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.
Leadership plays a vital role in the overall performance of an organization, be it a business, an educational institute or a government of a country. A leader is someone who leads his subordinates on the path of betterment and success of both, the individuals as well as the organization. There is no doubt that the selection of the leader plays a huge part in the performance of an organization. However, in my opinion, the duration of a leader's term totally depends on the team he's leading and will be different for different organizations. I will put forward three arguments to prove my point.
One benefit of having a leader for a long term is that he will have sufficient time to execute his vision and plans for the organization, without having the pressure of his term ending. This has been observed in various organizations: Mark Zuckerberg has been leading Facebook ever since its inception and the shares of Apple plummeted after a change in leadership. Steve Jobs had led the tech-giant for such a long time without having any major issues. An extended leadership term also helps develop and stabilize the working culture of an organization, since the job of a leader is not only to get the most out of his employees but also establish a culture in terms of ethics and dilligence. Hence, in such cases, an extended leadership might be better for an organization.
However, an argument in the opposite direction might be that a change in leadership can help move the organization out of stagnation. A new leader can bring in fresh ideas as well as a new perspective that might rejuvenate the working atmosphere of a company. Recently, we saw that the shares as well as the number of new and innovative products increased massively when Satya Nadella took over as the CEO of Microsoft. It is said that he has played a huge role in completely revamping the working atmosphere at Microsoft, which was earlier said to be so competitive that it was at the verge of being toxic. Nadella has helped create an atmosphere of innovation and healthy competition which can be seen in the rise of the company's stocks and employee satisfaction rates. Therefore, in such cases, it might be imperative to have leadership changes after some time.
Another place where an extended leadership might be detrimental to the people is the government of a country. An extended leadership stint might result in making the leadership party extremely powerful which is not a feature of a truly democratic state. We can see from the case of Zimbabwe, how even a democratically chosen leader can overthrow democracy and start a regime of tyranny and dictatorship. In cases of leadership of a nation, it is extremely important that those in power should be kept under check and there should be a provision to rescind their leadership by democratic methods.
The above examples show that there is no fixed answer to when there should be a change in leadership. It depends on the organization in question. I discussed how a change in the leadership of Microsoft proved beneficial for it, however it doesn't mean that you change the leader even if he is performing well. We have seen that in educational institutes, the Principals or Deans stay on power for years and years on end, without compromising the integrity of the institute. In conclusion, the provision to change a leader should be there at all times, however a necessary change in leadership is not the correct way for any organization.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 261, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...nt and success of both, the individuals as well as the organization. There is no doubt tha...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 481, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: he's
...eaders term totally depends on the team hes leading and will be different for diffe...
^^^
Line 17, column 240, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ft proved beneficial for it, however it doesnt mean that you change the leader even if...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, so, therefore, well, in conclusion, no doubt, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2903.0 2235.4752809 130% => OK
No of words: 595.0 442.535393258 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87899159664 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93888872473 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01718543537 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453781512605 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 933.3 704.065955056 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7613047174 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.12 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.08 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.142854262443 0.243740707755 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0435707190251 0.0831039109588 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0330884763704 0.0758088955206 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0849223843525 0.150359130593 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0289704068705 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: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => 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: 11.32 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.