Currently, there are several different generations of workers in the labour market (Statnickė, et.al, 2019). Generations are salient social categories that form the basis of a social world that is enriched with meaning and researchers should continue investigating generational phenomena as they apply to the workplace while paying special attention to the conditions and contexts in which a generation is activated as a source of identity and its outcomes (Van Rossem, 2019; Statnickė, 2019). Recent research (Urick et.al.,2017; Weeks, Schaffert, 2019; Underwood, 2020) indicate, that differences between generations are significant, especially when comparing the younger generations (Generations Y and Z) with the older ones (Baby Boomers and Generation X) (Ho, Yeung, 2020).

Generational differences can cause potential communication issues within the work environment including workplace conflicts, misunderstandings, misrepresentation of messages, poor working relations, reduced productivity, and lowered creativity, etc.  (Schullery, 2013; Savanevičienė, et.al, 2019; Ho, Yeung, 2020). Intergenerational communication problems are mentioned among the most common arising problems (Hillman, 2014; Schroth, 2019). Understanding these differences is crucial in the increasingly competitive global environment (Evans, Torres, 2020).

Research aim: examine intergenerational communication problems in tourism enterprises and identify teaching/learning initiatives required to develop adult learners’ communication competences to solve intergenerational communication problems.

Theoretical Framework is formed by the theories of adult learning, generational differences and intergenerational communication specifics.

The current research suggests the four generational cohorts in the workplace generally described as Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y, and Generation Z (Deyoe, Fox, 2012; Reisenwitz, Iyer, 2009; Bourne, 2015). In this article, based on Generation Theory, generation is identified by year of birth; as a group of people whose formation has been influenced by significant social, economic, political, cultural, etc. changes: (a) Baby Boomers, born between 1943 and 1960; (b) Generation X, born between 1961 and 1981; (c) Generation Y, born between 1982 and 2000, and (d) Generation Z, born after 2000.

Adults are characterized by maturity, self-confidence, autonomy, decision-making, purposefulness, but they are less open-minded and receptive to change than children. These traits affect adults’ motivation and ability to learn (Pappas, 2013; Kraus, 2016; Statnickė, Budrytė-Ausiejienė, 2018; Luka et.al, 2020). Adults have created a system of values that they bring into the learning context. Moreover, they have developed their own learning strategies (Rogers, 1996), therefore personalized instructions in acquiring the learning content are crucial (Hines, Whittington, 2017).

Previous research shows common traits in adult learning (Pätzold, 2011; Kolb, 1984; Long, 2002; Illeris, 2004), as well as cultural (Hofstede, 1986) and generational differences (Rothwell, 2008; Williams, 2018, McGill, 2019).

Baby Boomers are hardworking, responsible, have a sense of urgency, therefore learning must be meaningful to them. Time must be managed effectively, and the educator may take advantage of their extensive experience (Rothwell, 2008). In turn, Generation X may lack motivation and they have to know how applying what they learnt may benefit other people and themselves (Rothwell, 2008). Therefore, it is suggested invite them to participate in discussions. Generation Y are serious and work oriented, often impatient, usually have high expectations. Applying technology in teaching/learning is beneficial since they like the speed associated with being ‘linked in’ (McGill, 2019; Williams, 2018). Generation Z, often called new silent generation, are technologically savvy, tend to expect everything to be on the web (Underwood, 2020; Williams, 2018; Rothwell, 2008) and prefer using it to communicate with others. They are not perfect listeners and lack interpersonal skills (Kirchmayer, Fratricová, 2020), hence, their social and emotional needs have to be respected also in teaching/learning (McGill, 2019).

Research question: What intergenerational communication problems exist in tourism enterprises and what teaching/learning initiatives may be applied to eliminate them?

This research was conducted in the Nordplus Adult Development project „NordTourNet-3: Solving Communication Problems of Different Generations in Tourism Companies” (NPAD-2020/10015; 2020-2023). The project partners: three education institutions from Lithuania, Latvia and Sweden implementing adult education programs. The aim of the project: study communication differences among employees and customers of four different generations in tourism companies and create an educational game facilitating intergenerational communication problem solution in tourism enterprises and compile a training material package for educators of adult learners. This contribution deals with the results of the first stage – qualitative research conducted to elicit intergenerational communication problems in tourism organisations which at a later stage will serve as a basis for creating teaching/learning material to eliminate them. The research applies interpretivism paradigm which implies understanding ‘individual cases and situation’, meanings ‘that different actors bring to them’, furthermore, social phenomena are understood holistically (Coe, 2017, 6). Qualitative research design, exploratory research applying semi-structured interviews conducted face-to-face onsite or using Zoom and Cisco Webex platforms was done. The interview length varied between 1 hour and 2 hours 42 minutes. The period: January – July 2021. The questions focused on different generations, internal and external communication problems and possible problem solutions. The data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Hsieh and Shannon (2005) have identified three different approaches to qualitative content analysis to interpret meaning from the content of text data: conventional, directed or summative. The conventional approach to content analysis was used in this study. Data analysis was performed in several stages: 1) reading the text of the interview; 2) separation of categories on the basis of key words; 3) the division of the content of the categories into subcategories; 4) a description of the categories and subcategories and a justification of the evidence obtained during the interviews (supporting statements). According to Brown (2019, 73), in qualitative research ‘participants are construed as active and knowing agents’ who in interpretivism paradigm ‘may be viewed as experts and/or co-producers of knowledge’. Participants: one Baby-boomer, hotel owner from Sweden; six Generation X representatives – manager of TIC from Lithuania, owner of cultural training centre from Sweden, director of hostel, CEO of travel agency, manager of TIP from Latvia, owner of guest house from Latvia; five Generation Y representatives – director of tour operating company, co-owner of pizzeria from Lithuania, owner of guest house from Sweden, Board member of tour operating company from Latvia.

All informants are directly confronted with generational differences in their activities. The main differences: intergenerational responsibility, communication effectiveness, stress management, self-esteem, self-confidence, organizational loyalty, freedom, openness, attitude to work, use of IT, behaviour at work, prejudices, foreign language skills. Informants not only noticed differences between generations, but also emphasized their impact on communication process. Several main groups of generational differences affecting communication process can be distinguished: 1) language barriers (younger generations don’t speak Russian, older generations don’t speak English); 2) different interests leading to insufficiently effective communication with other generations; 3) the need to follow a hierarchy (the older generation wants a formal tone and respect from the younger ones); 4) different recording of information received during communication (Y and Z generations record information on the phone / make a video recording); 4) different transition and use of virtual space for communication, different use of IT; 5) different communication channels used (different use of social networks, younger generations tend to communicate in writing on social networks, groups, etc.); 6) different cultures, etc. During the research, 9 groups of identified communication problems were related to: 1) foreign language skills; 2) conflict situations between different generations; 3) (dis)use of information technology and/or social networks; 4) problems arising from transmission of information; 5) management of a tourism organization; 6) problems with customers; 7) problems in communication with partners and other businesses; 8) different behaviors, reactions, attitudes, desires of different generations; 9) others. In order to communicate more effectively with customers, the research identified 6 subcategories of teaching/learning measures required: 1) Specific training that meets the specifics of the company's activities; 2) Digital literacy competencies (including management of communication in social networks); 3) Public speaking courses; 4) Foreign language courses; 5) Marketing and sales courses; 6) Face-to-face courses in personal communication with customers.

*Brown, J. (2019). Qualitative Research Design: Principles, Choices and Strategies. *Coe, R.J. (2017). The nature of educational research. Research Methods & Methodologies in Education, (5-14), London:Sage. *Deyoe, R.H., Fox, T.L. (2012). Identifying strategies to minimize workplace conflict due to generational differences. *Evans, J., Torres, I. (2020). Generational Communication in the Workplace. In EdMedia+Innovate Learning, (972-976). *Hillman, D.R. (2014). Understanding multigenerational work-value conflict resolution. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 29(3), 240-257 *Ho, H.C., Yeung, D.Y. (2020). Conflict between younger and older workers: an identity-based approach. International Journal of Conflict Management. *Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(3),301-320. *Illeris, K. (2004). Adult education and adult learning. Malabar, FL:Krieger. *Kirchmayer, Z., Fratričová, J. (2020). What motivates generation Z at work? Insights into motivation drivers of business students in Slovakia. *Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall. *Kraus, A. (2016). Perspectives on Performativity: Pedagogical Knowledge in Teacher Education. Münster:Waxmann. *Luka, I., et al. (2020). Quality Assurance in Adult Education in Latvia. In Flavian, H. (Ed.). From Pedagogy to Quality Assurance in Education: An International Perspective, Emerald Publishing, 155-174. *Pappas, C. (2013). 8 Important Characteristics of Adult Learners. *Pätzold, H. (2011). Learning and Teaching in Adult Education. Contemporary Theories. Barbara Budrich Publishers. *Reisenwitz, T.H., Iyer, R. (2009). Differences in generation X and generation Y: Implications for the organization and marketers. Marketing management journal, 19(2). *Rothwell, W.J. (2008). Adult Learning Basics. Alexandria, Virginia: ASTD Press. *Schroth, H. (2019). Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace?.California Management Review, 61(3), 5-18. *Savanevičienė, A. et al. (2019). Individual innovativeness of different generations in the context of the forthcoming Society 5.0 in Lithuania. Engineering Economics, 30(2), 211-222. *Statnickė, G., Budrytė-Ausiejienė, L. (2018). The need for knowledge, abilities and skills of generation X representatives of small businesses working in tourism industry in remote rural areas of the Baltic region: case study of Lithuania and Estonia. Science and process of education. 2(27), 67-76. *Statnickė, G. (2019). An expression of different generations in an organization: a systematic literature review. Society. Integration. Education, 5, 273-291. *Statnickė, G., et al. (2019). The relationship between work engagement of different generations and mobile learning. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 67(6), 1627-1642. *Urick, M.J. et al. (2017). Understanding and managing intergenerational conflict: An examination of influences and strategies. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 166-185.