IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v2y2024i2p238-251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strengths And Weaknesses Of Smart Tourism Destinations: A Cross-Generational Study

Author

Listed:
  • Elena BOTEZAT

    (Department of Management - Marketing, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Olimpia BAN

    (: Department of Management - Marketing, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Adela Laura POPA

    (Department of Management - Marketing, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Dorin Cristian COITA

    (Department of Management - Marketing, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Teodora Mihaela TARCZA

    (Department of Management - Marketing, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania)

  • Lidia CHIRICOI

    (PhD student, Business Administration, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Oradea)

Abstract

Transforming tourism destinations using technology that makes the travel process efficient and pleasant for different generational groups is crucial. Any attempt to achieve this goal should start with an analysis of the feedback tourists provide about their digital experience at a destination. This study was carried out to gain an understanding of the perceptions of Romanian tourists of the strengths and weaknesses of smart tourism destinations as the first part of any SWOT analysis designed to collect critical factors about the current situation aiming to improve it to remain on a highly competitive market. The empirical data was obtained from 628 tourists belonging to Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y, and Generation Z. The results showed, after a MAXQDA Analytics Pro analysis, that for all four generations considered, the number of respondents who identified strengths is higher than those who mentioned weaknesses. The study also found more similarities than differences across generations in tourists' perceptions of smart technology. Beyond Wi-Fi, destination marketers should focus on internet signal quality and mobile apps for improved travel experiences. However, generational gaps emerged: older generations valued ease of use, while younger ones prioritized access to information apps. Gen Y identified virtual experiences as a weakness, while Gen Z highlighted problematic applications By leveraging these tourism destination strengths, marketers can optimize their digital strategies, ensuring relevance and resonance across diverse demographic segments. Moreover, such insights empower tourism destinations to innovate more effectively, meeting the evolving needs and expectations of each generation in an increasingly digital landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena BOTEZAT & Olimpia BAN & Adela Laura POPA & Dorin Cristian COITA & Teodora Mihaela TARCZA & Lidia CHIRICOI, 2024. "Strengths And Weaknesses Of Smart Tourism Destinations: A Cross-Generational Study," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 238-251, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:2:y:2024:i:2:p:238-251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/en/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/AUOES.December.2024.21.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    smart tourism destinations; Baby Boomers; Generation X; Y; Z; strengths; weaknesses.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M15 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - IT Management
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics
    • Z32 - Other Special Topics - - Tourism Economics - - - Tourism and Development

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:2:y:2024:i:2:p:238-251. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin ZMOLE The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Catalin ZMOLE to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feoraro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.