hi! everyone!
Thank you for your valuable suggestions!
Present your prespective on the issue below. Please
-consider the complexities and implications of the issue
-organize, develop, and express your ideas on the issue
-support your ideas with relevant reasons and examples
-control the elements of standard written English
TOPIC: "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
Response
In this claim, the speaker asserts that in any profession-business, education, government- those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. I agree insofar as the speaker's basic assertion that an enterprise need new leadership through the path to success. However, I don't agree with the speaker's conclusion that in any profession those in power should step down after five years. One of an example to support my opinion is the common fact that many companies don't change the leader every five year.
Admittedly, the change of the leadership for some time will gives new fresh air to the enterprise, thus to some extent helping the company go to success. Time is changing as well as the surroundings of a company, an enterprise will indulge in stop and tend to become old if all the things such the principles and regulations remain the same. A new leader will bring new ideals and management of the company. Revolutions sometimes will be taken to prevent that trend. I think the change of leadership is one of reformational measures. It is not strange that we can see many world-famous enterprise changes its leader reported by the paper and TV every day.
However, that is not to say that the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. The speaker do overlooks many equal factors that will lead a company to succeed. Think about the Microsoft, a very successful enterprise established by Bill Gates. Did we see that Microsoft change its leader frequently? The answer is no. Bill Gates has taken the position for more than 20 years. I do think it is the existing technology innovation and the owned creative company culture that lead Microsoft to success instead of revitalization through new leadership. Moreover, the valuable experience that a lead received during his position play a role in leading the enterprise to succeed. The longer a leader stay in the company, the more experience he will receive which will help him manage the company. The speaker ignore many important factors.
Sometimes, it is the leader's own private choice that makes him leave the company. Think about Li kaifu, the manger of Google of China. He succeed to manage the affairs of Google in China. However, his leave of the company is due to his own choice as he said.
Finally, I doubt the speaker's conclusion that those in power should step down after five years is based on week evidence. 5 years is just a number, a number which belongs to the author's own guesswork, let alone in any profession tend to like that.
To sum up, whether those in power should step down is determined by many factors such as the ability of innovation and the management, not the destiny time-five years as the speaker said. In final analysis, the surest path to success for enterprise should be considered seriously by every leader, at least not only the revitalization through new leadership.
Thank you for your valuable suggestions!
Present your prespective on the issue below. Please
-consider the complexities and implications of the issue
-organize, develop, and express your ideas on the issue
-support your ideas with relevant reasons and examples
-control the elements of standard written English
TOPIC: "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
Response
In this claim, the speaker asserts that in any profession-business, education, government- those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. I agree insofar as the speaker's basic assertion that an enterprise need new leadership through the path to success. However, I don't agree with the speaker's conclusion that in any profession those in power should step down after five years. One of an example to support my opinion is the common fact that many companies don't change the leader every five year.
Admittedly, the change of the leadership for some time will gives new fresh air to the enterprise, thus to some extent helping the company go to success. Time is changing as well as the surroundings of a company, an enterprise will indulge in stop and tend to become old if all the things such the principles and regulations remain the same. A new leader will bring new ideals and management of the company. Revolutions sometimes will be taken to prevent that trend. I think the change of leadership is one of reformational measures. It is not strange that we can see many world-famous enterprise changes its leader reported by the paper and TV every day.
However, that is not to say that the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. The speaker do overlooks many equal factors that will lead a company to succeed. Think about the Microsoft, a very successful enterprise established by Bill Gates. Did we see that Microsoft change its leader frequently? The answer is no. Bill Gates has taken the position for more than 20 years. I do think it is the existing technology innovation and the owned creative company culture that lead Microsoft to success instead of revitalization through new leadership. Moreover, the valuable experience that a lead received during his position play a role in leading the enterprise to succeed. The longer a leader stay in the company, the more experience he will receive which will help him manage the company. The speaker ignore many important factors.
Sometimes, it is the leader's own private choice that makes him leave the company. Think about Li kaifu, the manger of Google of China. He succeed to manage the affairs of Google in China. However, his leave of the company is due to his own choice as he said.
Finally, I doubt the speaker's conclusion that those in power should step down after five years is based on week evidence. 5 years is just a number, a number which belongs to the author's own guesswork, let alone in any profession tend to like that.
To sum up, whether those in power should step down is determined by many factors such as the ability of innovation and the management, not the destiny time-five years as the speaker said. In final analysis, the surest path to success for enterprise should be considered seriously by every leader, at least not only the revitalization through new leadership.