MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733350024 · doi:10.1108/whatt-06-2017-0026

The hospitality and tourism industry in Canada: innovative solutions for the future

2017· article· en· W2733350024 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chandana Jayawardena

Bibliographic record

VenueWorldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismHospitalityTheme (computing)OriginalityHospitality industryHospitality management studiesValue (mathematics)MarketingPublic relationsSociologyManagementBusinessPolitical scienceQualitative researchEconomicsSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to provide practical solutions to the strategic question: “The hospitality and tourism industry in Canada: what are the main challenges and solutions?”. It aims to capture the essence of scholarly contributions made by 25 Canadian experts and provide a conclusion to the Worldwide Hospitality Themes ( WHATT ) theme issue (v.9, n.4) dedicated to Canada. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws from key concepts, suggestions and solutions written by 25 Canadian authors in the previous papers of this theme issue. It is worth noting that these authors together have more than 700 years of experience in managing, operating and teaching all aspects of the tourism and hospitality industry. The paper presents nine summaries in the following order: the state of the industry (introductory article); finding innovative solutions for HR challenges (four articles); and new trends and innovation (four articles) Findings In conclusion, 20 recommendations relating to human capital enhancement, as well as general suggestions, are made to embrace useful trends and innovative thinking for future progress in Canada’s hospitality and tourism industry. Practical implications As this paper is a combination of many perspectives from nine co-authored articles, there is no single focus to draw common conclusions. For further information and analysis, it is recommended that the relevant articles from this theme issue be reviewed. Originality/value Readers interested in the Canadian hospitality and tourism industry will find this paper to be of interest.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorldwide Hospitality and Tourism ThemesSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207