negotia - babeș-bolyai university · 2017. 6. 14. · destination (ispas and saragea, 2011). della...

NEGOTIA1/2017

STUDIAUNIVERSITATISBABEŞ‐BOLYAI

NEGOTIA

1/2017March

EDITORIALBOARDOFSTUDIAUNIVERSITATISBABEŞ‐BOLYAINEGOTIA

EDITOR‐IN‐CHIEF:Assoc.Prof.IOANALINNISTOR,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaEXECUTIVEEDITOR:Prof.dr.CORNELIAPOP,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaCO‐EXECUTIVEEDITOR:Prof.dr.SVENM.LAUDIEN,UniversityofErfurt,Erfurt,GermanyEDITORIALBOARD:Prof.dr.PARTENIEDUMBRAVA,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaProf.dr.MASAHIKOYOSHII,KobeUniversity,JapanProf.dr.JÁNOSSZÁZ,CorvinusUniversity,Budapest,HungaryProf.dr.PHILIPPEBURNY,UniversitédeLiège,Liège,BelgiumProf.dr.MARILENPIRTEA,WestUniversity,Timişoara,RomaniaProf.dr.SEDEFAKGÜNGÖR,DokuzEylülUniversity,Izmir,TurkeyProf.dr.STANISLAVAACINSIGULINSKI,SuboticaUniversityofNoviSad,SerbiaProf.dr.DJULABOROZAN,J.J.StrossmayerUniversityofOsijek,Osijek,CroatiaProf.dr.CORNELIAPOP,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaProf.dr.IOANCRISTIANCHIFU,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaProf.dr.SMARANDACOSMA,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaProf.Ing.MIROSLAVSVATOŠ,CSc.,CzechUniversityofLifeScience,Prague,CzechRepublicProf.dr.SIMEONKARAFOLAS,TechnologicalEducationalInstitute(TEI)ofWestern

Macedonia,GreeceProf.UEKDr.hab.MAREKĆWIKLICKI,CracowUniversityofEconomics,PolandProf.UEKDr.hab.KRZYSZTOFWACH,CracowUniversityofEconomics,PolandAssoc.Prof.dr.IVANAKRAFTOVA,UniversityofPardubice,CzechRepublicAssoc.Prof.dr.MEDETYOLAL,AnadoluUniversity,Eskisehir,TurkeyAssoc.Prof.dr.KARELTOMŠÍK,CzechUniversityofLifeSciences,Prague,CzechRepublicAssoc.Prof.dr.BERNAKIRKULAK‐ULUDAG,DokuzEylülUniversity,Izmir,TurkeyAssoc.Prof.dr.PHAPRUKEUSSAHAWANITCHAKIT,MahasarakhamUniversity,Maha

Sarakham,ThailandAssoc.Prof.dr.OVIDIUIOANMOISESCU,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaAssoc.Prof.dr.ELENADANABAKO,Babeş‐BolyaiUnivesity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaAssoc.Prof.dr.MARIA‐ANDRADAGEORGESCU,NationalUniversityofPoliticalStudies

andPublicAdministration,RomaniaAssist.Prof.dr.GURHANAKTAS,DokuzEylülUniversity,Izmir,TurkeySeniorLect.PETERJOHNRAS,TshwaneUniversityofTechnology,SouthAfricaSeniorLect.dr.SUSANNALEVINAMIDDELBERG,North‐WestUniversity,Potchefstroom,

SouthAfricaLect.dr.GAMONSAVATSOMBOON,MahasarakhamUniversity,MahaSarakham,ThailandAssoc.Prof.dr.OANAGICĂ,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaIndependentfinancialanalystELISARINASTITIMURESAN,Seattle,USASECRETARIESOFTHEEDITORIALBOARD:Assoc.Prof.dr.OANAGICĂ,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,RomaniaLect.dr.MARIAMONICACOROŞ,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,Romania

YEAR Volume62(LXII)2017MONTH MARCHISSUE 1

PUBLISHEDONLINE:2017‐03‐17PUBLISHEDPRINT:2017‐03‐31

ISSUEDOI:10.24193/subbnegotia.2017.1

STUDIAUNIVERSITATISBABEŞ–BOLYAI

NEGOTIA

1

STUDIAUBBEDITORIALOFFICE:B.P.Hasdeuno.51,400371Cluj‐Napoca,Romania,Phone+40264405352,[email protected]

CUPRINS – CONTENT – SOMMAIRE – INHALT

CRISTINAVIJOLI,NICOLAEMARINESCU,InvestigatingtheImageof

aTouristDestination:TheCaseofSaariselkä..............................................5

SEMA EKINCEK,MERVE OZGUR GODE, SIBEL ONCEL,MEDET YOLAL,

GastronomyandCulinaryArtsEducationinTurkey:Department

Heads’Perspective......................................................................................................23

OANAADRIANAGICĂ,DOBROVOLSKAANASTASIYA,Entrepreneurial

OrientationofStudents.......................................................................................45

VINCENTQUENTINDOARÉ,MONICAMARIACOROŞ, La Roumanie,

peut‐elle êtreunedestinationattractivepour lesentrepreneurs

français?..........................................................................................................................63

STUDIAUBBNEGOTIA,LXII,1,2017,pp.5‐22(RECOMMENDEDCITATION)DOI:10.24193/subbnegotia.2017.1.01

INVESTIGATINGTHEIMAGEOFATOURISTDESTINATION:THECASEOFSAARISELKÄ

CRISTINAVIJOLI1,NICOLAEMARINESCU2

ABSTRACT.Thispaperemphasizestheimportanceofdefiningapreciseimageforatouristdestination.Wereviewfirstthemaincontributionsinthe literature on tourist destinations and their marketing. Then, weoutlinethemethodologyofamarketingresearchconductedinSaariselkä,aresortlocatedinnorthernFinland.Theresultsoftheresearchprovideinteresting insights on how the image of this particular destination isperceivedbytourists.Thefindingsoftheresearchalsoenableustodrawseveralconclusionswhichmayproveusefulforanenhancedefficiencyofthepromotionalefforts.Keywords:touristdestination,marketingresearch,onlinepromotionJELClassification:L83

Recommendedcitation:Vijoli,C.,Marinescu,N.,InvestigatingtheImageofaTouristDestination:TheCaseofSaariselkä,StudiaUBBNegotia,vol.62,issue1(March),2017,pp.5‐22.

1. IntroductionTheprocessofcreatingtheimageofacertaintouristdestination

implies the research, implementation and assessment of tourists’opinionsonthatrespectivedestination.

1Economist,MA,KONEOyj,Espoo,Finland,[email protected].,MTSAIDepartment,FacultyofEconomicSciencesandBusinessAdministration,TransilvaniaUniversityofBrasov,[email protected]

CRISTINAVIJOLI,NICOLAEMARINESCU

6

Themainaimofthispaperistoanalyze,bymeansofamarketingresearch,theopinionsoftouristsonSaariselkä,adestinationinnorthernFinland, with a view to identify the elements of differentiation forSaariselkäasatouristdestination.

Theresearchundertakenwithinthispaperisanempiricalstudyand,assuch,contributestotheliteratureonthewaytouristdestinationsare perceived, and subsequently marketed. The paper enriches theinsightsofotherrecentregionalstudiesthatdealwiththepromotionoftourist destinations. The results of the research offer interesting andusefulfindingsfortheadministratorsofthetouristdestinationinordertopromoteitmoreefficientlyonthetourismmarket.

Thepaper isstructuredas follows:westartbysurveyingsomeof the important contributions in the literature on the definition andmarketingoftouristdestinations.Inthenextsection,themethodofthemarketingresearchisdetailedtogetherwiththeinvestigatedpopulationandtheresultingsample.ThethirdsectioncomprisesthemainresultsoftheresearchorientedtowardstheopinionsoftouristsontheSaariselkädestination. In the last sectionwedrawsomeconclusionsconsideringthewaySaariselkäiscurrentlyperceivedandpromotedandwesuggestsomerecommendations.

2. ReviewofLiteratureOne of the first researchers to approach the concept of tourist

destinationwasGunn,whodefineditasacollectionofexperiencesgainedbythetraveller(Gunn,1972).Moreelaborate,Leiperconsideredthetouristdestination tobeapackagingofproductsandservicespartly createdbypublicandprivateoperators.Thecoreisnotthesingleattractioninitself,but a combination of factorsmade through the tourist’s consumptionexperience(Leiper,1990).Further,adestinationisalsoaplacewheretourist activities have been developed and then tourist products areproducedandconsumed(BuhalisandCosta,2006).

AccordingtotheUNWTO(2007),atouristdestinationischaracterizedbythreeperspectives:geographical(adistinctlyrecognizableareathattouristsvisitandstayinduringtheirtrip),economic(theplacewheretheystayandspendarelevantamountofmoneyandwheretourismrevenueissignificant),andpsychological(themainrationaloremotionalreasonsforthejourney).


7

Destinationmarketingisthenanamalgamationof individualorcollectiveefforts andactivities created to forma total experienceof avisitedplace(Murphyetal.,2000).

Tourist destination marketing is the on‐going research andevaluationprocessconducteduponthetargetpublic’sneeds,bymeansofwhichtheorganizationsinchargewithtouristdestinationmanagementbuildtheimageofthelocation(Morrison,2013).

The purpose of destinationmarketing organizations (DMOs) isto create awell‐designedmarketingmix targeted at a clearly definedtargetmarket tomoveadestination into the consideration setof thatspecificmarket(WoodsideandLysonski,1989).

Amajor aim of the positioning strategy of a tourist destinationshouldbetoreinforcepositiveimagesalreadyheldbythetargetaudience,correctnegativeimages,orcreateanewimage(PikeandRyan,2004).Infact,thisunderstandingofthedestinationimageiscriticalandprovidesthebasisformoreeffectiveandefficientfuturestrategicplanningforthedestination (Ispas and Saragea, 2011). Della Corte and Micera (2007)definedestinationimageasthewholeofbeliefs,ideasandimpressionsadestinationcangenerateinpotentialandactualtourists’minds.Accordingtootherauthors,adestinationimageiscomposedof3elements:theproduct(for instance theattraction itself), thebehaviorplusattitudeofhosts andthe environment, consisting ofweather, scenery and facilities (MilmanandPizam,1995).AsLaiandLi(2016)observeintheirrecentcomprehensiveresearch of 45 representative definitions of tourist destination image,eventhoughthisconcepthasbeenextensivelystudied,itsnatureandscopestillremainvague.

Thecoreof theconceptremainsthesame, though.Theneedtobuildastrongimageforatourismdestinationstemsfromthedesireofunderstandingthepsychologicalforcesthatmotivateindividualtravelers,asnotedbyChon(1990).Thus,onecansaythattheprocessofcreatingtheimageofthetouristdestinationinvolvesresearching,implementingandevaluatingthetourists’opinionsinthisregard.Itentailsthepromotionofatouristdestinationonvariousmediachannels.Promotionisoneoftheimportantactivitiesconductedbytheorganizationinchargeofthetouristdestinationmanagement.Likewise,thisactivityhasanessential


8

roleincreatingtheimageofthetouristdestination,anditscompetitiveedgeoverothertouristdestinations.Thepromotion,development,andfinally, the knowledge of tourist destinations by visitors are possibleafteridentifyinggenuineelements,capabletodifferentiateaplacefromothers(Baltescu,2016).

Theuseoftheinternettopromoteatouristdestinationrepresentsabigopportunitynowadays.Thus,destinationscanbenefitfromtheincreasingpopularityofsocialmediaandwebservices,usingthesetoolstodevelopacoherent image in the global marketplace, and interacting with potentialtourists, to subsequently ensure delivery of high levels of customersatisfaction(Morganetal.,2004).Giventhestrongcompetitionbetweendestinationsandtheincreasingtrendofworldwidetourism,newempiricalstudiesarecontinuouslypublishedonhowtobestpromoteselectedtouristdestinations.

3. Materialandmethod

ThepurposeofourresearchwastofindtheelementsofdifferentiationforSaariselkäasadestinationonthetourismmarket,andmoregenerallytoanalyzethetourists’perceptionsontheimageofSaariselkäasatouristdestination.

Theresearchobjectiveswerethefollowing:

toidentifytheprofileofthetouristswhovisitSaariselkä; toestablishthemainreasonsforchoosingSaariselkäbytourists; to identify the information sources used by the people who

chooseSaariselkäastheirtouristdestination; to assess the quality of the information retrievedwithin these

sources; tomeasurethenotorietyofseveraltouristattractions; toidentifythemaintouristattractions.


9

Thefollowingresearchhypotheseswereset:

A.Generalhypotheses

1)Most tourists checked the officialwebsite of the destination(www.saariselka.fi)beforechoosingSaariselkäastheirdestination.

2) The tourists analyzed the variety of leisure activities, whenchoosingSaariselkäastheirtouristdestination.

3)TouristsbelievethatSaariselkäisanidealholidaydestinationforafamily.

4)Thetouriststookintoaccounttheactivitiesforchildren,whenchoosingSaariselkäasdestination.

B.Statisticalhypotheses

1) Over 70% of tourists checked the official website of thedestination (www.saariselka.fi) before choosing Saariselkä as theirdestination.

Below70%oftouristscheckedtheofficialwebsiteofthedestination(www.saariselka.fi)beforechoosingSaariselkäastheirdestination.

2)Thetouristsconsideredthevarietyof leisureactivities tobeimportant,whenchoosingSaariselkäastheirdestination.

The touristsdidnot consider thevarietyof leisureactivities tobeimportant,whenchoosingSaariselkäastheirdestination.

3)Touristsagree thatSaariselkä isan idealholidaydestinationforafamily.

TouristsdonotagreethatSaariselkäisanidealholidaydestinationforafamily.

4)Touristsconsideredtheactivitiesforchildrentobeimportant,whenchoosingSaariselkäasdestination.

Touristsdidnotconsidertheactivitiesforchildrentobeimportant,whenchoosingSaariselkäasdestination.

Theresearchwasadescriptiveone.Inordertogatherthedata,the survey‐based inquirywasused.The tool fordata collectionwasaquestionnaire,filledinface‐to‐facewiththetargetpublic.


10

Anon‐randomsamplingmethod,namelyconventionalsamplingwas applied. It supposes choosing the sample components throughinterviews conducted on street or in an enclosure, by stopping thepersonsthattheoperatorconsiderstobepartofthepopulationstudied(Constantin,2009).ThisresearchwasconductedonthemainstreetofSaariselkä, at the ski slopes and inside Tunturi hotel. The studiedpopulation consisted of tourists. Throughout the duration of theresearch (March 2015), the number of tourists in Saariselkä reachedaround 6,000 persons according to the regionalmarketing agency, ofwhichabout60%womenand40%men,agedbetween35and64yearsold.ThemajorityoftouristspresentatthetimewereofFinnishorigin(approx.60%),theothersfromabroad(40%).

In order to determine the sample size, using a non‐randomsampling,aconfidencelevelof95%andapermissibleerrorof±5%,forwhich“z”takesthevalue1.96,wereconsidered.Thus,thesize“n”ofthesample in the case of the percentages was determined, applying theformula:

n z ∙ p ∙ qE

where,=permissibleerror,expressedinpercentages; = the value in the normal‐distribution table, corresponding to theconfidencelevelconsidered;=theassessmentincaseofsuccess,orofthosewhoanswer“Yes”;=(100 )theassessmentincaseoffailure,orofthosewhoanswer“No”.

Inthissituation,wedonothavepreviousinformationabout“p”.Therefore, themaximumachievable level is adopted: p=50%=>q=50%.

n 1.96 ∙ 0.5 ∙ 0.5

0.05 384

n=384personswhorepresentthetouristsofSaariselkä.Forobjectivereasons,asampleconsistingof384personscould

notbetakenintoaccount;hence,afixedsamplesizeof153personswaschosen.


11

Inthiscase,theerroris:

E z ∙ p ∙ q

n1.96 ∙ 50 ∙ 50

1537.92

Theresultingconfidencelevelis:

p zp ∙ qn

0.5 1.9650 ∙ 50153

0.5 0.0792

Asaresult, thesamplesizeof153personsentailedareductionof theprecision level,namely the acceptanceof a greater error,whilemaintaining theconfidence level (95%).Establishing that samplesize,the representativenesswas guaranteedwith an error of ± 7.92%andwithaconfidence levelof95%.Thesamplevalidationwasperformedbymeansofacomparisontestofthepercentagedifferences.

H0:π=π0;H1:π≠π0Where:H0–nullhypothesis;

H1–alternativehypothesis;π–percentageatthelevelofthestudiedpopulation;π0–realpercentageattheleveloftheresearchedpopulation;p–percentageatsamplelevel.

| |

∙ 100

4. Resultsanddiscussions

Theresultsoftheresearchrevealedsomeinterestinginsights.

Mostinterviewedtourists(37.9%)indicatedcrosscountryskiastheir main reason for choosing this tourist destination (see fig.1). Alargepartofthemmentionedthattheskislopesweresimilartothose


12

ofotherresortsinnorthernLapland.Yet,whatdifferentiateSaariselkäfrom other resortswere the purity of nature and the lack ofmassivebuildings.

As for theway tourists used to book their stay in Saariselkä, apercentageof 30.7%of the respondents booked their tourist servicesbymeans of online bookingwebsites. A similar percentage opted forpackages offered by travel agencies. Other ways of booking markedsmallpercentages.

Fig.1.ReasonsforchoosingSaariselkä

The most commonly used information sources by tourists forchoosing Saariselkä were: the official website of the destination, advicefromfriends/family,andreviewspostedonTripadvisor.com(seetable1).Thus,apercentageof63.8%ofallrespondentsresortedtotheofficialwebsite of the destination as their information source, this answerrepresenting 24.4% of the total. The smallest percentage in the totalnumber of answers was marked by videos on Vimeo or YouTube(5.9%),usedonlyby2.3%ofrespondents.


13

Table1.Responsefrequenciesoninformationsources

Responses PercentofCasesN Percent

Informationsources

CommentsonFacebook/Twitter 15 3.8% 9.9%Friends/Family 47 11.8% 30.9%HolidayandTravelBlogs 22 5.5% 14.5%Informationfromtravelagency 43 10.8% 28.3%PhotosonPinterest/Tumblr 10 2.5% 6.6%ReviewsonBooking.com 28 7.1% 18.4%ReviewsonTripAdvisor.com 48 12.1% 31.6%Saariselkä’sFacebookprofile 38 9.6% 25.0%Saariselka’smobileapplication 13 3.3% 8.6%Websitesaariselka.fi 97 24.4% 63.8%VideosonVimeo/YouTube 9 2.3% 5.9%Other 27 9.8% 25.7%

Total 397 100.0% 261.2%

Among thosewho checked thewebsitewww.saariselka.fi, 43%stated it included useful information; yet they suggested it might beupdatedwithaspectsrelatedto leisureactivities.However,asregardstheinformationonTripadvisor.com,mostrespondentsconsideredittobeneitherirrelevant,norrelevant,whichmeansitshouldbereviewedand completed. A consistent portion of respondents considered theinformation on the Facebook page to be useful. The tourists said,nevertheless,theywantedtofindmoreinformationonweatherandonthe activities that can be performed in Saariselkä. The research alsobroughtforwardtheactivitiesthattouristswouldliketoperformwhenstayinginSaariselkä(seetable2). Theclearmajorityofrespondents(19.4%)said theywouldmakecrosscountryskithroughoutthetimeperiodspentinSaariselkä.Likewise,alargeproportionoftourists(17.5%)emphasizedtheywouldmakeatriptoseeAuroraBorealis(mostof themwereof foreignorigin).Anactivityquitepopularamongtouristsisthehuskydogsledride(10.5%).


14

Table2.Responsefrequenciesonpreferredactivities

Responses PercentofCasesN Percent

Activities

CrossCountrySkiing 98 19.4% 64.1%DinneratReindeerFarm 23 4.6% 15.0%Down‐hillskiing/Snowboarding 36 7.1% 23.5%Huskysafari 53 10.5% 34.6%AngryBirdsActivityPark 5 1.0% 3.3%Reindeersafari 26 5.2% 17.0%SeetheAuroraBorealis(trips) 88 17.5% 57.5%Snowmobiling 44 8.7% 28.8%Snowshoehiking 50 9.9% 32.7%VisitSantaClaus'sResort 9 1.8% 5.9%Other 72 14.3% 47.0%

Total 504 100.0% 329.4%

AsforthemostimportantfactorsforchoosingSaariselkä,resultsshowed that nature and a relaxing environment played a major role(see fig.2).This factorhadanaverageof4.71 in termsof importance(where:1‐veryunimportant,5‐very important).76.5%ofrespondentsconsideredthatnatureandarelaxingenvironmentwereveryimportantinthedecisionalprocessofchoosingSaariselkäastheirholidaydestination.MostrespondentstotallyagreedthatSaariselkäisanideallocationforspending the holidayswith a group of friends, yet they did not agreethat,inthisdestination,thepriceofservicesislow.

Fig.2.TheimportanceofvariousfactorswhenchoosingSaariselkä


15

One can see that tourists perceived Saariselkä as a destinationofferingawidevarietyofactivities,whichcanbeperformedalongwitha group of friends (see fig. 3). A large portion of the respondentsconsideredthelocalstobehospitableandfriendly,andSaariselkätobeaunique/originaldestination.Theaveragescoreforthefirststatementhad the value of 3.63 (where: 1‐don’t agree, 5‐agree), meaning thattourists agreed that the destination isworth being visited also in thesummerseason/throughouttheyear.

Fig.3.OpinionsonSaariselkä

Tourists were also asked to assess the activities that can be

performedinSaariselkä,accordingtothenotorietyacquiredbymeansofvariouspromotional channels (see fig.4), alonga scale from1 to5(where:1‐lownotoriety;5‐highnotoriety).

Fig.4.NotorietyofactivitiesinSaariselkä


16

Notethatthehighestaverage(4.61)wasobtainedbytripsmadetoseeAuroraBorealis.TheaverageforAngryBirdsActivityParkwasofonly2.3,whichmeanstherespondentsconsideredtheparktohavelownotoriety.This locationhasbeen recentlyopenedand it hasnotbeensufficiently promoted on different media channels, hence it is lessknownamongtourists.

To enrich the findings of the research, the general hypothesesweretested.

1)Most tourists checked the officialwebsite of the destination(www.saariselka.fi)beforechoosingSaariselkäastheirtouristdestination.

H0:µ=0.7;H1:µ<0.7

Table3.Descriptivestatistics:officialwebsite

N Mean Std.Deviation Std.ErrorMean

saariselka.fi 153 .56 .499 .040

At the levelof the153personshavingansweredthisquestion, the

averageofthebinarycharacteristicis0.56(seetable3),whichsignifiesthat56%ofrespondentscheckedtheofficialwebsite.Notethatthepercentageatthelevelofthesampleislowerthanthetheoreticalvalueestablishedinthestatisticalhypothesis,μ0=70%oftherespondents. The significance level Sig. 2‐tailed (0,000) is lower than 0.05;therefore, the alternative hypothesis is accepted, according to which,thepercentageof thepersonswhoused theofficialwebsite to informthemselves, is significantly different from 70%. The analysis of theconfidenceintervalleadstothesamedecision,asitdoesnotincludethevalue“0”,thepercentagebeinglowerthan70%.

2)Touristsanalyzedthevarietyofleisureactivities,whenchoosingSaariselkäastheirtouristdestination.

H0:µ=4;H1:µ≠4

Table4.Descriptivestatistics:varietyofactivities

N Mean Std.Deviation Std.ErrorMeanThevarietyofleisureactivities

153 3.85 1.099 .089


17

For the153respondents,anaverageof3.85wasobtained(seetable4), in termsof the importancegivenbytourists to thevarietyofleisureactivities,withastandarddeviationof1.099.Notethattheaverageatthelevelofthesampleislowerthanthetheoreticalvaluesetinthestatisticalhypotheses,μ0=4. The significance level Sig. 2‐tailed (0.093) is higher than thesignificancelevel0.05;hencethenullhypothesisisaccepted,accordingtowhichtheaveragescoreisnotsignificantlydifferentfromthevalue4.Theanalysisoftheconfidenceintervalleadstothesamedecision,asitdoesnot include thevalue“0”. Inconclusion, touristsconsideredthe varietyofleisure activities to be important, representing one of the contributingfactorswhendecidingforSaariselkäasone’stouristdestination.

3)Accordingtotourists,Saariselkäisanidealholidaydestinationforafamily.

H0:µ=4;H1:µ≠4

Table5.Descriptivestatistics:familyholiday


Saariselkäisanidealdestinationforfamilies.

153 4.01 1.088 .088

An average of 4.01was obtained for the153 respondents (see

table5),statingtheiropiniononSaariselkäasanidealdestinationforafamily.Theaverageobtainedat the level of the sample ishigher thanthetheoreticalvaluesetinthestatisticalhypotheses,μ0=4. The significance level Sig. 2‐tailed (0.882) is higher than thesignificancelevel0.05;hencethenullhypothesisisaccepted,accordingtowhichtheaveragescoreisnotsignificantlydifferentfromthevalue4.Theanalysisoftheconfidenceintervalleadstothesamedecision,asit includes the value “0”. Thus, one can state that tourists agreed thatSaariselkäisaperfectdestinationforfamilies.

4) Tourists took into account the activities for children, whenchoosingSaariselkä.


18

H0:µ=4;H1:µ≠4

Table6.Descriptivestatistics:childrenactivities


Activitiesforchildren 153 1.86 1.269 .103Theaverageobtainedforthishypothesis isof1.86(seetable6).

ThesignificancelevelSig.2‐tailed(0.000)islowerthanthesignificancelevel0.05;hence thealternativehypothesis isaccepted.Theanalysisoftheconfidenceintervalleadstothesamedecision,asitdoesnotincludethe value “0”. In conclusion, tourists did not consider the activities forchildren tobe important,whenchoosingSaariselkädestination.On thecontrary,theyconsideredthemhardlyimportant.Mostofthemsaidthatthedestinationwasidealfortheelderlycouples,usuallycomingtorelax.

Differenceswerealsotested,inthecaseoftheaverage.H0:Thenotorietyaverage for theSaariselkäski resort is thesame forboth Finnish and foreign tourists; H1: The notoriety average for theSaariselkäskiresortdiffersbetweenFinnishandforeigntourists.

H0:µ0=µ1;H1:µ0≠µ1

Table7.Groupstatistics:skiresort

Countryoforigin


SkiresortSaariselkä

Finland 82 4.39 1.173 .130Foreigncountry 71 3.99 1.439 .171

ForFinnishtourists,thenotoriety‐assessmentaverageisof4.39

points (see table 7), ranging between the 4 and 5 levels of the scale.However,attheleveloftheforeigntourists,theaverageislower,3.99.This aspect shows that the notoriety of the ski resort in Saariselkä isloweramongthetouristscomingfromabroad.

Finally,differencesweretested,inthecaseofpercentages.


19

H0:ThereisnodifferencebetweenFinnishandforeigntourists,intermsofmaking the trips to see Aurora Borealis; H1: There is a differencebetween Finnish and foreign tourists, in terms ofmaking the trips toseeAuroraBorealis.

H0:µ0=µ1;H1:µ0≠µ1

Table8.Groupstatistics:AuroraBorealistrips

Countryoforigin


SeetheAuroraBorealis(trips)

Finland 82 .33 .473 .052Foreigncountry

71 .86 .350 .042

A percent of 86% of foreign tourists made trips to see Aurora

Borealis (see table 8). Only a percentage of 33 of the Finnish touristsperformedthisactivity.OnecanseethatthepercentageofthetouristsofFinnishorigin (24.8%) ishigheraround thevariable “Totallyagree”, interms of the affirmation “Saariselkä is worth being visited also in thesummer season/throughout the year.” Foreign tourists are neuter asregards this statement. A large portion of them said they were morewillingtovisitthedestinationinwinter,thaninotherseasons.Thus,onecanstatethereisadifferencebetweenthetwogroupsintheperceptionontheimageofthedestinationindifferentseasonsoftheyear.

5. Conclusions

This research reveals that themain reasons forwhich tourists

arechoosingSaariselkäarethenaturallandscapes,thequalityoftheskislopes, and the lack of agglomeration. However, one can notice thatmosttouristsinthisresortareofFinnishorigin.ForeigntouristschooseSaariselkäasitisalocationsituatedinnorthernFinland(furtherNorththanitsmaincompetitors),andthusthelikelihoodofseeingtheAuroraBorealisisgreater.


20

Likewise,notethatthetourists’wishtoperformotheractivitiesthancrosscountryskiandthetripstoseetheAuroraBorealis,isverylow.Thisaspectismainlyduetothelownotorietyoftheotheractivities,andalsototheirlackofpromotion,evenwithinthetouristdestinationitself. This research offers an overviewof the tourists’ perception onthe quality and usefulness of the information found on differentcommunicationchannels,andalsoonthenotorietyofthevarioustouristattractionsinSaariselkä.ItrevealsaseriesofmarketingproblemsoftheSaariselkädestination.Firstly,thislocationdoesnothaveacomparativeadvantage differentiating it from other destinations. Likewise, itsmaintouristattractionsarenotsufficientlypromotedontheonlinechannels.Furthermore, the officialwebsite and themobile application should beimproved in termsofnavigabilityandattractiveness, soas tobeeasierandmoreenjoyablefortouriststoaccess. Saariselkä is a destination with great tourist potential. Touristsarealwaysimpressedwiththebeautyoftheplace,andthestoriesbehindeachsight.ItisessentialfortheadministratorsofthisdestinationtoraisethevisibilityofSaariselkädestinationandtochooseanadequateonlinepromotional mix. Likewise, for an improved image of the Saariselkädestination,theimageshouldbeunitaryonallpromotionalchannels.

Theresearchhas its limitationsas it isconfinedtoa local levelandthereisabiastowardsregionalcharacteristics.Theextenttowhichsuch insightsmaybegeneralized toother regions isnot addressed inthepresentresearchasitwouldrequireknowledgeofvariousfeaturesofthepromotionalactivitiesinotherdestinationsandcontexts.

Nevertheless, we believe that the findings of our researchcontributepositivelytotheexistingliterature.TheresultscanbeusedbyadministratorsinSaariselkätoenhancetheefficiencyoftheireffortsto promote the tourist destination. Future research could comprisemoreempiricalstudiesonaninternationalleveltoenablecomparisonsof results. As long as tourism is on ascending worldwide trend, it isexpectedthatmoreempiricalstudieswillenrichtheliterature.


21

REFERENCES

1. Baltescu, C. (2016), “Culinary experiences as a key tourismattraction.

Case Study: Brasov County”, Bulletin of the Transilvania University ofBrasov,9,2,pp.107‐112.

2. Buhalis,D.,Costa,C.(2006),TourismBusinessFrontiers,Elsevier,Oxford.3. Chon,K.S. (1990), “Theroleofdestination image in tourism:Areview

anddiscussion”,TheTouristReview,45,2,pp.2‐9.4. Constantin,C.(2009),Cercetaridemarketing,Ed.UniversitatiiTransilvania,

Brasov.5. Della Corte, V., Micera, R. (2007), “Destination image analysis and

management:resultsofanempiricalresearchonthecaseofNaples”,inProceedings of the 6th International CongressMarketing Trends, Paris,France.

6. Gunn,C. (1972),Vacationscape:Designing touristregions,UniversityofTexas,BureauofBusinessResearch,Austin.

7. Ispas, A., Saragea, R.A. (2011), “Evaluating the image of touristdestinations. The case of the autonomous community of the CanaryIslands”,JournalofTourism,12,pp.5‐12.

8. Lai,K.,Li,X.(2016),“TourismDestinationImage:ConceptualProblemsandDefinitionalSolutions”, JournalofTravelResearch,55,8,pp.1065‐1080.

9. Leiper, N. (1990), “Tourist attraction systems”, Annals of TourismResearch,17,2,pp.367‐384.

10. Milman,A.,Pizam,A.(1995),“TheRoleoftheAwarenessandFamiliaritywithaDestination:TheCentralFloridaCase”,JournalofTravelResearch,33,3,pp.21‐27.

11. MorganN., Pritchard,A., Pride,R. (Eds.) (2004),DestinationBranding:Creating the Unique Destination Proposition, 2nd edition, Elsevier,Oxford.

12. Morrison, A.M. (2013),Marketing andmanaging tourism destinations,Routledge,NewYork.

13. Murphy,P.,Pritchard,M.,Smith,B.(2000),“Thedestinationproductandits impact on traveller perceptions”,TourismManagement, 21, 1, pp.43–52.

14. Pike, S., Ryan, C. (2004), “Destination positioning analysis through acomparisonofcognitive,affectiveandconativeperceptions”,JournalofTravelResearch,42,4,pp.333‐342.


22

15. UNWTO(2007),APracticalGuidetoDestinationManagement,UNWTO,Madrid.

16. Woodside,A.,Lysonski,S.(1989),“Ageneralmodeloftravellerdestinationchoice”,JournalofTravelResearch,27,1,pp.8‐14.


GASTRONOMYANDCULINARYARTSEDUCATIONINTURKEY:DEPARTMENTHEADS’PERSPECTIVE

SEMAEKINCEK1,MERVEOZGURGODE2,SIBELONCEL3,MEDETYOLAL4

ABSTRACT.Thisstudyinvestigatedhowgastronomyandculinaryartsdepartmentheadsperceivedtheirprogramsandwhattheirexpectationswereaboutthefutureoftheirfield.Aqualitativedesignwasemployedto collectdata from thedepartmentheads.A totalofninedepartmentheadsparticipated in the study. Findings revealed that course contentwasthemostimportantconcern, followedbytheinternshipproblems.Postgraduate programswere also desired for educating the necessaryacademicsspecializedandexperiencedinthefield.Academiceventsandcontestsarealsofoundtobeimportantinsupplementingandsupportingthegastronomyandculinaryartseducation.Keywords:Gastronomyandculinaryartseducation,departmentheads,perception.

JELClassification:I22

Recommendedcitation:Ekincek,S.,Gode,M.O.,Oncel,S.,Yolal,M.,GastronomyandculinaryartseducationinTurkey:Departmentheads’perspective,StudiaUBBNegotia,vol.62,issue1(March),2017,pp.23‐43.

1Researchassistant,AnadoluUniversity,FacultyofTourism,26470Eskisehir,Turkey,[email protected]

2Researchassistant,AnadoluUniversity,FacultyofTourism,26470Eskisehir,Turkey,[email protected]

3 Asist. Prof. Dr., Anadolu University, Faculty of Tourism, 26470 Eskisehir, Turkey,[email protected]

4 Assoc. Prof. Dr., Anadolu University, Faculty of Tourism, 26470 Eskisehir, Turkey,[email protected]

SEMAEKINCEK,MERVEOZGURGODE,SIBELONCEL,MEDETYOLAL

24

1. Introduction

Foodhasbecomeasignificantpartoftourismingeneral.Therefore,it is vital that hospitality education and training include a gastronomycomponent in order to give students a greater understanding of thehistoryandcultureoffoodanddrink(Santich,2004).Assuch,thegoalofuniversity‐levelgastronomyeducationistotrainandeducatestudents,whohaveagoodtheoreticalandpracticalknowledge,besidesbeingcapableofclearingupcomplexsocial,economicandtechnicalproblemsofgastronomy;havehighlevelsofknowledge,skills,andexecutiveability;havethecapacityofabstraction,synthesisanddecision‐makingbyevaluatingtheefficiencyofvariousfactors;andarefluentinatleastoneforeignlanguage(Avcikurt,2000,p.288;Haciogluetal.,2008,p.44).Inthesamemanner,gastronomyfieldofstudy isapparently interdisciplinary,withknowledge/skill requirements intechnicalculinaryskills,communicationskills,businessknowledge, foodscience,andothers(Harringtonetal.,2005).

Thegrowingimportanceofgastronomyintourismisrevealedbytheprominentpositionofthisfieldwithinacademicresearch(KivelaandCrotts,2006).Similarlystudieshavealsoexaminedarangeof topicsongastronomyanditsrelevancetohospitality(Santich,2004),practiceskillsofstudents/workers(Sarioglan,2013;Shen,2002;Yang,2003;Getz,1994),qualityinculinaryartsprograms(HertzmanandAckerman,2010;Hegarty,2011), employee expectations (Sarioglan, 2014), employee competences(Ko,2010)andgastronomyeducation(Zaharietal.,2009;KoandChung,2015). For example, the study of Powell (2005) suggested that mostcollegegraduateshavereceivedinsufficientinstructionfromeducatorswith professional experience. Similarly, Ko andChung (2015) suggestthateducatorswithinadequatepracticalprofessionalexperiencemayfailtoteachcontentmostrelevanttotheneedsofthecurrentworkenvironment.Regardingthequalityofgastronomyeducation,HertzmanandAckerman(2010)notethatfacultycharacteristics,organizationandadministrationfacilities, student learning opportunities, student outcomes and studentservices are considered important.However, research is still limited ongastronomy education. As such, studies at university‐level gastronomyeducationareneededduetoitsimportanceinthewell‐beingofthetourismindustryasawhole.


25

Therefore, this study tries to reveal how department heads ofGastronomyandCulinaryArts(GCA)departmentsatTurkishuniversitiesevaluate the contentandperformanceofprograms. In this context, theopinionsofdepartmentheads,asthemostsignificantcontributorsofthisfield,areofgreat importance.This isextremely importantespecially indesigningGCAprogramsthatwillmeettheneedsofthegastronomysectorandthetourismsectoringeneral.Forthepurposeofthestudy,thepaperstartswithareviewofGCAeducationinTurkey.Themethodologyutilizedis explained in the following section, and the findings are presented intheirdedicatedsection.Thepaperendswithadiscussionoftheresultsandsuggestionsdrawnfromthefindings.

2. GastronomyandCulinaryArtsEducationinTurkey

Tourism requires qualified personnel in order to maintain itscompetitiveedgearoundtheworld(Antonetal.,2013).Therefore,educationandtrainingoftheemployeesiscrucialforthewell‐beingoftheindustry.Thisisespeciallytrueforgastronomysectorwheretheskills,educationand talent are vital for the provision of food and service. In Turkey,gastronomyand/orculinaryeducationisprovidedintwoseparatewaysincludingsecondaryeducationanduniversity‐leveleducation. Secondary level GCA education in Turkey has been offered inspecializedhighschools(AnatolianCulinaryHighSchool)inBolu‐Mengen,since1985‐1986,andhasbeenconvertedintoadepartment/programinAnatolianHotelManagement and Tourism Schools as from2001‐2002academicyearandspreadoverthecountry.Thisisfollowedbyculinaryeducationatassociate,undergraduateandpostgraduatedegreesofferedbyuniversities(Cakir,2010,p.68).Thefirstundergraduateprogramwasopenedin2003inYeditepeUniversity,Istanbul.Consequentyearswitnesseda dramatic increase in the number of GCA departments starting from2009. While GCA departments offer programs within the Faculties ofTourisminmanyuniversities,thesedepartmentsofferprogramswithinthe body of the Faculties of Fine Arts in some universities, under theimpression that cookery is a work of art thanks to its preparation topresentation.


26

The primary goal of the departments of GCA in the faculties oftourismistotrainandeducatestudentsinkitchenmanagement,restaurantmanagement,café‐barmanagement,andfoodandbeveragemanagement.Further, these departments aim to train qualified personnel and executivechefs,whoareendowedwithknowledgeandskillswhichtheydisplayon the international arena, and who are specialized in national andinternationalcuisineculture.Ingeneral,allkitchenpersonnelshouldhaveagoodknowledgeofthekitchendomain.Foraproductiveandprofitableproduction, the information regarding the entire kitchen should berelayedprecisely.Thistransferofinformationshouldcoverareas,suchasthelayoutandphysicalpropertiesofthekitchen,thematerialsusedinthekitchenandwhattheyareusedfor(Gokdemir,2009,p.32). Moreover,postgraduateprogramshaveacriticalroleintrainingmore successfulmanagers in the future (Leeet al., 2008).This isalsoimportantfortheGCAdepartments,whichoccupiesasignificantplaceintourismfaculties.However,itisobservedthatonlyfouruniversitiesinTurkey(AbantİzzetBaysalUniversityinBolu,GaziUniversityinAnkara,GaziantepUniversityinGaziantepandOkanUniversityinIstanbul)offerpostgraduateprogramsinthisfield.InformaleducationservicesonculinaryartsarealsoofferedbyprogramsorganizedbytheMinistryofCultureandTourism,TourismDevelopmentandEducationFoundation,andsomeother private institutes (Demirkol andPelit, 2002).These programs setthegroundforqualifiedkitchenpersonnelandensurethatfoodpreparationisacceptedtobeaprofessioninsociety(Hughes,2003,p.10). Meantime, it iscrucial tocreateneed‐basedcourseschedulesandregularly update the course contents in the GCA programs. Bringing upqualifiedlaborforceispossiblethroughanefficientinstructor.AstudybyCetin(1993)inTurkeyreportsthat46.2%ofinstructorsdonothaveanysectorexperience,and70.3%aregraduatesofdifferentmajors.Therefore,opportunities for practical education should be created in order forgastronomydepartmentstoachieveitsgoals.Inthiscontext,awell‐equippedkitchen laboratory, where the students can practice their theoreticalknowledge,isessentialingastronomyeducation.Itcanbeeasilyclaimedthatstudentsareonlyprovidedwiththeoreticalknowledge,andwherethesolepurposeistopasscoursesorclasses(Akinci,2015).Assuch,rotelearningwithoutpracticeisatthecoreofsuchcourses.


27

Theroleofeducationalinstitutescannotbeunderestimatedintheprovision of quality GCA education. For example, Gilhespy (2005) claimsthattourismschoolsatalllevels,createdbymostoftheworld’suniversitiesin recent years, are designed to deliver a holistic, industry‐orientededucation.Therefore, theseschools focusonboth theemployabilityoffutureprofessionalsandthetraining intended for themtoacquire thenecessaryskills.Ontheotherhand,SigalaandBaum(2003)notethattourismschoolshavetraditionallyfocusedonhelpingstudentsacquirethenecessarytechnicalexpertise,whileneglectingotheraptitudesneededtorisetotoday’schallenges. Regardingtheskillsnecessaryforgastronomysector,Antonetal.(2013)suggestthatthecross‐curricularskillsnecessaryforthestudentsarenotcompatiblewiththeexpectationsandvaluesofthesector.Incaseof Turkey, Tuyluoglu (2003) argues that equipment and laboratoriesrequired by gastronomy education are not available at university leveleducational instituteswhich eliminates the opportunity to practice thetheoretical information. In their study, Cervera‐Taulet andRuiz‐Molina(2008, p. 64) suggest that students consider practical training beingbeneficial for their adaptation to the profession. Students also explainthatappliedtrainingpreparesthemfortheiractualjobs,thattheinstructorsareabletocombinetheoryandpracticewiththehelpofappliedtraining,andthatappliedtrainingmethods increasetheirprofessionalskillsandabilities.Thus,laboratoriesandsimulatedhotelsinallschoolsareessentialforgastronomyeducation(Capar,2002).Alongwiththeselaboratories,theclassrooms, which contain equipment andmaterials required by thesecourses,arealsoconsideredwithinthiscategory(SoybaliandBayraktaroglu,2013).In linewiththis,Cetin(1993)reportsthat42.1%ofthe instructorsexperience problems with inadequate kitchen laboratories, and 53.1%encounterproblemswithinsufficientlaboratoryequipment. Internshiporon‐jobtrainingprogramisalsocrucialalongwiththecoursecontentsandpractice,wherestudentscanfindtheopportunitytoactively practicewhat they learned at schools. Kayayurt (2002)notesthat77.7%ofkitchenpersonnelareself‐educated,andaregraduatesofprimaryorsecondaryschools.Inaddition,hisstudyfindingsrevealthatmerely 5.7% of the chefs received technical/vocational education ingastronomy. It isalsosuggested that since therearemanyuntrained/


28

unschooled employees in the sector, the students are discouraged towork in the sector after graduation. As Robinson and Barron (2007,p. 913) state, cooking is a profession that suffers from the lack ofqualified personnel. According to the results of a study by Gorkem andOzturk(2011),itisobservedthatnearlyonethirdofkitchenexecutivesinhotelsneverreceivedoccupationaleducation,andmerely1.2%graduatedfromuniversity‐leveloccupationaleducation.Moreover,kitchenexecutivesclaim that the culinary education in schools is notprecisely favorablefor the sector (Gorkem and Ozturk, 2011). Consequently, the schoolsarebeingdiscreditedduetotheirlow‐skilledgraduates.

3. Methodology This study employed a qualitative approach to understand theGCAdepartmentheads’opinionsaboutthefacultyprograms.Qualitativeresearches standoutwith their characteristicsof revealing the viewpointsandsemanticworldsofthesubjects(UnisenandKaya,2015).Apurposivesamplingapproachwasadopted.The studypopulation consistsofGCAdepartment heads ranked in Student Selection and Placement Center(OSYM)2015studentmanual.Accordingtostudentmanual,29universitiesinTurkeyofferGCAprograms.Theintentionwastoreachallthedepartmentheads, and the question formswere e‐mailed to 29 department headsbetweenJuly21andAugust5,2015.Further,thesurveywasremindedtotheGCAdepartmentheadstwotimes,onceattheendofAugustandonceinSeptember2015.Atotalofnineresponseswerereceived. Datawere collected throughaquestionnaire consistingof open‐ended questions. The questionnaire used in this study was developedthroughliteraturereview(Cetin,1993;Demirkol,2002;Kayayurt,2002;Du, 2003; Koc et al., 2014) also taking into consideration themeetingreportofGCAdepartmentheads,whichwasheldinAnadoluUniversity,Turkey,in2014.Thequestionsintheformwereasfollows:

* Please express your opinions on the contents of the coursesofferedinGCAdepartmentsconsideringtherequirementsofthisfield.

*WhatareyouropinionsoninternshipinGCAdepartments?


29

* Do you think postgraduate programs for GCA departmentsshouldbeopened?Whatareyouropinionsonthis?

*Doyouthinkthenationaland internationalacademicevents/activitiesareadequate?Whatareyouropinionsonthis?

*WhatareyouropinionsonnationalandinternationalcontestsinthefieldofGCA?

*WhatareyoursuggestionsandopinionsforthefutureofGCAdepartments?

Descriptiveanalysismethodwasutilizedfordataanalysis.Accordingtothisapproach,thedataobtainedaresummarizedandinterpretedonthebasisofpre‐determinedthemes.Inordertoconspicuouslyreflecttheopinions of interviewed or observed individuals, direct citations arefrequentlyusedindescriptiveanalysis.Thepurposeofthistypeofanalysisis topresent the findings ina revisedand interpretedmanner.Thedatawereanalyzedinfourstagesindescriptiveanalysismethod:(1)formingaframefordescriptiveanalysis, (2) findingthethemes,(3) identifyingthefindings,(4)interpretingthefindings.Forcredibilityofthestudy,thedatawere first presented without any interpretations, and the data wereanalyzed by more than one researchers. The researchers of this studyadheredtothehypotheticalcirclethroughcontinuouscomparisonsduringdataanalysis(ErsoyandAnagun,2009). Another strategy pursued in qualitative researches for validityand credibility of the research is the expert/peer‐review (Yildirim andSimsek, 2013). Peer‐reviewmethodhas been adopted in this study forcredibilityoftheresearch.Wehaveconvenedagroupofexpertsinthisfieldandmethod,informedthemverbally,andcarriedoutevaluations. The themes within the transcript were identified using Ritchie,SpencerandO’Connor’s(2003)frameworkofstepstoanalyzequalitativedata.Thestudyusedeachquestionasthemaintheme:coursecontents,internship,graduateprograms,academicevents/activities,cookingcontestsand the future of this field. Thedatawas processed in accordancewiththesesixthemes,andtheresultswerepresentedanddiscussed.Inthequotations,respondentswerelabeledasK1,K2,K3…K9toensuretheiranonymity.


30

4. Findings

4.1. CourseContents Previousliteraturesuggestthatcoursecontentsarecrucialforthesuccessof theGCAdepartments,especially inmeeting theneedsof theindustry(Santich,2004;Sarioglan,2014;Zaharietal.,2009).Assuch,theprimeconcernfortheGCAdepartmentheadswasfoundtobethecoursecontents.WhentheanswersoftheGCAdepartmentheadswereanalyzed,itwas seen that all participants indicated that the course contents werepreparedinlinewiththerequirementsandexpectationsofthesector.Inthisregard,forexample,K3statedthat“thegastronomycoursesofferedintourism faculties are compatible with the needs of tourism sector.”However, K4 stated that they “do not train chefs or cooks; the sectorshouldbeawareofthisandanticipatethisfact.” Ontheotherhand,practicalorexperientiallearningisaprerequisiteinthequalityoftheprogramandthegraduates(Sarioglan,2014;KoandChung,2015).Thiswasalsosupportedbytherespondentswhounderlinedthe importanceofpracticeopportunities.Totaketheargumentfurther,K1pointedoutadifferentproblemandnotedthat“inefficacyofpracticeopportunitiesandspecialistsareimportantissues.”Inlinewiththisopinion,K6 suggested that “there are toomany theoretical courses. The classesshouldbemorepractice‐oriented.” Anotheremergingissueregardingthecoursecontentwasfoundtobetheskillsofeducators.Regardingtherichnessanddiversityofgastronomyissues,K3suggestedthat“thereisabroadrelationshipbetweengastronomyandotherdisciplinesandthecoursesmighthaverichercontent.”However,K8commentedthatthey“donothaveadequatenumberofinstructors.”Inthisvein,K5indicatedthat“themainissuesaretheproblemsencounteredintheemploymentprocessofthespecialistsinpublicuniversitiesandinthefinancialsupportprocessforprovisionofpracticingmaterials.Thus,someuniversities are having hard times while training qualified chefs/cooksrequiredbythetourismindustry.” ItisclearthatthecoursecontentsofGCAdepartmentsshouldbeimprovedandrenewedinlinewiththerequirementsofthesector.Byairingtheirviews,onecaneasilyobservethattheproportionoftheoreticalandpracticalcoursesshouldbewell‐conceivedwhenplanningthecourse


31

contents.ThebudgetsshouldbeincreasedandtheuniversityadministrationsshouldbeawareoftheimportanceofequipmentandbudgetaryrequirementsofthegastronomydepartmentsforStateUniversities.Thiscanalsoincreasethecompetitivenessofpublicuniversitiesagainsttheprivateones.Moreover,as Hegarty (2011) suggests raising the discipline of culinary arts andgastronomybeyondthecraft‐based/vocational(operational)leveltounder/postgraduate‐degreelevel,educatorsthemselvesneedtobecomecriticallyreflectiveandknowledgeabletoenablestudentstolearnhowtolearn,tobecomeentrepreneurialandtechnologicalinnovators.Finally,educatorsandtheGCAdepartmentsmustalsoreinforcetheirrelationshipwiththeindustrytoensurethatthebenefitstobothstudentsandindustryfromtheeducationalprocesscanbeexpanded.

4.2. Internship Workinginroughhospitalityindustriesespeciallyinfoodservices,the staff should develop rigorous energetic personality, independent,critical,autonomousself‐directedlearning,self‐confidenceandcharismaticleadership skills (Zakaria et al., 2010).As such, it iswell documentedthat internship contributes to developing students’ competencies in GCA(Walo, 2001). Internship, placements and the practicum are a variety ofterms forwhat is, essentially, a period of employment in the tourismandhospitalityindustry(BusbyandGibson,2010). Studyresultssuggestedthatrespondentsunderlinedtheimportanceofinternship.Havingemphasizedtherelationshipbetweeninternshipandappliedcourses,K6gavethefollowingstatement: “Internship isnecessarytoconsolidatepractice.Internshipshouldbedoneattherightplace,wheretheymakeaconsiderablecontributiontoboththestudentsandthebusinesses.Notonlyquantityshouldbeconsideredwhileselectingthefacilitiesfor internship,thereshouldalsobesomequalitativecriteria.”AccordingtoK3,department,sector and students’ compliance are very important for the internshipperformance. He/she commented that “the interaction of these threestakeholdersensurea successful internshipprocess. If the facilityregardsinternshipmerelyaslow‐costlabor,ifthestudentsdotheirinternshiphalf‐heartedly,andifthefacultiesapplyinternshipasamatterofcircumstance,theinternshipperformancewouldeventuallybepoor.Oritmayalsobequite


32

the opposite.” K5 brought an alternative point of view focusing on thefaculties,andnotedthat“thestudentsshoulddefinitelybewell‐orientedandmonitored throughout their internship in GCA departments. A commissionconsistingoftheinstructorsshouldbeconstitutedforoptimumorientationandmonitoringandthesecommissionsshouldbefinanciallysupportedbytheiruniversities.” Twoparticipants(K1andK2)statedthattheycouldonlyassessthisquestionwithin the academicyear since internshipwasnotmandatory intheir departments. However, K4 criticized the sector’s attitude towardsinternship: “Internship is an obligatory practice that the students shoulddefinitelyexperienceandfulfill,butsincethesectoralauthoritieslookuponinternsaslow‐costlabor,ourstudentsalwayshavearoughtimeduringtheirinternshipperiods.”K9addedthat“internshipperiodsarenotsatisfyingperse,soworkexperienceshouldbeencouraged.” InternshipisnotonlytheweakshortcomingofGCAdepartments.Itisamongthecommonproblemsinthefacultiesoftourism.Thesectorshouldbroadenitsviewpointoninternship,stoplookinguponinternsaslow‐cost labor, and showduediligenceandultimateattention fora productiveinternship period. If the internship periods are monitored and evaluatedthrough protocols between the businesses and the university, theinternshipwould achieve its objectives. Thiswould be a guiding factor toprevent theproblemsthatwoulddiscourage thestudentsanddissuadethemfrompursuingacareerinthissector.Ontheotherhand,theinternshipshouldbeconsideredasasteptoimprovethepracticalknowledgeacquiredin applied courses. Long‐lasting knowledge and skills are ensured byrecommending internship for the students in accordance with theireducation.

4.3. PostgraduatePrograms Reflectingthematurationoftourismasafieldofstudy,RuhanenandMcLennan(2012)suggestthatcompetitionwithinthelabormarketandstudents’desireforprofessionalandfinancialadvancementaretheprimarydriversformanystudentstoundertakefurtherand/orhigher‐lever studies. Moreover, postgraduate level education in GCA has thepotentialtosupportacademicstudiesinthefield,andeducatethefuture


33

generationsofinstructors(Bayraktaroglu,2013).Whatisexpectedfrompostgraduateeducationistoensurethatindividualsspecializeincertainfieldsandconductscientificstudies(Demirkol,2002). When the opinions of GCA department headswere consideredonpostgraduateprograms,sevenoutofnineparticipantsagreeduponthe necessity of postgraduate programs in GCA. Having suggested thatpostgraduateprograms should be offered,K3noted that “postgraduateprogramsarenecessaryforthedevelopmentofthedepartment,foracademicimprovementandespecially forthesectortobenefit fromtheseacademicimprovements.” According to K6, postgraduate programs are especiallyneededforthedevelopmentofacademicstaffneededforGCAdepartments.On the contrary,K2 claimed that “it is tooearly tooffer thesegraduateprograms”.Theparticipantcontinuedthat“weneedtofacetheproblemsassociatedwith rapidpopularization ofundergraduate‐levelgastronomyprograms.” However, K8 suggested that “if there is an undergraduateprogram,thanthereshouldalsobeapostgraduateprogramforthestudents,whowouldliketospecializeonthissubject.” Motivational factors such as a personal interest in the field ofstudy,relevancetoemployment,enjoymentofstudy,skilldevelopmentand career change have increased the demand for postgraduateprogramsinGCA(RuhanenandMcLennan,2012).Assuch,postgraduateprogramsaresignificant, intermsofmakingup for lackof instructorsand academicmembers. Since gastronomy is affiliated tomany otherdisciplines,postgraduateprogramswouldhaveaguidingroleintermsofspecialization.However, the lackofqualified instructorsandacademicpersonnelmay be considered as an obstacle in offering postgraduateprograms.

4.4. AcademicEvents/Activities

Academiceventsandactivitiesprovideeducationalopportunitiesforexchangingideasamongparticipantsandserveasaneducationalandtrainingplatform(Getz,1997;Dwyer,etal.,2000).Academiceventsalsoofferthepotentialtoexpandparticipants’expertiseandknowledgeinagiven area. As such, these activities and eventsmay act as a beneficialtool for students’ development in GCA. Moreover, attending to theseevents offers networking opportunities for personal and professionaldevelopment(Judith,2014).


34

Whentheparticipantswereaskedwhetherthenumberofnationalandinternationalacademiceventsaresufficient,manyparticipantsstatedthatthefrequencyoftheseeventsonGCAwasnotadequate.Inthisregard,K1suggestedthat“initially, it isnecessarytoorganizenationalandtheninternational conferences and/or symposiums, which will be organizedannually.” K5 supported this idea and noted that “the conferences andsymposiumsonGCAarenotyetorganized inaprofessionalmanner. It isnecessarytoorganizeconferencesandsymposiumssimilartoannualNationalTourismCongress,whichwillencourageallGCAacademicstoparticipate.”In regards to the outcome of these events, K4 stated that “thenumberofacademic events/activities will eventually increase as the quality ofpostgraduateeducationincreases”. Theincreasingnumberofsymposiums,conferencesandworkshopsonGCAwillalsobeanencouragingfactorintermsofthequalityofthedepartments.Iftheseactivitiesarefinanciallysupportedandregulatedinaqualitativemanner,notonlytheacademicpersonnelbutalsothestudentswill be able to improve themselves and make appearances in variousplatforms.

4.5. CookingContests Cooking contests or sensorial tastings constitute examples ofactivitiesthatwouldencourageGCAstudents.Inthisregard,contestsareeducativeandusefultoolsforstudents,educators,audiences,societyandthesector.Contestsalsoprovideopportunitiestodiscussdailyissues,createideas to solve different problems, and share ideas among participants(GaripandGarip,2012).Moreover,contestsallowstudentstobondandencouragehealthycompetitionintheeducativeenvironment(Saha,2014).Contestsfurtherhelpstudentsdevelopskillsnecessaryfortheirprofessionalcareer. Whentheparticipantswereaskedaboutthenationalandinternationalcontests on GCA, K1 stated that the contests were not satisfying. K2reflectedhis/hernegativethoughtsthat“itistheblindleadingtheblind.The‘old‐boy’networkistooobvious.”K3statedthathe/shehasbeenparticipatinginallcontestssince2010.He/sheexpressedboththeprosandconsofthecontests: “Thecontestsarenotgivendue importance.Themembersofthe


35

juryarenotexpertsinthefield.Thecontestsareusuallyfarfrombeingfair,buttheyofferopportunitiesfortheparticipatingstudents,sincetheyalwayshavethechancefornetworkingandmeetingchefs.Inaddition,theyalsogetthe chance tomeetkeypeople for employmentpurposes.”Meanwhile, K4approachedthistopicfromanotherviewpointandnotedthat“thecontestsfortheacademicsshouldhavedifferentconcepts.”K6statedhis/herconcernsregarding the evaluationprocesses of the contests that “therearemajorissuesregardingtheevaluationcriteriaofthecontests.Thereareabundantcontestsoncookingandfood.Andthereareproblemsregardingtheobjectivityofthe jury.”AgreeingonK6’spointofviewK7expressedthat“notonlythemenu,butalsotheknowledgeandskillsofthecompetitorsshouldbeevaluated.” Thecontestsareamongthesignificanteventsthatwillcontributeto the development of GCA departments. The number of these eventsshould be increased, especially for the development of the students.Moreover,itisimportanttomotivatethestudentstoparticipateintheseevents.However,fairnessbecomesavitalissueinplanningandorganizingthesecontests.As such, theevaluationcriteriaand themembersof thejuryshouldbesetinafairandjustway.

4.6. OverallAssessment Finally, theparticipantswereaskedto indicatetheirsuggestionsandopinionsregardingthefutureofGCAdepartments.Themajorityofthedepartmentheadswerehopefulaboutthefutureofthefield.However,K8waspessimisticandindicatedthat“thegastronomydepartmentwillexperienceaturnaroundaslongasthenumberofGCAdepartmentsincreased.Soon,therewill beunemployed college‐graduates.” In this regardK2 underlined theimportanceofcooperationamongallstakeholdersandsettingquotasintermsofstudentnumbersatthedepartments,andsuggestedthat“ifuniversitiescanincreasesectoralcooperationandutilizetheirchefsandkitchens,andifthequotaswouldnotexceed30students,Ibelievethefutureofgastronomydepartmentwould bemore promising.” Supporting the ideas of K2, K1addedthat“itisessentialforanygastronomydepartmenttopromoteitselfandtosearchforsupportfromuniversityadministrationsandotherinstitutesthroughvariousprojects.Conferences,symposiums,various local festivals,contests, shows,workshopsand scientific journalswillalsobe significantimprovementsforthedevelopmentofthegastronomydepartment.”


36

Astheviewpointtowardsfoodandbeveragehasbeenchanginginrecent years, gastronomy and food and beverage have become moresignificant.Inordertohaveaneducated,well‐equipped,andsophisticatedworkforce,havingtheadequateskillsandknowledgetomeettheneedsofthesector,thedemandsandexpectationsofthegastronomydepartmentsshould definitely be satisfied. The increase in the number of specificscientific events/activities regarding the gastronomy departments willcontributetotheirdevelopment.Thevisionandmissionofthedepartmentsshouldbeexplainedpreciselytothesociety,thestudentsandprospectivestudents. Thus, this major will be well understood bereft of its fuzzyconnotation.

5. ConclusionandDiscussion

TheprimarypurposeofthisstudywastoexaminetheopinionsofGCA department heads on their programs and the structure of GCAeducation.Findingsof thestudyprovide importantcontributionstotheliterature by investigating the components of GCA education such ascourse contents, internship, postgraduate programs, academic events/activities,cookingcontestsandthefutureofGCAdepartments. Specifically, findings of this study reveal that course contents ofGCAdepartmentsshouldbedesignedonthebasisofsectorrequirements.Collaborationofthesectorandthepublicandprivateuniversitieswhentaking decisions regarding the course contents and courses, openingcourses in line with the needs of the sector and training the studentsaccordinglyareessentialforsector‐universitycollaboration.Accordingly,itisalsofoundthatthecoursecontentsshouldbesupplementedforgraduatestomeet the expectationsof the sector. These courses shouldbe student‐centered,insteadofassigninginstructor‐centeredones,andtocollaboratewiththesectorbyconferringonsectoralrepresentativeswhilepreparingthe curriculum. Limiting the number of students in applied courses inordertoincreasetheeffectivenessofeducationwillalsoensurethattheclasseswillbemoreefficient.Further,studyfindingsrevealthattheoreticaleducationshouldbesupplementedbyappliedcourses.AssuggestedbyTuyluoglu(2003),thetheoreticallearningwouldbemorepermanentwhensupported with applied courses. Moreover, increasing the number ofelectivecoursesmayallowstudentstospecializeontheirinterestedareas.


