"as to achieve the research objectives, methods and desired approach for analysis andcollection of data, the limitations and advantages of using the chosen method, process andresearch strategy used.This research methodology study will follow the levels of Saunders et al. (2009) which positsresearch methodology as an „onion? that illustrated the different layers that must be „peeledaway? before arriving at the research problem that is the central point, so as to help indescribing basic issues relating to decision of gathering information techniques as seen in thefigure below. It differentiates it from other methods and form a framework for the completionof the research process.Figure 4 The research onion (Saunders et al., 2015)Source: Saunders et al., 2015 5.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHYThe adoption of research philosophy is focused on how we view the world. Johnson andClark (2006) posited that researchers of business and management should be aware ofphilosophical obligation made as a result of research method decision as it will impact greatlyon what we do and the understanding of the investigation.Saunders et al. (2012) examined the two main methods of research philosophy; epistemologyand ontology.5.2.1 EPISTEMOLOGYEpistemology is concerned with what is accepted by valid knowledge (Collis and Hussey,2014). It deals with other philosophies such as positivism, realism and interpretivism asmajor philosophies (Bryman and Bell, 2011; Saunders et al., 2012).Realism is a logical point of view on scientific enquiry and knowledge developmentapproach. Interpretivism philosophy by Saunders et al. (2009) posits that the human factor isdifferent from its social actor role. While the positivism philosophy states that the phenomenathat are observed by the researcher will produce credible data or information.The researcher aims to adopt a positivist approach in this research as this approach willinvolve direct observation and using already existing theories through the collection of data,it is hence more suitable than the interpretivism approach which involves feelings which mayresult to being bias in certain judgements.5.2.2 ONTOLOGYOntology as posited by Collis and Hussey (2014) is concerned with the nature of reality.There are two aspects of ontology; subjectivism and objectivism. The subjectivism theorystates that social phenomena are made from the observations and consequent actions of people (Saunders et al., 2012). The term “social constructionism” or “constructionism” isoften associated with the term as added by Remenyi (2003).The objectivism theory states that social substances exist in all reality outer to social actorsthat are concerned with their existence (Saunders et al., 2009). Hence, ontology, objectivismaccepts realism irrespective of the awareness and thoughts of them as they independentlyexist.This research aims to adopt the objectivism philosophy as the understanding of humans aboutCSR varies amongst groups and in different ways as shown in the literature review ofdifferent understanding of the concepts of CSR.5.3 AXIOLOGYAxiology constitutes the role of values and ethics of the researcher in conducting a researchprocess (Saunders et al., 2016). As argued by Heron (1996) all human actions are backed upby values. Hence, the role of values plays an important role in all stages of the researchprocess to deliver credible results.5.4 RESEARCH APPROACHThe two types of research approach are the deductive and inductive (Bryman and Bull, 2007).As noted by Saunders et al. (2009) the researcher?s extent of understanding of the theory atthe beginning helps in providing a better research project design.The inductive method involves developing or building theories as a result of collection ofdata (Saunders et al., 2012).This research study has its end goal, the deductive method which involves starting with anexisting theory that can be narrowed to an operational hypothesis that suggests a relationship between specific concepts and further developed and tested (Saunders et al., 2009; Collis andHussey, 2014). DEDUCTIVE VS INDUCTIVE APPROACHFigure 5 Major differences between deductive and inductive approaches (Saunders et al.,2009) "