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.
It is unassailable that a true leader with an intellectual, clear vision, is an asset for any government or organization to achieve the intended goals. The affirmation claims that the head in power should pass the power to a new one every five years to ensure the success of the premise. However, if the chief of an enterprise changes every certain year, then along with the leader the company or government’s vision as well as the method of administration, everything would change accordingly. The outline of the statement is a contentious issue and needs scrupulous and cogent analysis as well as lucid delineation.
Admittedly, rejuvenation would lead to a definitive path for success. Nevertheless, for a neophyte leader, if he has taken control, it would take a considerable amount of time to gain experience as the head would be a novice and the exposure would have also been limited. By the time, the chief completely becomes comfortable and ready, the five-year tenure associated with the leadership would have been completed. Moreover, constant change of leaders every fifth year would leave the individuals in the lower hierarchy, bewildered. For instance, when a manager of the company follows certain principles to keep up the spirit of his teammates by giving, a day off after a productive week, team lunches, freedom to express opinions, etc., when supplanted by a new one, the group would be baffled with the morals the new manager follow.
Along with the confounded employees, if the old boss was successful, then there would be no evidence, that the new leader would also become successful. Provided that the new chief lacks a tantamount vision as the previous, then the organization would succumb. The best exemplification for this would be Steve Jobs. Steve when fired from the CEO post of Apple Inc., the products of apple lost popularity in the market and the management started to deteriorate. Eventually, Steve was asked to retake his previous position, then the rest is history.
However, it is not like if a victorious leader steps down, the authority capitulates. When a proficient chairperson leaves the position, the torch of success can be given to another individual with the same caliber and mindset as the precedent. For example, the ex-CEO of Google, Larry Page stepped down deliberately to focus his heed on his parent company and gave Sundar Pitchai his place as their vision for the company is identical, and believed him that he would administer his company Google in the same way. Therefore, if an expertise leader steps down, he could pass the authorization to an experienced new leader.
To put the enunciation in a nutshell, a leader doesn't need to yield the position after five years tenure even though being efficient, then the heads would lose the enthusiasm and spirit to work actively and thus the growth of the government or any enterprise would be obviated.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 48, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...the enunciation in a nutshell, a leader doesnt need to yield the position after five y...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, look, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, apart from, for example, for instance, such as, as well as, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 38.0 19.5258426966 195% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 32.0 12.4196629213 258% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 27.0 14.8657303371 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 125.0 58.6224719101 213% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 42.0 12.9106741573 325% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 5191.0 2235.4752809 232% => Less number of characters wanted.
No of words: 1006.0 442.535393258 227% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16003976143 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.63182945892 4.55969084622 124% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9873990492 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 470.0 215.323595506 218% => Less unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.467196819085 0.4932671777 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1636.2 704.065955056 232% => syllable counts are too long.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 19.0 4.99550561798 380% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 41.0 20.2370786517 203% => Too many sentences.
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.5471941566 60.3974514979 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.609756098 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5365853659 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.70731707317 5.21951772744 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 9.0 4.97078651685 181% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 27.0 10.2758426966 263% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => 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: 0.123066834091 0.243740707755 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0320995699642 0.0831039109588 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422782713816 0.0758088955206 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0620121595072 0.150359130593 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0440404711375 0.0667264976115 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.1392134831 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 269.0 100.480337079 268% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.