(a) Each student will lead a discussion and presentation of one text they have read (research paper

in their field) and will critically evaluate elements of the paper with the purpose of identifying: Initial premise on which the paper is built
The initial premise of the paper is built on the talent managerial practices as implemented by four Italian companies. The paper

Assumptions that underpin the premise Assumptions underpin the premise include:
Assuming that four selected Italian companies have made decisions on, designed and implemented talented management system. multiple case studies (Yin 1984) as a methodology will help in exploring and investigating the companies that adopted a structured talent managin order

Evidence that the research author(s) have presented to substantiate their initial claim 1. Theoretical assumption based on human capital science (Becker 1993) and theory of human capital
(Machin and Vignoles 2004), both articles consider talent management is interesting from research perspective and critical for companies. 2. Human Resource Development HRD literature questioned whether talent management is just a new label driven by a new management fashion or implies a real change (Iles, Preece, and Chuai 2010).

The key arguments in the study and how the type of method and approach taken has informed their choice and selection of data sources The method and approach adopted is the case study. This method allow the researcher to apply several approaches to inform the study. It gives the researcher wide range of data collection method in order to collect data and at the same time to discuss the topic under study. The key arguments therefore include: 1. talent management literature which include the definitions of talent management; the process of talent management; critical issues in talent management and 2. the approach also include criteria for selecting the key informants for the study. This influenced the perspective of the topic. The key informant was an employee in the human resource department in each company selected. 3. the key findings of the data collection. However, the researcher did not explain how the findings have been reached and which data analysis is adopted. Although there was a paragraph talking about analysis, this does not refer to scientific approach and does not have the scientific rigor. 4. 5.

 Any bias observed in the paper in its construction of argument Concluding knowledge claims and the quality of the evidence given in support of the claims.
The knowledge gained from the study is constructed on the basis of comparing the main operational features of talent management systems of the companies with the existing literature, in order to highlight where they are consistent and where they are not. The researchers collected wide range of evidences to support their claims.

Your own conclusion should summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the paper and suggest how you might overcome weaknesses identified. key strengths in the study include: it selected four cases in order to compare the topic under study between them. It adopts comparing between operational talents management and the literature. however, Key weaknesses include but not limited to: four cases are not enough to generalize to similar companies. Particularly, the selected companies are not representative and more likely management of talents is not their focus usually. o this limitation possibly tackled by extending the cases to more cases and not limiting it to companies adopt talent management but may be the companies not adopting it. This may allow for comparison among cases adopt and cases does not adopt. The researchers interviewed only human resource managers. This gives one perspective and it may not include the organization adoption always. The perspective of the whole organization need wide range of informants from all managerial levels. The level of understanding for the talent management probably limited by restricting the analysis to pre assumptions exist within the previous literature. Key themes from the literature have been selected and then the analysis was based on that. There is need for wider range of understanding which require grounded theory or (bottom up thematic approach) rather than approach adopting top down themes or structured open ended questions and interview.

(b) A written report selecting one key paper or a small number of papers to draw comparisons along the lines given in (a) above. Your written assignment should be no more than 5,000 words in length including references. You should adopt suitable headings and subheadings to structure arguments within your paper. When complete the paper should represent a critique of the research study or studies that you have selected. If you select more than one paper please limit your comparison to maximum of 5 papers.