From Inns to Institutions: A Century of Hotel Management Education and Its Academicization

Hans Zimmer

doi:10.65326/u7y566741

From Inns to Institutions: A Century of Hotel Management Education and Its Academicization

Oct 27, 2025
16 min read

Updated: 4 days ago

Author: Hans Zimmer

ORCID iD: 0009-0006-3510-7045

Affiliation: Swiss International University (SIU)

Received 22 June 2025; Revised 27 August 2025; Accepted 30 September 2025; Available online 27 October 2025; Version of Record 27 October 2025.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.65326/u7y566741

Volume 2, December 2025, (10018)

Abstract

Over the past hundred years, hotel management has moved from an apprenticeship-based craft to a research-informed academic field spanning bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels across leading universities. This article provides a critical, sociological account of that transformation. It traces the shift from experiential learning to formal curricula; explains how hospitality education became embedded in universities; and examines the roles of globalization, technology, branding, and regulation. To interpret these changes, the article mobilizes sociological lenses—Bourdieu’s forms of capital, world-systems theory, institutional isomorphism, human capital and credentialism, and the sociology of professions—alongside educational theories such as experiential learning and service-dominant logic. It argues that hotel management education reflects broader social processes: competition for status and distinction, diffusion from core to periphery in the world system, coercive and normative standards that drive program convergence, and the professional project that legitimizes hospitality as a knowledge domain. The piece concludes with implications for curriculum design, research agendas, and the future of learning in a technologically intensive, sustainability-conscious hospitality industry.

Keywords: hotel management education; hospitality higher education; professionalization; institutional isomorphism; service-dominant logic; revenue management; sustainability; experiential learning.

1. Introduction

A century ago, most hotel careers began at the front desk, in housekeeping, or in the kitchen, and competence was acquired through experience, mentorship, and time. Today, hotel management is taught in universities and specialised schools at every level, from diplomas to doctorates, and is supported by dedicated journals, research centres, and global professional networks. The shift from learning by doing to learning by studying and doing is not simply a matter of adding classrooms to kitchens. It marks a change in how the industry understands expertise, values credentials, and organises careers, and it raises a question that the field has rarely addressed directly: why did hotel management become an academic discipline, and through which social processes did that happen?

This article answers that question through a sociological reading of the field’s history. Rather than narrating events alone, it asks what mechanisms transformed a craft into a research-informed profession and how those mechanisms continue to shape curricula, research, and the labour market for managers. The argument is that academicization is best understood not as a single trend but as the joint product of several well-established social processes operating together: a professional project that codifies tacit knowledge to secure legitimacy; the use of credentials as labour-market signals; institutional pressures that make programmes converge; the conversion of educational capital into status; and the diffusion of curricular models across an unequal global system.

The existing literature documents the components of this transformation but seldom connects them. Studies of revenue management trace the intellectual evolution of that subfield (Denizci Guillet, 2020; Kimes, 2011); reviews of technology chart the adoption of automation and artificial intelligence (Ivanov et al., 2019; Doborjeh et al., 2022; Goel et al., 2022); sustainability reviews map green practice in lodging (Arun et al., 2021); and education research examines pedagogy, internships, and the move to online delivery (Zopiatis et al., 2021; Amin et al., 2022; Gupta et al., 2022). What is missing is an integrative, theoretically grounded account that explains why these developments cohered into an academic field and how distinct social mechanisms jointly produced that outcome. This article addresses that gap. Its contribution is twofold: it assembles an integrative conceptual framework linking the field’s history to a small set of sociological mechanisms, and it translates that framework into testable propositions that can guide subsequent empirical research.

The remainder of the article proceeds as follows. The next section sets out the conceptual approach and its boundaries. A historical synthesis then reconstructs the field’s trajectory in three phases. The article subsequently develops the theoretical lenses, examines how they are expressed in the contemporary curriculum, and consolidates the analysis into a framework and propositions. It closes with limitations, an agenda for future research, and a statement of contribution.