37

Studyfindingssuggestthatthesectorandstudentcongruenceisvery important for the performance of the internship, since internshiphas a significant influence on permanence of theoretical knowledge.Ensuring that students do their internship in linewith their educationshouldbeconsideredasapartofeducation.Thefactthatinternstudentsbeingtreatedaspersonnelandthebusinesses’higherexpectationsfromthesestudentscauseproblemsbetweenthestudentandthebusinesses,andthe internshipwouldendupasanunsatisfactoryprocess.Assuch,the businesses should be informed about the fact that internship is afollow‐upprocessesofeducation.Opportunitiesforinternshipandnumberofprojectsshouldbeincreasedanddiversifiedincollaborationwiththestakeholders.Thestudentsshouldatleastbepaidtheminimumwage,theinternshipconditionsshouldbestandardizedandcontrollable.Inaddition,revisionoftheacademiccalendarinlinewiththesector,andextensionofinternship periods will both ensure that the students find places forinternship and ensure a higher‐quality internship period. In addition,occupational laws shouldbe enacted, quality of employment shouldbeincreased, and job opportunities should beprovidedby revisionof thewagespolicy(KozakandAcikoz,2015).Moreover,asWalo(2001)suggests,educators should consider incorporating a practical component such asinternship or alternatively incorporate specialized training that willprovidesimilaroutcomesintermsofdevelopingstudents’managementcompetencies.Consequently,assuggestedbyKocetal.(2014),thereisaneedforacademicstospendmoretimeontheplanningandimplementationofgastronomyinternshipprograms. TheresultsalsosuggestedthatpostgraduateprogramsarerequiredinGCAeducation.Postgraduateprogramsareexpectedtoascertainthattheindividualsarespecializedincertainfields,thattheyconductscientificstudies topursueacademic careersand that theyacquire theability todeviseandimplementprojectsforthesectorasresearchersandplanners(Demirkol,2002).ThisisalsosupportedbyastudybyCetin(1993)thatinstructorsingastronomyhavenosectorexperience.Therefore,gastronomygraduates with industry experience should be encouraged to enrollpostgraduateprograms.Study findingsalsosuggest that thenumberofacademiceventswouldexpectedlyincreaseasthenumberofpostgraduateprogramsincrease.Thus,high‐qualitytourismeducationatpostgraduatelevel is important for training and educating qualified instructors andresearchers (Du,2003:109).Consequently, it is recommended that the


38

number of postgraduate programs should be increased to improve thequalityandquantityofacademicsinthefield. In linewiththe findings, it isclear thatGCAdepartmentsdonotonlytrainchefs/cooks.Thegraduatesofthismajorarealsoprospectiveacademicians,executivechefsandfacilitymanagers.Thus,armingstudentswithnecessaryknowledgeandskills isoneof themost importantgoals ofthesedepartments.Currentdrawbacksandtheproblemsofthedepartmentscan be overcome when they are supported and backed by necessaryresourcesneededforqualityeducation.Inthiscontext,cooperationandcollaborationbetween the stakeholdersprovidesan important tool for thedepartmentheads.Moreover,closerrelationshipamongthedepartmentheadsisrequiredtosolvetheproblemsspecifictothesedepartmentsandtoimprovetheireducationalservices.Collaborationisalsoessential for theeffectiveness of practical training and the internship. Setting closerrelationswith the sector, assigning qualified internship businesses andmonitoring the studentsduring their employmentwill help faculties toharvestdesiredoutcomes.As thestudy findingssuggest, increasing thenumberofcontestswill improvecompetitivenessofboththedepartmentsand the students. As such, the contribution of national and internationalprominentrepresentatives tomakeassessments ina fairandrighteouswayisnecessaryfororganizingcontestsandeventsonGCA.Lastbutnotleast, developmentof a positive attitude towardsGCA is a prerequisiteforthesuccessofGCAdepartmentsatuniversitylevel. Onthebasisofstudyfindings,itcanbesuggestedthattheacademicdevelopment of these departments can be taken a step further if theinstructorsandacademicpersonnelaresupportedandsubsidized.Inthisregard, provision of adequate facilities, financial support for both thedepartment and the instructors are important for the success of thedepartments. Similarly, sector‐university collaboration can improvedepartmentstoovercomeproblemsofcoursecontentsdesignedaccordingto the needs and expectations of the sector and internship thatwouldsatisfyallparties.Moreover,organizingmeetings,seminarsandcontestsmayhelpdepartmentsanagendatosharetheirexperiences,programsandcapabilities. Such eventsmay alsohelp students to expand their learningand to meet important players in the field. In addition, promotionalactivities designed to help prospective students to make right choiceswhen building a career in this field can increase recognition about thefieldandthedepartments.Assuch,informingprospectivestudentsabout


39

the advantages and disadvantages of the field may also help rightstudentstochooseGCAeducation. Studyfindingsrevealedthatthemajorityoftheparticipantswereunsatisfiedwiththenumberofthegastronomycontests.Insuch,contestsprovideanopportunityforGCAstudentstogainexperienceandtoevaluatethemselvesintermsoftheirproficiencycomparedtotheirpeers.AccordingtotheresultsoftheAcademicTourismEducationSearchConference(KozakandAcikoz,2015),academicevents,suchasconferences,contestsandfairs,arethebackbonesofgastronomy.Moreover,theseeventsofferstudentsachancetoutilizeandshowtheirknowledgeandskills,anopportunitytomeet the sector employees. Therefore, increasing the number of studentcontestsmayhelpboththeGCAdepartmentsandtheirstudentstoevaluatethemselves. Thisstudyshouldbeevaluatedonthebasisofcertainlimitations.Theprimarylimitationofthisstudyisthatitislimitedwiththeopinionsof GCA department heads in Turkey. Moreover, although there are 29facultiesofferingGCAprograms,onlyninedepartmentheadsparticipatedinthestudy.Further,thisstudyislimitedtothedeterminedthemesofcoursecontents,internship,postgraduateprograms,academicevents,contestsandoverallevaluation.However,severalotherfactorsmayhaveanimpactontheGCAeducation.ItispossiblethatinclusionofotherfactorsmayresultinabetteroverviewofGCAeducation.Therefore,futurestudiesmayexamineotherfactorsinGCA.Furthermore,thisstudyincludedonlytheopinionsandthoughtsofdepartmentheads.Futureresearchshouldexamineperceptionsof students and other stakeholders in GCA. Similar studies focusing ondifferentstakeholdersanddifferentcountrieswillbroadenourknowledgeandhelpusdevelopbetterunderstandingofGCAeducation.

REFERENCES

1. Akinci,Z.(2015).“Meslekyüksekokullarındaverilenturizmeğitiminindeğerlendirilmesi”,MediterraneanJournalofHumanities,Vol.1,pp.43‐59.

2. Anton, J.M.R., Almeida,M.M.A., Andrada, L.R. and Pedroche,M.C. (2013).“Areuniversitytourismprogramspreparingtheprofessionalsthetouristindustryneeds?Alongitudinalstudy”,JournalofHospitality,Leisure,Sport&TourismEducation,Vol.12,pp.25‐35.


40

3. Avcikurt, C. (2000). “Education and training in tourism in Turkey:problemsandprospects”,BalıkesirÜniversitesiSosyalBilimlerEnstitüsüDergisi,Vol.4,pp.282‐297.

4. Barron,P.andMaxwell,G.(1993).“Hospitalitymanagementstudent’sviewsofthehospitalityindustry”,InternationalJournalofContemporaryHospitalityManagement,Vol.5No.5,pp.V‐V10.

5. Bayraktaroglu, E. (2013). Türkiye’de lisans düzeyinde turizm eğitimiveren kurumların uygulama olanakları. Unpublished master’s thesis.Afyonkarahisar:AfyonKocatepeUniversity.

6. Busby,G.D.andGibson,P.(2010).“Tourismandhospitalityinternshipexperiencesoverseas:aBritishperspective”,JournalofHospitality,Leisure,SportsandTourismEducation(Pre‐2012),Vol.9,No.1,pp.4.

7. Cakir,M.(2010).Otelişletmelerininmutfakbölümündeistihdamedilenpersonelin eğitim sürecinindeğerlendirilmesi: İstanbul’daki5 yıldızlı zincirotellere yönelik biralan çalışması. Unpublishedmaster’s thesis, İstanbul:İstanbulUniversity.

8. Capar, B. (2002). “Turizm sektörü‐turizm eğitim kurumları işbirliği, stajsorunlarıveçözümönerileri”.TurizmEğitimiWorkshop,pp.415‐426,Ankara,Turkey,9‐11December1992.

9. Cervera‐Taulet,A.C.andRuiz‐Molina,M.E.(2008).“Tourismeducation:astrategicanalysismodel”,JournalofHospitality,Leisure,Sports&TourismEducation,Vol.7,No.2,pp.59‐70.

10. Cetin,S.(1993).Turizmendüstrisinemutfakelemanıyetiştirmeyeyönelikeğitimprogramlarınındeğerlendirilmesi.UnpublishedDoctorateDissertation.Adana:ÇukurovaUniversity.

11. Demirkol,Ş.andPelit,E.(2002).“Türkiye’dekiturizmeğitimsistemiveAvrupa Birliği sürecinde olası gelişmeler”, Gazi Üniversitesi Ticaret veTurizmEğitimFakültesiDergisi,Vol.2,pp.1‐20.

12. Demirkol,Ş.(2002).“Turizmalanındakilisansüstüprogramlarınanalizivesektöreluyumlaştırmayayönelikgörüşler”.TurizmEğitimiWorkshop,pp.87‐98,Ankara,Turkey,9‐11December1992.

13. Du, J. (2003). “Reforms anddevelopment of higher tourismeducation inChina”,JournalofTeachinginTravel&Tourism,Vol.3,No.1,pp.103‐113.

14. Dwyer,L.,Mellor,R.,Mistilis,N.andMules,T.(2000).“Aframeworkforevaluating and forecasting the impacts of special events”, in Allen, J.,Harris,R.,Jago,L.K.andVeal,A.J.(Eds.)EventsBeyond2000:SettingtheAgenda,AustralianCentreforEventManagement,Sydney,pp.31‐45.

15. Ersoy,A.andAnagun,S.S.(2009).“Sınıföğretmenlerininfenveteknolojidersiödevsürecineilişkingörüşleri”,NecatibeyEğitimFakültesiElektronikFenveMatematikEğitimiDergisi,Vol.3,No.1.


41

16. Garip,E.andGarip,S.B.(2012).“İçmimarlıkeğitimindeyaratıcılıkveyarismalar(Creativityandcontestsininteriorarchitectureeducation)”,inManav,B.,Kutlu,R.,Eceoğlu,A.,Kılanc,R.Ö.(Eds.)ICMEK2ndNationalCongressonInteriorArchitectureEducation,IstanbulKulturUniversity,Istanbul,pp.24‐33.

17. Getz, D. (1994). “Students’ work experiences, perceptions and attitudestowardscareersinhospitalityandtourism:alongitudinalcasestudyinSpey Valley, Scotland”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,Vol.13,No.1,pp25–37.

18. Getz,D.(1997).“Eventmanagementandeventtourism”,NewYork:CognizantCommunicationCorporation.

19. Gilhespy, I. (2005). “Designing personal developmentmodules for leisurestudies:adiscussionof theadoptionof flexibleteachingand learningapproaches”,JournalofLeisure,Sport&TourismEducation,Vol.4,No.1.

20. Gokdemir, A. (2009). “Yiyecek içecek işletmelerindemutfakhizmetleriyönetimi”,Ankara:DetayYayıncılık.

21. Gorkem,O.andOzturk,Y.(2011).“Otelmutfaklarındastajyeristihdamıvebecerieğitimiyeterliğineyönelikbiruygulama”,İşletmeAraştırmalarıDergisi,Vol.3,No.4,pp.18‐33.

22. Hacioglu,N.,Kasli,M.,Sahin,S.andTetik,N.(2008).“Türkiye’deturizmeğitimi”,Ankara:DetayYayncılık.

23. Harrington,R.,Mandabach,K.H.VanLeeuwen,D.andThibodeaux,W.(2005).“Amulti‐lensframeworkexplainingstructuraldifferencesacrossfoodserviceandculinaryeducation”,International JournalofHospitalityManagement,Vol.24,No.2,pp.195‐218.

24. Hegarty, J.A. (2011). “Achieving excellence bymeans of critical reflectionandcultural imagination inculinaryartsandgastronomyeducation”,JournalofCulinaryScience&Technology,Vol.9,No.2,pp.55‐63.

25. Hertzman,J.andAckerman,R.(2010).“Evaluatingqualityinassociatedegreeculinaryartsprograms”,QualityAssuranceinEducation,Vol.18,No.3,pp.209‐226.

26. Hughes, M.H. (2003). Culinary professional training:measurement ofnutritionknowledgeamongculinarystudentsenrolledinasoutheasternculinaryartsinstitute.UnpublishedDoctorateDissertation,Alabama:AuburnUniversity.

27. Judith, M. (2014). “Academic conference attendance‐motives and barriersaffectingthetourism,eventsandhospitalityuniversityeducationsector”,inCAUTHE2014:TourismandHospitalityintheContemporaryWorld:Trends,ChangesandComplexity,SchoolofTourism,theUniversityofQueensland,Brisbane,pp.1009‐1011.


42

28. Kayayurt, Y. (2002).Dört–beşyıldızlıotelmutfaklarında çalışan personelinyiyecek hazırlama, pişirme ve saklama konusundaki bilgi düzeylerinintespitivebunauygunhizmet içieğitimprogramıönerisi.Unpublishedmaster’sthesis.Ankara:GaziUniversity.

29. Kivela,J.andCrotts,J.C.(2006).“Tourismandgastronomy:gastronomy'sinfluenceonhowtouristsexperienceadestination”,JournalofHospitality&TourismResearch,Vol.30,No.3,pp.354‐377.

30. Ko,W. (2010). “To evaluate the professional culinary competence ofhospitality”,JournalofCulinaryScience&Technology,Vol.8,No.2‐3,pp.136‐146.

31. Ko,W.H. and Chung, F.M. (2015). “Learning satisfaction for culinarystudents: the effect of teaching quality and professional experience”,International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, Vol.7, No.1,pp.1‐13.

32. Koc, E., Yumusak, S., Ulukoy,M., Kilic, R. and Toptas, A. (2014). “Areinternshipprogramsencouragingordiscouraging?AviewpointoftourismandhospitalitystudentsinTurkey”,JournalofHospitality,Leisure,Sport&TourismEducation,Vol.15,pp.135‐142.

33. Kozak, N. and Acikoz Z. (2015). “Academic tourism education searchconference: gastronomy education search conference (Report No: 7)”,Antalya,Turkey,26‐27February2015.

34. Lee,M.J., Kim, S.S. andAdaL. (2008). “Perceptionsof hospitality andtourismstudentstowardsstudymotivationsandpreferences:astudyof Hong Kong students”, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport andTourismEducation,Vol.7,No.2,pp.45‐58.

35. Powell,R.A.(2005).“Integratingpracticeintoengineeringeducation”,in Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition,Portland,Oregon,USA,pp.8437‐8449.

36. Ritchie,J.,Spencer,L.andO’Connor,W.(2003).“Carryingoutqualitativeanalysis”.InRitchie,J.andLewis,J.(Eds.),Qualitativeresearchpractice,Sage,London,pp.219‐262

37. Ruhanen,L. andMcLennan,C. (2012). “The learningexperiencesandpreferencesof tourismpostgraduatestudents”, JournalofTeaching inTravel&Tourism,Vol.12,pp.146‐164.

38. Saha,S.C.(2014).“Thekitchenchampions”,HumanCapital,Sept.2012,pp.48‐51.

39. Santich,B.(2004).“Thestudyofgastronomyanditsrelevancetohospitalityeducationandtraining”, International JournalofHospitalityManagement,Vol.23,pp.15‐24.


43

40. Sarioglan,M.(2013).“Industrialprovisionofpracticeskillsofstudentstraininggastronomyeducation:caseofTurkey”, International JournalonNewTrendsinEducationandtheirImplication,Vol.4,No.4,pp.216‐220.

41. Sarioglan, M. (2014). “Expectations of employee in food & beveragefirmandgastronomyeducation(CaseofTurkey)”,EuropeanJournalofResearchonEducation,2014,Vol.2,(SpecialIssue6),pp.198‐202.

42. Shen, M.C. (2002). “Professional competences required for entry‐levelworkerinChinese‐stylebanquethall:amodelDelphistudy”.Unpublishedmaster’sthesis,Taiwan:ShihHsinUniversity.

43. Sigala,M.andBaum,T.(2003).“Trendsandissuesintourismandhospitalityhighereducation:visioningtheFuture”,TourismandHospitalityResearch,Vol.4,No.4,pp.367‐76.

44. Soybali, H. andBayraktaroglu, E. (2013). “Türkiye’de lisans düzeyindeturizmeğitimiverenkurumlarınuygulamaolanaklarınındeğerlendirilmesiüzerinebiraraştırma”,AnatoliaTurizmAraştırmalarıDergisi,Vol.24,No.2,pp.185‐199.

45. Tuyluoglu, T. (2003). Türkiye turizm eğitiminin niteliği. Unpublishedmaster’sthesis,Ankara:AnkaraUniversity.

46. Unisen,A.andEmine,Kaya(2015). “Fenbilimleridersinin ilkokul üçüncüsınıfprogramınaalınmasıylailgiliöğretmengörüşlerinindeğerlendirilmesi”,AdıyamanÜniversitesiSosyalBilimlerEnstitüsüDergisi,2015Vol.2,pp.546‐571.

47. Walo,M.(2001).“AssessingthecontributionofinternshipindevelopingAustraliantourismandhospitalitystudents’managementcompetencies”,Asia‐PacificJournalofCooperativeEducation,Vol.2,No.1,pp.12‐28.

48. Yang,W.W.(2003).Astudyonprofessionalcompetencesofchefs:Comparisonsof food and beverage professional competences. Unpublished master’sthesis.Taiwan:NationalYunlinUniversityofScienceandTechnology.

49. Yildirim A. and Simsek H. (2013). “Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırmayöntemleri”.Ankara:SeçkinYayncılık.

50. Zahari,M.S.M., Jalis,M.H., Zulfifly,M.I., Radzi, S.M. andOthman, Z. (2009).“Gastronomy: an opportunity forMalaysian educators”, InternationalEducationStudies,Vol.2No.2,pp.66‐71.

51. Zakaria,M.A.,Wahab,S.H.A.andJasmi,M.A.(2010).“Culinaryarteducation:ademandingprofession inculinarytourismforMalaysian’sneweconomyniche”,Proceedingsofthe1stUPIInternationalConferenceonTechnicalandVocationalEducationandTraining,Bandung,Indonesia,10‐11November2010,pp.534‐542.


ENTREPRENEURIALORIENTATIONOFSTUDENTS

OANAADRIANAGICĂ1,DOBROVOLSKAANASTASIYA2

ABSTRACT. The main purpose of this paper is to investigate theentrepreneurial orientation of university students and whether theirnationalities and level of education influence their entrepreneurialintentions.Theinvestigatedsampleincludedstudentsfrom6countries(Romania, Germany, Poland, Russia, UnitedKingdomand France) andthe entrepreneurial traitswere risk‐takingpropensity, innovativeness,locus of control, self‐esteem, need for achievement and proactiveness.Thefindings indicatethat,overall,only inthecaseof locusofcontrolthere are statistically significant differences between the differentnationalities. The need for achievement and proactiveness differsignificantlyonlyinthecaseofGermans,ononehand,andRomaniansandRussiansontheother.Theotherentrepreneurialdimensionswerenotinfluencedbystudents’nationality.Ourresultsshowthatonlyself‐esteemandproactivenesswereinfluencedbythelevelofstudies.

Keywords: personality traits, entrepreneurial orientation, students,educationlevel

JELClassification:L26

Recommendedcitation:Gica,O.A.,Dobrovolska,A.,Entrepreneurialorientationofstudents,StudiaUBBNegotia,vol.62,issue1(March),2017,pp.45‐62.

1Assoc.Prof.Dr.,DepartmentofHospitalityServices,FacultyofBusiness,Babeș‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,[email protected]

2SeniorBusinessDevelopmentConsultant,Oracle,[email protected]

OANAADRIANAGICĂ,DOBROVOLSKAANASTASIYA

46

INTRODUCTIONThepositiveeffectofentrepreneurshiponeconomicgrowthandits

capacity tocreatewealth,productandprocess innovations, technologicalandorganizationalknowledgeandtoprovidenewjobsisacknowledged.

Entrepreneurship can be promoted early in life by education(Obschonka,Silbereisen&Schmitt‐Rodermund,2010,inLucaandCazan,2011).Educationalprogramsaimingatthedevelopmentofentrepreneurialcompetences do make a difference, providing not only knowledge, butattitudechangetowardsentrepreneurship(Souitaris,Zerbinati&Al‐Laham,2007,inLucaandCazan,2011).Growingevidenceregardingtherelationshipbetweenentrepreneurs’education,theirbusinesses,andprospectsofsuccessisindicativeoftheimportanceofuniversity‐basedtrainingforbothgraduateandundergraduatestudents(Al‐Habib,Abdulaziz,2012).

Entrepreneurshipisamatterofculture(institutionalpointofview)oramatterofstateofmind(individualpointofview).Thusentrepreneurshipeducation ishelpful tocreateanentrepreneurial culturewithin countries,societies,firms,associations,andsoon,and/ortochangethemindsetofindividuals(FayolleandKlandz,2006).

Culture isa setof sharedvalues,beliefsandexpectedbehavior(Hofstede,2001,inPostigo,IacobucciandTamborini,2006).Anentrepreneurialcultureimpliesasocietywithahighentrepreneurialbirthrateandwithan important degree of acceptance of entrepreneurs. Some culturesproducemoreentrepreneursthanothers.MuellerandThomas(2001)seea relationshipbetweenvalues,beliefsandbehavior,andpointoutthatdifferencesinculturemayinfluencethedecisionofwhetherornottobecomeanentrepreneur.Onlyfewstudiesfocusedoncross‐culturalstudiesintermsofentrepreneurial intentamongstudents(LüthjeandFranke,2003).Thestudiesfocusingonstudents’careerdecisionsconcludethat cultural context influences career decisions through social norms,valuationsandpracticesandthereexistconsistentcross‐culturaldifferencesinpeople'swillingnesstobecomeanentrepreneur(Floresetal.,2010).

Inthiscontext,themainpurposeofthisresearchistoinvestigatetheentrepreneurialorientationofuniversitystudentsandwhethertheirnationalitiesandlevelofeducationinfluencetheirentrepreneurialintentionsinanattempttofillthegapexistentintheliteratureintermofcross‐culturalstudies.Theinvestigatedsampleincludedstudentsfrom6countries(Romania,


47

Germany,Poland,Russia,GreatBritainandFrance)andtheentrepreneurialtraitsentrepreneurialwererisk‐takingpropensity,innovativeness,locusofcontrol, self‐esteem,need forachievementandproactivenesswhichwerementionedbypreviousstudiesandwhichweconsidertoberepresentativeforsuccessfulentrepreneurs.

LITERATUREREVIEWThe topic of Entrepreneurship has been discussed in many

researchpapersforseveraldecades.Thestudiesconcerningthetriggersofentrepreneurship argue thatmotivations for becoming an entrepreneurcan be categorized as either push or pull situational factors includingfrustrationwithpresentlife‐style,childhood,familyenvironment,education,age,workhistory,rolemodels,andsupportnetworks(Hisrich,1990;Martin,1984;Moore,1986;Krueger,1993;ScheinbergandMacMillan,1988,inMuellerandThomas,2001).Inadditiontopushandpullfactors,personalcharacteristics(sometimesreferredtoaspersonalitytraits)alsoplayaroleinnewventureinitiation(MuellerandThomas,2001).

