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 statement claims that the people in power in any area, be it business, politics, education or government, must not have a tenure exceeding five years. The reason provided being that the revitalization that these changes bring would pave the surest path to the success of the enterprise.
Change is the law of nature, the old has to make way for the new in a constant, continuous cycle. Any organisation that desires to succeed has to embrace the virtue of adaptability. From the biological ecosystems to the corporate conglomerates to the deemed universities, survival of the fittest is the way of life. Leadership, at every stage, is responsible for this adaptation that must be adopted for the organisation to survive, and indeed, thrive. It goes without saying that the very structure responsible for the reaction to change is not left stagnant. Those in power, making the decisions that shape the future of the organisation, must themselves not remain immovable, unchangeable individuals. New leadership, after an appropriate amount of time, should replace the status quo, ushering in novel solutions to problems and greater successes for the enterprise.
While I agree with the claim that those in power must step down after five years in most fields, I believe it would prove less than beneficial in some others. In politics, in governments and related enterprises where power comes with the mandate of the public, it is imperative that the authority to choose their leaders, on the basis of their performance, remain in the hands of the common man through the electoral system. In certain ventures, however, the experience that comes with time is invaluable and greatly add to the organisation’s success. In privately owned or business enterprises, or even the education system, to ask a leader to step down by five years would undermine her expertise and knowledge and lead to squandering of the opportunity to utilise it to reach greater heights. For instance, an experienced manager of a business would know about the workings of the market and be able to predict its response to a product with greater precision than a less experienced individual with the same credentials could.
In my opinion, the reason provided to substantiate the claim is not without error. There is no one sure path to success. It is an outcome, subjected to a multitude of conditions. Revitalisation, while important, does not always guarantee gains. A complete reordering of an organisation, disrupting the well-oiled machinery of workers that has assembled over the course of time, may well prove to be a disruption that causes it considerable losses. New leadership may in some cases prove a favourable change, and in some others a disastrous one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 557, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...add to the organisation's success. In privately owned or business enterprises...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, so, well, while, as to, for instance, in my opinion, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2303.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 448.0 442.535393258 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.140625 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60065326758 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09746719971 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533482142857 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 737.1 704.065955056 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.0542996029 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.15 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.2 5.21951772744 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => 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: 0.283267728727 0.243740707755 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678847561728 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.054343640979 0.0758088955206 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157158409738 0.150359130593 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.06597751668 0.0667264976115 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 100.480337079 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.