Value | Category | Cases | |
---|---|---|---|
BETTER TECHNOLOGY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
COST REDUCTION | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
COST SAVING/NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENTY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
CTS. | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
DEMAND ON THEIR PRODUCTS WAS LOW. | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
DIVERSIFY PRODUCTION | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
ECONOMY IS BAD SO NO NEED TO INVEST | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
EXPENSIVE TO INVEST IN NEW TECHNOLOGY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
FRUSTRATIONS OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
GOVERNMENT POLICY OF EMPLOYMENT | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
HIGH QUALITY OF PRODUCTS. | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
HIGH TAXATION | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
IMPROVE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
IMPROVE ON PACKAGING | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
IMPROVE ON QUALITY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
IMPROVE QUALITY OF PRODUCTS TO MAKE THEM MORE COMPETITIVE | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
IMPROVING PRODUCTS | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
INCREASE PRODUCTION | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
INCREASE PRODUCTION & CAPACITY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
MARKET FOR THE PRODUCT SMALL | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
NO INCENTIVES TO INVEST AND NO RESORCES TO DO SO. | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
NO MONEY FOR INVESTMENT IN NEW TECHNOLOGY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
NON AVAILABILITY OF PACKAGING MATERIALS LOCALLY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
PRODUCTIVITY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
PROGRAMMING | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TO ICREASE PRODUTION | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TO IMPROVE ON THE QUALITY OF PRODUCTS. | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TO IMPROVE PRODUCTION PROCESS | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TO IMPROVE PRODUCTS QUALITY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TO UPGRADE OPERATIONS | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
TOWELING TECHNOLOGY | 1 |
3.1%
|
|
UT INCREASE QUALITY | 1 |
3.1%
|