Question: Do you accept the argument that systems of human resource management and training continue to provide Germany and Japan with sources of competitive advantage over other major national economies? i. Introduction. Suggest answer to the question and outline how to validate your suggested answer by clarifying the analytical structure ii. Key Arguments. Human resources - investment or cost? Have HRs been a weakness in some countries? To what extent are systems converging? To what extent embedded, and what lessons are there from the transfer of systems? How do they explain competitive differences? Are there functional equivalents? The question demands case/company examples. What represents best practice, if there is such a thing. Are there national differences in HRM and training systems, or are differences more complex? Focus on key topics, such as industrial relations versus employment relations versus training/education, and, within them, topics such as collective bargaining/unions (IR) and life time employment (ER). iii. Employment relations – management structures, job security, welfare/bonus schemes. Size of firms, and managerial enterprise. Internal labour markets. Life time employment systems. iv. Industrial relations – trades unions, labour markets, works councils, company/enterprise unions, employer associations, and representation rights. v. Work relations. Production and operations management. Line management and organization. vi. Skills, training, education, productivity. vii. HR as strategy by firms. HRs as investment. Institutional environment. vii. How easy to relate HR and training systems to national economic success? viii. Conclusion