THE STRATEGIC ROLE OF HRM IN THE TURKISH TOURISM

SECTOR WITHIN THE EU MEMBERSHIP JOURNEY

Serkan Bayraktaroglu,
Rana Ozen Kutanis,
Oguz Turkay
Sakarya Universty, TURKEY
Abstract
This paper provides an analysis and evaluation of the main perspectives on global
challenges faced by the Turkish tourism sector. The issues involved are; the evaluation of
the transformation process of hospitality organisations in Turkey within the European
Union Process and the “key success factors” of being successful in order to develop and
maintain competitive advantage within the global challenge. It identifies the issues which
appear to be of prime importance when challenging global issues including strategic
HRM in tourism sector. In order to draw a profile of Turkish Tourism sector a SWOT
analysis will be made (Porter, 1985). The paper will underline the globalisation
dimension within the tourism sector especially focusing on the EU dimension and moving
onto the emergence of HRM issues into the tourism context with more strategic
understanding. The paper will be concluded by the sustainable tourism development
issues and general remarks and propositions on the future of the Turkish tourism sector.

Introduction
Since the late 1980s, global tourism has grown fairly constantly. Events in the early
twenty-first century, however, appear to have changed this and led to reconsideration that
development is inevitable. Recently, it has become clear that major natural and human-
induced incidents can greatly influence tourism growth and development. Natural
disasters, such as storms, floods and volcanic explosions can severely disrupt tourism
activities, but despite their severity, such events are usually highly localised, and their
effects on global tourism are generally small scale and short lived.
The concept of globalisation has achieved much currency and a high degree of popularity
in recent years (Robertson, 1992; Waters, 1995, Parker, 1998). This is probably due to the
fact that globalisation is transforming the world at a rapid pace and it is changing the
traditional workplace and employment practices (Blyton et al. 1998). Globalisation has
been taking place as part of the inevitable process of change. In order for organisations to
survive or prosper, executives will have to learn to manage and think differently. As
Turkish tourism is prepared to compete in a global economy, many are introducing new
techniques that require more educated and trained workers. In this paper the required
framework for the Turkish tourism will be proposed as challenging in a global world
economy especially within the EU membership process.
349
In the following parts of this paper, there are important topics related to tourism and
globalisation, properties of Turkish tourism sector, HRM strategies in Turkey and the
effects of EU procedures on HRM in Turkey.
Tourism and Globalisation
Although it is widely accepted that we live in a “borderless” world (Ohmae, 1999),
globalisation may be considered as a means of attracting foreign investment, while
increasing exports and developing international alliances to penetrate new markets, has
become a world-wide trend. Globalisation is inevitable, although by some of the
developing countries it could be perceived as undesirable and as a threat. Globalisation
does not necessarily mean eliminating differences, imitating others or allowing more
developed nations to impose their models. It also means integrating differences, putting
together our strengths, building from the differences and being able to join efforts for a
win-win process. In this context, globalisation can be considered as a “world-wide
pressure for change” (Granell, 2000).
Globalization has changed the business dynamics in the hospitality industry. Greenberg
and Baron (1997) stressed the increase in capital flows, competition, and economic
interdependencies across countries. Choi et al. (2000) observed the evolving dynamics of
international labour utilization, while Wilson et al. (2000) cited knowledge gaps in
contract catering in the hospitality industry. In this context it is especially important for
hospitality managers to understand the implications of globalisation and plan for the
implementation of strategic approaches (Munoz, 2005).
Tourism is one of the fastest growing sectors of the global economy and developing
countries are attempting to consider it as an industry in an attempt to attract foreign
investment and financial reserves. While conceding that the uncontrolled growth of this
industry can result in serious environmental and social problems, some international
policy-makers for instance, the United Nations contends that such negative effects can be
controlled and reduced.
In recent years, tourism and its associated economic repercussions have taken place
within a wider context of globalisation of the world economy (Sugiyarto et al., 2003). The
context of the tourism activities have been changed radically as globalisation means
lowering the barriers which impede international flows of goods, services and financial
capital and more flexible exchange rates with the aim of inducing markets to operate
more efficiently. The issue of whether globalisation is beneficial remains controversial
particularly because globalisation policies are often examined without consideration of
their interactions with key sectors of the economy, notably tourism.