2. Conceptual approach and scope

This is a conceptual, theory-synthesis study rather than an empirical one. Its purpose is to integrate dispersed strands of scholarship into a coherent explanation and to derive propositions, not to test hypotheses with primary data. The method follows the logic of an integrative review, in which the researcher gathers conceptually relevant work, interprets it against a theoretical scaffold, and produces a new synthesis. The claims advanced here are therefore interpretive: they organise existing knowledge and specify relationships that future studies can examine, and they are offered with that status made explicit.

Source selection followed two logics. First, foundational social theory was chosen for its direct bearing on credentialing, organisational convergence, and value creation: the sociology of professions (Wilensky, 1964), signaling theory (Spence, 1973), institutional isomorphism (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983), and service-dominant logic (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Bourdieu’s account of the forms of capital and world-systems reasoning about core–periphery diffusion are used as established interpretive vocabulary. Second, recent peer-reviewed hospitality and tourism scholarship was selected to characterise the current state of the field, with priority given to review and agenda-setting articles in established outlets covering revenue management, technology and artificial intelligence, sustainability, and education. Preference was given to systematic and conceptual reviews; non-peer-reviewed material and purely operational manuals were excluded.

The analytical procedure was abductive. The historical record was first reconstructed into three phases. Mechanisms were then coded from the theoretical literature, and each major curricular and structural development was mapped onto the mechanism that best accounted for it. Moving iteratively between theory and evidence, the analysis identified recurring relationships and consolidated them into propositions and an integrative framework. In scope, the study concerns tertiary hotel and lodging management education; it speaks to adjacent fields such as tourism and events education only by extension, and its conclusions are conceptual rather than causal.

3. From craft to curriculum: a historical synthesis

3.1 The experiential core

In the early twentieth century, hotels were typically family-run or supervised by a small managerial cadre, and training was predominantly hands-on. Advancement followed demonstrated competence in guest service, operations, and reliability. Vocational institutes and apprenticeships existed, but they concentrated on operational skills—culinary technique, service etiquette, and rooms operations—rather than on management theory or analysis. Knowledge was largely tacit, transmitted person to person, and validated by performance on the floor rather than by qualifications.

3.2 Scale, standards, and systems

As national and then international chains expanded, standardised operating procedures and brand promises raised the importance of managerial coordination. Larger room inventories, food and beverage outlets, and events spaces demanded structured systems. The diffusion of yield, or revenue, management—first in airlines and later in lodging—together with advances in reservations technology and early property management systems, pushed the industry toward analytical decision-making. The skills that distinguished a capable manager increasingly combined analytical and communicative competence, and the function itself became more strategic and more central to financial performance (Kimes, 2011). Education responded with new courses in cost control, marketing, organisational behaviour, and service quality, marking the first substantial movement of analytical content into the curriculum.

3.3 The university embrace and the research turn

From the late twentieth century onward, hospitality education took firm root in universities. Specialised hotel schools matured, university departments proliferated, and the curriculum broadened to encompass finance, strategy, law, human resources, real estate, technology, sustainability, and entrepreneurship. Graduate programmes grew, doctoral training and research centres followed, and dedicated journals consolidated a scholarly community. The maturation of subfields such as revenue management illustrates this trajectory: bibliometric analysis shows a coherent, cumulating body of research with an identifiable intellectual structure, even as it has largely developed within established paradigms rather than breaking from them (Denizci Guillet, 2020). The accumulation of systematic reviews across the field—on internships and experiential learning, for example (Zopiatis et al., 2021)—is itself a marker of disciplinary self-awareness, signalling a community capable of taking stock of its own knowledge and setting research agendas.

4. Theoretical lenses on academicization

4.1 The professional project

The classic sociology of professions describes how occupations pursue professional status by securing control over a body of knowledge and a labour market, typically by codifying expertise and asserting a service ideal (Wilensky, 1964). Read through this lens, academicization is a professional project. By converting experiential know-how into formal curricula, peer-reviewed research, and graduate training, the field stakes a jurisdictional claim over managerial work in hospitality and recasts that work as a knowledge domain rather than a set of manual tasks. The growth of journals, doctoral programmes, and research centres is not incidental to this project; it is its principal instrument, because a recognised body of codified knowledge is what distinguishes a profession from a trade.

