objective can be either to raise funds for training or to change attitudes. In some cases, objectives go beyond the training issue to affect further dimensions, such as the choice of technology as in Singapore. There are basically two broad approaches to financing system namely: compulsory and incentive instruments. Compulsory instruments usually take the form of a payroll tax (annual turnover levy in the Gambia) whilst the incentive structures are based on a tax rebate (Mauritius) or training grant (Ivory Coast). Also, training systems and their financing can be considered within a macro-economic and educational perspective. Financing training can be part of a public policy aimed at reducing investor’s risks. It is notably the case in export-oriented countries operating with a long-term vision, such as Singapore or Mauritius. In such cases, training serves broader industrial policy goals involving, besides incentive instruments, substantial state financing to develop certain skills and establish powerful publicly financed training institutions. It can also be initiated to reduce poverty and raise the social status of its citizenry by creating employment through the acquisition of employable skills. This is typically the situation in the Gambia and most other SSA countries. Calloids (1994) noted that the overall management and co-ordination of national training systems is quite varied, ranging from centralized planning to market-oriented regulation.. Financing Skills Development in Sub-Saharan Africa As noted earlier, different countries in SSA undertaking reforms to TVET have taken different approaches to financing skills development. Generally the trend has been the establishment of payroll levy systems that are charged on employers at varying rates. Bhuwanee (2004) reported on the funding strategies of four SSA countries namely: Ghana; Zimbabwe; Tanzania and Mauritius. Ghana without providing any specific way of providing funds to the TVET, suggests that government should show commitment by allocating adequate resources for TVET funding. It is further noted that all stakeholders including employers and beneficiary trainees are asked to contribute to the funding of TVET. Also there is the recognition that TVET in Ghana should be 13 .

(24) . supported by the Ghana Education Trust Fund (GETFund) and that other sources should be explored to find sources for adequate funding for TVET. Tanzania talks about the need to establish a unified funding mechanism and the concept of cost sharing whereby employers, trainees and others meet the cost as seen necessary (Bhuwanee, 2004). It was proposed that the source of funding be a unitary levy system. The recommendation concerning funding of TVET in Zimbabwe is that the bulk of the funding for TVET should come from the government and the Zimbabwe Manpower Development Fund (ZIMDEF). Presently the ZIMDEF collects from companies 1% of their annual salary bill as levy to the ZIMDEF to support TVET programmes. In Mauritius, the financing is based on the principle of partnership between the public and private sectors. Industry is one of the principle partners in the financing of training activities. Employers contribute a compulsory levy at a flat rate of 1% of the total basic salary of their employees though the overall responsibility for TVET has been the responsibility of government. It can be seen from the above four countries as reported by Bhuwanee that financing TVET is generally prescribed by government for companies to finance, where possible little or nothing comes from government. Students, parents and sponsors share a large chunk of the training budget but this is generally hard to evaluate in real terms particularly for SSA countries struggling with very weak TVET and educational budgeting system (Penrose, 1993). In the Gambia, the financing of skills development is mainly the responsibility of the private sector through compulsory contribution to the National Education and Technical Training Levy (NETTL). The levy was designed to collect 0.25% of annual turnover of companies employing five (5) or more employees. However, the NETTL was only operational for a period of less than 2 months and is now replaced with a tariff (band) system, prescribed by the government. Other forms of funding recommended were a subvention from government and support from donors agencies. The government subvention to support skills development was removed once the levy was enforced. Since the beginning of reforms to TVET in the Gambia in 2006, there are yet not any donor agencies that have shown keen interest to support the continuation of such TVET reforms in the Gambia. The UNESCO and ILO Recommendations of 2002 on financing of TVET for the Twentyfirst Century stresses that TVET funding should be a shared responsibility between government, the private sector, voluntary organisations, and the students themselves. Generally, this has been 14 .

