ineffective in their dealings with the much more dynamic and
efficient parastatals.

The parastatals themselves have, however, been loath to plan.
The very idea of planning was and still is alien to the
managements of most enterprises who, as is shown below, are
hired from western firms and, in some cases, from the very firms
that were nationalised. It is not easy to change work systems that
have for so long been geared to anarchic ‘laissez-faire’ business
principles. It is even more difficult to change the management
style of thinking-in effect, the ideology — upon which such
systems rest. As we shall see it was a minor financial crisis at the
national level which strengthened the hand of the planners and
forced parastatals, reluctantly and so far with only moderate suc-
cess, to plan their activities.

Even now there is still some confusion over the function of en-
terprise plans. Some parastatals view the preparation of annual
plans and budgets as pure management control tools for internal
consumption rather than as essential components of national plan-
ning. Thus, enterprise plans of the N.D.C. subsidiaries are sent to
N.D.C. Headquarters where they are reviewed ‘for completeness,
accuracy, internal consistency, format, adherence to policies
procedures etc. When the review is completed, the plans are sent
back to individual companies accompanied by comments. Then
the final plans are presented to the company board of directors for
approval and to N.D.C. headquarters for information. When ap-
proved, the plans are ready to be integrated into one overall
N.D.C. Plan which is presented to the N.D.C. Board of Directors
for approval’.'* But this plan appears to be drawn up after the An-
nual Plan rather than forming, as we would expect, an integral
part of the national plan. Indeed, N.D.C. give the impression that
once their overall plan is approved by the Board that is the end of
the process, and they speak of planning solely in terms of being “a
major management tool in the N.D.C.*'> While this is an im-
portant function of enterprise plans it must not be allowed to
remain in the sole one. The real difference between economic
anarchy under capitalism and economic order under socialism lies
not in the fact that enterprises plan in the latter but not in the for-
mer, for capitalist enterprises have been planning for years. Rather
it lies in the coordination of enterprise plans and the subservice of
the individual plan to the nationally determined performance

13