The trait model has been a significant element of research onentrepreneurship(GürolandAtsan,2006).Severaltheoristshavearguedthatsomepersonalcharacteristicsortraitsdefinetheentrepreneurandare instrumental inmotivatingentrepreneurialbehavior (Mueller andThomas,2001).

Hisrich(1990)arguesthattheentrepreneurdemonstratesinitiativeandcreativethinking,isabletoorganizesocialandeconomicmechanismsto turn resourcesandsituations topractical account, andaccepts riskandfailure.Previousstudiesindicatethatentrepreneurspossesshighneedfor achievement, moderate risk‐taking propensity (McClelland, 1961,Brockhaus1982inMuellerandThomas,2001;BegleyandBoyd1987,Koh,1996, in Ertuna and Gurel, 2008, Gürol and Atsan, 2006), preference forenergeticand/ornovelactivity(McClelland,1961inMuellerandThomas,2001),toleranceofambiguity(BegleyandBoyd,1987,Koh,1996,inErtunaandGurel,2008), internal locusofcontrol,highdegreeof self‐confidenceandinnovativeness(Koh,1996,inErtunaandGurel,2008,GürolandAtsan,2006), and assuming personal responsibility for successes or failure(McClelland,1961inMuellerandThomas,2001).


48

In this paper we examine six personal traits associated withentrepreneurialpotential,namely:innovativeness,self‐esteem,proactiveness,needforachievement,locusofcontrolandrisktakingpropensity.

Innovativeness is generally connected with entrepreneurshipandtheabilitytostartanewbusiness.Schumpeter(1990)andGurelet al.(2010)definedtheentrepreneurasaninnovatorandDrucker(1985,inAl‐HabibandAbdulaziz,2012)arguesthatcreativityandinnovationareconditionsinherentintheroleofentrepreneurship.

Self‐esteemisanimportantcharacteristicofanentrepreneur,ashavinghighconfidenceinyourownabilitiesisvitalforsuccessfullyhandlingcomplexanddemandingtasks.Intheliteratureonentrepreneurship,itisstatedthatentrepreneursdemonstrateahigherdegreeofself‐esteemwithrespecttoothers(Koh,1996inGürolandAtsan,2006;Robinsonetal.,1991).

Proactivenessreflects initiative in theentrepreneurialprocess,describingthecapabilityofanticipatingandpreparingforpotentialsituationsin the future, whether they are positive or negative. It is an importantfunctionforentrepreneursinthatitencompassesthevisionandimaginationthatisneededtopursuemarketopportunities(LumpkinandDess,1996).

Need for achievement – individuals with a high need forachievementperformbetterwithnon‐routinetasksandtakeresponsibilityfortheirperformance.Theyseekfeedback,comparethemselveswithothers,set themselves challenging goals, and constantly try to improve theirperformance(McClelland,1961,inKraussetal.,2015).

Locusofcontroldescribestheperceptionapersonhasinregardstohowhe/shebelievestheycaninfluencethelifeevents.Individualswithaninternal locus of control believe that they are in control of their life, priorresearchdemonstratedthatthosepossessingahigherinternallocusofcontrolaremoreentrepreneurialthanoneswithalowerinternallocusofcontrol(BegleyandBoyd,1987).

Risk‐takinghasbeenhistoricallyassociatedwithentrepreneurship(Gürol and Atsan, 2006). Previous empirical research characterizeentrepreneursasrisk‐takers,althoughtheyalsoindicatethatentrepreneursprefertotakemoderaterisksintheirbusinessdecisionsratherthanbeing


49

involved in situationswhere there is extreme risk or uncertainty (Koh,1996, Thomas andMueller, 2000, in Gurel, Altinay, and Daniele, 2010).Risk‐takingpropensitycanbeeffectivelyconceptualizedasanindividual’sorientationtowardtakingchancesinadecision‐makingscenario(SextonandBowman,1985,inAl‐Habib,Abdulaziz,2012).

AccordingtoSchumpeter(MuellerandThomas,2001)thecreationofnewventuresandentrepreneurialactivitydependsupontheavailabilityof prospective entrepreneurs, i.e. individuals possessingpersonality traitscombinedwith personal circumstanceswhich are likely to lead them toforminganewventureadalsouponandentrepreneurialclimate. MATERIALSANDRESEARCHMETHODS

This research paper focuses on exploring the entrepreneurial

orientationdimensionsofstudentsandhowtheireducationandnationalityinfluence these dimensions. We have conducted a questionnaire‐basedsurvey.Datawerecollectedviaanonlineself‐administeredquestionnairewhichwaspostedonsocialmedialikeFacebook,targetingstudentgroupsandstudentforums.Thesamplingmethodusedwas“snowball”.

The questionnaire consisted of two main parts, the first wasdesigned to collect information about demographics and the second partconsistedof64itemsusedformeasuringtheentrepreneurialdimensions:attitude towardsrisk,need forachievement,self‐esteem, locusof control,proactiveness, and innovativeness. Each dimension was measured usingseveralitems,ona5pointLikertscaleswithanchors“1‐Stronglydisagree”and“5‐Stronglyagree”.Theneedforachievementwasmeasuredwith6items, innovativenesswith22 items,personal controlwith7 items, self‐esteemwith8items,risk‐takingwith6(items)andproactivenesswith7items.QuestionsregardingInnovative‐nessinclude:“Ibelieveitismoreimportant to thinkabout futurepossibilities thanpast results”or “If Isee something I don’t like, I fix it”; Proactivenesswasmeasuredwithelementssuchas“Ibelievethattobesuccessfulabusinesspersonmustspendtimeplanningthefutureofhis/herbusiness”and“Ialwaystrytomake friendswithpeoplewhomaybeuseful in life”;Risk‐takingwasdeterminedbyquestionslike“Igetexcitedwhendoingnew,unusualthingsinmylife”or“Itendtoactbravelyinsituationswhereriskisinvolved”.


50

The variables representing the six entrepreneurial dimensionswere computed as the average score of all the items describing thespecificdimensions.

Wehaveformulatedtworesearchhypotheses:

H1:Students’nationalityinfluencetheirentrepreneurialorientationdimensions

H2:Students’educationinfluencetheirentrepreneurialorientationdimensions

To test the first hypothesiswehave appliedOne –wayANOVAandtheT‐Testbypairingtwonationalities.ForthesecondonewehaveusedT‐TesttocomparethemeansoftheEO(entrepreneurialorientation)dimensionsbetweenthetwogroupsofstudents(bachelorandrespectively,masterstudents).

SamplecharacteristicsAtotalnumberof250studentshavetakenpartinthissurvey,but

only a number of 164 questionnaireswere complete. The final sampleincludesstudentsfromGermany(21),France(20),UK(22),Poland(20),Russia(21)andRomania(60).Themajorityofrespondentswerefemales(116)andtheaverageageoftheparticipantswas23years.

In terms of educational level, 87 participants were Bachelorstudents, 4 MBA students and 73 were Master students. The sampleincludedstudentswithdiversemajors/specializationsrangingfrombusinessor economics (the highest percentage, of approximately 40%) to IT,communication,education,archeology,languages,ormedicine.Table1presents more information regarding the characteristics of studentsthatwereincludedinoursample.

Table1.Samplecharacteristics

Gender Percent Educationlevel Percent

Male 29.3 Bachelor 53.0Female 70.7 Master 47.0


51

Nationality Percent Major/Specialisation Percent

British 13.4 BusinessandEconomics 46.3French 12.2 PsychologyandSociology 4.9German 12.8 LanguagesandEducation 12.2Polish 12.2 ITandEngineering 15.2Romanian 36.6 Law 4.3Russian 12.8 EuropeanandPoliticalstudies 10.4 Medicine 1.8

HistoryandArcheology 1.8

Agriculture 3.0

Source:Authors'calculations RESEARCHRESULTS

Backgroundandentrepreneurialintentions

From the164 respondents, 125 individuals (76.2%)havebeenalreadyemployed in some formor another.This comes as adifferentfigurethanmanywouldexpect,sincegenerallytheoldergenerationsofstudents were not as inclined, or forced to, find employed as manyyoungadultsarenow.Itshowshowtherecentshifts ineconomicandsocialfactors,suchashightuitionfeesofmanyeducationalinstitutionsorrequirementsintermsofworkexperienceofmanycompanies,determinestudents toenter the jobmarketduring theiruniversitystudies.Morethan 50% of the students participating in our study have less than 3yearsofworkexperience.

As previous research shows, having an entrepreneur in thefamily is an important factor conducive to the decision to start abusiness(MatthewsandMoser,1995inVecianaetal.,2005).Anumberof 64 students declared they have an entrepreneur in their family.Consequently,forthesepersonstheideaofbecominganentrepreneurthemselvesshouldbemoreappealing.However,only6%ofthequestionedstudentshavealreadystarted theirownbusiness.Moredetails regardingstudent’sbackgroundareshownintable2.


52

Table2.Students’background

Workexperience PercentFamily

entrepreneurPercent

No 23.8 No 61.6Yes 76.2 Yes 38.4

Yearsofworkexperience Percent Ownabusiness Percent

none 22.6 No 93.9lessthan1year 4.9 Yes 6.1between1and3years 47.6

between3and5years 17.1

between5and10years 5.5

over10years 2.4

Source:Authors'calculations

H1:Students’nationality influence theirentrepreneurialorientationdimensions

Asmentionedintheresearchmethodologysection,ourresearch

has focused on six entrepreneurial orientation dimensions, namelyneedforachievement,innovativeness,locusofcontrol,self‐esteem,risktakingpropensityandproactiveness.

As the results show (see table 3) the students participating inourstudyposesagoodentrepreneurialpotentialastheyarecharacterizedbyahighneedforachievement,proactiveness,creativity,confidenceintheirownskillsandabilities,believethattheyareincontroloftheirlifeandexhibitamoderaterisktakingpropensity.

One‐wayANOVAhas been usedwas for testing correlations inordertoidentifysignificantdifferenceamongnationalities.TheresultsoftheANOVAtest(asshownintable4)showthat,inthecaselocusofcontrol (Sig .021) there is a statistically significant difference amongnationalities.


53

Table3.MeanscoresofEOdimensions

Needfor

achievementInnovative‐

nessLocusofcontrol

Self‐esteem

Risk‐takingpropensity

Proactive‐ness

Mean 3.9307 3.6799 3.5357 3.6578 3.0976 3.7605N 164 164 164 164 164 164Std.

Deviation.50025 .46566 .55258 .39306 .61116 .65282


Table4.Entrepreneurialdimensionsbynationality–ANOVAtestresults

SumofSquares

dfMeanSquare

F Sig.

Needforachieve‐ment

BetweenGroups 2.363 5 .473 1.943 .090WithinGroups 38.427 158 .243 Total 40.790 163

Innovative‐ness


Locusofcontrol


Self‐esteem

BetweenGroups .479 5 .096 .612 .691WithinGroups 24.704 158 .156 Total 25.183 163



Proactive‐ness

BetweenGroups 2.536 5 .507 1.197 .313

WithinGroups 66.931 158 .424

Total 69.467 163



54

ForamoreindepthanalysiswehaveappliedtheT‐testtoidentifythedifferencesbetweennationalitiesintermsoflocusofcontroldimension.Theresults (see table5)showthat therearestatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenBritishandGerman(3.71,vs.3.26),FrenchandRussian(3.37vs.3.7),GermanandRomanian(3.26vs.3.6)andGermanandRussian(3.26.vs.3.7).

Table5.IndependentSampleT‐Testforlocusofcontroldimension

Levene'sTestforEqualityofVariances

t‐testforEqualityofMeans

F Sig.

t df

Sig.

(2‐tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std.Error

Difference

British/French

Equalvariancesassumed

2.183 .147 1.858 40 .071 .33571 .18071

British/German


1.386 .246 2.471 41 .018 .44898 .18169

British/Polish


.077 .783 1.611 40 .115 .31429 .19505

British/Romanian


1.505 .224 .782 80 .437 .10952 .14011

British/Russian


1.198 .280 .074 41 .941 .01361 .18388

French/German


.145 .706 .756 39 .454 .11327 .14977

French/Polish


2.226 .144 ‐.130 38 .897 ‐.02143 .16513

French/Romanian


.698 .406 ‐1.743 78 .085 ‐.22619 .12976

French/Russian


.190 .665 ‐2.110 39 .041 ‐.32211 .15268

German/Polish


1.217 .277 ‐.804 39 .426 ‐.13469 .16758

German/Romanian


.148 .701 ‐2.625 79 .010 ‐.33946 .12934


55

German/Russian


.005 .945 ‐2.798 40 .008 ‐.43537 .15562

Polish/Romanian


.877 .352 ‐1.495 78 .139 ‐.20476 .13699

Polish/Russian


.990 .326 ‐1.767 39 .085 ‐.30068 .17019

Romanian/Russian


.086 .770 ‐.735 79 .464 ‐.09592 .13044

Source:Authors'calculationsFromtheachievementperspective,RomaniansandRussiansare

generallyhavingagreaterdesiretobehigh‐achievers,withscoresof4.02out of 5. Perhaps this comes as a result of the local economic and socialenvironment,wherethehigherriskoflivinginrelativepovertytranslatestoahigherdrivetobesuccessful.Meanwhile,thelowestachieversareGermans,having the final value of 3.67. As the T‐test shows there is a statisticallysignificantdifferenceintermsofneedforachievementbetweenGermansandRussians(t=‐2.555,df=40,sig.=.015)andbetweenGermansandRomanians(t=‐2.809,df=79,sig.=.006).

Innovativeness,theabilitytointroducesomethingnewanddifferenton themarket (Chen 2007; Gupta et al. 2004 in Ozaralli and Rivenburgh,2016),isoneofthecornerstonesofentrepreneurship,astheskillofbringingforwardaninnovativeproduct/serviceoftenmeansthedifferencebetweenmarketfailureandsuccess.Theaverageinnovativenessscoreforallstudentswas calculated at the value of 3.6799. TheBritish are themost innovativenation,withanoverallscoreof3.7355,followedbytheFrench(3.7227)andthe Romanians averaging 3.7220 in this category. The results prove howstudents belonging to these two nations are generally more able to thinkoutsidetheboxandapproachchallengesinaunique,unforeseenway.Germanstudents are the least innovative group of the six selected nationalities,receivinganaverageof3.4848points.

Self‐esteem,theconfidenceinyourownabilitiesandcompetencesinthe quality of yourwork is very important for entrepreneurs. The highestscoreatthisdimensionwasobtainedbytheRomanians(3.7) followedbytheBritish(3.68)whilethelowestscorewasobtainedbytheRussians(3.52).


56

The average scoreof risk‐takingpropensity for all the surveyedstudents is lower than for theotherentrepreneurialdimensions(3.09).The nation with the highest score is Britain, with an average of 3.26followedcloselybytheFrench(3.24).Thenationlessinclinedtoassumerisks are the Polish with a score of 2.91.While risk‐taking is perhapssomethingmoredifficulttoteachanddevelopthantheotherdimensionsofEntrepreneurialOrientation,itisstillextremelyimportantforstudentstobemorefamiliarwiththeissuesandchallengesowningabusinessimplies,butatthesametimetheyshouldbeencouragedto“fail”andlearnfromtheirmistakes.Afterall,thebigmajorityofentrepreneurshavehadtodealwithsome formofdisappointment in theiractivities,but foundsuccess bynotbeingafraidtotryoncemoreandtakingtherisktofailbeforetheirbreakthrough. Proactiveness,theabilitytoforeseethefutureifspecificstepsaretakenatamomentintime,couldbevital formanycurrentorpotentialentrepreneurs, especially for those dealing with volatile markets. TheBritishandtheRomanianstudentsaretheoneswiththehighestscore(3.81),whiletheGermansscorethelowest(3.44),theresultsoftheT‐Testshowinga statistically significant difference between Germans and Romanians(t=‐2.269,df=79,sig.=.026)andbetweenGermanandRussian(t=‐2.240,df=40,sig.=.031).

Table6.MeanscoresofEOdimensionsdependingonthenationality

NationalityNeedfor

achievementInnovative‐

nessLocusofcontrol

Self‐esteem


Proactive‐ness

British

Mean 3.9708 3.7355 3.7143 3.6818 3.2652 3.8182

N 22 22 22 22 22 22

Std.Deviation

.52842 .38381 .67727 .34660 .49243 .70426

French

Mean 3.8964 3.7227 3.3786 3.6500 3.2417 3.7929

N 20 20 20 20 20 20

Std.Deviation

.44060 .38651 .46181 .34076 .56319 .57419


57

German

Mean 3.6735 3.4848 3.2653 3.6488 3.0000 3.4422

N 21 21 21 21 21 21

Std.Deviation .46870 .55546 .49546 .37836 .66458 .59745

Polish

Mean 3.8214 3.6000 3.4000 3.6500 2.9167 3.7500

N 20 20 20 20 20 20

Std.Deviation .58650 .47596 .57630 .43792 .63176 .75717

Romanian

Mean 4.0226 3.7220 3.6048 3.7021 3.0667 3.8167

N 60 60 60 60 60 60

Std.Deviation .49740 .49412 .51499 .41623 .64455 .66804

Russian

Mean 4.0204 3.7316 3.7007 3.5298 3.1429 3.8367

N 21 21 21 21 21 21

Std.Deviation .40917 .40856 .51290 .40293 .58520 .54264


Wecanconclude thus that the firsthypothesiswhichstates thatstudents’nationalityinfluencetheirentrepreneurialorientationdimensions isonlypartiallysupported.

H2:Students’educationinfluencetheirentrepreneurialorientation

dimensions

The Independent Sample T‐Test was used to test whether theeducational levelofstudentsinfluencestheEntrepreneurialOrientationdimensions. The results (see table 7) highlighted that both self‐esteemand proactiveness were influenced by level of studies. Post‐graduatestudentswerebothmoreproactive,withscoreof3.88comparedtothatof3.64forBachelorstudents,andposesahigherself‐esteem,3.76meanscorecomparedto3.56forundergraduates. The master students show a slightly higher score for need forachievement, innovativenessandlocusofcontrolcomparedtobachelorstudents,whilethelattershowahigherscoreforrisk‐takingpropensity


58

(seetable8),butthetestshowedthattherewerenostatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenmasterandbachelorstudentsfortheseentrepreneurialdimensions.

ThereforewearguethatH2hypothesiswasonlypartiallysupported.

Table7.IndependentSampleT‐TestforEducationalLevel

Levene'sTestforEqualityofVariances

t‐testforEqualityofMeans

F Sig.

t df

Sig.(2‐tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std.Error

Difference

Needforachieve‐ment


.889 .347 ‐1.860 162 .065 ‐.14453 .07769

Innovativeness


.006 .938 ‐1.945 162 .053 ‐.14053 .07224

Locusofcontrol


.348 .556 .111 162 .912 .00962 .08672

Self‐esteem


.158 .692 ‐3.268 162 .001 ‐.19527 .05975



.532 .467 .088 162 .930 .00846 .09592

Proactive‐ness


1.924 .167 ‐2.401 162 .017 ‐.24172 .10068



59

Table8.Entrepreneurialdimensionsbyeducationallevel

Needforachivement

Inovative‐ness

Locusofcontrol

Self‐esteem


Proactive‐ness

BachelorMean 3.8629 3.6139 3.5402 3.5661 3.1015 3.647

Std.Deviation

0.5231 0.46344 0.56028 0.39337 0.57922 0.67775

Master Mean 4.0074 3.7544 3.5306 3.7614 3.0931 3.8887

Std.Deviation

0.46459 0.45979 0.54736 0.36846 0.64916 0.60237

Total Mean 3.9307 3.6799 3.5357 3.6578 3.0976 3.7605

Std.Deviation

.50025 .46566 .55258 .39306 .61116 .65282

Source:Authors'calculations CONCLUSIONS

As entrepreneurship contributes to economic growth,

entrepreneurship education can promote an entrepreneurial culturealso could help to develop and stimulate entrepreneurial skills whilepreparing students for a dynamic labour market where holding auniversity degree is no longer a guarantee of employment (Postigo,IacobucciandTamborini,2006).

Previousresearchonthepsychologicallevelshowsalinkbetweenvalues, beliefs and behaviour so it can be argued that differences innational culture, in which these values and beliefs are embedded, mayinfluenceawiderangeofbehavioursincludingthedecisiontobecomeself‐employedratherthantoworkforothers(MuellerandThomas,2001).Ourresearch results show that there is a statistically significant differenceacrossnationalitieswithrespecttolocusofcontrol.Thus,BritishstudentsaremoreinternalthanFrenchstudents,Russianstudentsaremoreinternalthan theirFrenchcounterpartsandRomanianandRussian students, ononehand,aremoreinternalthanGermanstudents,ontheotherhand.


60

Anotherfindingwasastatisticallysignificantdifferenceintermsofneedfor achievement and proactiveness, Romanian and Russian studentsscoring higher than Germans for these entrepreneurial traits. ThereforewemightconcludethatRomanianandRussianstudentspossessahigherentrepreneurial orientation, this finding being consistent with thefindingsofBaumetal.(1993,inHofstedeetal.,2004)that‘entrepreneurial’individuals in countries with high power distance, high uncertaintyavoidance, low masculinity and low level of individualism have moredifficultiesin‘doingthingstheirownway’assuchbeingmoreinclinedtostartforthemselves,andAcs,AudretschandEvans(1994,inHofstede,etal.,2004)whoempiricallyconfirmthathighuncertaintyavoidanceandlowindividualismarerelatedtohigherlevelsofself‐employment. Wehavefoundapositiveeffectofeducationonproactivenessandself‐esteem so we agree with other researchers findings that highereducationlevelscanincreaseperceptionsofperson’sownabilitytoexploitnewbusinessopportunities(AutioandAcs,2010,inDeClercq,Lim,Oh,2013). Intermsoffurtherresearch,ourpurposeistoextendthesamplesizeinordertoincludeinourstudymorestudentsfromGreatBritain,Germany,France,PolandandRussiaandalsotoinvestigatethe individualcultural values of students since research on culture’s influence onentrepreneurship showed contradicting results. Consistent with the‘aggregatepsychologicaltraits’perspectivePDI–(powerdistance index),UAI – (uncertainty avoidance index), MAS+ (masculinity) and IDV+(individualism)stimulateentrepreneurship(Shane,1992;1993,inHofstede,etal.,2004)whileaccordingtothesociallegitimationperspectiveregardingthe levelofentrepreneurship it couldbeargued that ‘entrepreneurial’individualsincountrieswithPDI+,UAI+,MAS‐,andIDV‐mightchoosetostarttheirownbusiness(Baumetal.,1993,inHofstede,etal.,2004).

