Many thanks for the opportunity to review your interesting work. In full development, it adds to the existing body of knowledge as it is embedded in empirical research. Well done on the current effort. However, the work cannot be recommended for express publication owing to the following systemic and structural issues. These are written in no order of importance: 1. This is a good piece of writing with the potential to garner a lot of citations once published. 2. A last English editorial is required e.g., line 19-20 and or page 12 line 7and 8 etc. as examples. 3. Page 14 2.3 Summary: Please retitle appropriately as one cannot have a summary in the middle of an article. 4. Page 15 lines 3-4 please remove in summary 5. Page 16. The research hypothesis should be bold and clear. Presenting the research framework is not a substitute for the research hypothesis. The research framework should follow the research methodology and or come before whichever you prefer and not be mixed with the research hypothesis. Please consider introducing a new section. The research method/methodology section needs to be repackaged or introduced with clear structure and logic for easy readability. Currently, it is jumbled up, although everything required for the components of the research method/methodology section is there. It needs tightening, realignment, and sharper focusing. Why is Table 9 under data collection and not data analysis and results? This section represents the major weakness of the work that needs structural attention. 6. The way of the data analysis itself is ok. 7. 4.3.3 Brief Summary page 39 - Please learn to have appropriate alternative titles /headings e.g., Research results synthesis etc.