The research landscape in tourism and hospitality often feels like a house divided. On one side, there is the quantitative camp searching for broad, linear patterns; on the other side, there are qualitative scholars who prefer deep, contextual dives. This division suggests that scholars may overlook valuable insights in the middle. Therefore, this study examines how Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) and Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) are transforming the landscape and bridging the methodological and analytical divide. For this purpose, authors analyzed 91 peer-reviewed articles using PRISMA 2020 systematic review principles from six databases. The findings highlight that this multi-methodological triangulation addresses causal asymmetry, acknowledging that the drivers of success are not necessarily mirror images of those of failure. The study implies that, in theory, it bridges the gap between qualitative nuance and quantitative rigor, moving from universal linear assumptions to complexity theory. Methodologically, it allows for a prioritized roadmap in which NCA pinpoints exact operational thresholds and fsQCA provides strategic flexibility. In practice, the findings offer a two-tiered decision-making framework for industry managers: first, addressing non-negotiable bottlenecks, and second, selecting the strategic configuration that best aligns with their unique resource base. The review concludes that, while challenges such as data calibration and interpretative complexity remain, integrating these paradigms offers a more authentic and comprehensive understanding of the volatile landscape of tourism and hospitality.
Geremew et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: