How to develop your own argument in a literature review? In a literature review, we look at recent publications and put what other researchers have said in this context. However, how can I develop my own argument? Should I write it with my own words or should the argument be based in what others have said?
Damien Igoe's answer is very accurate, however, I would add that I think it is possible to interpret what someone wrote in a different way than others have previously interpreted. However, your arguments should not be confused with the other authors' arguments.

Originality in analysis is often welcomed. However, originality in structure should be done very carefully. Common structures exist for a reason. In my field, it is common to switch between the reviewed author's points and your own:


  Jones (1991) claimed that the primary motivator for workers was public
  recognition while Smith (2004) believed that workers were more
  concerned with monetary compensation. I will show that both were
  correct by showing that workers really care most about their
  compensation being publicly higher than the average for their
  position.