(25) . the intentions for most countries but with increasing budgetary constraints and economic hardship, financing TVET usually end up in the hands of only a few and possibly the employers alone.. Public Sector Commitment to Skills Training and Development Penrose (1993) highlighted that many attempts to undertake reforms have not succeeded because they have been limited to interventions in the education sector ministries and as a result, TVET must be considered as an integral part of the entire educational system for human resource development and not a separate entity from the general education system (Bhuwanee, 2004). Lall (1989) insists that the state should not play a direct part in providing finance for training, but experience from Asian countries suggests that there is a case for the state doing so (Griffin and Knight, 1990). In the four country case study (Bhuwanee, 2004), it was generally agreed that governments must be committed by allocating adequate resources for TVET reforms, but should not be the sole provider. It is therefore apparent that reforms should take full account of the need to strengthen a potentially beneficial relationship between the state and other relevant stakeholders.. Private Sector Participation in Skills Training and Development In SSA, reforms to TVET has witnessed a major paradigm shift, where the private sectors are encouraged by government to takeover skills development not only the financing aspect but as well as management of skills development as in the case of the Gambia (NTA, 2006a). However, from existing literature there is yet to be a major breakthrough for a successful private sector participation in the education and training in SSA. Although Johanson (2001) and Danida (2002) indicated that some systems (e.g. Mauritius) appear to be developing positively. There has been widespread criticism of the attempt to develop both training authorities and levies in Africa. According to Emunemu (2008), private sector involvement in Nigeria is on a graduating scale from arms length donations, to partnerships with educational institutions right through to 15 .

(26) . the active participation in the provision of educational services – for profit. He noted that all the activities along this scale can be enhanced to improve the quality and access to education and skills development opportunities. Private sector participation in the education and training remains a major challenge for SSA, although financing mechanisms for TVET are mainly supported by the private sector through mainly levy systems (legislated and enforced by government), the formula for which varies from country to country. However, the private sector views the training levy as yet another form of tax (Johanson, 2001). In some countries, this perspective is exacerbated by highly bureaucratic and centralized levy management structures and systems. It is also reported that the private sector is apprehensive of the predominance of government control on the management and disbursement of the training levy (Durango, 2002).. Donor Support to Skills Training and Development Since the start of development cooperation in the 1950s through to the 1980s, one of the most important elements of support to economic development was the promotion of skills development (McGrath, 2002). This was as a result of the fact that there was recognition of the need to develop a cadre of technically capable workers to support modernization and industrialization in SSA. Technical and vocational education and training (TVET) was an important element of development agency strategy during those periods. The late 1990’s has witnessed a shift in development agency support to skills development for developing countries. The major catalyst in the shift of approach was a 1996 report of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (McGrath, 2002). The report, “Shaping the Twenty-First Century” (OECD-DAC, 1996), sought to build on the series of world conferences of the early 1990s produced a priority list of International Development Targets (IDTs), which were claimed to have summarized the conclusions of those conferences. Donor shift of approach to skills development is further worsen by the recent trend towards sector programmes and has resulted in development agencies and countries concentrating in fewer sectors in a few countries (e.g. Luxemburg concentrating in a few West African States and EU focusing mainly in governance and communication in the Gambia). This furthers the 16 .

(27) . likelihood of skills development receiving reduced attention. According to (McGrath, 2002), skills development is by its nature cross-sectoral and this makes it harder to organize into sectoral programmes than education or health (WGICSD, 1999). Danida (2002) highlights the need for a skills development perspective to be included within all sectoral programmes.. Funding Strategy for TVET The key to TVET success in SSA countries depends largely on the sustainability of the funding mechanisms that are put in place. In most countries, there is no adequate strategic planning to facilitate the transparent definition and prioritization of areas for funding (Durango, 2002). Funding TVET is more expensive than general academic education due to cost of equipment, tools and consumables required for practical skills training. Presently the state of training facilities in the SSA and in particular the Gambia (NTA, 2006c) is highly undesirable and requires huge investment capital to rehabilitate and establish additional training institutions. The inadequacy of government and local funding to meet the demands of TVET capital investment means that external funding will be highly desirable to support TVET investment (Durango, 2002) on infrastructure, equipment and human resources. In the Gambia, the main public TVET institution, the Gambia Technical Training Institute (GTTI) suffers from under investment (Johanson, 2008). Currently, there is acute lack of teaching equipment and materials. This is evident by the presence of World Bank donated items as far back as when the institution was established in early 1980’s. Workshops are literally empty with no basic teaching aids and materials. The GTTI is located close to the capital city Banjul and is currently the only public TVET centre in the Gambia. Without hesitation, the need to build additional training centres along the length and breadth of the country cannot be overemphasised. It is therefore important that a solid strategic framework for sustainable complimentary funding mechanisms be device and agreed to by all stakeholders. The recent ICDF Funding Agreement (2008) to finance the establishment of a TVET skills centre in a rural setting is indeed a viable investment for the Gambia.. 17 .

