Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.
There are several reasons why those in power across all fields, including business, politics, education, and government, should not be required to step down after five years. The primary responsibility of a leader is to guide and maneuver their organization through both rough times and burgeoning ones. In doing so, he or she must have foresight and vision to accomplish goals, which often require more than five years to complete. In addition, it can be quite costly to change leaders frequently. Therefore, a great leader, one who can effectively guide a group of followers to accomplish certain goals in an efficient and benevolent manner, should be allowed to lead for longer than five years.
Firstly, leaders of business, politics, education, and government face extremely daunting tasks that may take decades to solve. Integral to their success is to have a foresight of a visionary, that can later on be translated into action over a period of time. Within five years, there is no guarantee that their entire plan can be completed in an efficacious manner. One instance that quickly comes to mind is Abraham Lincoln, who fought to free America from the grips of slavery. It is quite fathomable that had his untimely assassination not occurred, segregation within parts of the country, especially in the South, would have ceased much earlier and not lingered well into the 20th century.
Secondly, the costs of replacing a leader can be quite high. Whenever a new leader steps in and fills the role of their predecessor, there is a transitionary period that the organization faces, which limits productivity. For example, once a new President of the United States is elected, he typically replaces many of the former Cabinet members with his own counsel. This process can last for several weeks or even months and be prioritized over other pressing issues facing the nation. Therefore frequent changes of leadership result in higher financial and opportunity costs for the organization as a whole.
Proponents of the notion that those in power should step down after five years, be it business, politics, education, or government, can cite examples of poor leadership. They argue that ruthless dictators such as Hitler, poor CEOs that move an organization into insolvency, and tenured principals who have become complacent in their roles should be replaced. In fact, if those in power were displaced after five years, their actions would quickly be mitigated by the election of a new power - one who can correct the errors of their predecessor. However, this quandary can be solved without requiring leaders to step down after five years simply by providing the organization the power to impeach the leader if he or she is not performing up to the standard. While this power can be exercised at any time, it should only be used whenever the chief is leading poorly. For effective leaders, it should not be mandatory for them to step down, especially if they are completing their mission in a timely manner that is supported by others in their organization.
In conclusion, a leader’s goal is to provide a mission and vision for others under them to follow. It is imperative that they complete the goals of the organization in a thorough and effective manner, which can take longer than five years. Additionally, the costs associated with transitioning leadership can be quite high. Ideally, an organization would desire to mitigate these costs by reducing the frequency of establishing a new power. Given the aforementioned reasons, it should not be mandatory for a leader to step down after five years.
- Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. 66
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future. 58
- In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. 66
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts. 66
- Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the numbe 77
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 245, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ter on be translated into action over a period of time. Within five years, there is no guarant...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 342, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an efficacious manner" with adverb for "efficacious"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...that their entire plan can be completed in an efficacious manner. One instance that quickly comes to min...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 488, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ther pressing issues facing the nation. Therefore frequent changes of leadership result i...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 989, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a timely manner" with adverb for "timely"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ly if they are completing their mission in a timely manner that is supported by others in their or...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 85.0 58.6224719101 145% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3033.0 2235.4752809 136% => OK
No of words: 595.0 442.535393258 134% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0974789916 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93888872473 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87336268526 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 290.0 215.323595506 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487394957983 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 955.8 704.065955056 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0672362637 60.3974514979 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.653846154 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8846153846 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.26923076923 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273704494074 0.243740707755 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0858288562187 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128939979309 0.0758088955206 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16347661149 0.150359130593 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106318942318 0.0667264976115 159% => 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: 12.6 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 159.0 100.480337079 158% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
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.