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 author claims that leaders of any type of fields should be altered after the five years of leadership. This claim is supported by the reason of the triumph is achieved through the novel leadership. In what follows, I will content my idea about the claim with my supporting ideas. Finally, the reason which supports the claim will be considered for the evaluation.
I fundamentally agree with the proposition that there should be a shift of leadership over the specific period. Among the countless reasons that bolster my idea, I will delve to two most significant ones. First of all, insufficient management after the appropriate chance should be changed till halt the side effect of his or her failures our the system. It is obvious that the efficiency of the leader is clarified after the specific period. Indeed, whether a function of the leader is beneficial or not is illustrated after a short period of his or her function in the position. In the case that he or she does not present the desired function, there should be sufficient duration for the leaders to solve the mistakes and overcomes his or her failures. However, if the desired situation is not achieved after the specified period, the bearing of the extra period would be a waste of time, energy, and money. In this case, the new leader with the new idea and method could be effective. In addition, five years that is mentioned in the prompt seems an adequate period for presenting the aimed function during the leadership; and the required function is not presented the by the leader the alteration should be done.
Another equally notable point justifying my opinion is the importance of creative and novel thought at the leadership. With the assumption of the effective type of leadership controlling the system, the obligation of leader’s change is crucial. This claim is supporting with the significance of the new and fresh idea in the periodic pattern. The successful leader achieves the specific success based on his or her specified method which will lose its novelty after a period. Besides, since the instinct of the human being is based on the thriving and growing, the repetition of the same method after the period will be pale for the people and the method would not be considered as the success. In this case, the importance of the new idea and method get highlighted which could be achieved by the alteration of method producer -leader-.
Finally, as the reason concerned about the claim I do agree with the writer of the issue. As the reason states the requirement of the revitalization is obtainable by the new manager. According to my attitude, the new manager is equal to the new method and rational system, which add the new and fresh thought to the controlled system. This novelty adds more attention to the system which could be effective for the attraction of extra supports. According to the noteworthy refreshingly intelligent research conducted by the graduate student at the psychology science at METU University, the novel system attracts 35 percent more attention toward itself according to its unique appearance. If this attraction is well controlled by the system could be converted to the extra success for the system.
To wrap it up, all aforementioned arguments lead us to the conclusion that the importance of manager change after the five years is crucial for having the constant success without the failure and adding the novelty to gain more adhesion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1220, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e leader the alteration should be done. Another equally notable point justifying...
^^^
Line 5, column 91, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... do agree with the writer of the issue. As the reason states the requirement of th...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, first, however, if, so, well, in addition, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 12.9106741573 225% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2894.0 2235.4752809 129% => OK
No of words: 583.0 442.535393258 132% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96397941681 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.91379618374 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76746971748 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.421955403087 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 894.6 704.065955056 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.38483146067 251% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.3858884331 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.307692308 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4230769231 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.80769230769 5.21951772744 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 22.0 10.2758426966 214% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.180682920976 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627646918493 0.0831039109588 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0493949364165 0.0758088955206 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117637633511 0.150359130593 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0543233187875 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 138.0 100.480337079 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.