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.
Leaders of enterprises are important as they make a glut of decisions which can even change the companies’ facet. Although most leaders start their positions with a strong will to achieve their goals, many of them easily lose their initial mindset after several years. Consequently, they sometimes demonstrate a serious aberrance from the original, primary goals. For this reason, some people assert that one should not keep in power for more than five years for companies’ revitalization. However, there are several realistic problems in compelling them to give up their power and electing new leaders every five years.
Firstly, most leaders of private enterprises highly contributed to the company in various aspects for many years. In other words, as their power is strongly built and maintained, others cannot easily compel them to abandon their power. Thus, in order to change enterprises’ leaders, they have to give up the power themselves. However, for most cases, the leadership positions have a strong relation to their assets such as stocks - ceding a leader’s role to others is similar to ceding their assets to others. In this aspect, not many of them will be willing to step down from an important position. Therefore, the limitation of the period as a leader is unsound for many private companies.
Secondly, changing leader process requires high costs in terms of both money and time. In order to elect a new leader, a company needs to nominate candidates, present the promises, and go through the voting procedure. In spite of the possible simplification of the steps, it still requires such procedures which would be unnecessary unless the company changes its leader. Furthermore, adaptation to new leaders’ policies is highly costly if they have totally different goals from the previous leaders. Hence, changing a leader can be disadvantageous as it might prevent a company from using its time and money for a more valuable purpose.
Changing a leader every five years might be helpful for an enterprise resulting in the companies’ revitalization. However, coercion of changing leadership policy does not seem to be applicable to private companies and the cost for the election of new leaders is expensive. As a result, the claim and the reason would not be able to obtain acceptance due to their lack of consideration of reality.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, such as, as a result, in other words, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1979.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20789473684 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88109364676 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 215.323595506 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.526315789474 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 612.0 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 25.6403853887 60.3974514979 42% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.157894737 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.57894736842 5.21951772744 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129948870768 0.243740707755 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0470977787119 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0381040327412 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0913067593578 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.033469887469 0.0667264976115 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 100.480337079 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.