was admitting that no steps to train middle and top level
management had been taken, and that the training programme
had been confined to junior staff.’*” Even some two secretaries, a
laundry manager and the chief of reception were expatriates.
When the agreement was terminated and Mlonot thrown out, the
Chief of T.T.C. had to rush to Europe to recruit new managers —
there was no Tanzanian to take over! These cases are not ex-
ceptions but appear to be the rule. Often in the joint ventures, local
personnel is employed in such areas as public relations, personnel
matters, local marketing and sales, while technical areas are
headed by the expatriates, thus depriving the local personnel of
technical knowhow.

In addition, the foreign partner is very zealous in guarding
technical knowledge inventions, etc. Referring to the case of India,
Kidron points out:

Typically, strict control is sought over the use to which the techniques
imparted are put. This applies equally to a foreign branch, subsidiary
company or an independent company. The Indian firm is usually en-
joined to keep secret, during and even after the currency of the
agreement, all information supplied within its terms, by exercising ‘due
deligence’, by not sub-licensing or by not collaborating with other par-
ties in related fields. In most cases, not all, the use of information
received must be discontinued after the agreement lapses
and in a few, the Indian firm must be prepared to return all drawings,
specifications, and other data supplied. Moreover, the supplier of the
new technique is often protected from importing a complete technology
by clauses with which specifically exclude ‘fundamental investigation
and development’, or which permit it not to disclose information ‘which
it does not have the right to disclose by reason of contractual obligations
incurred prior to the agreement’. Finally, while the indian associate is
not always granted exclusive use of the foreign partner's patents in In-
dia, it is normally ‘not entitled to use any knowledge about inventions
of (the foreign firm) for the procurement of own patients’.*®

Some of the same corporations involved in India also operated in
Africa. There is no reason to believe that their practice in Africa is
any different or more benevolent.

But more important than the extent of importation of
technology is the type of technology imported. It is to this that we
should turn to next.

62