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.
The claim states that the individuals on high posts must step down after five years because reviving by new leader will lead to success of the enterprise. The claim includes any possible field with a hierachial system, which mainly any system in the present day. The idea is quite ideal however, it is as feasible as it seems. I disagree with this claim too a great extent because many other important ideas exist, apart from revitalization, that are important for the success of the enterprise.
Firstly, the systems where the higher position is acquired on the basis of capability and the individual's contribution to the enterprise, this claim would lead to unfairness. The individual on the high postion has worked hard and achieved that position and untill the person keeps the integruity and no other individual out-weighs their capability, it would be unfairness to the commend an individual to step down their position. This can be better explained for a hypothetical scenario that occurs in lives of many individuals. For instance, you join a company and work there for five long years and then you acquire the position of the Manager. Now, five years down the line, there has not been an employee that is capable to be a manager and the company has always been growing in your jurisdiction. Under the claim stated above, it would mean that you may now not have new effective ideas and must step down the position. This would certainly lead to a feeling of unfairness as well as if the new manager is not capable enough the company can certainly go into loss.
Secondly, democratic systems like the government, such a short tenure of high position can lead to electing an individual that is not suitable for the position. This means that if the enterprise does not have enough suitable people for the role or enough suitable people that will be honest, then the voters will be forced to choose between two bad choices and they will have to choose the less bad choice. This does not lead to a great result in every area. In South India, there was a state, that is divided into two now, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The differences between the community has existed since forever, yet they lived in harmony as one state. However, about a decade ago, a government was elected that let the public demonstrate their feeling in public settings and this meant there were riots, school shut downs, bombs and physical injuries. All of this resultede into the seperation of the two states. Even though, the stepping down of the government is sensible here, the forced-choice to choose between two bad choices has already done the damage, economically and psychologically.
Lastly, in cases of dictatorship or places where the ruling runs within the family, this claim an result would work very well. As no two individuals are the same, the change in the ruler will bring change to the community under it. However, for most cases if the individual is capable they would acquire the high position and hence enforcing this rule will not necessarily benefit the enterprise and will lead to unwanted damage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 264, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...h mainly any system in the present day. The idea is quite ideal however, it is as f...
^^^
Line 5, column 95, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...ired on the basis of capability and the individuals contribution to the enterprise, this cl...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 376, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...r capability, it would be unfairness to the commend an individual to step down their positi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 96, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ling runs within the family, this claim an result would work very well. As no two ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, apart from, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2587.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 530.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88113207547 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6100750928 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460377358491 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 809.1 704.065955056 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9648837457 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.590909091 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0909090909 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.63636363636 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14199139065 0.243740707755 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429186254976 0.0831039109588 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0504879553921 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0957542395773 0.150359130593 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0666356842046 0.0667264976115 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.1392134831 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => 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.