REFERENCES

1. Begley,T.M.,Boyd,D., (1987),Psychologicalcharacteristicsassociatedwithperformanceinentrepreneurialfirmsandsmallbusinesses,JournalofBusinessVenturing,Vol.2,pg.79‐93.


61

2. DeClercq,D.,Lim,D.S.,Oh,C.H.,(2013).Individual‐levelresourcesandnewbusinessactivity:Thecontingentroleofinstitutionalcontext,EntrepreneurshipTheoryandPractice,Vol.37(2),pg.303‐330.

3. Ertuna,Z.I.,Gurel,E.(2008),EffectsofEntrepreneurialTraitsandEducationon Entrepreneurial Intentions, Proceedings of the 26th EuroCHRIECongress,Dubai,UnitedArabEmirates.

4. Fayolle, A., Klandt H., (2006), Issues and newness in the field ofentrepreneurshipeducation.Newlensesfornewpracticalandacademicquestions in International entrepreneurship education, issues andnewness,EdwardElgarPublishingLimited,Cheltenham,pg.1‐17.

5. Flores, L.Y., Robitschek, C., Celebi, E., Andersen, C., Hoang,U. (2010),SocialcognitiveinfluencesonMexicanAmericans’careerchoicesacrossHolland’sthemes,JournalofVocationalBehavior,Vol.76,pg.198–210.

6. Gürol, Y., Atsan, N., (2006), Entrepreneurial characteristics amongstuniversity students: Some insights for entrepreneurship education andtraininginTurkey,Education+Training,Vol.48(1),pg.25‐38.

7. Gurel,E.,Altinay,L.,Daniele,R.,(2010),TourismStudents’EntrepreneurialIntentions,AnnalsofTourismResearch,Vol.37(3),pg.646–669.

8. Al‐Habib,M.,Abdulaziz,K.(2012),IdentifyingTheTraitsOfEntrepreneursInAUniversitySetting:AnEmpiricalExaminationOfSaudiArabianUniversityStudents, International Business & Economics Research Journal, Vol.11(9),pg.1019‐1028.

9. Hofstede,G.,Noorderhaven,N.G.,Thurik,A.R.,Uhlaner,L.M.,Wennekers,A.R., Wildeman, R.E., (2004), Culture's role in entrepreneurship: self‐employment out of dissatisfaction, Innovation, entrepreneurship andculture: The interaction between technology, progress and economicgrowth,pg.162‐203.

10. Krauss,S.I.,Frese,M.,Friedrich,C.,&Unger,J.M.(2015).Entrepreneurialorientation:A psychologicalmodel of success among southernAfricansmallbusinessowners, European Journal ofWork andOrganizationalPsychology,Vol.14(3),pg.315‐344.

11. Luca,M.R.,Cazan,A.‐M.,(2011),InvolvementinEntrepreneurialTrainingandPersonality, Procedia ‐ Social andBehavioral Sciences,Vol. 30, pg.1251–1256.

12. Lumpkin,G.T.,Dess,G.G.(1996),Clarifyingtheentrepreneurialorientationconstruct and linking it toperformance, The Academy ofManagementReview,Vol.21(1),pg.135‐172.

13. Lüthje,C.,Franke,N.(2003),The“making”ofanentrepreneur:testingamodelofentrepreneurialintentamongengineeringstudentsatMIT,R&DManagement,Vol.33(2),pg.135–147.


62

14. Mueller,S.L.,Thomas,A.S.,(2001),Cultureandentrepreneurialpotential:A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness, Journal ofbusinessventuring,Vol.16(1),pg.51‐75.

15. Ozaralli, N., & Rivenburgh, N.K., (2016), Entrepreneurial intention:antecedentstoentrepreneurialbehaviorintheUSAandTurkey.JournalofGlobalEntrepreneurshipResearch,6(1),3.

16. Postigo, S., Iacobucci, D., and Tamborini, M.F. (2006). Undergraduatestudents as a source of potential entrepreneurs: a comparative studybetween ItalyandArgentina. Internationalentrepreneurshipeducation,issuesandnewness.EdwardElgarPublishingLimited,Cheltenham,pg.218‐240.

17. Robinson,P.B.,Stimpson,D.V.,Huefner,J.C.,Hunt,H.K.(1991),AnAttitudeApproachToThePredictionOfEntrepreneurship,EntrepreneurshipTheoryandPractice,Vol.15(4),pg.13‐31

18. Veciana,J.M.,Aponte,M.,Urbano,D.,(2005).Universitystudents’attitudestowardsentrepreneurship:Atwocountriescomparison,TheInternationalEntrepreneurshipandManagementJournal,Vol.1(2),pg.165‐182.


LAROUMANIE,PEUT‐ELLEÊTREUNEDESTINATIONATTRACTIVEPOURLESENTREPRENEURSFRANÇAIS?

VINCENTQUENTINDOARÉ1,MONICAMARIACOROŞ2

ABSTRACT.CouldRomaniabeanattractivedestinationforFrenchentrepreneurs? Today, most companies struggle to identify newpartners, new places and new markets for their current and futureprojects.Despitetheextremelypainfulpastduringthecommunisteraandovertheprolongedtransitionyears,Romaniafacesitsfuturewithoptimism.Oncethedifficultperiodafterthe2008crisishadcometoanend,Romaniastartedаneweconomicgrowth,withsubstantialforeigninvestment.Thisdevelopmentwasmainlyduetothetertiarysectorofthe national economy and to the international support provided byinstitutionssuchastheEuropeanCommission(EC), theWorldBank andthe InternationalMonetaryFund (IMF), combinedwithanambitiousadjustment program. Romania has understood that internationalrelationsplayacrucialroleinacountry’sdevelopment.Consequently,the state’s goalhasbecome thatofdevelopingandmaintaining goodpoliticalandeconomicrelationswithvariousstates,allovertheworld.Fromageographicalpointofview,thecountryisagatetotheEastfortheEuropeanUnion(EU)andtotheWestfortheOrientalstates.Rоmаniаpresentsаrealuntappedpotentialandаgreatnumberofbenefits,aimedat attracting new investors. The domestic market, the geographicposition, the geopolitical stability or the youth, as an asset, combinewithmanyopportunitiesinvariouseconomicsectors,providinginvestorswithgenuinereasonstotakeRomaniaintoconsideration,whenthinkingaboutnewphasesofinternationalization.Theattractivenessofthecountryas a destination for French investors and entrepreneurs is a widelyrecognized fact.Factors suchas the laborcost, the fiscalpolicies, theculturalsimilaritiesorthesharingofFrancophonevalueshavealready

1Diplôméenmaster:MasterProgramofInternationalBusinessAdministration,FacultédeBusiness,UniversitéBabeş‐BolyaideCluj‐Napoca,[email protected].

2Chargéedecours,Dr,DépartementdesServicesd’Hospitalité,FacultédeBusiness,UniversitéBabeş‐BolyaideCluj‐Napoca,[email protected],[email protected].

VINCENTQUENTINDOARÉ,MONICAMARIACOROŞ

64

brought major French players (Dacia‐Renault, Michelin, Grоupe SоciétéGénérаl BRD, Lafarge, Cora, Carrefour or Accor) on the localmarketandmanyFrenchinvestments.Inthiscontext,thepresentpaperaimsatidentifyingthoseelementsthatdeterminetheattractivenessofthismarket for French entrepreneurs. An interview‐based research hasbeenconductedamongthemembersof theCCIFER(ChambreFrançaisedeCommerceetd’IndustrieenRoumanie).

Mots‐clés:attractivité;entrepreneursfrançais;investisseursfrançais;environnementd’affaires;Roumanie.ClassificationJEL:L83

Recommendedcitation:Doare,V.Q., Coros,M.M.,LaRoumanie,peut‐elleêtreunedestinationattractivepour lesentrepreneursfrançais?,StudiaUBBNegotia,vol.62,issue1(March),2017,pp.63‐91.

1. IntroductionetrevuedelalittératureLemondeestenperpétuelleévolution,lacrisefinancièrede2008,

bien qu’ayant commencé aux États‐Unis, s’est étendue à l’économiemondiale en affectant particulièrement les pays du Nord. Dorénavant,nous vivons dans un monde où les entreprises recherchent lespartenaires, les lieux, les marchés de demain pour s’y projeter et s’yimplanter.Lamondialisationdel’économiefavoriselesdélocalisationsetlesentreprisesprofitentdecesopportunitéssurlecoûtdutravailetsurlafiscalitéavantageusedecertainsÉtatspourtransférerleursmoyensdeproduction des pays développés. C’est critiquable, mais c’est aussidéfendable,carlaconcurrenceestférocesurcertainssecteursd’activitéet la croissance est quasiment inexistante en Europe de l’Ouest; seulscertainsÉtatsémergentstirentlacroissancemondialeverslehaut,etcespays sontdésormaisassezpuissantspourexigerdeprofiter, euxaussi,dudéveloppementindustriel.C’estparticulièrementlecasdelaChine,duBrésil,etdel’Inde(WorldBank).


65

En ce qui concerne la Roumanie,malgré un passé extrêmementdouloureuxsous l’èrecommuniste,etpassi lointain,cepaysregarde lefutur avec optimisme. La chute de l’URSS et la rentrée dans l’UnionEuropéenneontpermisdeuxpériodesdecroissanceextraordinaireafinderattraper,dansunecertainemesure,leretardsurlespaysd’Europedel’Ouest. Les Roumains considèrent l’Union Européenne comme unechanceetcetenthousiasme,combinéàunepopulationjeune,dynamiqueetbienformée,donnenaissanceàdesprojetséconomiquesintéressantset susceptibles d’attirer des entreprises étrangères.Mais, est‐ce que laRoumanie a le potentiel nécessaire à ses ambitions? (Pearce Hardt etKaufman,1995;VorzsáketCoroş,2007,pp.251‐256)

Commedenombreuxancienspaysdublocsoviétique,sonéconomies’est transformée en économie demarché. Après une forte période decroissance, 6,5% de moyenne par an entre 2002 et 2008, l’économieroumainea connuunepériode trèsdifficile. La croissanced’avant‐crisereposaitsurunmécanismedangereux,alimentépardiversesbulles,tellesquelesprix,lessalaires,lescréditsouencorel’immobilier.Mais,également,surunaffluximportantdecapitauxétrangersetsurunepolitiquebudgétaireexpansionniste.Cependant,bienquelaRoumaniedisposed’unpotentielimportant,ellerestel’undespayslespluspauvresdel’UnionEuropéenne.CettepériodeafaitsubiràlaRoumanieunfortralentissementde l’activitééconomique,enparticulierdanslesecteurdel’automobilequiestlargementtributairedescommandesextérieures(PearceHardtetKaufman,1995;EuropeanCommission,2016;Ministèredesaffairesétrangèresfrançais).

Suite à son adhésion à l’Union Européenne en janvier 2007, laRoumaniea commencéunenouvellephasede croissanceéconomiqueavecdesinvestissementsétrangerssubstantiels.LesdifficultésconnuesaupréalableontobligélaRoumanieàfaireappelauxbailleursinternationaux,telsqueleFondsMonétaireInternational(FMI),lacommissionEuropéenneetlaBanqueMondiale,combinéavecunprogrammed’ajustementambitieux(EuropeanCommission,2016;Eur‐Lex,2006‐2007).

LePIBa augmentédemanière régulière et une classemoyennes’estdéveloppée.LaRoumanieestainsidevenue lesecondpays leplusdynamiquedelarégion,aprèslaPologne.Letauxdechômage,quiétaitrelativementbasavant lacrise financièreaaugmentédepuis2008(sesituantà7,5%en2013).LaRoumanieaffichel’unedesdettespubliquesles


66

plusbassesdel’UE(38,2%duPIBen2013).Lepaysaréussiàramenersondéficitpublic à 2,4%duproduit intérieurbrut (PIB) en2013. Lepays a retrouvé le cheminde la croissance en2012 (+1,5%), puis en2013(+2,5%)avecuneprévisionde+2,1%pour2014.Laproductionindustrielleaaugmentéde4,7%en2013(Eurostat;WorldBank).

Les Roumains nourrissent de très fortes attentes vis‐à‐vis del’Union Européenne. En effet, outre la source de développementéconomique que représente celle‐ci (32,2 milliards d’euros ont étéattribués à la Roumanie pour la période 2007‐2013, et la Roumaniebénéficierad’unedotation substantiellede7milliardsd’eurospour lapériode2014‐2020)pour lapopulation, cette intégrationdans l’Unionmarquelaruptureavec l’époquecommuniste(RomanianGovernment,2016).

La Roumanie corrige les déséquilibres macroéconomiquesresponsablesd’unecrisequis’estrévéléeavanttout interne.Le traitementdesdéséquilibresestpassépardesmesuresd’austéritédrastiques(baissede25%dessalairesdanslafonctionpublique,baissede15%destransfertssociauxhorsretraites,augmentationdelaTVAde19%à24%)etils’estsoldéparunsuccès.LaRoumanieaparailleursmisenœuvredesréformesstructurelles(loideresponsabilité fiscale, loiétablissantunegrilleuniquede salaires dans la fonction publique, loi de réforme du système desretraites),visantàpérenniser leretourvers lacroissance.Envuedesasituation géographique, le rapprochement s’est fait naturellement avecl’UnionEuropéenne.LaRoumanieacomprisquecelle‐cipourraitluiapporterle support dont le pays a besoinpour exploiter sonpotentiel (RomanianGovernment,2016).

Concernant les relations internationales de la Roumanie et avecl’UnionEuropéenne,onpeutdirequelepremierpaysd’Europecentraleet de l’Est à avoir établi des relations contractuelles avec l’UE (accordd’associationen1993,dépôtdelacandidatureen1995)estlaRoumaniequiavaitfaitdel’adhésionàl’Unioneuropéenne,intervenuele1erjanvier2007,unobjectifmajeurdesapolitiqueétrangèreet,également,desondéveloppementéconomiqueàlongterme(RomanianGovernment,2016).

Aujourd’hui,laprioritéeuropéennedelaRoumanieestsonentréedans l’espace Schengen. À la suite de son adhésion à l’UE en 2007, laRoumanieaengagéleprocessuspermettantsonentréedansl’espacede


67

librecirculationdesmarchandisesetdescitoyensquiconstituel’undeséléments fondateursde l’espace économique. Ce travail technique s’estachevéenjuin2011parl’adoptiondesconclusionsduConseilEuropéenrelevant leniveausuffisantdepréparation(VorzsáketCoroş,2007,pp.251‐256;Coroș,2012;Ministèredesaffairesétrangèresfrançais).

Toutefois,considérantlapersistancedeproblèmesdecorruptionetdedysfonctionnementdusystèmejudiciaire,l’AllemagneetlaFranceontremisencausel’entréedelaRoumaniedansl’espaceSchengen,puisontproposéàl’automne2011unesolutionendeuxétapes:dansunpremiertemps, l’ouverturedesfrontièresaériennesetmaritimes,puisdansunedécision ultérieure l’ouverture des frontières terrestres. Un exempleprouvequelaRoumanieafaitdegroseffortspourrentrerdansl’espaceSchengen:elleaintensifiésesdémarchespourlaluttecontrelacorruptionensedotantd’institutionstellesquel’AgenceNationalepourl’Intégrité(ANI)ou la Direction Nationale Anticorruption (DNA) (Ministère des affairesétrangèresfrançais;BusinessReview,2016;Doaré,2014).

L’aidedel’UnionEuropéennefaitbeaucoupdebienàl’économieroumaine et il est vrai que celle‐ci s’améliore depuis 2007. Mais, c’estégalementgrâceàl’Étatroumainetàsescitoyensquis’efforcentd’atteindreles objectifs fixés par les institutions européennes. En plus de sonappartenanceàl’UE,laRoumanieàdesrelationsavecdenombreuxpaysdans lemonde, dont la Chine qui est un de ses principaux partenaireséconomiques (Coroș, 2012;Ministère des affaires étrangères français;KPMGRoumanie).

LesrelationsdelaRoumanieaveclerestedumondeetaveclesÉtats‐Unis sont cordiales. Les deuxpays sont liéspar unpartenariat stratégiquedepuis 1997. La Roumanie accueille, en vertu de l’accord du 6 septembre2005,deuxbasesaméricaines.CetaccordaconstituéunsuccèsextérieuretintérieurpourlePrésidentBăsescu.Le13septembre2011,HillaryClinton(alors secrétaire d’État du gouvernement américain) et son homologueroumain Teodor Baconschi ont signé un accord intergouvernementalprévoyantlamiseenplaced’élémentsdusystèmededéfenseantimissile(ABM)surlabaseroumainedeDeveselu(Suddupays).CetaccordaétésignéaucoursdelavisiteauxÉtats‐UnisduPrésidentBăsescuquis’estentretenuavecMonsieurlePrésidentObama,visiteaucoursdelaquelleune«Déclaration commune sur lepartenariat stratégiquepour le 21e


68

siècle»aétésignée.Mais,outresadimensionmilitaire,onpeutvoirdanscepartenariat une réelle détermination des États‐Unis et de la Roumanied’entretenirdesrelations,etlaconfiancequiexisteentrecesdeuxnations(RomanianGovernment,2016;Doaré,2014).

LapolitiquerégionaledelaRoumaniesebasesurladiplomatiedebonvoisinageetl’ouverturesurlamerNoire.Bucarests’investit,depuislatransitiondémocratique,àétablirdebonnesrelationsavecsesvoisinsetàjouerunrôlerégional.Lepayssoutientlerenforcementdelaprésencedel’UnionEuropéennedanslarégionàtraversla«SynergiemerNoire»lancée en Avril 2007, qui vise à améliorer la coopération régionale,notammentàtraversl’OrganisationdeCoopérationÉconomiquedelaMerNoire(OCEMNouBSECselonl’acronymeanglais),dontelleestmembre(RomanianGovernment,2016;Doaré,2014).

Avoir de bonnes relations politiques et économiques avec laRépubliquePopulairedeChineestl’undesautresobjectifsmajeursdelapolitiqueextérieureroumaine.En1968,laChineaprisladéfensedelaRoumanie auprès d’unde ses grands voisins.Depuis cette date, lesrelationsentrecesdeuxpayssesontintensifiées.LaChineest,désormais,leplusimportantpartenairecommercialdelaRoumaniedansl’Extrême‐Orient,soitunélémentquiconfirmel’intérêtparticulierdelaRoumaniepour cet État. Malgré la distance entre ces deux pays, plus de 9000compagnies chinoises sont enregistrées actuellement en Roumanie,paysquiestdevenuattrayantauxyeuxdeshommesd’affaireschinois(RomanianGovernment,2016;Doaré,2014;WorldBank).

LaChineaffirme,desoncôté,êtreprêteàtravaillerencoopérationaveclaRoumaniepourdévelopperl’échangeetlacoopérationdansdiversdomaines,telsquelecommerce,l’investissement, l’énergierenouvelableetmêmelaculture.Parexemple,lenumérounchinoisdestechnologiesdel’informationdelacommunication(TIC)Huawei,aaidéàpromouvoirlemarchédel’emploilocaletfourniunsoutienttechnologiqueàlaRoumanie.SasituationgéographiquedanslapéninsulebalkaniquefaitdelaRoumaniele portail oriental de l’UnionEuropéenne. Elle travaille activement afind’intensifierlesrelationsentrelaChineetl’Europecentraleetorientale,ainsiqu’avecl’UnionEuropéenne.L’influencedelaChineauniveaumondialnepeutqu’êtrebénéfiqueàlaRoumanie(RomanianGovernment,2016;Doaré,2014).


69

Ilsemblerait,donc,quelaRoumanieaitréussiàadapterunepolitiqueéquilibréedanssesrelationsextérieures,enattachantsimultanémentunegrandeimportanceauxpaysoccidentauxetàlaChine.LaRoumanieestun pays qui a de l’influence dans sa région, malgré sa situation dedeuxième pays le plus pauvre de l’espace économique européen. Ellefait en sorte d’améliorer ses conditions grâce aux aides fournies parl’Union.SesrelationssolidesaveclesÉUAetlaChineluipermettentdes’appuyersurcelles‐cipourl’avenir.

Aujourd’hui,lePIBdelaRoumanieparsecteursedivisedelamanièresuivante: le secteur primaire représente 7% (28% de la populationactive),lesecteursecondaire37,3%(33%delapopulationactive)etlesecteur tertiaire 55,7% (39% de la population active) (Ministère desaffairesétrangèresfrançais;InstitutNationaldeStatistiquedeRoumanie).