4.2 Credentials as signals

Signaling theory explains why credentials matter even when much of a manager’s competence is still learned on the job (Spence, 1973). Where employers cannot directly observe ability and where the cost of a poor managerial hire is high, an observable and costly-to-acquire credential serves as a screening device. As ownership structures grew more complex and managerial roles came to require analytics, strategy, and multidisciplinary coordination, degrees became convenient filters for employers and, in turn, a target for students. This dynamic helps account for the durability of the degree-to-career pipeline independently of any direct effect of schooling on productivity, and it sits alongside the human-capital intuition that formal study also builds genuinely useful capabilities.

4.3 Institutional isomorphism

Why do hospitality programmes across very different institutions and countries look so similar? Institutional theory offers an answer through three mechanisms of convergence (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). Coercive pressures arise from government quality frameworks, accreditation requirements, and rules governing internships and work placements, which oblige programmes to document outcomes, hours, and assessment. Mimetic pressures arise from uncertainty about the best curriculum, which encourages imitation of respected schools’ course structures. Normative pressures arise from professional associations and from faculty trained in similar graduate programmes who share methods, pedagogy, and editorial standards. Together these forces produce the cross-institutional homogeneity that is so visible in programme design.

4.4 Capitals, distinction, and the logic of service

Bourdieu’s account of the forms of capital clarifies the appeal of formal qualifications. A degree functions as institutionalised cultural capital—disciplinary language, analytic methods, and case reasoning embodied in the graduate—that is convertible, under the right conditions, into economic capital through employment and into symbolic capital through association with prestigious institutions. Programmes also cultivate social capital in the form of alumni networks and industry partnerships. The movement of the field into elite universities thus did more than transmit skills; it reframed hospitality from service work into a knowledge-intensive domain and supplied a mechanism by which status distinctions are reproduced within the managerial labour market. Service-dominant logic complements this account on the substantive side of the curriculum: by treating value as co-created in interaction rather than embedded in a product (Vargo and Lusch, 2004), it provides the conceptual basis for teaching experience design, service blueprinting, and service recovery as core managerial competences rather than peripheral skills.

4.5 Globalization and core–periphery diffusion

The geography of hospitality education is illuminated by world-systems reasoning. Curricular models, accreditation practices, and research paradigms tend to originate in core academic centres and diffuse outward to semi-peripheral and peripheral regions through partnerships, branch campuses, and the mobility of faculty and students. Destination markets across Asia, the Middle East, and Africa adapt these models to local hospitality ecologies—resort, religious, heritage, and wellness tourism—producing hybrid programmes that blend global frameworks with regional priorities. The outcome is partial convergence rather than uniform replication, and the inequalities of the wider system persist in the form of uneven access to high-status programmes and to the hospitality hubs where practical training is concentrated.

5. The contemporary curriculum and its drivers

The modern curriculum can be read as the sedimented result of the processes described above. It retains an operational foundation—front office, housekeeping, food and beverage, and events—while layering on the business and analytical content that academicization introduced. The subsections below examine the principal drivers shaping that content and connect each to the field’s evolving evidence base.

5.1 Analytics and revenue science

Revenue management, distribution strategy, and digital marketing now anchor the analytical core of hospitality programmes. The subfield’s consolidation into a coherent research tradition (Denizci Guillet, 2020) and the recognition that effective revenue managers need both analytical and communicative competence (Kimes, 2011) have given this material a secure curricular place. Teaching it well, however, remains challenging: aligning classroom instruction with fast-moving industry practice requires continual updating of cases, data, and tools, a difficulty documented in the scholarship on revenue management education (Demirciftci et al., 2017). The pedagogical task is therefore not only to convey technique but to cultivate judgement about when and how to apply it.