(28) . Training Authorities To respond to the developing skills needs of the economy and to be in a position to be proactive, rather than just responsive, in relation to ongoing technological and industrial change, public training systems need a greater degree of independence than is forthcoming from line ministries (Ziderman, 2001). So where institutionally possible, fully fledged, autonomous national training authorities to be established charged with the central role of assuming responsibility for national skills development. Currently there are well over 30 countries in SSA implementing reforms to TVET and majority of which have established training authorities mandated in various forms to be responsible for skills development. The NTA is semiautonomous and decisions have recently been influenced by the parent department of state for higher education. This trend is worrying if the NTA is to achieve the level of autonomy required to execute its activities. The NTA must endeavour to work more closely with its board rather than with the parent department of state.. Training Levies / Funds Most cases National Training Agencies/Authorities are financed, fully or partially, through a training payroll levy imposed on firms. According to Ziderman (2001), the origins of training funds may be traced back to the development of earmarked training levies. The earliest forms of training levies – assessed on the total payroll of enterprises – were developed in a number of Latin American countries (the Brazilian experience), as an integral part of the working of employer - based national training boards. Herschbach (1990) stated that the characteristics of individual training agencies (funds) vary so greatly that it is difficult to generalize about them. Training funds have since been developed in over thirty (30) SSA countries (Ziderman, 2001) although their objectives and range of activities vary widely from country to country. An important objective of establishing national training funds (particularly when financed by company training levies) is to provide sustained and stable funding for the training programs they support. Ziderman (2001) indicated that in practice this has not always been achieved, 18 .

(29) . notably when funds do not receive the resources that have been designated to finance its activities; noting that training levy proceeds, designated for the training fund, may be absorbed instead into general government revenues. Durango (2002) emphasised that training levy funds based on levies imposed on the private sector should be dedicated to the training of employed workers. The levy should focus on the skills training and upgrading of workers to meet the specific needs of industry. He further noted that the levy should be used for the direct transfer of skills not for “brick and mortar” issues. A national training fund may be seen as a unique institutional framework for unifying and augmenting public sources of funding for training and for allocating funds in line with national policies and priorities. According to Ziderman (2001), levy proceeds are regarded, in practice, as general tax revenues and not passed on to the fund. This was the case in the Gambia prior to the establishment of the National Training Authority. Ziderman (2001) noted that a major advantage of levy-grant systems is that they do not draw on public funds, a point of some importance in time of parsimonious government budgets; in addition they can lead to more systematic, structured enterprise training. However on the other hand they may result in between-firm inequities if there is no close relationship between the burden of the levy and the benefits received.. Funding Diversification In many SSA countries, government plays a dominant role in both the financing and provision of training. General constraints in national budgets have exerted their toll on the quality and effectiveness of public training. According to Ziderman (2001) these increasing pressures on government budgets provide an opening for the diversification funding for training. However, this notion should be taken with caution; otherwise it might result to lethargy from most governments thereby passing over financing burdens to other stakeholders as in the case of the Gambia. As noted by Ziderman (2001), appropriate role of government in training finance and provision requires a country to determine its individual needs for public sector training intervention. Public sector training needs assessment will likely direct government to remain a 19 .

(30) . central and continuing role for the state in most countries in the delivery and financing of training. Durango (2002) and Bhuwanee (2004) argued that as funding for TVET is an investment, it must be shared among government, industry, the community and the learner, with the involvement and contribution of volunteers and NGO’s.. Training Fund / Levy Management Most training funds are managed by a governing board. Board representation is usually tripartite (government, unions and employers) and frequently divided equally between the three main stakeholders. In the Gambia, there are no union representatives but rather business sector representatives, with a one-third representation. The remaining membership are government and training institution representative. Ziderman (2001) highlighted that participation of main stakeholders (especially employers) in national training policy formation and management has an important role to play in building consensus on training issues; this may be particularly important where enterprise training levies are in place. In cases where company contribution forms a substantial or entire part of the training fund income, it might be both appropriate and politic that employers should feel they have some control on the uses to which the levies are put (Ziderman, 2001).. Social Responsibility (Disadvantaged Groups) There is an increasing social awareness (and conscience) concerning the low current status and skills needs of special groups, such as the poor, ethnic minorities and women. According to Ziderman (2001), in parallel, there is wide acceptance of the view that the government has an obligation to assist in this field, through financing and perhaps provision of special programs, aimed particularly at securing entry into the informal sector.. 20 .

