Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
This statement raises quite a controversial issue. Although it is impossible to negate that in some cases power being held for more than just five years by the same person, or group of people, can be beneficial to whatever enterprise is concerned, being this the case of longstanding leaders such as Steve Jobs, it should be noted that the occurrence of one of these outstanding individuals is all but anecdotic if compared to the vast majority of cases, where its outcome is usually not even close to adequate. Therefore, I strongly agree with the statement that is posed.
First of all, it is certainly relevant to bear in mind that this conundrum is not new; in fact, it has existed at least since the time of Ancient Greece. Indeed, there was a procedure, called ostracism, by which a longstanding leader could be removed from its position; it even went beyond just that: the individual had to actually abandon the city, the polis, for a certain amount of time. Being Ancient Greece one of the main pillars of today’s western society, the creators of democracy and one civilization that contributed greatly to the development of mankind from every perspective, it is safe to assure that they knew what they were doing.
In addition to what has been said, it should be noted that, as the proposed statement indicates, it is true that in order to revitalize an enterprise, new blood is needed. There are cases where change is needed because of the corruption of the former leaders; in Spain, my home country, the persistence of a single political party in some areas has lead to an unbearable increase in political corruption. There is not one single day when we are not reminded that some politician who had the power in an area for who-knows-how-long is being judged.
However true what has been addressed above might be, it is also important to consider those cases where the results of a longstanding leadership are just the opposite. Indeed, Steve Jobs was Apple’s head for many years, leading the company to success in a meteoric way.
In conclusion, although it is true that some outstanding individuals can hold power for long with great results, the fact that most of the times it happens just the other way around should be enough to assure there is a necessity to change our leaders as many times as needed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 257, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a meteoric way" with adverb for "meteoric"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...y years, leading the company to success in a meteoric way. In conclusion, although it is true...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 113, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... hold power for long with great results, the fact that most of the times it happe...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'therefore', 'at least', 'in addition', 'in conclusion', 'in fact', 'such as', 'first of all', 'in some cases', 'it is true']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.201327433628 0.240241500013 84% => OK
Verbs: 0.174778761062 0.157235817809 111% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0907079646018 0.0880659088768 103% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0464601769912 0.0497285424764 93% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0420353982301 0.0444667217837 95% => OK
Prepositions: 0.132743362832 0.12292977631 108% => OK
Participles: 0.0530973451327 0.0406280797675 131% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.77740857921 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.033185840708 0.030933414821 107% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.0016655270985 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.106194690265 0.0997080785238 107% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0154867256637 0.0249443105267 62% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0243362831858 0.0148568991511 164% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2346.0 2732.02544248 86% => OK
No of words: 402.0 452.878318584 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.83582089552 6.0361032391 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.58838876751 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.308457711443 0.366273622748 84% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.241293532338 0.280924506359 86% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.169154228856 0.200843997647 84% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.121890547264 0.132149295362 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77740857921 2.79330140395 99% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 219.290929204 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547263681592 0.48968727796 112% => OK
Word variations: 62.5986299978 55.4138127331 113% => OK
How many sentences: 12.0 20.6194690265 58% => OK
Sentence length: 33.5 23.380412469 143% => OK
Sentence length SD: 107.103629724 59.4972553346 180% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 195.5 141.124799967 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.5 23.380412469 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.33333333333 0.674092028746 198% => Less Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 57.6293532338 51.4728631049 112% => OK
Elegance: 1.47058823529 1.64882698954 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.269995757981 0.391690518653 69% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.102647880309 0.123202303941 83% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0473717786377 0.077325440228 61% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.640163330394 0.547984918172 117% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.209644103354 0.149214159877 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.135509431058 0.161403998019 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0578745661869 0.0892212321368 65% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.376734233881 0.385218514788 98% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.084558148496 0.0692045440612 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197959691828 0.275328986314 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0340333593234 0.0653680567796 52% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.4325221239 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.30420353982 38% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 3.66592920354 27% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 10.0 13.5995575221 74% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.