5.2 Digital transformation, artificial intelligence, and automation

Digital transformation has reframed the manager’s required competences around digital customer engagement, experience management, innovation, and leadership (Busulwa et al., 2022). Property management systems, customer data platforms, and analytics have become routine, while artificial intelligence and robotics have moved from novelty to subject of systematic study (Ivanov et al., 2019; Doborjeh et al., 2022). Reviews of adoption stress that the value of these technologies depends on organisational and human factors as much as on the technology itself (Goel et al., 2022), and the pandemic accelerated interest in contactless and touchless service models (Gaur et al., 2021). The recurring lesson for the curriculum is one of augmentation rather than substitution: programmes increasingly teach students to redesign roles and workflows so that automation supports, rather than displaces, the human core of hospitality. Platform intermediation adds a further dimension, since third-party channels shape visibility and pricing power and have prompted scholarship on the theories needed to understand platform-mediated exchange in the sector (Altinay and Taheri, 2019).

5.3 Sustainability and responsible hospitality

Sustainability has moved from the margins of the curriculum toward its centre. Programmes connect lodging operations to energy and water stewardship, waste reduction, supply-chain ethics, and inclusive employment, and they introduce certification and reporting frameworks. The evidence base on green practice in hotels has matured accordingly: a systematic review of the adoption and consumption of green hotel products and services consolidates a substantial literature and calls for multi-theoretic explanation of consumer and organisational behaviour (Arun et al., 2021). Teaching sustainability as a source of value—through risk reduction, cost savings, and guest preference—rather than as mere compliance reflects this maturation.

5.4 Experience design and the logic of co-creation

Service-dominant logic has a direct curricular expression (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Courses on guest-journey mapping, service blueprinting, and service recovery treat the guest experience as something co-produced in interaction, and they equip managers to design encounters and to recover gracefully when they fail. This orientation links the operational foundation of the curriculum to its analytical and strategic content, because designing and measuring experience requires both empathy and data.

5.5 Experiential learning and pedagogy

Experiential components—internships, rotations, training hotels, and student-run outlets—remain central to how the field teaches, translating theory into judgement. A systematic review of hospitality internships synthesises this tradition and identifies gaps and an agenda for future work (Zopiatis et al., 2021), while evidence on internship effectiveness shows measurable effects on students’ development and career decisions. The forced shift to online delivery during the pandemic tested these pedagogies and generated new evidence about what makes digital learning effective for tourism and hospitality students (Amin et al., 2022) and about how educators themselves coped with the transition (Gupta et al., 2022). The broader lesson is that the field’s pedagogy is increasingly reflective and evidence-informed, a further sign of academic maturity.

5.6 Crisis, resilience, and the limits of routine

Recent shocks have made resilience a curricular concern in its own right. The pandemic prompted a rapid reassessment of the sector and an explicit research agenda (Gursoy and Chi, 2020), and it revealed how analytical routines such as revenue management must be adapted when demand collapses and historical data lose their predictive value (Denizci Guillet and Chu, 2021). Educating managers for such conditions means teaching scenario planning, flexible inventory strategies, and judgement under uncertainty alongside the standard analytical toolkit.

6. Discussion: an integrative framework and propositions

Read together, the mechanisms set out above explain academicization more fully than any one of them does alone. The professional project supplies the motive—legitimacy and jurisdiction—while signaling explains why employers and students sustain the credential market that the project requires. Institutional isomorphism accounts for the convergent form that programmes take once the field is established, and the logic of capital explains why that convergence is accompanied by persistent status differentiation between institutions. World-systems diffusion situates these processes in an unequal global geography, and service-dominant logic, together with digital transformation, describes how the substantive knowledge base is being redefined around co-creation and data. The contribution of this synthesis is to show that these are not competing explanations but complementary mechanisms operating at different levels: motive, market, organisational field, status order, geography, and knowledge base.

This framework speaks to several debates. In the long-running contrast between human-capital and credentialist accounts of education, the analysis suggests that both operate simultaneously in hospitality: degrees build genuine capability and serve as screening signals, and the field’s persistent emphasis on experiential learning can be read as an attempt to ensure that the signal corresponds to substance. In debates about convergence and diversity, the framework implies a tension rather than a contradiction: isomorphic pressures push programmes toward a common template, while core–periphery hybridisation and the competitive value of differentiation push back toward regional distinctiveness. In debates about technology, the recurring curricular emphasis on augmentation rather than substitution indicates that the field is defining its knowledge base around the integration of human service and machine capability rather than around either alone.

