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 claim that in any prospective field, those in power should step down after five years is reasonably true. Whereas the reason stated for the claim is conditionally true. The reason that the surest path to success is revitalisation through new leadership is only completely true provided the new leader has the correct intent and the mettle to carry forward the legacy. New leadership not necessarily means new/young blood, it means new ideas.
Firstly, if an organisation has a leader who has served for more than a required time then traits of banality in an organisation can be observed. This is because an organisation cannot survive long on a mundane set of tenets. Evolution requires change. In order to thrive for an organisation, it is necessary to evolve which with a constant leader seems improbable. Reason being, we are humans, and as humans, we tend to accept what is working for us and avoid the risk of obscurity. We don’t like to do things which diverge from our preoccupied approach.
Secondly, one person represents only a certain kind of beliefs. For an organisation to sustain for a long period, it needs to be comprehensive with its ideology. Since we, as humans, are limited with our thoughts, it is required for an organisation to have different leaders with a diverse range of beliefs.
For example, even the prime minister of India serves a term for only five years and then the prime minister is re-elected, and so is the government. Whereas, the president of the United States serves for four years before re-election.
However, it is not necessary that an organisation would do wonders with new leadership. It is possible that the new leader has no intent in the welfare of the organisation, that the leader has no imminent vision for the organisation, that the leader is unable to inspire its pupil, or the leader simply lacks the audacity to diverge from the precedents’ views. Hence it is not necessary that new leadership would always prosper the organisation.
For example, the son of a highly successful king might not be the right choice as a succession to the kingdom if the prince is not even interested in kingship and wants to pursue art. On the other hand, a wise dweller has the potential of becoming a king with his wisdom and dedication to sacrifice himself for the kingdom.
Hence conclude that, in any field, revitalisation of leadership in an organisation is necessary in order to succeed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... new/young blood, it means new ideas. Firstly, if an organisation has a leader...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...diverge from our preoccupied approach. Secondly, one person represents only a c...
^^^^
Line 8, column 366, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...iverge from the precedents' views. Hence it is not necessary that new leadership...
^^^^^
Line 12, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...o sacrifice himself for the kingdom. Hence conclude that, in any field, revitalisa...
^^^^^
Line 12, column 118, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ation is necessary in order to succeed.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, well, whereas, for example, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 58.6224719101 87% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2051.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 415.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9421686747 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94301222329 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.49156626506 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 645.3 704.065955056 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.4471284451 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.6666666667 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7619047619 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61904761905 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 4.97078651685 141% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236803444349 0.243740707755 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0728535702832 0.0831039109588 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0980663931371 0.0758088955206 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11610809936 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125138760682 0.0667264976115 188% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 100.480337079 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.