350
1. SWOT Analysis of Turkish Tourism Sector

The definition of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of Turkish Tourism

Sector is very important for the first step. The strengths and weaknesses are about
internal, the opportunities and threats are about external analysis.
Strengths: They are the values of Turkey as an attraction centre. The advantages that
support the decision of preference of tourists are strengths. The strengths of Turkey can
be enumerated as follows:
• Nice and sandy beaches
• Wonderful views/panoramas of mountain, forest and river
• Mild climate, natural resources, clean environment
• Bridge between Asia and Europe
• Traditional hospitable society
• Very young and dynamic population which can adapt to tourism concept
• Rich historical and cultural heritage
• Opportunities of great sport, yacht and sail
• Closeness to main markets because of geographical location
• Rich cuisine and delicious meals
• Large shopping opportunities
• Relatively a cheap attraction centre
• One of the famous destinations in the world.
Natural beauties, strategic geography, rich and friendly culture are strongest features of
Turkey. Tourism sector can evaluate all these components simultaneously.
Weaknesses: They may arise from the inside of the country or from the outside partly.
They are:
• Seasonal problems and low capacity usage rates
• Insufficient substructure
• Low quality of tourist services
• Insufficiency of camping, self-catering and youth hostels
• Weak railways and roads
• Insufficient airway and their riggings
• Insufficient health conditions
• Insufficient educated personnel
• Distance to the countries which send tourists
• Chronicle high inflation rate
• The negative attitude of Turkish media
• Insufficient concern of municipalities and of Public Sector to Tourism
Especially, turbulent economy, low quality in transportation and insufficient educated
personnel are very important weaknesses for Turkey. For security of Turkey, these
weaknesses must be solved immediately. Otherwise, the unsatisfied tourists may make
word of mouth negatively. Therefore they may affect the potential tourists for Turkey.
351
Opportunities: Evaluation of the opportunities positively obtains advantages relatively to
rivals. Opportunities may be profitable new markets or products in the future.
• The importance of Eurasia region
• Strategic place of politics and economics of Turkey
• Qualitative and cheap marine tourism
• The increasing interest of historical, natural and cultural tourism
• Thermal tourism facilities
• New markets in East Europe
• Using the secondary residences for tourism
• Great internal tourism potential
• The East Mediterranean Tourism Agreement became valid
• Developed transportation opportunities
Thermal tourism, marine tourism, transportation facilities and being a bridge between
Asia and Europe are important opportunities for Turkey. If Turkish tourism sector can use
these opportunities strategically, it can be tourism paradise.
Threats: Danger and threats are the factors that affect both Turkey and the tourism sector
negatively. Some of them are:
• The image problems which arouse from terror events eventually
• Negative effects of the close wars in Iraq and in Middle-east
• Chronicle high inflation problem of Turkish economy
• The increasing competition in Tourism sector
• New tourism countries in Far-east and in East Europe
• The supportive policies of EU just for the members
• The rival countries which are members of EU, increase their competitive
advantages by using the support of finance and knowledge.
Recently, terror events, the negative effects of our neighbour countries, problems of
Turkish economy and competitors in tourism are important threats. Therefore, the
responsibility of Turkey is greater than the other competitor countries in tourism.
For competitive advantages, Turkish tourism sector must analyse all these points, and
must manage human resources strategically. Turkish tourism sector needs capable,
educated, efficient and talented personnel in terms of very dynamic and changeable
environment. Additionally, business strategy is also very important for tourism sector.
Therefore, Strategic Human Resource Management is inevitable for Turkish tourism
sector.

2. The Emergence of Strategic HRM

Although human resources are very important in a people industry such as tourism
(Baum, 1993), the area is characterised by unconstructive attitudes to investment in
human capital, in flexible employment practices and an educational and training support
352
system of doubtful relevance (Parsons, 1996). Human resources are looked at as
operational considerations in the tourism industry and this operationally oriented
approach and the superficial and peripheral reference to human resources at the policy
and planning level have resulted in a frivolous and ad hoc approach to key issues in its
development (Baum and Conlin, 1994).
The 1980s saw the emergence of the concept of strategic HRM (for example Bratton and
Gold, 1999; Boxall, 1992; Schuler, 1989). Increased competition in both national and
global arenas has forced managers to reconsider the management of all resources within
the organisation, paying specific attention to the effective management of the human
resource, leading to declarations such as “people are our most valuable asset”. This
reappraisal of the techniques used to manage employees within an organisation has led to
the development of various approaches towards human resource management: for
example the instrumental approach which focuses on the so-called hard HR areas such as
HR planning where human resources are viewed as “rationally” as any other economic
factor; and the humanistic approach emphasising the so-called softer aspects of HRM
such as organisational culture and employee commitment (Goss, 1994).
The shift from traditional personnel management towards a more sophisticated human
resource management has been reported extensively in recent years (Storey, 1989; Legge,
1989; Sisson, 1989; Guest, 1989; Beer et al. 1985). Guest (1993) identifies the central
levers for HRM as selection, training and rewards. It is widely accepted, however, that
the main features of a human resource management network include additional features
such as welfare, trade unions, assessment, employee involvement and equal opportunities.
A further and essential feature of the HR model, or ideology, is that it is intended to be
strategic in nature. Sophisticated human resource management practice stipulates that in
order to be effective the HR activities of an organisation must be linked to an overall
corporate strategy and that the business direction of the organisation must be reflected
and supported by the HRM techniques adopted (Bayraktaroglu, 2002).
Research on strategic HRM focuses heavily on the linkage between HRM and business
strategy (Schuler and Jackson, 1987; Gratton et al., 1999; Sheppeck and Militello, 2000;
Huang, 2001). Linking HRM and business strategy requires HR departments’ providing
appropriate input into strategic decisions, HR managers’ participation in strategic
planning and decision-making processes (Fombrun et al., 1984), integrating HRM with
business strategy by means of forming and implementing HRM strategies and policies
(Schuler, 1992; Sheehan, 2005). Moreover, as it is necessary for HR departments to
provide the required input into strategic decisions and be a part of the decision-making
process, it has been argued that the HR department’s representation on the board of
directors is becoming more and more necessary (Kelly and Gennard, 1996). On the other
hand, the strategic role of the HR function can be evaluated by examining the existence
and quality of HR strategies and policies and by examining whether HR departments’
performance is being measured or not (Barutcugil, 2004). The role and importance of
HRM vary within different companies and one of the main reasons for the varying roles
and practices of HRM within companies is organizational size (Aycan, 2001). Recent
research on HRM practices and organization size show that there is a strong linkage

353
between two variables (Bayo-Moriones and Merino-Diaz de Cerio, 2001) and it supports
the role and importance of HRM in larger companies.

3. HRM Strategies in Tourism Sector

Before discussing human resource strategies in the tourism sector it is useful to remind
the unique characteristics shared by service industries. Sasser et al. (1978) describe four
main characteristics which render the sector as fundamentally different from
manufacturing industries, namely simultaneity; heterogeneity; intangibility; and
perishability. Simultaneity refers to production and consumption of services; clearly these
occur simultaneously. For example, a meal in a restaurant is consumed as part of the
process of the whole event, immediately after it has been prepared and while the
consumer and producer are in close proximity. Heterogeneity describes the way in which
hotels and restaurants aim to reproduce the same quality of service each time but in actual
fact this can vary substantially from establishment to establishment and from day to day
because of the variables, e.g. staff attitude, mood, atmosphere, etc. Services are
intangible; therefore the quality of the service is indefinable and will vary from consumer
to consumer depending on their experiences, perceptions and expectations. Finally,
perishability indicates that services have a definite life span and cannot be stored. Taking
these four factors into consideration it becomes clear that the role of the employee in the
service sector is vital. The labour market features of the hotel industry are also
significant. These features may be summarised as a fairly large proportion of unskilled
labour; the transferability of skills between broad ranges of hotel and catering
establishments; high levels of labour turnover; absenteeism; and low levels of pay (Riley,
1991).

4. EU and Turkish Tourism: Recent Development of Turkish Tourism and the Role
of EU

The consequence of globalization for developing countries like Turkey is growing

importance of “international integration” view as a key to development. International
integration involves a cultural transformation and moving far from traditional societal
structure away (Clancy, 1999:3). The interaction between countries and between cultures
was seen as a part of this development process (Clancy, 1999). In the context of
“modernization” approach (Clancy, 1999), tourism industry was assessed an option to
develop a country, because tourism was evaluated as the open window of the country to
the “West” and “liberal world”. By this view, tourism is a key to integration of national
economy to the world.
Tourism which planned in the framework of sustainability, crucially contribute to
development with its capacity to create employment and to earn foreign exchange, in
spite of some criticism on its positive effects (Welford et. al., 1999:168-169; Steck,
354
1999:9). At this reason, tourism is being encouraged in EU. In Turkey, it was also
encouraged by the government, with the relation of these features for many years.
Therefore, EU and Turkey as two actors looked for an appropriate ground to tourism
development with common expectations are going to close day by day within the frame
created by tourism.
Europe is a region in which the most intense tourist movements occur. In the year 2004,
426 million of the international travel which was 766 million in total occurred towards
the region countries (UNWTO,2006). Despite the decrease in total share of the world
tourism which Europe pulls, growth and development of the region continues. Despite the
recent trends in world tourism market Europe holds a 57% of the total tourist market. EU
gathers a 5.5% of its GNP from tourism. Employment power of the tourism sector is 9
million people which stand for 6% of the total EU employment. Therefore tourism is
especially a source for creating jobs in less developed and surrounding regions (Avrupa
Komisyonu Türkiye Temsilciliği, 2000).

5. The Tourism Policy of EU

European Union aimed that member countries would develop close relationships between
themselves and economic, social as well as cultural welfare of the citizens of the member
countries from the very beginning of Treaty of Rome. From this point of view tourism
sector play a crucial role in achieving this goal and that is why European Union purposely
aims to develop the tourism sector. Removal of the inner frontiers within member
countries is closely related to the integration and development of tourism goals. While
tourism is of great importance to EU member countries it is only very recently that a
policy on tourism is put into action. In EU tourism sector is first put into Community
Action Program in a very limited manner by the Maastricht Treaty. Topics like education,
research, environment, transportation, consumer rights, health, regional development,
employment, taxation, culture and competition which are also closely related to tourism
have different policies. Differences between the development levels of tourism Union
member countries as well as their regions hindered the EU from developing a sound
tourism policy (İstanbullu and Dinçer, 1997).
Instead of presenting a unique tourism policy, the EU supported tourism within scope of
different union policies. The EU publishes directives on tourism at different times.
Development of tourism is seen as a strategic issue by the Union. Because of this reason,
in order to improve mobility and touristic activities different subjects are brought into
consideration. After appointment of a commission member who is charge of tourism
activities by the union in 1980, the need to increase tourism functionality and proposals in
line with this need are introduced. After this date, many programs has implemented to
control and shape the borders of tourism development. “EU Tourism Policy Guidelines”
(1982), “EU Activities in Tourism” (1996), “EU Action Plan in Tourism (1995)”, “Green
Book” (1995), “Philoxenia” (1996), “Working Together For the Future of European
Tourism” (2001) are main examples of these. All these programs emphasize the
355
importance of tourism for EU. Within this context, topics like, freedom of travel,
consumer rights, improvement of working conditions, vocational education and definition
of job specifications, environmental and cultural preservation, prolonging tourism season
in order to include low and middle income class with off-the-season prices, prioritization
of alternative tourism activities, improvement of social tourism which may be used as an
incentive for young people, are covered (Istanbullu ve Dincer, 1997;98). Plans are made
for improvement of service quality, tourism information system, dissemination of
statistics and research information and increasing competitive capabilities of member
countries in order to attract tourists out of the EU. In order to achieve the above
mentioned goals rather than presenting a special tourism policy the EU adopted a policy
which is supporting tourism under different Union policies (TURSAB, 2001: 141).
It is estimated that tourism will play a great role in integration process because of the
higher growth rates observed in the EU. Increased flow of tourists between member
countries is expected to grow more and besides this, official regulations should be
introduced in line with the rising importance of the tourism sector (Coles and Hall, 2005).
It is estimated that tourism will have a great positive impact on the income levels of rural
areas, preserving cultural heritage, creating more jobs for the young generation and health
tourism. From this point of view tourism is seen as a income generating, job producing
welfare source for the member countries’ citizens. On the other tourism is also source for
social gains and an assurance for different cultures and environment (Coles and Hall,
2005:56).
It is clear that this political framework not only reflects that the EU values tourism but
also holds space for Turkish tourism development. It can be observed that the EU policies
handle tourism in a strategic and planned manner. This situation has a two-sided effect
potential. First one is, being a member candidate Turkey should adapt to Union tourism
policies. The second one is the EU is the most important market for Turkish tourism
which forces Turkish tourism to follow the EU perspective and regulations.
Turkey gained 16.850Bn. USD from 19.836 Mn visitors in the year 2006. This number
represents %19,7 of the total export and %4.2 of the GNP of Turkey (T.C Culture and
Tourism Ministry, 2007). While numbers indicate a decline when compared to the year
before, the increase in the number of visitors and income is significant. The EU is the
most important market for Turkish tourism. 2006 numbers show that 10.321Mn tourists
from 25 Union member countries visited Turkey which represents %52.07 of the total
visitors (T.C Culture and Tourism Ministry, 2007).
At this point it would be better to indicate that Turkish tourism is in a structural
transformation. This transformation can be observed if certain periods of Turkish tourism
policy are examined. The main framework of the Turkish tourism is drawn by Five Year
Development Plans since 1963 (Olalı, 1990: 64). Development of tourism by means of
incentives had been a primary topic for governments in the planned era. In almost every
Five Year Plan tourism’s importance for improvement of Turkish economy is stressed.
However in the first era of plans, only active foreign tourism was the point of focus. In
order to achieve this utilization of the country resources for tourism was encouraged
(Senol and Kasli, 2007:39-40). Besides, topics like; determination of the supply sources
356
of the country, completion of the infrastructure and superstructure facilities, carrying out
marketing activities, education, price and control was assigned as government duties in
the first development plans (Olalı, 1990:65). The main idea behind the first plans was
unconditional support for mass tourism because of its potential for economical income.
Increase in total bed numbers was supported. In order to support tourism development
Tourism Incentive Law was put into order in 1982. In the fifth development plan which
covered 1985-89 topics like protection of environment and issues on employee rights
were introduced for the first time (Senol and Kasli, 2007:44). This period was also
significant because of rising financial support. Especially land allotment permits for
touristic investments and tax exemptions were used as incentives. With the sixth
development plan (1990-1994) developing different types of tourism, protection of
natural and historical values, making tourism a whole-year activity, taking customer
needs into consideration and improving quality of tourism education were introduced as
important topics. This approach secured its place in the next two following five-year
plans (Senol and Kasli, 2007:44-47).
Foresights on development of tourism throughout the country and benefiting rural areas
from the gaining of this sector are preserved in the 9th Development Plan (Plan: 8193).
This situation is caused partly from the effects of approaches on benefiting from tourism
in rural region development of EU and other countries. It is seen on the last Development
Plan that the effects of tourism activities which settled on the coastal areas are tried to
spread throughout the country. Besides, it is pointed out that tourism should not damage
natural environment (p.81). Cultural tourism is encouraged in order to activate culture
potential of the country and develop social dialogue. Therefore necessity of training
qualified labour force is pointed out (p.45). Local authorities and users are required to
participate in tourism decisions (p.82). It is clear that by 9th Development Plan, goal of 36
billion dollars revenue from 38 million tourists in 2013 is set as a government policy
(DPT, 2006: 61).
However, ever since this transformation requirement felt, some researchers stated the
negative situations making transformation necessary: According to Tosun and Timothy
(2001), deficiencies of tourism development approaches in Turkey can be summarized
under following issues: Requirement of political stability, establishment of supporting
institutions and autonomation, implementation of a proper and modern tourism planning
approach by considering specific characteristics of destination, and cooperation with
Western governments and international agencies. According to researchers, example of
tourism development in Turkey is exhibiting the common reflexes of many developing
countries. Since 1980s foreign debts, low potential o export, diminishment of foreign
currencies supplied by Turkish workers working in neighboring countries after 1981 and
encouragement by IMF caused Turkish government to consider development of tourism
primarily. Interference of international organizations, such as IMF, to Turkish economy
facilitated implementation of neo-liberal development strategies. Thus, generous and
large financial privileges were given to tourism sector. This situation led to a quick
growth in an environment where there is no planning, development principles and private
sector experience (p. 352). Besides, deducting from Turkey example Tosun (2001) is
pointing the obstacles for developing countries in tourism development. These obstacles
357
are taking revenues as primary goal, deficiency of a modern tourism development
approach, structure of public administration system, substantial environmental
deterioration, and structure of international tourism system. Tourism development in
Turkey has been implemented by planning and permitting specific areas for tourism and
encouraging investments in these areas (Tosun et. al., 2003). Therefore, tourism was
restricted to western coasts and big cities.
Tourism sector is a very important economic activity in Turkey with its employment
capacity of 2,5 million people. Besides the strategic importance of HRM in tourism
sector, it is observed that there are no sufficient applications in Turkish tourism. It is also
observed that strategic approach to HRM is inhibited mainly by structural characteristics
of the country tourism. Another important negative effect is caused by “all inclusive”
system spread recent years. Furthermore, long-lasting problem of deficiency of qualified
labour force has been waiting for a solution for years. Such that, it is becoming an
important difficulty to remain tourism school graduates in tourism sector. According to
researches over students, reasons for unwillingness to work in tourism are as follows
(Duman et al, 2006): low wages, long working periods, shift working and stress. These
problems also show negative issues in strategic insight of country tourism to HRM.

6. Potential Effects of EU Procedures on HRM in Turkey

Since concordat of Ankara (in 1963), Turkish investors are trying to develop own policies
according to EU policies. This process, have gained speed with to be candidate for EU
with the Helsinki Summit in 1999. With the social and economic policies of EU, Turkey
focused develop own productivity and quality. In this side, with the integration of
technology development and flexible employment policies, advantages of cost, quality
and effectiveness provided (Tatlıdil and Xantacou, 2002: 8).
Determinants of the long term relations of the EU-Turkey will may be those countries’
human resources and the development of employment field. As known, against EU’s old
population, Turkey has quite young population. This advantage and the dynamism of the
young population seem as a great advantage for Turkey. Within this, vision of EU, brings
a special application in the field of human resources for Turkey. The EU vision will
develop HRM applications in Turkey. As a candidate country Turkish policies are being
affected by EU policies and applications strongly. This effect involves more democratic
characteristics and occurred as liberalization. Therefore, by this vision Turkish Tourism
Sector is turning into more coordinated and planned industry.
It seems that the EU trying to develop a new vision for the principles of information
community. As a revaluation characteristic for the EC, the “information community”
process will create new business structures and technologies. This new business
structures will create many new business opportunities. This formation seems like a key
stone for sustainability of the competition forces and the decreasing factor for
unemployment in the long term (European Commission, 1996: 3). Within this, EU

358
policies anticipated human resources development in the different fields. In this scope
Commission attracting attention for the need of the effective regulations for those fields.
Job Security and Health: In the tourism sector various job group and various
employees works in the different conditions. Waiters, chiefs, tourist guides, tour
operators, bus drivers, educators and the animators are the workers whose are the
dependant on the condition of the different work schedule, time and seasonality
characteristics of tourism sector. EU presents the precaution guidelines for the improving
working and living conditions and the labour market conditions with it’s labour safety
and health foresight. Some of the EU regulations in social field directly related with
tourism sector with its sectoral characteristics.
With these regulations, some health and safety articles legislated for the temporary and
half day workers’ and also provided improvement for the working conditions with the
minimum rest times for labour shifts. This regulation presents 48 hours maximum work
time for one week. EU supports sectoral dialogue for the labour safety. In this scope,
European hotels, restaurants and cafes national associations’ confederations HOTREC is
encouraged to join representative foundation of labour (ECF-IUF) by EU.

7. Women’s Employment in Tourism:

Women make up %44 of all European employment capacity for the year 2006. This
numbers changes in member countries. i.e. while Malta has lowest ratio of 32%, for the
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania this ratio is 50%. But, more than half of the employees are
the women in the hotel and restaurant sector for all of EU. This ratios in the basis of the
countries lowest in Malta 28%, Greece 44%, Italy and France 49% and highest in Estonia
76%, Lithuania 83% and Latvia 95%. In the basis of hospitality sector women workers’
ratio is rising to the 62%. This ratio is under the average for the Malta 26% and for the all
of the other countries this ratio is more than men workers ratio (Demunter and
Dimitrakopoulou, 2007).
It is obviously, the EU vision has a great opportunity for development and regeneration
for Turkey. That claim’s empirical evidences are also presented i.e. according to
researches; after the customs union, it seems that Turkey shows a active improvement in
the basis of globalization and develop its competitive forces. This development and
improvement is higher than EU member countries (Coban and Coban, 2004).
Globalization is putting forward the providing customer satisfaction, reconstruction and
quality issues for the sectoral and international competition. Within this, new and
unpredictable competitors are getting in to the markets. This truth is valid for the Turkey
and its markets. Formerly, seem as noncompetitive countries such as Malta, Czech
Republic and North Africa now creating difficulties like usual competitors such as Spain,
Italy and Greece. In this competitive conditions labour productivity is one of the critical
success factor and achieved more importance (Tekeli, 2007).

359
8. Conclusion

HR function’s gaining of a strategic role and nature shows its increasing importance.
Considering economic, technologic, and social developments, the changing expectations
of a skilled workforce in Turkey, and harmonization with the EU, companies in Turkey
have to keep pace with the changing role and status of HRM.
With the consequences of globalization, relationship between countries are being shaped
again, furthermore the industrial dynamics are also changing. Countries are trying to
establish relationship in favor of his interests with the context of growing competition in
all production areas. Especially for the neighbor countries, both competition and
integration are key factors to development. Countries act with the motivation to gain a
competitive advantage and on the other hand to improve his integration capability with
others. It will be useful to evaluate relationship between Turkey and EU in this context.
Tourism is a key sector –may be most important one- for the relationship between Turkey
and EU. This is an area which highest competition arises between these two actors. This
involves also big capacity to interactions between Turkish and European cultures,
therefore creates great opportunity to know each other and to strengthen the spirit of co-
operation. Therefore, to develop tourism in Turkey has a potential effect to improve
relationships with EU members.
It is necessary to structural harmonization of Turkish tourism policy with EU policies.
Thus human resource management applications and working conditions of Turkish
tourism must be receive priority consideration. Human resources are the crucial for
tourism development. To manage human resources strategically is premise of
effectiveness. It is also necessary to build a fit integration with more developed countries
located in the region. For tourism industry in Turkey, EU vision brings important
progress to light. This progress will increase and continue whether Turkey is going to be
a member of EU or not. The most crucial dynamic of this progress is Human Resource.
Industrial transformation depends on the transformation of human resource. Hence, HRM
must be evaluated in a strategic manner. If HRM can not manage effectively, it will
definitely produce problems to respond to the progress which tourism development of
Turkey will be faced.

References

Avrupa Komisyonu Türkiye Temsilciliği (2000), AB Turizm Politikası: İs Dünyası,

İstihdam ve Gelisme, Ankara.
Aycan, Z. (2001), “Human resource management in Turkey-current issues and future
challenges”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 252-60.
Barutçugil, İ. (2004), Stratejik İnsan Kaynakları Yönetimi (Strategic Human Resource
Management), Kariyer Yayınları, Istanbul.

360
Baum T, and Conlin MV. (1994) Comprehensive human resource planning: an essential
key to sustainable tourism in island settings. In Progress in Tourism, Recreation
and Hospitality Management, Vol. 6, Cooper CP, Lockwood A (eds). Wiley:
Chichester; 259-270.
Baum T. (1993) Human resources in tourism: an introduction. In Human Resource Issues
in International Tourism, Baum T (ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford; pp.3-
21.
Bayo-Moriones, J.A. and Merino-Diaz de Cerio, J. (2001), “Size and HRM in the Spanish
manufacturing industry”, Employee Relations, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 188-206.
Bayraktaroglu, S. (2002) Strategic and Non-Strategic Human Resources Management.
Istanbul: Beta.
Bayraktaroglu, S. (2006) Human Resources Management. Sakarya, Adapazari.
Bayraktaroglu, S. and Ozen Kutanis, R. (2003) “Transforming Hotels Into Learning
Organisations: A New Strategy For Going Global”. Tourism Management. 24(2):
149-154.
Beaumont, P.B. (1992), “The US human resource management literature: a review”, in
Salaman, G. (Ed.) (1992), Human Resource Strategies, Sage, London.
Beer, M., Spector, B., Lawrence, P., Mills, D. and Walton, R., (1985) HRM: A General
Manager’s Perspective, Free Press, New York, NY.
Blyton, P. Lucio, M. M. , McGurk, J. and Turnbull, P (1998) Contesting Globalization:
Airline Restructuring, Labour Flexibility and Trade Union Strategies, London:
International Transport Workers’ Federation.
Boxall, P. (1992) Strategic human resource management: beginnings of a new theoretical
sophistication? Human Resource Management Journal 2(3): 60-79.

Boxhall, P.F. (1993), “The significance of human resource management: a

reconsideration of the evidence”, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 645-64.
Bratton, J. and Gold, J. (1999) Human Resources Management.. London: MacMillan
Press.
Choi, J.G., Woods, R.H. and Murmann, S.K. (2000), “International labour markets and
the migration of labour forces as an alternative solution for labour shortages in
the hospitality industry”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 61-7.
Clancy, Michael J. (1999), “Tourism And Development: Evidence From Mexico”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol.26, No.1, pp.1-20.
Coban, Orhan ve Serap Çoban (2004), “Globalleşme İndeksiyle Türkiye’nin Rekabet
Gücünün Ölçülmesi: AB Ülkeleriyle Bir Karşılaştırma, 1970-2001”, Türkiye-
Kırgızistan Manas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 10, ss: 163-175.
Coles, Tim and Derek HALL (2005), “Tourism And European Union Enlargement: Plus
Ça Change?”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 7, pp. 51-61
Demir, Cengiz (2004) “A Profile of Turkish tourism”. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management. 16(5): 325-328.
Demunter Christophe and Chryssanthi Dimitrakopoulou (2007), “Employment of Women
in The Tourist Accomodation Sector” EUROSTAT Data in Focus, Çevrimiçi:
361
 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-QA-07-018/EN/KS-
QA-07-018-EN.PDF
DPT (2006), “Dokuzuncu Kalkınma Planı”, Çevrimiçi:
http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/plan/plan9.pdf
Duman, Teoman, Mustafa TEPECİ ve Kamil UNUR (2006), “Mersin’de Yükseköğretim
ve Orta Öğretim Düzeyinde Turizm Eğitimi Almakta Olan Öğrencilerin Sektörün
Çalışma Koşullarını Algılamaları ve Sektörde Çalışma İsteklerinin Karşılaştırmalı
Analizi” Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt 17, Sayı 1, ss. 51-69.
Fombrun, C.J., Tichy, N.M. and Devanna, M.A. (1984), Strategic Human Resource
Management, Wiley, New York, NY.
Goss, D., (1994), Principles of Human Resource Management, Routledge, London.
Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., Stiles, P. and Truss, C. (1999), “Linking individual
performance to business strategy: the people process model”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 17-31.
Greenberg, J. and Baron, R.A. (1997) Behavior in Organizations: Understanding and
Managing the Human Side of Work, Prentice-Hall International, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
Guest, D., (1993) “Current perspectives on human resource management in the United
Kingdom”, in Hegewisch, A. and Brewster, C. (Eds), European Developments in
Human Resource Management, Kogan Page, London.
Guest, D., (1989) “HRM: implications for industrial relations”, in Storey, J. (Ed.), New
Perspectives on HRM, Routledge, London.
Huang, T. (2001), “The effects of linkage between business and human resource
management strategies”, Personnel Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 132-51.
İstanbullu-Dinçer, Füsun (1997), Avrupa Birliği’nde Turizm ve Uygulanan Politikalar,
Der Yayınları, İstanbul.
Kelly, J. and Gennard, J. (1996), “The role of personnel directors on the board of
directors”, Personnel Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 7-24.
Legge, K., (1989) “Human resource management: a critical analysis”, in Storey, J. (Ed.),
New Perspectives on Human Resource Management, Routledge, London.
Miles. L. (1993), “Rise of the mystery shopper”, Marketing, 29 July, pp. 19-20.
Munoz, J. M. (2005) Executive Insights on Globalisation: Implications for hospitality
managers in emerging locations. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management. 17(4): 365-371.
Ohmae, K. (1995) The Borderless World: Power and Strategy in the Inter-linked
Economy, London: Collins.
Olalı, Hasan (1990), Turizm Politikası ve Planlaması, İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme
Fakültesi Yayınları No:228, Yön Ajans, İstanbul.
Parker, B (1998) Globalization and Business Practice: Managing Across Boundaries,
London: Sage.
Parsons D. (1996) Education and training policy. In The Hospitality Industry, Tourism
and European Perspectives on Policies, Thomas R (ed.). Capsules: London; 153-
166.
Porter M. (1985) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior
Performance. The Free Press: New York.
362
Riley, M., (1991) Human Resource Management – A Guide to Personnel Practice in the
Hotel and Catering Industry, Butterworth-Heinemann, London.
Robertson, R (1992) Globalization, London: Sage.
Sasser, W.E., Olsen, R.P. and Wyckoff, D.D. (1978), Management of Service Operations,
Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Schuler, R. S. (1989) Strategic human resource management and industrial relations.
Human Relations. 42(2): 157-84.
Schuler, R.S. (1992), “Strategic human resource management: linking the people with the
strategic needs of the business”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 18-
32.
Schuler, R.S. and Jackson, S.E. (1987), “Linking competitive strategy and human
resource management practices”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 3,
pp. 207-19.
Şenol, Fazıl ve Mehmet Kaşlı (2007), “Planlı Dönemde Türk Turizm Politikası ve
Sürecin Analizi”, I. Ulusal Türkiye Turizmi Kongresi 07-08 Eylül 2007 Sakarya
Üniversitesi Karasu Meslek Yüksek Okulu, Kongre Bildiri Kitabı, Detay
Yayıncılık, Ankara, ss. 37-58.
Sheehan, C. (2005), “A model for HRM strategic integration”, Personnel Review, Vol. 34
No. 2, pp. 192-209.
Sheppeck, M.A. and Militello, J. (2000), “Strategic HR configurations and organizational
performance”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 5-16.
Sisson, K. (1989), Personnel Management in Britain, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Steck, Birgit (1999), Sustainable Tourism As A Development Option: Practical Guide for
Local Planners, Developers And Decision Makers, Federal Ministry For
Economic Co-operation And Development of Germany, Eschborn.
Storey, J. (1989) New Perspectives on Human Resource Management, London:
Routledge.
Storey, J. (1992) Developments in the Management of Human Resources, Oxford:
Blackwell.
Storey, J. (1998) Strategic non-HRM a viable alternative?, Strategic Change 7, 397-406.
Tatlıdil, Ercan and Yota Xanthacou (2002), “Türk İşgücünün Yapısı ve Avrupa Birliği
İstihdam Politikaları”, EGE Akademik Bakış: Ekonomi, İşletme, Uluslar arası
İlişkiler ve Siyaset Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 2, Sayı, 2, ss.1-14.
TC Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı (2007), Turizm İstatistikleri 2006, TC Kültür Ve Turizm
Bakanlığı Yatırım Ve İşletmeler Genel Müdürlüğü Araştırma Ve Değerlendirme
Dairesi Başkanlığı, Ankara.
Tekeli, Hasan (2007), “Global Turizm Pazarında Türkiye'nin Potansiyeli Yeniden
Değerlendirilmelidir”, Çevrimiçi:
http://www.turizmforumu.net/makale/makalem.htm#
Tosun, C. (2001), ‘Challenges of Sustainable Tourism Development in the Developing
World: The Case of Turkey’, Tourism Management, Vol. 22(3), pp. 285-99.
Tosun, C. (2002), ‘Host Perceptions of Tourism Impacts: A Comparative Study’, Annals
of Tourism Research, Vol. 28(4), pp. 231-53.
Tosun, C. and Fyall, A. (2004), ‘An Evaluation of the Marketing Orientation of 4 and 5
Star Hotels’, in EuroCHRIE Congress 2004 November 3-7, Global Issues and
363
 Trends in the Hospitality and Tourism Industries, Congress Proceedings CD,
Bilkent University, Ankara.
Tosun, C., Timothy, D.J. and Öztürk, Y. (2004), ‘Tourism Growth, National
Development and Regional Inequality in Turkey’, in B. Bramwell and B. Lane
(eds), Trends and Issues in the Mediterranean Tourism, Channel View, Sydney,
pp. 133-56.
Tosun, Cevat and Dallen J. Timothy (2001), “Shortcomings in Planning Approachs To
Tourism Development in Developing Countries: The Case of Turkey”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol.13, No.7,
pp.352-359.
Tosun, Cevat, Dallen J. Timothy and Yüksel Öztürk (2003), “Tourism Growth, National
Development And Regional Inequality in Turkey”, Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, Vol. 11, No. 2&3, pp.133-161.
Türkiye Seyahat Acentaları Birliği -TÜRSAB (2001), Avrupa Birliği ve Turizm, Boyut
Matbaacılık, İstanbul.
UNWTO (2006), World Tourism Barometer, Vol.4, No.1.
Waters, M. (1995) Globalization. London: Routledge.
Welford, Richard, Bjarne Ytterhus and Jason Eligh (1999), “Tourism And Sustainable
Development: An Analysis Policy And Guidelines For Manging Provision And
Consumption”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 7, pp. 165-177.
Wilson, M.D.J., Murray, A.E. and Black, A.M. (2000), “Contract catering: the skills
required for the next millennium”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 75-9.

364