Table 1 consolidates the framework, linking each lens to its core mechanism, its expression in hotel management education, and an associated proposition. The propositions that follow are interpretive claims intended to be examined empirically.

Table 1. An integrative framework linking sociological mechanisms to the academicization of hotel management education.

Theoretical lens	Core social mechanism	Manifestation in hotel management education	Proposition
Sociology of professions (Wilensky, 1964)	A professional project: codifying tacit know-how to claim jurisdiction and legitimacy	Conversion of apprenticeship craft into formal curricula, journals, doctoral training and research centres	P1
Signaling and credentialism (Spence, 1973)	Costly, observable credentials screen ability under hiring uncertainty	Degrees adopted by employers as filters for complex managerial roles; degree-to-career pipeline	P2
Institutional isomorphism (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983)	Coercive, mimetic and normative pressures homogenise organisational fields	Convergent programme structures, accreditation, course sequencing and shared methods across institutions	P3
Forms of capital and distinction (Bourdieu)	Conversion of cultural capital into economic and symbolic capital	Credentials as institutionalised cultural capital; prestige of elite schools reproducing status	P4
World-systems and core–periphery diffusion	Models diffuse from core centres outward and are locally adapted	Hybrid curricula blending global frameworks with regional hospitality ecologies	P5
Service-dominant logic (Vargo and Lusch, 2004)	Value is co-created in interaction rather than embedded in a product	Experience design, analytics and AI repositioning the manager as integrator of service and data	P6

Note: The table summarises an interpretive synthesis of the literature reviewed in this article. The mechanisms are complementary rather than mutually exclusive, and the propositions are conceptual claims offered for empirical examination rather than established findings. Bourdieu’s forms of capital and world-systems core–periphery reasoning are used here as established interpretive frameworks.

P1. The academicization of hotel management is a professional project in which actors convert experiential know-how into codified, credential-bearing knowledge to secure jurisdiction over managerial work and legitimacy as a knowledge domain.

P2. As ownership structures and managerial tasks grow more complex and candidate ability becomes costlier to verify, formal credentials function increasingly as screening signals, reinforcing the degree-to-career pipeline beyond their direct contribution to productivity.

P3. Under regulatory pressure, uncertainty, and shared professional norms, hotel management programmes converge structurally and curricularly through coercive, mimetic, and normative mechanisms, producing cross-institutional homogeneity.

P4. Hospitality credentials operate as institutionalised cultural capital convertible into economic and symbolic capital, so that affiliation with prestigious programmes reproduces status distinctions within the managerial labour market.

P5. Curricular models, accreditation logics, and research paradigms diffuse from core academic centres to semi-peripheral and peripheral regions, where they are hybridised with local hospitality ecologies, generating partial convergence rather than uniform replication.

P6. As value is increasingly understood as co-created, and as analytics and artificial intelligence reshape operations, curricula reposition the manager as an integrator of human service and data-driven decision-making, redefining the field’s knowledge base around augmentation rather than substitution.

7. Limitations and future research

Three limitations qualify the analysis and point toward future work. First, the study is conceptual and interpretive; its propositions organise existing knowledge but have not been tested, and they invite empirical examination. Bibliometric and content-analytic studies could assess the degree and drivers of curricular convergence implied by P3; tracer and labour-market studies could disentangle the signaling and human-capital effects in P2; and comparative case studies could examine the hybridisation described in P5. Second, the literature drawn upon is weighted toward English-language scholarship and core-region journals, which may under-represent work from regions where hospitality education is growing fastest; incorporating Global South perspectives would test whether the framework holds where the core–periphery dynamic is most consequential. Third, several recent sources reflect the pandemic period and may over-index on crisis and online themes; longitudinal work is needed to determine which of these shifts are durable. Beyond addressing these limitations, future research could examine how artificial intelligence is reshaping the field’s knowledge base and whether the augmentation orientation in P6 survives sustained automation, and how micro-credentials and lifelong-learning arrangements interact with the traditional degree.

