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 revitalisation 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
Amongst many other assets, leaders are one important asset of society. Having a good leader is very crucial for the success of a particular organization; be it a political body, government, or a private firm. Because a leader’s decisions and actions have an impact on the masses. In this essay, I will argue against the claim made by the author, by suggesting that leadership in any field of work should stay as long as they are doing their job properly. Let us discuss this further.
The author suggests that for the establishment to be successful; leaders should be changed every five years. However, this imposes some critical questions. Firstly, Why should we replace someone when they are doing their job properly? It is a rare quality to lead people. Few people can persuade and motivate other human beings. It is almost impossible to guarantee that a successor is as good as its predecessor, especially when it comes to leadership skills. Take a look at the tech giant Apple. After Steve Jobs was fired from being CEO of Apple; Apple’s creativity and success started to plummet. Eventually, Apple had to rehire him for the same role. Reason: He was simply amazing at his job. Now it brings us to the next important question.
How can we be so sure that five years are good enough to groom a potential leader? This five-year cycle of changing leadership actually might harm upcoming leaders. By giving a deadline, we are merely starting a race. We might hinder the growth of new candidates by forcing them to learn things within this deadline. Everyone has a different way of improving, learning, and becoming successful. This is no different for leaders. Everyone has to follow their path. Therefore they need a different amount of time to become good leaders.
Having said that, I also believe that there should be a change in leadership. But it should follow a pragmatic approach. Instead of having a fixed tenure, current leaders should groom potential heirs and give them the space they need. With the mutual agreement, current leaders should step down to give the torch to the new generation. This will bring more creative minds to decision making roles without sacrificing an individual’s goals of reaching their full potential.
In conclusion, leadership is a rare trait, and we should retain good leaders as long as we can; to give ample time to new leaders to be mature enough to lead
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 465, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ers. Everyone has to follow their path. Therefore they need a different amount of time to...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, look, so, therefore, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2009.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67375483204 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585365853659 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 608.4 704.065955056 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 23.0359550562 56% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.9447043897 60.3974514979 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 66.9666666667 118.986275619 56% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.6666666667 23.4991977007 58% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 3.03333333333 5.21951772744 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145644047708 0.243740707755 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0337747494304 0.0831039109588 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0341708048267 0.0758088955206 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.080909146642 0.150359130593 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0210963412967 0.0667264976115 32% => 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: 8.5 14.1392134831 60% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.74 48.8420337079 137% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 12.1743820225 59% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.55 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 100.480337079 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 11.2143820225 64% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.