(31) . Conditions for Training Fund Success According to Ziderman (2001), successful outcomes are unlikely to be forthcoming unless six key conditions are satisfied. a. Security of income to the fund – assure adequate levels, stability and sustainability of training fund incomes. b. Fund management autonomy – ensure decision making autonomy of management board and its control over budget allocations. c. Stakeholder ownership – substantial representation of the major stakeholders. on. management board, engendering a sense of ownership – particularly of employer groups where training levies are in place. d. Avoid role of training provider – training centres’ run by a training fund tend to receive high subsidies and preferential treatment; this distorts training markets and militates against moves towards an open, competitive training system. e. Transparency of fund management decision making – decision-making to be open and in particular, the basis for fund allocation to be known and understood.. Levy Scheme Design and Implementation Ziderman (2001) highlighted that the success record of training levies in SSA countries appears to be less than in other regions. He further noted that particular attention will need to be accorded to levy scheme design and implementation in order to secure the benefits of payroll levies while avoiding some of the weakness that have been evident in the SSA context, which includes: a. Levy rate – levy rates to be subject by law to periodic review to avoid the accumulation of surpluses. b. National or sectoral levy rates – a standard, national payroll levy rate will be most appropriate for most SSA country situations. c. Sectoral coverage – levy coverage should be as wide as possible across public economic sectors and to include enterprises. 21 .

(32) . d. Company size – very small firms should be exempt from levy payment, on both efficiency and equity grounds. e. Levy collection – levy collection should be placed in the hands of effective agents; selfcollection by funding organisation should be avoided. f. Security of levy proceeds – special attention should be given to guarding levy revenues from raiding by the government by placing in special, closed accounts. g. Employers buy-in – employers should be involved in levy policy formulation and execution. h. Premature introduction payroll levies – payroll levies may be inappropriate where levy income generating capacity is weak – either because of the limited size of the formal sector or administrative/organisational difficulties of levy collection.. Governance and Control The efficacy of a training fund may depend to a large extend on the framework of governance and control within which it functions. Most training funds are statutory, quasiautonomous bodies; they usually operate under the general umbrella of labour ministries and, more immediately, of a board with some degree of stakeholder representation (Ziderman, 2001). In the Gambia, the training fund is within the purview of the NTA (which is semiautonomous and under the department of state for higher education) with a marginal majority management board membership from the private sector. Governance and control of the training fund should solely be the responsibility of the management board thus ensuring disbursement policies and decisions that are linked to market needs. However, the level of government control (and the extent of board autonomy) is not necessarily linked with a greater or lesser degree of training fund effectiveness; the central is how, and for what purposes, control is used (Herschbach, 1990). Bhuwanee (2004) stressed that a transparent disbursement to support priority areas in accordance with the pre-determined strategic focus should be indicated.. 22 .

(33) . Training Fund Sustainability According to Ziderman (2001), an important objective of establishing national training fund is to provide sustained and stable funding for the training programs they support. In the Gambia this has been a major challenge since the enactment of the NETTL in 2005. The enforcement of the levy Act only lasted for less than two months beginning 2007, after being delayed for a year due to operationalisation difficulties at the Commissioner of Tax Office, who was mandated by the NETTL Act for the collection process. Currently, the sustainability of not only the skills training fund but the overall national skills development and training system, which mainly relies on the NETTL for funding is at stake due to stakeholder rejection in contributing to the levy. According to Ziderman (2001), a shortfall of funding may arise for many reasons but of particular note are the following: a. Training levy proceeds absorbed into general government revenue – reasons for this are numerous but one major reason is continuing financial crisis the country faces and the lack of full endorsement by fiscal authorities on the concept of earmarking levy revenues for training. b. Failure of financing bodies to meet their funding obligations – donors, government and the private sector could all be victims of this process. In the Gambia, the government ceased provision of the subvention immediately the levy was made operational. The allocated budget support to the NTA by the European Commission following Reforms to TVET, are not forth coming since when the EC project was implemented. c. Technical difficulties of levy collection – this constitutes a potentially serious problem in many SSA countries and the Gambia being no exception has been seriously constrained by this factor.. The NETTL Act was approved by Parliament in November 2005; which. coincided with the transformation of the Income Tax Department, mandated by the NETTL Act for the collection of the levy, to the newly established Gambia Revenue Authority (GRA). During the transition period several meetings were held with management for commencement of collection in 2006. However to alleged technical and administrative constraints, collection was postponed to the following year (2007), which resulted to an entire year’s revenue lost for skills development in the Gambia. d. External donor funded training faces sustainability crisis over the long term – this problem of fund sustainability is endemic in those SSA countries where public budgets are severely 23 .