8. Conclusion

Within a century, hotel management moved from tacit craft to academic field. This article has argued that the transition is best understood as the joint outcome of several social mechanisms: a professional project that codified knowledge to claim legitimacy, credential signaling that sustained a degree market, institutional isomorphism that made programmes converge, the conversion of educational capital into status, and the diffusion of models across an unequal world system, with service-dominant logic and digital transformation now redefining the knowledge base. The contribution is an integrative framework that connects the field’s history to these mechanisms and a set of propositions through which the framework can be tested. Education did not displace experience; it framed, scaled, and legitimised it, producing a manager who is at once practitioner and analyst. Recognising the social processes behind this transformation can help educators design curricula that hold analytical rigour and operational empathy together, and can give the field a clearer account of its own intellectual maturity.

References

Altinay, L. and Taheri, B. (2019), “Emerging themes and theories in the sharing economy: a critical note for hospitality and tourism”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2018-0171
Amin, I., Yousaf, A., Walia, S. and Bashir, M. (2022), “What shapes e-learning effectiveness among tourism education students? An empirical assessment during COVID-19”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, Vol. 30, 100337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100337
Arun, T.M., Kaur, P., Bresciani, S. and Dhir, A. (2021), “What drives the adoption and consumption of green hotel products and services? A systematic literature review of past achievement and future promises”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 2637–2655. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2768
Busulwa, R., Pickering, M. and Mao, I. (2022), “Digital transformation and hospitality management competencies: toward an integrative framework”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 102, 103132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103132
Demirciftci, T., Cetin, G. and Bilgihan, A. (2017), “Coping with RM challenges in hospitality education”, Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41272-017-0086-0
Denizci Guillet, B. (2020), “An evolutionary analysis of revenue management research in hospitality and tourism: is there a paradigm shift?”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 560–587. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2019-0515
Denizci Guillet, B. and Chu, A.M.C. (2021), “Managing hotel revenue amid the COVID-19 crisis”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 604–627. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2020-0623
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983), “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Doborjeh, Z., Hemmington, N., Doborjeh, M. and Kasabov, N. (2022), “Artificial intelligence: a systematic review of methods and applications in hospitality and tourism”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 1154–1176. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-06-2021-0767
Gaur, L., Afaq, A., Singh, G. and Dwivedi, Y.K. (2021), “Role of artificial intelligence and robotics to foster the touchless travel during a pandemic: a review and research agenda”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 33 No. 11, pp. 4079–4098. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-11-2020-1246
Goel, P., Kaushik, N., Sivathanu, B., Pillai, R. and Vikas, J. (2022), “Consumers’ adoption of artificial intelligence and robotics in hospitality and tourism sector: literature review and future research agenda”, Tourism Review, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 1081–1096. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-03-2021-0138
Gupta, V., Roy, H. and Sahu, G. (2022), “How the tourism & hospitality lecturers coped with the transition to online teaching due to COVID-19: an assessment of stressors, negative sentiments and coping strategies”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, Vol. 30, 100341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100341
Gursoy, D. and Chi, C.G. (2020), “Effects of COVID-19 pandemic on hospitality industry: review of the current situations and a research agenda”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 527–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2020.1788231
Ivanov, S., Gretzel, U., Berezina, K., Sigala, M. and Webster, C. (2019), “Progress on robotics in hospitality and tourism: a review of the literature”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 489–521. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-08-2018-0087
Kimes, S.E. (2011), “The future of hotel revenue management”, Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1057/rpm.2010.47
Spence, M. (1973), “Job market signaling”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 87 No. 3, pp. 355–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882010
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2004), “Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Wilensky, H.L. (1964), “The professionalization of everyone?”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 70 No. 2, pp. 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1086/223790
Zopiatis, A., Papadopoulos, C. and Theofanous, Y. (2021), “A systematic review of literature on hospitality internships”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, Vol. 28, 100309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100309