Systematic literature review identifies human resource connections in family businesses, suggesting future research directions.
Purpose There is not a theoretical framework that conceptualizes the interaction between Human Resources (hereinafter HR) and Family Business (hereinafter FAMBUS) in Hospitality and Tourism (hereinafter H&T) sector because of the fragmented research on the subject. This study seeks to close this gap by offering the first Systematic Literature Review (hereinafter SLR) in the area. The conversation about research gaps offers a potential link between the three academic themes, highlighting limitations in existing research and providing promising research avenues for future research. Design/methodology/approach The SLR was chosen as the preferable methodological approach to fully examine the interaction between HR and FAMBUS research in H&T sector. Four methodological steps were outlined for carrying out this study: (1) the development of targeted research inquiries; (2) the creation of the data extraction form and the specification of the criteria for inclusion and exclusion; (3) descriptive analysis of the findings; and (4) content analysis and conceptualization of the HR research field in the H&T sector. Findings The research outlined the structure of the body of work now available at the nexus of the three scientific disciplines. Due to inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 15 studies were gathered. These studies were then analyzed through thematic analysis and the most frequent were highlighted. This analysis served as the foundation for the subsequent research’s development of a cohesive conceptual framework. Originality/value This study is the first attempt to systematically investigate human resources in family business with a focus on the tourism and hospitality sector. It also contains an extended sample with more than 300 academic journals in four thematic categories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chalis et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: