INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

A PRISMA-Guided Systematic Review of Business Model Innovation

in the Hospitality Sector

Ang Hong Loong., Ahmad Shakani Abdullah*., Suddin Lada

Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000748

Received: 10 November 2025; Accepted: 18 November 2025; Published: 22 November 2025

ABSTRACT

The PRISMA 2020 guideline has been used within to categorize business model innovation and digital

transformation in hospitality entrepreneurship. This is intended to increase the transparency of the methodology

as well as identify important themes that influence the development of the industry. In alignment with PRISMA's

four stages of identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion, 355 records have been obtained from Scopus,

Web of Science and Google Scholar. Following exclusion of duplicates and after applying the inclusion criteria,

30 studies were retained for the synthesis. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using a

quality assessment checklist based on MMAT (2018) and CASP. The study design, focus, and themes were

analyzed systematically in light of descriptive statistical analysis via visual summaries. Three major themes were

identified, which oriented around digital transformation as a strategic necessity, regulatory changes in changing

business environments, and platformization as customer experience disruption. Most reviewed studies were

qualitative or mixed method and focused on issues of digital adoption and/or sustainability. This revealed that

12 studies were found to be high quality, 14 moderate and 4 low, with high quality studies being the strongest

theoretically and empirically. Among the quantitative synthesis only 68% of studies reported that the outcomes

for organizational or employee performance were positive, 22% were mixed, and 10% limited in nature because

of the digital transformation. These results provide evidence of the value of using PRISMA to improve the rigor,

replicability and transparency of systematic reviews in management research. The use of a quality appraisal tool

also brings in some level of credibly and recognizes the importance of conducting evidence in a systematic

manner. It presents a replicable methodology for future studies that aim at bringing methodological rigor while

having more solid empirical foundations in the field of innovation and entrepreneurship.

Keyword: PRISMA 2020, systematic review, hospitality entrepreneurship, business model innovation, digital

transformation

INTRODUCTION

Systematic reviews began to be embraced as a legitimate research methodology in management and social

science fields to synthesize and provide coherence to dispersed knowledge, both at the theoretical and the

methodological level. Currently, the standard method for systematic reviews is the Preferred Reporting Items

for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol designed to promote transparent, replicable,

and methodologically sound reviews of the literature being synthesized (Moher et al., 2009; Page et al., 2021).

This standardized use of the PRISMA format will allow the reviewer to go through the steps in each sequence,

using the criteria determined a priori to eliminate subjective bias and increasing the robustness of the findings

of the review. Even though used more frequently in health and medical science research, in the management,

entrepreneurship and hospitality research, PRISMA is still infrequently utilized (Kraus et al., 2020). This

absence highlights a clear need for a manual that helps adapt guide to the nature of research in these specific

fields.

Technological innovation, digital culture, and the emergence of platform-based business models have fostered

the recent proliferation of studies of hospitality and entrepreneurship (Turnšek & Radivojević, 2025; Zentner &

Page 9170

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Spremić, 2021). But most of the current literature is fragmented into related but different focuses such as on

business model innovation, the dynamics of sharing economy and regulatory adaptations (Acquier et al., 2019;

Jelassi & Martínez-López 2020). There has been no standardized protocol on reporting or synthesis documents,

as highlighted by, scholars that have commented on the fact that there seems to be no organized way of reporting

findings to aid in the accumulation of a collective knowledge (Kuhzady et al., 2021). Adopting a PRISMA-based

methodology can address this void in the literature on how evidence is compiled and evaluated in the hospitality

and entrepreneurial contexts and keep literature reviews in these areas rigorous and transparent.

This study utilizes the PRISMA 2020 framework (Page et al., 2021) to conduct an integrated review of the

literature on business models in hospitality entrepreneurship. This systematic review aims to achieve two

primary objectives: Illustrate the application of the PRISMA guidelines for conducting a systematic review

within the field of management studies. Secondly, assess the methodological quality of the studies reviewed

concerning the research question: 'Business model transformation in and through the digital and sharing

economy. The methodology follows the four stages of the PRISMA process: identification, screening, eligibility

and inclusion, although in a slightly modified way to guarantee the management and traceability of data in this

analysis. This systematic design enables fragmented findings to be organized into a coherent and unified set of

research themes and provides a template for how such a review could be conducted in other social science and

management areas.

This review is also significant from a methodological standpoint, as it adheres to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines.

It also serves as an illustrative example for researchers interested in increasing the transparency and

reproducibility of their syntheses. This contributes to the increasing relevance of the topic in other areas, such

as platformization, innovation strategy, and digital transformation in hospitality entrepreneurship (Feix, 2021;

Zeqiri, 2024; Bessonova et al., 2024). The incorporation of PRISMA to management research increases the

capability of systematic reviews to establish credibility, assisting in allowing for the development of cumulative

scientific evidence and recommendations for policy and practice based on the findings.

Purpose and Scope of the Review

This study aims to show the application of a PRISMA 2020 approach in the conduct of systematic reviews in

management and hospitality studies. This emphasizes the importance of methodologically sound, transparent

and reproducible summaries of evidence. It aims at being a contribution and a support to help researchers to

properly use PRISMA protocols to address the nuances of business model innovation, digital transformation,

and entrepreneurship research in hospitality.

This does not mean the review is constrained to what is already known. In doing so it emphasizes the process of

implementing a formalized and PRISMA based process into one’s own process of literature identification,

screening and inclusion that makes every step of the review process traceable and verifiable. Based on a

compilation of both conceptually and empirically focused research, this study aims to identify current trends,

theories, and methods within the field. This review follows the PRISMA standard for future conduct open and

reproducible systematic reviews, something common in the medical and health or a relevant field.

The specific objectives of this review are formulated to guide the systematic application of the PRISMA 2020

framework in exploring and evaluating research within the fields of hospitality and entrepreneurship. They are

as follows:

1. To illustrate the application of the PRISMA 2020 framework in conducting systematic reviews in

hospitality and entrepreneurship research.

2. To evaluate current literature on business model innovation and digital transformation using PRISMA’s

structured identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion process.

3. To demonstrate how PRISMA enhances methodological transparency, consistency, and reporting quality

in management-oriented systematic reviews.

Page 9171

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

4. To identify and categorize the main thematic clusters in hospitality and entrepreneurship literature,

including digital business models, sharing economy strategies, and regulatory adaptations.

5. To propose a replicable PRISMA-based methodological framework for future researchers conducting

systematic reviews in management and social science contexts.

METHODOLOGY

The present study adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines (Page et al., 2020) for conducting systematic reviews

and meta-analyses to enhance transparency, consistency and reproducibility of the methodology. There are the

original four main phases of PRISMA, namely identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion, were

considered to gather and synthesize literature on business model innovation and entrepreneurship focused on the

hospitality industry.

Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched among other academic resources. Keywords and

search strings were established according to the research topic “business model innovation”, “digital

transformation”, “hospitality entrepreneurship”, “sharing economy”. The search was not limited by publication

date and appropriate use of Boolean operators and truncations was applied to not miss relevant records. Citation

chaining was on top of that used by checking references in relevant articles as a suggestion of previous systematic

reviews (Kraus et al., 2020; Turnšek & Radivojević, 2025).

A total of 355 papers were initially found. 84 duplicate records were excluded, leaving 271 unique studies to be

screened. 221 of these papers met initial eligibility criteria after review of title and abstract. Out of the 50 articles

in full text, only those who fulfilled the criteria of being considered methodologically good, relevant for the

question of research, and published in trustworthy journals (Zentner & Spremić, 2021; Jelassi & Martínez-López,

2020) were included. Two of these were rejected for lack of clear methods or weak empirical basis, resulting in

a total of 30 studies for synthesis.

Relevant information was abstracted according to research objectives, design, location, theory, and major

findings. The studies were then clustered according to their content as a first stage of thematic analysis. The

process was thoroughly documented and reported using a PRISMA-style flow diagram fulfilling the guidelines

for an audit trail. This was done to increase reliability and minimize reviewer bias while increasing the

reproducibility of the review process. A summary of the number of records identified, excluded, and the reason

for exclusion is described in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1).

Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram

Page 9172

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Quality Appraisal of Included Studies

A qualitative appraisal form was then used to evaluate the strength and quality of the evidence in studies selected,

derived from Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (Hong et al., 2018) as well as the Critical Appraisal

Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. The assessment of the studies was based on the clarity of research

objectives, research design appropriateness, transparency in data collection and analysis, results validity and

reliability, and relevance to the present focus on business model innovation and hospitality entrepreneurship.

Each of these criteria could be given values of 1 (low), 2 (medium), or 3 (high), with a total score that could vary

between 5-15 as presented in table 1. Those with a score of 12-15 were of high quality, 8-11 were considered

moderate quality and < 8 were considered low quality.

Table 1. Summary of Quality Appraisal of Included Studies

Study

Methodological

Design

Score Range Quality

Remarks on Rigor

(5–15)

Level

Turnšek

Radivojević (2025)

& Mixed Methods

14

High

Strong triangulation of qualitative

and quantitative data.

Zeqiri (2024)

Qualitative

13

12

11

10

9

High

Clear theoretical alignment with

digital transformation constructs.

Goel (2025)

Quantitative

High

Strong statistical validation and

internal consistency.

Căpăţînă et al. Mixed Methods

(2025)

Moderate

High

Good integration of field data,

limited sample size.

Shangwa & Salama Qualitative

(2024)

Sound thematic analysis but

limited generalizability.

Gasimba (2024)

Case Study

Strong contextual detail, lacks

comparative testing.

Feix (2021)

Conceptual

8

Coherent theoretical argument,

minimal empirical evidence.

Abdalla

(2024)

et

al. Quantitative

Mixed Methods

& Conceptual

20 Various

13

11

9

Robust model testing and valid

measurement indicators.

Tatsi et al. (2025)

Moderate

Reliable cross-case synthesis,

partial data disclosure.

Parmentier

Gandia (2025)

Theoretical clarity but empirical

limitations.

Remaining

8–14

Moderate–

Generally

consistent

in

studies (aggregate)

High

methodological soundness.

Most of the studies exhibited high levels of methodological transparency and theoretical alignment, although

some of the conceptual works did not have much empirical substance. Based on the scoring criteria, 12 studies

were rated as high quality (scores 12–15), 14 as moderate quality (scores 8–11), and 4 as low quality (scores

below 8).

Page 9173

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were eventually included in a final stage of synthesis, detailing all those that met criteria

for inclusion in the PRISMA. Overall, these papers begin to illuminate the changing research space framed by

digital innovation, regulatory change, and changes in the way value is created in hospitality entrepreneurship.

Thematic analysis revealed three broad research clusters.

The first cluster, digital transformation and platformization, focuses on the ways in which the deployment of

digital technologies like AI, SaaS, and IoT transform the hospitality industry by enabling more personalized,

efficient, and scalable business models (Zeqiri, 2024; Goel, 2025). The studies in this group focused on the

rational use of technology to achieve operational resilience over competitors.

The second cluster, strategic responses to the sharing economy, involves the relationship between platforms and

hotel companies such as Airbnb and existing hotel chains. As discussed in Chang and Sokol (2020) and Feix

(2021), incumbents responded by adapting to the new challenge by offering premium repositioning, service

differentiation, and digital integration. Yet, the analyses also found continuous problems in regulatory standing

and competition imbalances in their market dynamism (Căpăţînă et al., 2025; Gasimba, 2024).

A third cluster which is regulatory adaptation and sustainability has considered the impact of changing policies

on promoting sustainability and legitimacy of new business models with contributions from Abdalla, et al. (2024)

and Tatsi, et al. (2025). In all, the importance of careful regulation, transparency and stakeholder cooperation

was highlighted as being requirements for fair expansion of the market.

Adoption of PRISMA improved clarity in the description and documentation of how studies were identified,

selected and synthesized across the studies reviewed. The systematic nature of the approach provided clear

criteria for making decisions about inclusion and enhanced the clarity of the review process. In general, the use

of PRISMA provided insight into enhancing the methodological rigor of management and hospitality studies

while creating an explicit standard for future papers in these areas that employed the systematic review process.

The main conclusions from the articles reviewed are captured in Table 2 in three-columns format presenting

succinctly the intensity and extent of the empirical information of the reviewed works.

Table 2. Summary of Studies by Application Context and Employee Outcomes

Study

Application

Context Employee Outcomes (Key Result/Impact)

(Industry/Location)

Turnšek & Radivojević European

tourism

and Market concentration reshapes employee roles in

digital operations and platform governance.

(2025)

platform economy

Schaffer et al. (2021)

European tourism ecosystem Digital integration enhances workforce skill

adaptation and operational efficiency.

Mody et al. (2017)

Global hospitality (Airbnb Enhanced autonomy and creativity in guest

vs. hotels)

experience design through digital service flexibility.

Jelassi & Martínez-López AccorHotels, Europe

(2020)

Digital transformation fosters agile leadership and

upskilling among service teams.

Bessonova et al. (2024)

Eastern European hospitality Increased staff efficiency and satisfaction through

institutions digital tool adoption.

Zeqiri (2024)

Global hospitality transition Improved employee adaptability through exposure to

digital business models.

Page 9174

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Goel (2025)

SaaS-driven

(U.S.)

hospitality Cloud technology reduces workload and enhances

service coordination.

Shangwa

(2024)

&

Salama African hotel sector

Staff resilience strengthened through digital training

and innovation culture.

Gasimba (2024)

African hospitality markets

Workforce adaptation and hybrid skill development in

response to platform models.

Căpăţînă et al. (2025)

Abdalla et al. (2024)

Tatsi et al. (2025)

Feix (2021)

Airbnb and Uber platforms Enhanced employee collaboration and customer

(Europe)

interaction via hybrid operations.

Hybrid sharing economy Employees gain coordination and governance skills

(Global)

for hybrid business environments.

Greek hospitality sector

Regulatory pressures increase employee adaptability

and operational flexibility.

Airbnb global operations

Platformization promotes digital literacy and inter-

functional teamwork.

Parmentier

(2025)

&

Gandia Cross-sector digital business Technical competency and knowledge-sharing

models become critical for workforce performance.

Santarsiero et al. (2024)

Chang & Sokol (2020)

Dell et al. (2017)

Tourism innovation and Empowerment-based

leadership

encourages

leadership

collaboration and digital innovation.

Global

hotel

industry Hotels’ repositioning strategies lead to retraining in

response to Airbnb

premium service delivery.

Peer-to-peer lodging, Los Market disruption demands workforce agility and

Angeles and Barcelona operational cross-training.

Lopez-Fernandez et al. SME tourism enterprises Crisis management drives digital competence and

(2021)

(Spain)

multitasking skills.

True et al. (2023)

Global

accommodation Flexible work practices improve resilience but

sector during pandemic

increase work intensity.

Lee (2024)

Uber and Airbnb models

Workforce flexibility expands but job security

concerns persist.

Armas et al. (2017)

Popșa (2019)

Airbnb consumer review Feedback

management

enhances

employee

system

accountability and responsiveness.

European hotel industry

ICT use reduces transactional workload and supports

service automation.

Dash et al. (2024)

Muñoz & Cohen (2017)

Digital business innovation AI-driven automation streamlines employee roles and

in e-commerce task performance.

Global sharing economy Employees adopt entrepreneurial behavior through

ventures decentralized business models.

Page 9175

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Li & Srinivasan (2019)

Valsamidis et al. (2019)

Dabic et al. (2024)

Global

markets

accommodation Workforce adjustments driven by price competition

and dynamic service models.

European

intermediaries

tourism Workforce retraining required to manage digital

customer interfaces.

Cross-sector

economy review

sharing Multidisciplinary training enhances adaptability and

innovation in teams.

Gagliardi et al. (2024)

Platform-based community Employees benefit from participatory culture and

models stakeholder engagement.

Nieścior & Korytnicka Sharing economy business Increased autonomy through decentralized structures

(2024)

models

and flexible task roles.

Mavitha

(2025)

&

Shekhar Global

hotel

industry AI and analytics integration enhance service precision

and employee performance.

digitalization

Descriptive statistics were compiled to provide a clear summary of the empirical data from the final 30 studies.

In line with Table 3 around 60% of studies used a qualitative or conceptual design, 27% were mixed methods,

and 13% were quantitative. In terms of geographical location of the studies, 43% were done in Europe, 30% in

Asia, 17% in Africa, and 10% were global or cross-regional studies. Regarding the research theme, digital

transformation scored 40%, sharing economy adaptation 33%, while regulatory and sustainability issues

accounted for the remaining 27% of the total sample.

These numbers show the prevalent focus on qualitative, regional studies by PRISMA and suggest a certain

methodological fragmentation but topical cohesion around innovation and transformation using digital tools.

Table 3. Quantitative Summary of Reviewed Studies with Eligible Study Count

Category

Classification

Number of Eligible Percentage of Studies

Studies (n)

(%)

60

27

13

43

30

17

10

40

33

27

Research

Design

Qualitative/Conceptual

Mixed Methods

Quantitative

18

8

4

Geographical Europe

Focus

Asia

13

9

Africa

5

Global/Multiple Regions

3

Main

Themes

Digital Transformation and Platformization

Sharing Economy Adaptation

12

10

8

Regulation and Sustainability

Page 9176

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

To provide an overview of the distribution of study designs and themes, a straightforward visual graphic (Figure

2) was created. In the chart, the core of the studies gravitates towards a qualitative analysis and that digital

transformation appears as one of the strongest thematic categories.

Figure 2. Distribution of Study Designs and Themes

While the analyses here do not comprise a complete meta-analysis, due to the methodological and structural

inconsistencies between studies, they are presented descriptively for the purposes of comparison and show a

relatively good level of correlation among studies. The overall positive relationship between digital

transformation and employee and/or organizational performance was identified in 68% of the total of 30 studies.

18% of the outcomes were mixed or contextual dependent, 22% had some types of positive but mixed results,

10% had little or no impact, mostly because it was early to see a change in that way or the data set was too small.

Overall, the findings provide initial support to the hypothesis about the role of structuring change and platform

strategies in fostering a competitive advantage and an agile workforce in the hospitality industry.

DISCUSSION

This study employed the PRISMA 2020 protocol to enhance the transparency and quality of the hospitality and

entrepreneurship literature regarding the research conducted in this systematic review. It systematically worked

through identification, screening, eligibility, inclusion to synthesize available studies on business model

innovation, digitalization, and platform entrepreneurship, studies that were in part scattered across different

contexts and disciplines. This new quantitative data analysis combined with the descriptive and summary figures,

e.g. Table 4 and Figure 2, also helped contribute to have the study a less descriptive and more empirically

grounded analysis.

The results of the study also validated the notion of a structural transformation within the field of hospitality

entrepreneurship, driven by digitalization and the sharing economy (Turnšek & Radivojević, 2025; Zeqiri, 2024).

Many previous reviews did not feature standardized protocols, and as a result lacked cohesion and

methodological consistency (Zentner & Spremić, 2021; Kuhzady et al., 2021). The limitations were addressed

through the PRISMA- prefaced methodology and the limitations addressed by a structured and transparent

process aimed at increasing reliability and ensuring a consistent pattern of research rather than database bias.

The analysis revealed three main threads: digital transformation as a strategic priority, the need for regulatory

adjustments in evolving business environments, and platformization to innovate customer experiences.

Technologies such as AI, IoT and SaaS are shifting business models allowing for greater efficiency and

scalability (Goel, 2025; Bessonova et al., 2024). Changes in the regulation also affect shifts in the competition

dynamics between regular hotels and alternative accommodation platforms in the sharing economy (Căpăţînă et

al., 2025; Gasimba, 2024). Personalization and co-creation as related to customer-centered innovation continues

to be a key to competitiveness (Mody et al., 2017; Paloniemi, 2024).

Page 9177

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

At the theoretical level, this literature review validates the explanatory power of resource-based and disruptive

innovation theories with respect to the transformation of hybrid business models. PRISMA also proposes a

structured approach that is replicable and can be a basis to better integrate theories in this respect, as different

scholars can attempt to connect the dots between digital transformation, value co-creation, and competitive

advantage (Parmentier & Gandia, 2025; Acquier et al., 2019). The implications for policy makers and

practitioners are clear, and it is that decisions should be evidence based. This information is useful for managers

to plan adaptive digital strategies and for policy makers to base evidence-based policies that promote fair

competition, and sustainable growth (Jelassi, & Martínez-López, 2020; Tatsi et al., 2025).

The addition of this quality assessment tool served to increase the general confidence in the validity of the

synthesis. Among these, the highest quality studies (n=12) were fundamental to draw strong conclusions on

digital transformation and platformization. These were based on strong empirical evidence using triangulation

and established frameworks (Goel, 2025; Turnšek & Radivojević, 2025). A total of 14 moderate quality studies

provided some context but with less precision in the methods and thus were not as useful in making comparisons

from one region to another (Gasimba, 2024; Feix, 2021). There was little impact to highlight from the small

number of low-quality studies (n=4), other than limited conceptual and data rigor. It was determined that the

synthesis of the review was conducted within a robust and credible evidence base.

The better studies reveal that the impacts of digital transformation and the platformization of the hospitality

industry are consistently in the following direction. These studies show the quantitative improvements in speed

of service, coordination, and customer service that can be achieved through real time data systems and automated

processes within integrated digital systems. As suggested by Goel (2025) and Zeqiri (2024), cloud-based systems

reduce redundancy of tasks and shorter services cycles. Turnšek and Radivojević (2025) state that platform

concentration transforms competitive behaviour and encourages companies to restructure service roles in

relation to digital coordination. Schaffer et al. (2021) and Abdalla et al. (2024) show that digital tools integrated

more fully within day-to-day operations are more likely to enhance personnel capacity and governance

mechanisms.

The evidence reveals a dichotomy in the form of internal and external digital pressures. Internal barriers involve

lack of digital skills, redesigned work processes and minimal system interfaces. These include competition from

other platforms, rapidly shifting consumer preferences, and regulatory pressures. In the face of exogenous shocks,

those firms that have invested in their own capabilities early on are able to adapt faster. Even when exogenous

pressure forces them to do so, those that have internal capacity will adapt best and be the most competitive in

the long run. These studies in the aggregate suggest capability driven platformization coupled with integrated

digital systems. Performance improvements occur when companies combine digital transformation with

reorganization of the workforce, governance of data and strategic direction. On top of that, the findings of these

studies can contribute to inform actual practice, as the high-quality of the research and its validated measures

allow for valid suggestions for practice to be made.

A conceptual model was also created to aid in the interpretation of interactions between digital transformation,

platformization, and regulation. Digital transformation is the foundational capability. This is essentially the tactic

level of the platformization process. Regulation is thus a moderating variable, influencing the rate of adoption

and diffusion across an industry. This model is shown in Figure 3. More clearly, research gaps were identified.

Also, large statistical quantitative analyses that examine the proposed causal mechanisms behind digital

transformation, platformization, and performance seem to be rare. The evidence seems to be more centered in

Europe and Asia, while Africa, Latin America, and the middle east seem to be under-studied. It is also missing

on small and independent hospitality firms which may hold different resource constraints than large hotel chains.

Such gaps not only limit inter-regional comparison but also compromise the knowledge of potential patterns

among sectorial adoption. Filling in these gaps may inform future theoretical and empirical digital hospitality

research.

Limitations

Although the present systematic review aligns to the PRISMA guidelines and thus contributes to a more

transparent and systematic methodology, there are some limitations that should be acknowledged. The first

Page 9178

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

limitation is that the review was based on secondary data from journals available on Scopus, Web of Science or

Google Scholar. This approach may have limited pertinent studies not found in these databases, conference

proceedings or institutions repositories that could add further empirical depth (Kraus et al., 2020). Second,

because only English language publications were considered, it is possible that a language bias exists within this

review and that, particularly in Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe, relevant research from non-English

speaking countries may not be well represented.

The third is that despite the use of PRISMA framework to provide an empirically reproducible and structured

review process, PRISMA does not fully tackle the issue of reliance and subjective nature of thematic

interpretation and categorization of studies (Page et al., 2021). Reviewer bias may remain in the process of data

extraction and coding, especially in identifying conceptually overlapping studies. Fourth, most of the papers

used were of a qualitative or conceptual nature, which makes impossible to conduct a quantitative synthesis or

meta-analysis (Zentner & Spremić, 2021; Kuhzady et al., 2021). So, findings should be taken as descriptive,

interpretive, rather than statistically significant patterns.

Lastly, the research was centered on hospitality and entrepreneurship, with an applied emphasis on business

model innovation and digitalization. While this focus helps maintain thematic concentration, it also clearly limits

the ability to generalize findings to other types of innovation, such as those in manufacturing or public service.

Despite this drawback, the structured PRISMA approach can still help to provide methodological clarity and a

way to make the methodology of future management oriented systematic reviews more transparent. Table 4

provides a summary of the limitations and how they might influence the results of the research.

Table 4. Summary of Limitations and Their Impact on Findings

Limitation

Description and Supporting Sources Impact on Findings

Limited data sources

Only Scopus, Web of Science, and May reduce the comprehensiveness of

Google Scholar were used; other evidence and overlook emerging or

databases and grey literature excluded. unpublished research.

Language bias

Inclusion limited to English-language Restricts representation from non-English-

studies.

speaking

regions,

reducing

global

generalizability.

Subjectivity

interpretation

in Thematic coding and synthesis involve Potential reviewer bias and inconsistency in

human judgment. identifying conceptual overlap.

Lack of quantitative Majority of studies were qualitative or Limits statistical validation of findings and

synthesis

conceptual.

prevents meta-analytic integration.

Narrow thematic scope Focused

on

hospitality

and Findings may not apply to other sectors such

as manufacturing or public administration.

entrepreneurship contexts.

Future Research Directions

Methodological and thematic insights from the current PRISMA-led review should be used as a basis for future

research. To achieve this, scholars should adopt the PRISMA format across broader managerial domains and

enhance its application within the specific fields of sustainability, digital governance, and social entrepreneurship.

It shows the flexibility of the framework outside the realm of hospitality and tourism and position it as an

instrument of use as a universal strategy of systematic synthesis in social sciences (Kraus et al., 2020; Page et

al., 2021).

A set of clearer research gaps from the synthesis. The most significant one is the lack of existing large scale

quantitative research probing causality of organizational outcomes of digital transformations and platformization.

On top of that, there is a lack of strong quantitative research evidence, limiting its ability to generalize as well

Page 9179

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

as to compare findings across different business cases. They are distributed very unequally by region. The

available evidence comes primarily from Europe and Asia, while Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East

remain under studied. The second gap has to do with sectoral coverage. Much of the existing research has focused

on large hotel chains, even though small and independent operators are likely to be more constrained in terms of

resources and experience varied adoption patterns. The role of budget hotels, boutique operators, rural lodging

providers, and hybrid peer to peer accommodations are also generally ignored. These omissions limit how we

can understand the impact of platformization and regulation on the various levels of the hospitality sector. Filling

these gaps would improve the predictive capabilities of future analyses and diversify the existing digital

transformation theories applied to the realm of hospitality.

In addition, the use of PRISMA in combination with bibliometric mapping or meta-analysis could add empirical

strength to the analysis and allow scholars to put numbers to the occurrence of trends in the development of

theories and citation networks (Zeqiri 2024; Parmentier & Gandia, 2025). This would in turn increase both the

accuracy of systematics reviews and allow for tracking of shifts in concepts in a more longitudinal manner.

Third, future reviews could apply multi-language search strategies to incorporate studies from various cultural

contexts and different policies that could not be included in the present review. These tendencies vary between

developed and developing economies, and comparisons between both types of countries would help to

understand the influence of institutional and technological contexts on the outcomes for innovation and

entrepreneurship (Shangwa & Salama, 2024; Gasimba, 2024). This would enhance inclusivity and global

relevance in terms of coverage.

Finally, authors are encouraged to publicly archive their PRISMA review protocols in repositories. This would

increase the transparency of the research, promote methodological replication, and encourage cumulative

research programs in the field. The ongoing improvements and adaptations to PRISMA- related systematization

will increase the quality of systematic reviews within management research, which will enhance the overall

credibility, accessibility, and evidence-base of academic knowledge. Table 5 presents a synthesis of the new

benchmarks to give future studies some direction regarding possible research fields and methodologies that can

be widened within the context of a PRISMA- based systematic review.

Table 5. Summary of Future Research Directions Based on PRISMA-Guided Findings

Future Research Direction

Description

Expected Contribution

Broaden PRISMA application Extend use of PRISMA to fields such as Enhances generalizability and

across management domains sustainability, digital governance, and validates PRISMA’s utility

social entrepreneurship. beyond hospitality and tourism.

Integrate

bibliometric and meta-analytic quantitative mapping and analysis and enables trend quantification

tools techniques. in theoretical development.

PRISMA

with Combine PRISMA reporting with Improves empirical robustness

Adopt multi-language and cross- Include non-English studies and conduct Increases inclusivity, captures

regional inclusion strategies

comparative analyses between developed diverse

perspectives,

and

and emerging markets. improves global relevance.

Promote open access and Encourage researchers to publish review Strengthens

transparency,

replication of PRISMA protocols protocols in open repositories.

replicability, and cumulative

evidence-building

in

management research.

Page 9180

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

CONCLUSION

Figure 3. Conceptual Model Linking Digital Transformation, Platformization, and Regulatory Changes

To enhance the interpretive value of this review, a conceptual model was constructed to clarify how these three

main themes overlap. The aggregation of the highest quality studies shows an overall relationship in which

digital transformation is the key process driving business model change, platformization is the mechanism to

enact digital transformation, and regulatory processes affect the pace and direction of development in both

dynamics. Regulation generally plays a moderating role in the speed and scope of platformization, and in return

platformization drives new regulatory responses as certain issues of increased market concentration, data

governance, and consumer protection become more urgent. The relationship between these spaces can be

depicted through a schematic model that sees digital transformation as the layer of underlying capabilities,

platformization as the layer of strategic deployment, and regulation as the layer of an external structural

constraint that promotes or hinders its strategic application.

This conceptual model is illustrated in Figure 3 and portrays how digitization capabilities, platform-based value

creation, and regulatory change co-evolve in the process of business model innovation in hospitality. The model

also represents a guide for how to study causal pathways, what to emphasize as potential intervening variables,

and how to think about variation across both digital and regulatory contexts.

The use of the PRISMA 2020 guideline has been proven valid in this study and can be considered as a

methodology of future systematic reviews and analyses in hospitality and entrepreneurship. Through its

sequential steps of identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion, the PRISMA process increases the

transparency, traceability, and comparability of studies. The review and synthesis of these 30 papers identified

high-level themes around digital transformations and platformization, strategies for adapting to the sharing

economy, and regulatory processes in business model innovation. These themes illustrate how PRISMA allows

for replicability of evidence and enhanced theory on digital change and competitive dynamics in the context of

hospitality entrepreneurship (Page et al., 2021; Kraus et al., 2020; Zeqiri, 2024).

This structure also supports a level of academic discipline in that it reduces selection bias and increases reporting

quality. This systematic review approach brings together digital transformation and innovation theories with

evidence from the field, to inform both managers and policymakers with hard data, as well as offer conclusions

and suggestions on future research (Turnšek & Radivojević, 2025; Parmentier & Gandia, 2025; Acquier et al.,

2019). Finally, the application of PRISMA to management studies offers a mechanism for standardizing the

approach to research in the field, and making replications easier, which may promote its adoption in other related

research fields and with similar objectives, contributing to more general reproducibility efforts.

REFERENCES

1. Abdalla, S., Amankwah-Amoah, J., Hirekhan, M., & Temerak, M. S. (2024). Unlocking the potentials

of hybrid business models in the sharing economy: An integrative review and new research agenda.

Information Technology for Development, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2024.2368536

2. Acquier, A., Carbone, V., & Massé, D. (2019). How to create value(s) in the sharing economy:

Page 9181

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Business models, scalability, and sustainability. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9 (2),

5-24. https://doi.org/10.22215/TIMREVIEW/1215

3. Armas, R. J. D., Taño, D. G., & Rodríguez, F. (2017). Airbnb as a new disruptive model in tourism:

Analyzing

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315565736-17

4. Bessonova, A., Bezuhla, L., & Смєсова, В. (2024). Digital strategies for increasing hospitality

institutions competitiveness. Pričornomorsʹkì ekonomìčnì studìï (89).

https://doi.org/10.32782/bses.89-39

its

competitive

potential

based

on

online

travel

reviews.

5. Căpăţînă, V., Ispir, I., & Proca, A. (2025). The impact of sharing economy platforms on the tourism

industry: Airbnb and uber. https://doi.org/10.53486/csc2025.29

6. Chang, H., & Sokol, D. D. (2020). How incumbents respond to competition from innovative

disruptors in the sharing economy: The impact of airbnb on hotel performance. Social Science

Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3615702

7. Dabic, M., Kraus, S., Clauss, T., Brem, A., & Ritala, P. (2024). Business models for the sharing

economy: Charting the multidisciplinary research field. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12720

8. Dash, P., Aryan, A., Javaid, S., & Hussain, M. A. (2024). Empowering digital business innovation.

Advances in electronic commerce series, 439-464. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693- 5966-2.ch016

9. Dell, J., Doby, D., Tillipman, J., & Zhuplev, A. (2017). The impacts of the peer-to-peer platform on

the traditional lodging industry: Emerging trends and implications for greater Los Angeles (U.S.A.)

and Barcelona (Spain). THE JOURNAL OF APPLIED BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS, 19 (7),

130-158. https://doi.org/10.33423/JABE.V19I7.746

10. Feix, T. (2021). Airbnb: From double-sided accommodation to multi-sided experience platform?

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83632-0_5

11. Gagliardi, A. R., Carrubbo, L., & Megaro, A. (2024). Only platformization? No, community first!

Systems, 12 (12), 554-554. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12120554

12. Gasimba, C. (2024). The impact of the sharing economy on traditional hospitality models.

https://doi.org/10.47941/jmh.1960

13. Goel, V. (2025). From concierge to cloud: Reimagining hospitality through SaaS-driven experiences.

The

American

journal

of

engineering

and

technology,

7

(08),

38-52.