2. MatérieletMéthodePoureffectuerlesrecherches,nousavonsutilisédessitesofficiels

afind’obtenir les résultats lesplusprécis,maiségalementpourque lesdonnées soient fiables. Notre travail est le résultat des recherchesd’informations et d’analyse de celles‐ci pour déterminer le potentieléconomiquedelaRoumaniedanslesannéesàvenir.Onadécidédefaireunerecherchequalitative,baséesurl’utilisationdel’interviewdirectouàdistance(partéléphoneouélectronique).Poursélecter lesparticipants,nous avons utilisé la base des données de la Chambre Française deCommerceetd’IndustrieenRoumanie(CCIFER),contenantplusde500entreprises, dont 60% sont PMEs. Nous avons choisi un échantillond’approximent 300 entreprises, en assurant une dispersion équilibréedesentreprisesfrançaisesétabliesenRoumanie(Annuaire;Chambresdecommerce et de l’industrie française à l’étranger). Nous avons invité lesmembresdel’échantillonétabliàprendrepartdansnotreétudequalitativeetnousavonseffectivementinterviewé36chefsd’entreprisesoureprésentants(positions exécutives). En utilisant le questionnaire et les donnéesobtenuesvialesinterviews,lesinformationscollectéesontétéanalyséesd’unemanière interprétative‐diagnostique. L’objectif principal de notrerecherche était de fournir uneprésentationdétaillée et complète du sujet.


70

Ensuite,nousavonsconstruituneenquêtepourlesentrepreneursetlesmanagersfrançaisdumarchéroumain,enquêtebaséesurlesrecherchesdeKPMG,PWC,DeloitteetEY.

Lacombinaisonqualitativeetquantitativeenrichitlarechercheetpermet d’atteindre l’objectif établi au début du projet. L’un des autresobjectifs majeurs était de voir si la Roumanie était une destinationattractive pour faire des affaires, du point de vue des investisseurs etmanagers français. L’outil de l’enquête était un questionnaire incluantdesquestionsfermées,maisaussidesquestionsàéchelle(permettantdenoterde1à10,parexemple)etquelquesquestionsouvertes.L’enquêteaétéfaiteetpartagéeenfrançais.

Les plus importants problèmes couverts durant cette rechercheontété:

lesavantagesetlesinconvénientsdelaRoumanieentantquedestinationd’affaires;

lesclésdusuccèsenRoumanie; desconseilspourlesPME:commentvenirenRoumanie; l’évolutiondumarchéenRoumanie; lessecteursclésfutursdelaRoumanie.3. RésultatsetDébatsLes avantages et les inconvénients de la Roumanie comme

destination d’affaires pour les entrepreneurs français ont constitué unpremier sujetdecette recherchepourdéterminer les raisonsd’investirenRoumanie.Malgréleralentissementsubiàcausedelacrisede2008,laRoumanieestdenouveausurdebonsrailspourévoluer. Ilexisteunréelpotentiel encore inexploitéou trèspeu;mais, aussi, un très grandnombre d’avantages mis à la disposition des investisseurs pour lesattirer,puisquelaRoumanieaenviedevoirs’installerdesinvestisseurs,toutenétantmotivéepourcontinuersaprogression(Awex,2016).

Avantd’aborderlepotentielparsecteurd’activité,ondémontrerale potentiel global qu’offre la Roumanie par son marché intérieur, sapositiongéographique, sa situationgéopolitiqueouencore sa jeunesse.Lepaysoffredesopportunitésdecroissanceparlataillesignificativede


71

sonmarchéetparsonstadededéveloppementquin’apasencoreatteintlamaturité.Aucarrefourentrel’Europeetl’AsieetayantsonouverturesurlamerNoire–l’exempleavecleportdeConstanţasurlamerNoire,quiestenfaituneported’accèsaumarchéeuropéenparleSud‐Est–,lepayssetrouveàl’intersectiondesroutescommercialeseuropéennesEst‐Ouest, mais aussi Europe‐Afrique du Nord‐Moyen Orient‐Asie et àenviron300kmduBosphore.

Comme conséquence du printemps arabe, la Roumanie estaujourd'huiunedestinationdechoixpourlesentreprisesquiavaientfaitle choix initial de délocaliser leurs activités dans les pays duMaghreb(Maroc,Tunisie,…)etquisouhaitentaujourd'huirelocalisercesactivitésversunezoneplusstable.LaRoumanieétantmembredel’UEainsiquedel’OTAN,lesinvestisseursnes’inquiètentpasdelastabilitédupays.

LaRoumaniedisposed’unejeunessedequalitéetquiaenviederéussir.Leursparentsayantconnulecommunisme,lesjeunesroumainsconnaissent la chance qu’ils ont de vivre à notre époque. Le systèmescolaireetuniversitaireestdequalitéet reconnu.Les jeunes roumainsontde l’ambitionetveulent réussir.Pourdonnerunexemple: «Jen’aipasderêvedanslaviejustedesobjectifs.»;voilàl’unedesphrasesqu’unjeuneroumainaditquandonluiavaitdemandécequeseraitletravaildesesrêves(Doaré,2014).

Parcontre, ilyaunpointquidoitêtresouligné:c’estlacapacitéde la Roumanie de garder cette élite florissante. Étant donné que cesjeunesontlachancedevoyageretdecôtoyerdesétrangers,ilspeuventimaginer le salaire et le niveau de vie qu’ils pourraient avoir dans unautre pays comparé à leur pays natal et ils sont donc naturellementattirés par l’étranger (surtout l’Allemagne et les États‐Unis). Mais, lesRoumainssontattachésàleurpaysetsontfiersdeleursorigines.Mêmes’ils partent un moment, pour commencer leur carrière, ils ont pourobjectifderentrerenRoumanie.

Les avantages de la Roumanie sont adaptés aux différentspotentielsdupays.L’Étatneseconcentrepassurunseulsecteur,etveutdonnerà tous lessecteurs lachancedesedévelopper(PearceHardtetKaufman,1995;Coroș,2012;Doaré,2014).

L'agriculture représenteprèsde7%duPIBde laRoumanieetemploieunquartde lapopulationactive. Lesprincipales ressources etproductions agricoles sont les céréales, les betteraves à sucre et lespommesdeterre.Toutefois,lerendementrestetrèsbasparrapportaux


72

capacitésdupays.Pourprendrel’exempledescéréales,en2012,lenombredekilogrammesproduitparhectareétaitde2364.Pourcomparaison,laFranceétaità7524.Cequirévèleunréelpotentield’augmentationdelaproduction. Par ailleurs, environ 25% du pays est couvert de forêts(particulièrement autour de la Transylvanie) et l'industrie du bois sedéveloppetrèsrapidement(BusinessFrance,2016;Chambredecommerceetd'industriedeTunis,2016).

LaRoumanieseraun«paradisagricole»deplusenplusconvoitéparlesinvestisseurs.Lesterrainsysontfertilesetengrandeabondance.Il existe une grandemarge de progression grâce à l’amélioration de laproductivité avec l’accès aux machines les plus performantes que l’onpeut trouver sur le marché. Cette agriculture est également beaucoupsubventionnée par l’Union Européenne. Le pays dispose d'un avantagemajeurdansledomainedel'agriculturebiologiquedufaitqu'elledisposed'un terrain agricole varié, mais aussi et, surtout, propre. Aujourd'huiencore, il y a plusieursmillions d'hectares qui ne sont pas cultivés oucultivéssansengrais.Lespetitspaysans,quipratiquent l'agriculturedesubsistance,fontd'ailleursdéjàdubioetlaconversionaubiocertifiéestplutôt simple. Dans les régions vallonnées où l'on fait surtout del'élevage,onesthabituéàrépandrelepurindesbêtessurlepâturageoubiendans lepotager.Unautreexemple, celuides fermiersdesgrandesplainesduSud,eux,ilsrépandentdepuistoujoursleurpailledirectementsurleschampsaprèslarécoltedublé(DoaréetCoroş,2015).

LaRoumanieprésentelacaractéristiqued’êtreunpaysproducteurdegazetdepétrole,etbénéficied’unebonneautonomieénergétique.Lesréservescumuléesdegazetdepétroleluiassurent,àparamètresconstants,28et respectivement16annéesdeconsommation.Elleestdépendantedugazrussepour30%desesapprovisionnements(vial’Ukraine).Les70%restantsontfournisparsaproductionnationale(10‐12milliardsdem³).

Cependant,lepaysdisposeraitd’importantsgisementsdegazdeschiste, évalués à 1444 milliards de m3 par l’agence américaine EIA,équivalentsà100ansdeconsommationactuelle,concentrésenTransylvanieet en Dobroudja (Sud‐Est entre Danube et mer Noire), ainsi que desgisementsoffshoreenmerNoire,quipourraientluiassurer l’indépendanceénergétique.Deplus,laRoumaniedisposed’eauxdesurfaceetsouterraines,ainsiquedeminesd’oretd’argent,quisont,d’ailleurs,unsujetdedébat


73

nationalpuisqu’il y a eudegrandesmanifestations contre lepillagedecesressourcespardesentreprisesétrangères.

LaRoumaniebénéficied’unegéographiefavorableaudéveloppementdesénergiesrenouvelables.SelonsaStratégieénergétiquepourlapériode2007‐2020etsonPlanNationald’Actiondansledomainedel’Énergiedesources Renouvelables (PNAER), la Roumanie disposerait d’un potentielimportant enmatière d’énergies renouvelables: énergie solaire, énergieéolienne, énergie hydroélectrique (Doaré et Coroş, 2015; Ministère desaffairesétrangèresfrançais).

Cepotentiels’expliquepardesconditionsnaturellesparticulièrementadéquates(relief,climat,ressources,géographie),favorisantledéploiementdestechnologiesdanslesrégionssuivantes:

pour l’énergiesolaire– leDeltaduDanube, laDobroudjaet laPlaineduSud;

pourl’énergieéolienne–laDobroudjaetlaMoldavie(régiondeplainesetdecollines);

pour le petit hydraulique – le plateau de Transylvanie, laMoldavie, les Carpates, ainsi que les régions au pied des CarpatesOrientauxetMéridionaux;

pour labiomasse– laPlaineduSud, laMoldavie, lesCarpates,ainsiquelesrégionsaupieddesCarpatesOrientauxetMéridionaux;

pour l’énergie géothermale – la Plaine du Sud et la Plaine del’Ouest(DoaréetCoroş,2015;Ministèredesaffairesétrangèresfrançais;CCIFER,2016).

L’industrie a un rôle important dans l’économie roumaine,représentant en 2012 plus de 28% du PIB. Les différents secteursindustrielsemploientplusde23%delamaind’œuvreactiveenRoumanieet sontengénéral localisésdans leszonesurbainesetpériurbaines,enparticulier dans les Sud et Nord‐Ouest du pays. Les grands groupesindustrielseuropéensetmondiauxsontbienreprésentésenRoumanie,surtoutgrâceauxinvestisseursétrangersquiontrachetéslamajoritédesfacilités de production industrielle. Cependant la majorité des acteursdans le secteur sont de petites etmoyennes entreprises (Coroş, 2012;DoaréetCoroş,2015;CCIFER,2016).


74

Le principal secteur industriel est l’automobile, situé à la 4epositionenEurope.Lesecteurautomobileroumainaccueilledeuxgrandsconstructeursmondiaux(RenaultetFord)etplusde500équipementierset sous‐traitants.En2011, la contributiondu secteurauPIBnational aétédeplusde11milliardsd’euros(CCIFER,2016;Wall‐Street,2016).

Il existe des besoinsmajeurs et une réelle volonté en faveur dudéveloppementdesinfrastructuresdetransport,qu’ellessoientroutières,ferroviaires ou aéroportuaires. Actuellement, la Roumanie compte 80000kmdevoies,dont20%deroutesnationales(ausensdecellesquel’ontrouveenFrance),cequireprésentelaplusfaibledensitéeuropéenneduréseauroutier(Awex,2016).

Ilexiste17aéroportsopérationnelsenRoumanie,etlaprioritédugouvernementestdedévelopperdesaéroportsrégionauxpourintensifierlevolumedepassagersparanetl’accessibilitédupaysparvoieaérienne.Grâceàcesefforts,uneenveloppede39,2milliardsd’eurosaétépromisesur lapériodede2014à2020par l’UnionEuropéenne,dontunepartieconséquenteseraallouéeauxtransportsafindecontinuerderendrelaRoumanieplusperformantedanscesecteur(Awex,2016).

L’activitédeconstruction,aprèsunboomsansprécédent,aétéunpeuralentie,touchéecommetouslesautressecteursparlacriseéconomiquemondiale.Cependant,uneforteprogressionestréapparuedepuis2011.Deplus,lesalairebrutestégalementenaugmentationdanscesecteur.Lesprévisionspourledomainedelaconstructionsontbonnes,carilretrouvesondynamismed’avantlacrisegrâceauxfondseuropéens.Dansledomainede la rénovation, le gouvernement roumain estime que 2,5millions delogements en zones urbaines et 2 millions en zones rurales vont fairel’objetdetravauximportants.Lesnouvellesconstructionsconcernent,quantàelles,aussibien lesbâtiments industrielsquerésidentiels (multiplicationspectaculairedanslaconstructionderésidencessecondairesenmilieurural,àlamontagneparexemple).Mais,lareprisedecesecteurseraégalementsoutenue par le projet d’amélioration des infrastructures de transport(Awex,2016).

L'économie de la Roumanie est principalement axée sur lesservices,quireprésententprèsde60%duPIB,etemploientenvironlamoitiéde lamaind'œuvrenationale.LaRoumanien’estplusseulementunpaysindustrieletagricole,maissonsecteurtertiairepèseunréelpoids


75

danssonéconomie.CequidevraitsetraduireparunemodificationdelademandeetdesattentesdesRoumains,maiségalementparunchangementdemodedevie(LeMOCI,2016).

Lemarchéroumaindelasantéest l’undesplusdynamiquesdelarégionavecuneréformedusystèmepublicplusavancéequejamais(réorganisationdusystèmehospitalier, révisiondupaquetdebasedeservicesmédicaux,etc.),etunsecteurprivéavecdestauxdecroissanceannuelsàdeuxchiffres.Bienquelesdépensesdesantésoientencoreendessousdelamoyenneeuropéenne,lesinitiativesrécentesdugouvernementpourréformer lesecteurde lasantédevraientpermettreunemeilleuregestionde l’argentpublic (actuellementautourde5,5milliardsd’eurosdépensésannuellementdanslesystèmepublic),undésengorgementdeshôpitauxetdesinvestissementsconséquents.Pourcequiestdesservicesprivésdesanté,cemarchéaétéestiméàenviron530millionsd’eurosen2012.Lesprofessionnelsdudomaineestimentque,dansles2à3annéesàvenir,lephénomèneprendraplusd’ampleuraveclaconsolidationdesopérateursdéjàprésentssurlemarché,l’ouverturedenouvellescliniquesetd’hôpitaux privés et, pourquoi pas, l’entréedenouveaux acteurs sur lemarché(ActualdeCluj,2016).

Concernantlesluxeetdistributionspécialisée,ils’agitd’unmarchédeprèsde20millionsdeconsommateursparmilesquels2,5millionsdeBucarestois, dont une part importante de revenus comparables à ceuxdesEuropéensdel’Ouest.Ilsépargnentpeuetconsommentsouventpourafficherleursstatutssociaux.Lemarchéduluxeenparticuliern’acessédecroîtreaucoursdesdernièresannées.Lessegmentsdominantssontl’automobilede luxe(55%), lamodeet lesaccessoires(30%).Danscecontextetrèsporteur,denombreusesenseignesinternationalesprestigieusesont ouvert des boutiques dès 2012 à Bucarest et même auparavant.Certaines activités qui suscitent une forte demande locale sont encoresous‐représentées en Roumanie, souvent traitées de façon informelleet/oumalstructurée:institutsdebeautéetsalonsdecoiffure,lavageetentretienautomobile,distributiondeproduitsculturels.

Lesanalystesaffirmaientunanimementquelessortiesdelacriseéconomiquepréfigureraientdanslespaysd’Europedel’Estunenvoldelaconsommation(AWEX,2016).


76

Lagrandegénérositédelagéographieroumainepermetd’envisagerde multiples formes d’expériences touristiques. Il peut être balnéaireaveclesstationsquiexistentsurlelittoraldelamerNoire;naturalisteavec les nombreux paysages qu’offre la Roumanie (montagnes, grandesétendues,plaines…);maiségalementurbain,pourdécouvrirlacultureetl’architecturedelapériodecommunisteoudespériodesantérieures.Letourismeruralestaussi très important,car iloffredesexpériencesvraiment authentiques dans des cadres pittoresques (Doaré et Coroş,2015).

De plus, on peut voir le développement d’un tourisme médicalspécialisédans lessoinsdentaires.Pour l’exemplede laFrance, le premieravantageindéniabledutourismemédicalestsansaucundoutelapriseenchargeparl’assurancemaladiefrançaisedessoins,sitantestqueceux‐cisontréalisésdansunpaysde l’UnionEuropéenne: laRoumanie faisantpartie de l’UE, le remboursement est équivalent à celui auquel l’assurépeutprétendrepourdessoinsréalisésenFrance(ActualdeCluj,2016).

OnparledelarégiondeClujcommedelanouvelleSiliconeValley.Lenombrededéveloppeursde très grandesqualités estun fait etnonplus une hypothèse.Denombreuses entreprises de l’Europede l’Ouestdélocalisent leurs activités dans des sociétés d’informatique ici, enRoumanie.C’estégalementdevenuunpôlereconnudans lacréationdeStart‐ups. Les événements liés aux jeunes entreprises sont de plus enplus nombreux et attirent des personnes de toutes les nationalités quisaventquetouslesacteursdudomainedel’informatiquegardentunœiltrèsattentifsurl’évolutiondelaRoumaniedanscedomaine.

La consommation est le principalmoteur de la croissance pourl’année2014.Lesecteurautomobileaétéundesleviersdelacroissanceen2013.Cellede2014seraportéeparlareprisedelademandeinterne.Labaissedesprixdesbiensalimentaires,suiteauxrécoltesexceptionnellesenregistréesen2013,aconduitàlabaissedelaTVAde2013surlepain(de24%à9%)età lahaussedusalaireminimumréaliséeen2014et2015,permettantd’augmenter lepouvoird’achatdesménages.Le tauxdirecteur de la banque centrale a été progressivement abaissé jusqu’às’établirà3,50%depuis février2014, soit sonplusbasniveauhistorique.Cette évolution devrait encourager la consommation des ménages etl’investissement,enrendantlesempruntsenmonnaielocaleplusattractifs(baissede3%descréditsausecteurprivéen2013)(RomaniaInsider,2016).


77

Lesrelationsquelepaysentretientaveclesdifférentespartiesdumondecitéesdanslapremièrepartiepeuventêtreunvéritableatoutenmatièrede commerce. LapuissancedesÉtats‐Unisetde laChine,maiségalementenmatièredeconfiancepourlesautrespaysvoulantnégocieravec la Roumanie. On peut voir que le potentiel de la Roumanie estextrêmementdiversifié et ne se cantonnepasdansun seul secteur. Enplus de toutes ces possibilités qu’offre le pays, il existe de nombreuxavantages pour s’y établir. Les avantages de la Roumanie sont adaptésauxdifférentspotentielsdupays.L’Étatneseconcentrepassurunseulsecteuretveutdonneràtouslessecteurslachancedesedévelopper.

Pourlesentreprisesétrangères,l’undesavantagesestlecoûttrèsattractifdelamaind’œuvre(lecoûthorairedelamaind’œuvreaétéenRoumanieen2013de4,6euros;enFrancede34,3eurosouenSuèdede40,1euros). À noter pour la Roumanie: les coûts horaires de la maind’œuvredansl’ensembledel’économie,exprimésenmonnaienationale,enRoumanie+32,8%depuis2008(Tableau1).Lorsquequelqu’unvoitlessalairesmoyensetminimums,ilsnepeuventêtrecomparésavecceuxdeFranceoud’autrespaysdel’UE.

Tableau1.Exemplesderémunérationsmoyennesnettesmensuelles

Salairenetd'undirecteurgénéral àpartirde1500€

Salairenetd'uningénieurspécialisé àpartirde800€

Salairenetd'unesecrétairebilingue àpartirde300€

Salairenetd'unemployé àpartirde200€

Salairenetd'unouvrierspécialisé àpartirde200€

Source:LPGRoumanie(sociétédeconseilenInvestissementenRoumanie)

Ledoubleavantagedelamaind’œuvreenRoumanieestqu’ellen’est

paschèreetqu’elleestcompétente.Malgrétouteslesdifficultésengendréesparlecommunisme,l’undesavantagestirésdecettepériodeestunetraditionde l’industrie, ce qui se traduit par une grande compétencedes travailleursroumains.C’estuneforcedetravailhautementqualifiée,avecdetrèsbonnes


78

connaissancesdelanguesétrangères(beaucoupdefrancophones),forméeentechnologie,IT,ingénierie.Deplus,lesinfrastructuresindustriellesfortementdéveloppées incluent celles de l’industrie pétrolière et pétrochimique. Ilexisteplusde40parcsindustrielsenRoumanie(WorldEconomicForum,GCR,2015).

Figure1.LaComparaisondescoûtshorairesdelamaind’œuvredans

l’ensembledespaysdel’UnionEuropéenneen2013

Source:Eurostat

En combinant le premier avantage avec desmesures favorables àl’implantation des entreprises, l’État joue la carte de la séduction desentreprisesétrangèresaumaximumquandiladoptedesloispourattirerlesentreprisesétrangères.Legouvernementaapprouvél’exonérationdel'impôtsurlesbénéficesréinvestisdessociétés(impôts0surlebénéficeréinvesti).L’impôtsurlessociétésestseulementde16%contre33%enFrance,parexemple.Lesbarrièresàl’entréesontfaibles.Lalégislationroumaineprévoitdesdispositionsspécifiquespourlesinvestissementsétrangers.Elleautoriseles investisseurs étrangers à participer à la privatisation et à accéder aumarchédomestique.Iln’yaaucunelimitesurlesparticipationsétrangèresdans les sociétés commerciales roumaines. Elles peuvent être 100%étrangères,bienquelespartenariatssoientplusfréquents,etellespeuventrapatrieràl’étranger100%desbénéficesaprèsimpôts.


