Talk:Strategic human resource planning

Peer Review (J. Wiggins)
Comprehensiveness- Key point: implement a strategy to ensure workforce can adequately and sustainably meet demand •	Good job of bulleting the “implementation stage” sub header and listing step by step guideline, it is simple yet effective way to explain the application of this process •	Try to add additional information to the “Theories and practices” sub header, not very in depth •	Further elaborate in ”Overarching process, policy and tools” sub header •	Consider adding any varying or opposing perspectives (if possible) Sourcing- •	Add hyper link to “Targeted human resource strategies” (if possible) •	Overarching process, policy and tool sub header has no sources •	Good job of using diversified sources Neutrality- •	The article does a great job of being neutral through out •	Good job of excluding personal and un-sourced opinions Readability- •	Reconsider using two definition sources back to back in first paragraph •	Use full name or book title first time a source is referenced (Bulla and Scott/ Reily) •	Clear, concise rhetoric through out Open ended Questions- 1.	I like the “implementation stages” header best because I feel it easy to read due to the bulleted style, yet still did an efficient job of describing a complex process. 2.	The two improvements needed are -	Increase the information and add sources to the ”Overarching process, policy and tools” sub header, or just get rid of it entirely -	Go further in depth into the “Theories and practices” sub header. It currently has very little info or sentence structure, and I am not quite sure of the purpose this section serves to the article as a whole (as it the section is currently worded.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggins jake (talk • contribs) 12:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review Emmmayork
The introduction gives a clear and direct description of what the page is about. Strategic Human Resource planning is explained thoroughly and the way this strategy is used in business and workplaces in easily understood in the introductory paragraph. The article section Implemented Stages is a great touch to this article. It thoroughly explains an in-depth process of how Human Resource Planning works best within different settings. The paragraphs are well spoken and easily understandable but could use more sources, This article gives great straightforward and unbiased information. The information presented in this article gives accurate and equal representation on the topic.The group did a thorough job putting the article together and adding a large bulk of information, making the article flow. The article could use more referencing and sources throughout but otherwise is very informational and easily understandable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmmayork (talk • contribs) 16:29, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review by Jack
The introduction is informative and gives good background into the rest of the page. The body of the page is well organized and is informative. There is a good amount of information in each section. The group also did a good job of staying with a neutral point of view throughout the entirety of the article. A couple sections could be elaborated a little more but the group did a good job overall. I like the external link to allow an opportunity for further information on the section. The references also looked to be good sources for both quality and quantity of material. Well done.Bobcatdodger25 (talk) 21:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)