Claim: In any field – business, politics, education, government – those in power should step down in five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
For success in any field, it is important that a good leader takes the stand and brings about the progress of his enterprise by motivating the employees, workers, etc. of the enterprise. May it be business, politics, education or government, the power that leads the entity must be righteous and possess good decision making skills. Here, the author claims that in any of the aforementioned fields, the power must step down in five years. I disagree with this claim as it doesn’t corroborate with the other facts required to run an enterprise pertaining to the power at end.
As stated in the claim, a tenure of five years is only a constitutional duration provided for the people in power to rule or administer a particular country, business enterprise or political party. In that duration the authorities in power can make amendments in previously held policies, suggest reforms, make new plans or also continue with the old customs. It entirely depends on the power how they wish to utilize their tenure and do better for the country or business and help the society. Making compulsions as to changing the face of the governing body every five years doesn’t sound appropriate because it largely limits the power in the hands of the governing body and also makes it unlikely for them to complete their prescient tasks from being completed.
Consider the example of a country where a political party once chosen, forms the central government. In a tenure of five years this government brought about several reforms, abolished age old customs, qualified undue taxes on its citizens but at the same time also made rules and regulations stricter. If this government collapses and the opposing party’s government is formed, it is highly unlikely for this party to continue with the earlier government’s policies. It might as well scrap their rules and policies and introduce new taxes, rules, etc. This continuous change in rule and policies every five years would affect the citizens, because in every five years they have to change their ways and abide by new rules. Same applies in case of business. If the board members change every five years, introducing new changes each time, the investors, customers and employees too have to abide by their rules.
The reason for the mentioned claim by the author is specified as, the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization though new leadership. However, the success of any company or enterprise depends upon the efficiency of its policies, their conduct and morality. It also depends on how persuasive are these rules for the citizens and how complacently they adhere to it. Leadership is a broad concept and varies from person to person depending on his/her ethics and moral codes. Dictatorship, communism, democracy are different types of leaderships that govern a country and the output of each of these is well known to us in this modern society.
Thus, in order to successfully bring about the development of a country, enterprise, political party or even educational institute, the leaders running the institute need not necessarily be changed every five years. The success depends on the authority and credibility of the governing party.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nterprise. May it be business, politics, education or government, the power that ...
^^
Line 5, column 494, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rnment's policies. It might as well scrap their rules and policies and intro...
^^
Line 5, column 889, Rule ID: TOO_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'to have'?
Suggestion: to have
... the investors, customers and employees too have to abide by their rules. The reason ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, thus, well, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 26.0 14.8657303371 175% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2712.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 530.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11698113208 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84848426089 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 261.0 215.323595506 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492452830189 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 859.5 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.6739088741 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.913043478 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0434782609 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.17391304348 5.21951772744 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.319040892906 0.243740707755 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0879937425283 0.0831039109588 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0931883857283 0.0758088955206 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173343073318 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0771391819402 0.0667264976115 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.71 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 100.480337079 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.