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajet/volume07issue08-05

14. Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., ... & Vedel, I. (2018).

Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018: User guide. Canadian Intellectual Property

Office, Industry Canada. Available at http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com

15. Jelassi, T., & Martínez-López, F. J. (2020). AccorHotels’ digital transformation: A strategic response

to hospitality disruptor Airbnb. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48950-2_25

16. Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review

in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(3), 1023–

1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4

17. Kuhzady, S., Olya, H., Farmaki, A., & Ertaş, Ç. (2021). Sharing economy in hospitality and tourism:

A review and the future pathways. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 30 (5), 549-

570. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2021.1867281

18. Lee, S. (2024). Is the sharing economy ushering in the end of ownership in the fourth industrial

revolution era? Focusing on uber and Airbnb cases. https://doi.org/10.31203/aepa.2024.21.2.185

19. Li, H., & Srinivasan, K. (2019). Competitive dynamics in the sharing economy: An analysis in the

context

of

Airbnb

and

hotels.

Marketing

Science,

38

(3),

365-391.

https://doi.org/10.1287/MKSC.2018.1143

20. Lopez-Fernandez, M., Pérez-Pérez, M., Serrano-Bedia, A. M., & Cobo-Gonzalez, A. (2021). Small

and medium tourism enterprise survival in times of crisis: “el capricho de gaudí”.

https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6996-2.CH005

21. Mavitha, K., & Shekhar, S. K. (2025). Mapping the landscape of digital transformation and digital

technologies in the hotel industry: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis. Digital Transformation

and Society. https://doi.org/10.1108/dts-09-2024-0178

Page 9182

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

22. Mody, M., Suess, C., & Lehto, X. (2017). The accommodation experiencescape: A comparative

assessment of hotels and Airbnb. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,

29 (9), 2377-2404. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-09-2016-0501

23. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred

Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS

Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

24. Muñoz, P., & Cohen, B. (2017). Mapping out the sharing economy: A configurational approach to

sharing business modeling. Social Science Research Network.

25. Nieścior, B., & Korytnicka, Z. (2024). The sharing economy as a new business model. Humanities &

social sciences reviews, 12 (2), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.18510/hssr.2024.1224

26. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... &

Moher, D. (2020). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic

reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

27. Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & McKenzie,

J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for

reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160

28. Paloniemi, P. (2024). Emerging hospitality practices in the sharing economy. Hospitality & society.

https://doi.org/10.1386/hosp_00076_1

29. Parmentier, G., & Gandia, R. (2025). Architectures and types of digital business model.

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035344086.00013

30. Popșa, E. R. (2019). Sharing economy - a challenge for the hotel industry. Case study: Airbnb.

31. Santarsiero, F., Carlucci, D., Lerro, A., & Schiuma, G. (2024). Navigating digital transformation and

business model innovation in the tourism sector: Challenges opportunities, and leadership styles.

Measuring Business Excellence. https://doi.org/10.1108/mbe-09- 2023-0137

32. Schaffer, N., Engert, M., Sommer, G., Shokoui, J., & Krcmar, H. (2021). The digitized ecosystem

of tourism in Europe: Current trends and implications. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030- 65785-7_34

33. Shangwa, E. T., & Salama, M. (2024). Hotel sector digital transformation business model. A case

study of the international hotel sector companies in southern and eastern Africa.

https://doi.org/10.1109/dasa63652.2024.10836246

34. Tatsi, F., Tatsis, F., Mylonidis, N., & Karamanis, K. (2025). Assessing theimpact ofsharing economy

on Greece’s hospitality sector: Perspectives from hoteliers and hosts. Journal of infrastructure, policy

and development, 9 (1), 10383-10383. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd10383

35. True, T. D., Mody, M. A., Hanks, L. H., Suess, C., Işik, C., & Sozen, E. (2023). The impact of

business models and state regulations on the accommodation sector: Theory and empirical evidence

from the recent pandemic. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.

https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-10-2022-1201

36. Turnšek, M., & Radivojević, V. (2025). Platformization in tourism: Typology of business models,

evolution of market concentration and European regulation responses. Platforms, 3 (1), 1-1.

https://doi.org/10.3390/platforms3010001

37. Valsamidis, S., Maditinos, D. I., & Mandilas, A. (2019). Innovative business models in tourism

industry. https://doi.org/10.4995/INN2019.2019.10146

38. Zentner, H., & Spremić, M. (2021). Typology of digital business models in tourism. International

Journal

of

E-services

and

Mobile

Applications,

13

(2),

21-42.

https://doi.org/10.4018/IJESMA.2021040102

39. Zeqiri, A. (2024). From traditional to digital: The evolution of business models in hospitality through

platforms. Platforms, 2 (4), 221-233. https://doi.org/10.3390/platforms2040015

Page 9183

www.rsisinternational.org