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.
The statement claims that for an enterprise’s survival, changing the leadership from time to time-5 years perhaps- is effective to help itself in staying vital. From the political point of view, It is easy to find that lots of countries practicing democracy change their leaders and management teams in every few years. However, if we add in monarchies( constitutional monarchies excluded) and countries in dictatorship throughout centuries, it is not hard to find that democracies may be just inchoate with unproven stability. Furthermore, from the business perspective, there are much more companies or institutes with dictatorial leadership. It seems more salubrious and competitive for a company to stay in this way.
Changing leadership frequently sounds like a good method for an enterprise to revitalize itself. Like democracy, it always offers a sense of relief even if the worst people become president, the system will secure him to be ruled out some day. However, switching the leadership is a literally dangerous practice. For example, every time a company switches their leaders, it becomes unstable itself and results in the downfall of their stock prices. Incorporating new leaders usually accompanied with new implementations of rules, and new initiation of visions, which takes time for members to get accustomed to. Sometimes the new leaders may not be experienced enough and that will be even more consuming and dangerous for the company.
In addition, countries perform democracy may be guaranteed with fairness and probity, but not with competitiveness and survivability. One of the best advantages of democracy is that it gives everyone equal right, and better chances to assume higher positions. However, lots of countries with democracies out of expectations are actually poor and unstable. Especially in Africa, after World War Two, European left their colony, colonized countries followed their colonizer practicing democracy. Poor and unstable as newborn regimes, upheavals raised up everywhere, and most regimes later were replaced by some powerful dictators and military government. The phenomenon may be applied to other kinds of enterprises as well.
To sum up, it is possible to change leaders in an enterprise to revitalize itself, but it is also a dangerous act as well. Changing new leaders the enterprise becomes unstable and vulnerable to the environment and takes time and resources to pull itself back on the trail. Moreover, such act could create a fairness environment, but pose itself under the threat of losing competitiveness and basic survivability. Therefore, it is axiomatic to see most of the enterprises execute dictatorship throughout history.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, well, for example, in addition, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2290.0 2235.4752809 102% => OK
No of words: 416.0 442.535393258 94% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50480769231 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18037840009 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 229.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550480769231 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 724.5 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.1706402202 60.3974514979 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 109.047619048 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8095238095 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61904761905 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.109934641754 0.243740707755 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0343363282553 0.0831039109588 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0329116983264 0.0758088955206 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0669684403653 0.150359130593 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.028494082307 0.0667264976115 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: 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.