(34) . constrained over the medium term and where the time is not ripe for the introduction of training levies. According to Ziderman (2001), over generous external support for national training funds, without planned, complementary development of domestic funding, will result ultimately in moribund training authorities and empty coffers.. Summary of Literature Review Although, there is general recognition in both government and research circles that skills development is an alternative solution to poverty alleviation in developing countries particularly SSA, there is widespread disparity in perception as to how and who should finance skills training and development. From one extreme end of the spectrum, there are researchers who believed that governments should be committed to financing skills development as in the Asia Pacific rim. Whilst those on the other end of the spectrum called for a full private sector led skills development. This view is particularly supported by governments and the donor agencies. Mid-way are those calling for an all-inclusive financing strategy involving public sector, private sector, donors, NGO’s, the communities and learners. It is however evident that government, the private sector and donor agencies are all shying away from financing skills development in the SSA. Arguably, the immediate beneficiaries to skills training are employers in industry and should therefore take a lead in financing skills development. It would however be short-sighted not to acknowledge the fact that governments will be at a greater advantage both politically, socially and economically if skills training can bring about the much needed economic and social changes that are expected. Ziderman (2001) has indicated critical success factors that could lead to private sector commitment to levy systems. However, due to the nature of governments in SSA countries, there is not yet any country that is able to attain to all those critical factors thus the current resentment by employers in the Gambia to levy system. This study adopts Ziderman’s key critical success factors as the independent (motivational and de-motivating) variables of the research in assessing employers’ willingness to contribute to the levy. It is apparent that reforms should take full account of the need to strengthen a potentially beneficial relationship between the state and other relevant stakeholders. The challenge for most 24 .

(35) . SSA governments is the ability to dialogue with employers and avoid being seen as regulators and policy makers. There are strong indicators that employers might consider financing skills development, provided that governments are prepared to implement some of the important critical success factors identified by Ziderman. The current developments in the field of skills development in SSA seem promising, it must however be reiterated that both government and the private sector need to work hand-in-glove to overcome some of the challenges outlined above. It is against this background that the paper recommends a broad base stakeholder financing of skills development, inclusive of the public sector, private sector, donors, NGO’s, the communities and learners.. 25 .

(36) . 26 .

(37) . CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY Chapter Overview This chapter embodies the research framework, hypothesis testing, methods of data collection, instrumentation, population and sampling criteria, and data analysis and research procedure. The chapter depicts a pictorial diagram of the research framework and shows the interface between the predictor variables (independent), explanatory variables (dependent) and the demographic dimensions. There are five main questions for the research, which enquire on the motivational and de-motivating factors influencing employer contribution to the levy. Each question is tested by a null hypothesis. The chapter provides an account of the data collection process for both the pilot study and the field study. The sample for both the pilot study and field study distributed amongst the participating population are laid out in tabular form. This is followed by an explanation of the instruments used in the research, which are mainly the questionnaires, the validity and reliability testing process and the tools used for each process.. Research Framework The research framework was developed to feature the research questions and hypotheses. The motivational and de-motivating factors influencing employer contribution to the levy (Figure 3.1.) were used as the predictor (independent) variables for this study. These factors were identified as critical elements influencing employer contribution to a levy system in previous studies (Ziderman, 2001). The explanatory (dependent) variable for the research explained employer contribution to levy and was measured using four dimensions: business voluntary contribution; business anticipation in fulfilling their obligations; business has no corporate social responsibility and all inclusive contribution to the levy. Since the questionnaire was developed by the researcher, a reliability of the dimensions was tested for consistency. Data collected for the dimensions in this variable were tested against the demographic dimensions and the independent variables. As 27 .