How to develop your own argument in a literature review?
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.