79

Toutestfaitpourl’installationdenouvellesentrepriseset,parlamême occasion, la création de nouvelles richesses en Roumanie. Parexemple, les implantations durables des sociétés incitent les créationsd’emplois. De plus, lemarché du travail et les relations de travail sontréglementéspar lecodedu travailet lesnormeseuropéennes.Onpeutégalement citer ledéficit syndicalqui,dupointdevuedesentreprises,facilitelesnégociationsaveclestravailleurs.

La décision de s’établir en Roumanie peut être prise aussi pourcopiercertainesentreprisesderenomquil’ontdéjàfait.Sidesentreprisestellement prestigieuses s’établissent dans ce pays c’est qu’il doit y avoirdesavantages.Àtitred’exemple,voiciquelquessociétésdéjàprésentesenRoumanieetleursprojets:«Daimlervainvestir300millionsd’eurosdanssonusinedeSebeș,afind’yaccueillirlaproductiond’unenouvelleboîtedevitesses d’ici à 2016. Ces capacités supplémentaires viennent compléterles capacités de l’usine d’Untertürkheim (Allemagne). En effet, enproduisant en Roumanie, Daimler limite ses coûts de distribution et deproduction. Le coût du travail horaire enRoumanie est presque 10 foismoinsélevéqu’enAllemagne.Lesboîtesdevitessesproduitesdansl’usinede Sebeș équiperont les voitures et véhicules de loisir de la marqueMercedes.»(Lavrut,2014).Unautreexempleest:«Leplusgrandélevagedebisonsd'EuropeinauguréàcôtédeCluj,enRoumanie:Laplusgrandeferme de bisons d'Europe a été inaugurée dans le département de Cluj(centre). Surnommée le BT Ranch, cette exploitation s'étend sur unesurfacede400hectaresetaccueille277animaux.Deuxhommesd'affaires,l'unallemandet l'autreautrichien, sontà l'originedecet investissementd'unmillionetdemid'euros.Lesdeuxpropriétairessouhaitentparailleursétendreleurparcpourouvrircetautomneunzoo,ainsiqu'unhôtelpouraccueillirlesamateursdechasse.Ilsprévoientenfindecréerunechaînederestaurantsoùseravendueleurviande.»(LepetitJournal,2014).

Unautreaspectessentielquiconditionneladécisiond’internalisationd’une entreprise est la compatibilité du style demanagement. C’est unéquilibretrèsdifficileàtrouverpouruneentreprisequis’implante:quelstyle de management doit être utilisé, quel pourcentage de locaux etd’expatriés.Ilfautjaugerplusieurstechniquesavantdechoisirlabonnesolution. Il n’y a pas de vérité dans ce domaine, car une technique demanagement qui marche dans le pays du siège du groupe peut êtretotalement inadaptéeàunnouveaupays.Grâceàses«ressemblances»culturelles,latransitionpeutêtresimplifiéeenRoumanie.


80

Tableau2.LesDimensionsculturellesdeGeertHofstede

Source:TheHofstedeCentre

Lesdeuxpayslatins(laRoumanieetlaFrance)ontdesdimensionsculturellesassezproches,commeonpeutleconstaterdesrésultatsdutableau ci‐dessus. De la sorte, les Français comprennent mieux lesouvriersroumainset,parconséquent, letravailensembledevientplusfacile en comparaison aux possibilités d’autres pays dumonde. Ainsi,l’internationalisationdesentreprisesfrançaisessurlemarchéroumainest beaucoup facilitée, fait expliqué aussi par les relations politiques,économiquesetculturellesdelonguedurée(Wall‐Street,2016).

LaRoumanieestunpaysfrancophone,maislesgensontaussidetrèsbonnes connaissances de langues étrangères: en premier l’anglais, maisensuite,lefrançais,l’italien,l’espagnoletl’allemand.C’estunequalitéassezraredansunpaystelquelaFrancedeparler3languesparfaitement,maisenRoumaniecelasembleêtreassezbanal.

La double qualité de membre de l’UE et de l’OTANdémontreégalementunestabilitégéopolitique.Pourunpaysémergent,ilesttrèsintéressantdepouvoirs’appuyersurlefaitqu’iln’yaurapasdeconflitsarmés.

Unautreavantageestgénéréparlastabilitéduleuparrapportàl’euro. Encore une fois c’est une sécurité pour tout investisseur ouentrepreneurdes’assurerquelamonnaiedanslaquellelestransactionssont effectuées a une stabilité: il n’y a eu aucune baisse ou haussesignificativeduleucomparéàl’eurodepuisenvirontroisannées.

Lesinvestisseursétrangers,sociétésoupersonnesphysiquesd’unÉtat membre de la Communauté Européenne, qui sont résidents enRoumanie, peuvent acquérir des terrains depuis la date d’entrée de la


81

Roumanie dans l’UE.Néanmoins, ils n’ont pas pu acquérir directementdesterresagricoles,desforêtsetdesterresdesylviculturependantunepériodedeseptansaprèsladated’entréedelaRoumaniedansl’UE.Encequiconcerne lessociétésoupersonnesphysiquesd’unÉtatquin’estpasmembrede l’UE, ils sont autorisés à acquérir des terrains sous lesconditions prévues par les traités internationaux et sous réserve deréciprocité.Quellequesoit leurnationalité, lespersonnesphysiquesoules sociétés étrangères peuvent contourner ces contraintes et acquérirdes terrainsenRoumaniepar l’intermédiairede lamiseenplaced’unesociétéroumainedontilsontlecontrôle.

Pourlacompréhensiondel’environnementroumaindesaffaires,onaréaliséuneétudeavecl’aidedel’interview.Cetteanalyseestbaséesurunéchantillond’environ400entreprises.Suiteàuntauxderéponsestrop peu élevé, on a décidé d’obtenir des réponses via des interviewsphysiques,enréalisantunrecherchequalitativeetnonpasquantitative.Delasorte,onaréussiàenfaire36,cequipermetd’obteniruntauxderéponsesde9%àcetteenquêteenligne.Lacibleestvraimentspécifiqueet,parfois,elleneveutpasêtreconnuedugrandpublicpourcertainesactivités(ilexisteencoredetropnombreuxpréjugéssurlaRoumanie).

Figure2.LesRaisonspourinvestirenRoumanie

Source:Enquêteenligneetinterviews

12

14

21

1

9

0 5 10 15 20 25

Sur les traces d’un partenaire

Attractivité du marché

Nouvelles opportunités

Francophonie

Sur les traces d’un concurrent

Répondants


82

Dans ce graphique (plusieurs réponses étaient possibles), nouspouvonsvoirque:

33,3%desparticipantssontvenuspoursuivreunpartenaire;lesgrandsgroupesfrançaissesontinstallés,puisdenombreusesPMElesontsuivis;deplus,avoirunpartenairedéjàétablipermetgrandementdefaciliter l’implantation: lanouvellesociétéarriveavecdescertitudesetnonentantqu’explorateur;

38,9%pourl’attractivitédumarché,cequiconfirmelatendancedéjàvueci‐dessus; c’estunmarchéquiagrandi jouraprès jouretqui,contrairementauxpaysdel’Ouest,n’estpassaturé;

58,8%pour lesnouvellesopportunités: l’internationalisationest une question quotidienne et récurrente pour chaque entreprise;aujourd’hui, nous vivons dans un monde global et il est, donc, asseznormaldevenirdanslespaysenpleindéveloppementpourtrouverdenouvellesopportunités(c’estunedémarcheentrepreneuriale);

2,8% seulement pour la frаncоphоnie, ce qui peut êtrecompréhensif parce que la hautemaîtrise de la langue anglaise par lepeupleroumainfacilitegrandementlescommunications;

25% pour suivre un concurrent: l’avantage de suivre un«modèle»estd’entirerlesenseignementspouréviterdereproduirelesmêmeserreurs;lesmeilleuresinnovationssontdeschosesquiexistent,maisquisontretravailléespourdevenirleplusperformantpossibledansunnouveaucontexte.

Figure3.L’ÉvaluationdeladécisiondevenirenRoumanie



83

Àlaquestion«Diriez‐vousquevenirenRoumanieaétéunebonnedécision?»,63,9%desrépondantstrouventqueoui.Deplus,lepourcentagedepersonnesnonsatisfaitesesttrèsbasetnonreprésentatif.Danscettequestion, des requêtes de clarifications ont été demandées. Les facteursmisenavantpar lespersonnesayant répondusont ceuxprésentésplusbas(danslesfiguressurlesélémentspositifsetnégatifs).

Figure4.LaManièred’obtenirdesinformationssurlaRoumanie

Source:EnquêteenligneetinterviewsLa réponse la plus fréquente à la question «Commentavez‐vous

obtenu vos informations sur laRoumanie?» a été la suivante: par desrecherchespersonnellesavec58,3%ougrâceàunpartenairedéjàétabli(cequiconfirmelatendancedelapremièrequestion).Deplus,envuedesdiscussionsquel’onapuavoiraveccertainsentrepreneurs,beaucoupd’entreeuxontdesoriginesroumaines(eux‐mêmesouquelqu’undeleursfamilles).Onpeutvoirque lesautorités roumaineset françaisesdoivent faireuneffortsurlapromotiondeleurexistence.

Unpourcentagede61,1%desinvestisseursontuncapitaltotalementfrançais. Quand des entrepreneurs français viennent en Roumanie, laplupart du temps, ils créent leurs sociétés de zéro, c’est‐à‐dire qu’ilspréfèrentcommencerunenouvellesociétéplutôtqued’investirdansunedéjàexistante.Celapeutêtreunequestiondeconfiancecar,engénéral,les Français (les individus et non pas seulement les entrepreneurs) nefontpasconfiancelesunsauxlesautres.

21

4

17

7

4

0 10 20 30

Recherche individuelle

Cabinets de conseil (Sources…

Partenaire déjà établi en…

Autorités françaises (CFAC, …

Autorités roumaines Répondants


84

Figure5.LePourcentageducapitalfrançaisdanslacompagnie


Figure6.L’ApportdesinvestisseursfrançaisenRoumanie


24

31

11

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Management

Savoir-faire

Processus industriel

Répondants


85

Ils’agitincontestablementdusavoir‐faireetdumanagement,avec86,1%et,respectivement,66,7%.Ilesttrèsdifférentdetravaillerdansunepetitesociétéavecuncadrerégional(ounational)comparéàunacteurinternational. Laméthodologie et les processus doivent absolument êtreparfaitementmaîtrisésetbienétablis,toutcommelemanagement,si lasociétéveutêtreperformantefaceàlacompétitioninternationale.

Figure7.LesÉlémentsquigénèrentdesdifficultéspourl’entreprise

Source:Enquêteenligneetinterviews Danscegraphique,nousavonsprisencomptelescritèreslesplusreprésentatifsdesréponses.Onpeutvoirquelalégislationchangeanteetlabureaucratiesontplusreprésentéesquelacorruption(auxdeuxniveaux–localetgouvernemental), cequiestunebonnechosepour laRoumanie,carlepaysamisenplacedenombreusesréformesetdesinstitutionspourlaluttecontrelacorruption.Denotrepointdevue,celasignifiequeletravaildu gouvernement porte ces fruits et que, même si la corruption existeencore(commedanstouslespaysdumonde),cen’estplusleproblèmeleplusimportantlorsqu’onfaitdesaffairesenRoumanie.


86

Figure8.LesÉlémentspositifspourfairedesaffairesenRoumanie

Source:EnquêteenligneetinterviewsOnpeutvoirquelesréponsesdesinterviewés,formuléesdansce

diagramme, confirment les affirmations faites auparavant. Le coût dutravail combinéavec laqualité et les similarités culturellesdonnentunénormeavantageà laRoumanie. Le fait que lepaysest également trèsprochedelaFranceentermesdedistance(2h30d’avion)estlefacteurleplusimportant.

Figure9.L’Existenced’unecommunautéfrancophoneforte



87

LespersonnesinterrogéesontréponduqueOuidansunpourcentagede55,6%.Àcettequestion,desclarificationsontétédemandées.Voiciun résumédes précisions apportées par certains participants à l’enquête:oui,nousressentonsunecommunautéfrançaise,grâceàl’existencedelaCCIFERetUBIFRANCE,quiaidebeaucoup;unecommunauté très forte estprésenteàBucarestetceladûàlaprésencedegrandsgroupesfrançais;merciégalementaupoidsdel’histoireetauxcourtesdistancesgéographiquesquiséparent nos deux pays; l’aide des entrepreneurs déjà établis est unvéritable accélérateurpour les nouveaux arrivants. Pour conclure, onvoudraitciterunparticipantà l’étudedont lacitationcorrespondàdenombreux autres cas: «Je suis plus Roumain que Français, je suisintégré.».

Figure10.Surlechangementdelaperceptiondel’investisseur

depuisl’arrivéeenRoumanie

Source:EnquêteenligneetinterviewsCettequestiondenotreenquêtemontreque9/10desentrepreneurs

quisontvenusenRoumaniesontsatisfaitsdeleursdécisions.Mêmesic’est ceque l’on faitd’uneopportunitéqui compte leplus, lespresque89% démontrent que la Roumanie, de manière générale, a un climatd’affairesfavorableauxinvestisseursvenusdeFrance.


88

4. ConclusionsMalgré la situation économique du pays, et son avant‐dernière

placedansl’UnionEuropéenne,laRoumanieàunvraipotentiel.Ceretouràlacroissance,ens’appuyantsurlesbailleursdefondsinternationauxetsurl’UE,enestunepreuve.Lesrelationsinternationalesdéveloppéesaufildutemps,sontdetrèsbonsatoutspourlefutur.GrâceàcesrelationsetauxrestructurationseffectuéesparlaRoumanie,lesinvestisseursétrangersfont confiance à ce pays. Les objectifs clairement affichés d’étendre sesrelationsinternationalesconfirmentquelaRoumaniecomprendl’importancede ses échanges. La prédominance du secteur tertiaire et la relance de laconsommationdétermineunchangementduniveaudeviedelaRoumaniequitendàserapprocherdeceluidesEuropéensdel’Ouest.Lesménageschangentleursprioritésdeconsommation,cequiintéresselesinvestisseurs,car lemarchén’aclairementpasatteintsamaturité.L’augmentationdesinvestissementsdirectsàl’étrangerestl’undesfacteursquidéterminentlapolitique du gouvernement roumain, celui‐ci ayant compris que lapérennisationdelacroissancepasseraparuneouverturedupaysetdesmesurespourrendrelepaysdeplusenplusattractif.

Lacombinaisonentrelepotentieldupays,danslestroissecteursde l’économie, et les avantages d’investir en Roumanie sont la clef del’avenir.Quecesoitpourlesaffairesoupourl’économie,laRoumanieestunpaysquiregardeversl’avenir.Ens’appuyantsurl’UnionEuropéenneet ses solides relations internationales, le payspeut envisagerun futurplusserein.LaRoumanieestunpaysquiattireetquialepotentielpourattirer,etcelui‐cinesecantonnepasseulementdansunseulsecteurdel’économie,maisdanstous.Laquestionquiseposeest:«LaRoumanieévoluera‐t‐elle assez vite pour garder sa jeunesse de qualité?». Cettejeunesseestl’atoutmajeurpourpérenniserceretourverslacroissanceetconstitueralabasedesfutursconsommateursdedemain.

Lesrelationsquelepaysentretientaveclesdifférentespartiesdumonde peuvent constituer un réel atout – par exemple le pouvoiréconomiquedesÉtats‐UnisetdelaChine–,maiségalemententermedeconfiancepourlesautrespaysquiveulentnégocieraveclaRoumanie.OnpeutvoirquelepotentieldelaRoumanieestextrêmementdiversifiéetnesecantonnepasdansunseulsecteur.Derrièretoutescesopportunitésdanslepays,ilydenombreuxavantagespours’yinstaller.


89

Les investisseurs sont intéressés par le fait que le marché n’aclairementpas atteint samaturité. L’augmentationdes investissementsdirects à l’étranger est un facteur déterminant de la politique dugouvernementroumainquiacomprisqueledéveloppementdurabledelacroissancepasseraparuneouverturedupaysetpardesmesurespourlerendreplusattractif.Commenousavonspulevoirlorsdel’analysedel’enquête, c’est également le point de vue partagé par la majorité desentrepreneursfrançaisprésentsenRoumanie.IlssontenRoumaniepourchangerleschoses,pourtrouver«l’opportunité»dedemain,etilspensentréellementquecelle‐cisetrouveenRoumanie.

REFERENCES

1. Coroş, Monica Maria (2012), «The Development of Romanian SMEssince theBeginningof the20thCentury”, inStudiaUniversitatisBabes‐Bolyai,Negotia,No1/2012.

2. Doaré, Vincent; Coroş,MonicaMaria (2015), «Romania, an AttractiveDestination for French Entrepreneurs?», paper presented at theInternational Conference Small and Medium Sized Enterprises in aGlobalizedWorld,Babeş‐BolyaiUniversity,Cluj‐Napoca,Romania,September24‐26,2015.

3. Doaré, Vincent (2014), The Economic Potential of Romania, BachelorThesis,BlaisePascalUniversityofClermont‐Ferrand,France.

4. Lavrut, Cindy (2014), «Daimler va investir 300millions d’euros dansson usine roumaine », 07.0.2014, http://www.ccfa.fr/Daimler‐va‐investir‐300‐millions‐d,133975(20.12.2016).

5. PearceHardt,John;Kaufman,RichardF.(1995),East‐CentralEuropeanEconomiesinTransition,UnitedStates.Congress.JointEconomicCommittee.

6. Vorzsák,Magdalena,Coroş,MonicaMaria(2007),«SMEs’Performancesat theMomentofRomania’s Integration intotheEuropeanUnion», paperpresentedattheinternationalconferenceCompetitivenessandEuropeanIntegration, October 26‐27, 2007, Cluj‐Napoca, Print Art, Cluj‐Napoca,Editors:LiviuIlieş,CorinaGavrea,2007,pp.251‐256.

7. xxx«Local investors to the largesthospital in the region to recover»,ActualdeCluj(2016),www.аctuаldecluj.rо/investitоri‐lоcаli‐pentru‐cel‐mаi‐mаre‐spitаl‐de‐recuperаre‐din‐regiune/(17.05.2016).


90

8. xxxAnnuaire,http://www.conydev.fr/frame_menu.php?goto=contact.php(21.11.2015).

9. xxxBusinessFrance(2016),«GuidedesaffairesenRoumanie»,Awex,www.awex‐export.be/files/library/.../ROUMANIE/Guide‐affaires‐Roumanie‐2016.pdf(28.09.2016).

10. xxx Chambres de commerce et de l’industrie française à l’étranger,www.ccifer.ro

11. (28.05.2016).12. xxx Chambre de commerce et d'industrie de Tunis (2016),Roumanie,

www.ccitunis.org.tn/files/EUROPE_PDF/ROUMANIE.pdf(20.03.2016)13. xxx Eur‐Lex (2006‐2007), http://eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐content/FR/TXT/

?uri=CELEX:52006DC0649(15.05.2016).14. xxx European Commission (2016), A Partial and Fragile Recovery,

www.ec.eurоpа.eu/grоwth/smes/business‐friendly‐envirоnment/perfоrmаnce‐review(8.06.2016).

15. xxxEurostat,ec.eurоpа.eu/eurоstаt(15.05.2016).16. xxx FedEx Express (2015), European SME Export Report – France,

www.FedEx‐Express‐Eurоpeаn‐SME‐Expоrt‐Repоrt‐juillet‐2015.pdf(25.04.2016).

17. xxx«FrenchInvestorsArefortheLongTerminRomania»,(2016), inWall‐Street;www.wаll‐street.rо/аrticоl/Cоmpаnii/186298/eric‐fаidy‐ccifer‐investitоrii‐frаncezi‐sunt‐pe‐termen‐lung‐in‐rоmаniа‐si‐nu‐scаd‐sumele‐аlоcаte.html(22.05.2016).

18. xxx«FrenchCompaniesGrapplingwithIngrainedLocalIssuesinRomania»(2016), in Business Review, http://www.business‐review.eu/feаtured/french‐cоmpаnies‐grаppling‐with‐ingrаined‐lоcаl‐issues‐in‐rоmаniа‐67272(21.11.2015).

19. xxx «Investissement – Le plus grand élevage de bisons d'EuropeinauguréàcôtédeCluj»(2014),LePetitJournal,http://www.lepetitjournal.com/bucarest/accueil/breves/182450‐investissement‐le‐plus‐grand‐elevage‐de‐bisons‐d‐europe‐inaugure‐a‐cote‐de‐cluj(17.05.2016).

20. xxxHofstedeCentre,https://geert‐hofstede.com/(27.05.2016).21. xxx Institut National de Statistique de Roumanie, www.insse.ro

(08.06.2016).22. xxxKPMGRoumanie,hоme.kpmg.cоm/rо/en(17.05.2016).23. xxxLeMOCI,MoniteurduCommerceInternationaldepuis1883(2016),

«Roumanie»,http://www.lemoci.com/fiche‐pays/roumanie/(27.11.2016).


91

24. xxx Ministère des affaires étrangères français,www.diplоmаtie.gоuv.fr(12.05.2016).

25. xxx Romanian Government (2016), www.dpiis.gоv.rо/new_dpiis/event‐tо‐prоmоte‐french‐investment‐in‐rоmаniа‐held‐in‐pаris/(2.06.2016).

26. xxx «Top 30 French Companies in Romania» (2016), in RomaniaInsider,www.rоmаniа‐insider.cоm/tоp‐30‐french‐cоmpаnies‐in‐rоmаniа‐mаke‐оver‐eur‐12‐bln‐per‐yeаr/152806/(7.05.2016).

27. xxxWorldBank,www.wds.wоrldbаnk.оrg(23.05.2016).28. xxxWorldEconomicForum(2015),TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport

(GCR),www.GCR_2015‐2016_full‐repоrt.pdf(17.05.2016).

negotia - babeș-bolyai university · 2017. 6. 14. · destination (ispas and saragea, 2011). della...

Documents