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.
While revitalization can serve well when an institution is not going well, it's not warranted that just bringing in a new face will ensure the success of any organization. The claim also demands a change in leadership every five years. While there are both pros and cons of people staying in power for long which we will discuss ahead, what is more important is the assessment of results produced by the leadership and its competency, not a random 5-year rule.
Firstly, frequent change in leadership will dwindle the stability of any organization. As a saying goes, "Success comes from experience and experience comes from bad experience." People already in leadership have that experience. Bringing in new person just because of some random rule which demands change in leadership in every 5 years can hamper the momentum an organization is in. A better approach will be to assess & review accomplishments of any leadership continuously to ensure it's sound running and take a decision to whether continue with the same leadership or bring in a new leadership based upon review. It would have made no sense to fire Steve Jobs after the first five years without any assessment. We also know the situation Apple faced when they did eventually fire Steve and the results he brought to Apple when he later rejoined. So, bringing in a new face just for the sake of bringing in a new face even when a company is running well will only bring instability into the company.
Secondly, even in politics, we have seen many leaders who have served for more than 5 years and have done really good. Barack Obama served for his second term as a president of USA and so is Xi Jinping serving his second term in China. Both countries have done really well under their leadership which has lasted for more than 5 years. There are times in a country's reign when exemplary leaders serve them. Such moments must be cherished. The country will benefit a lot from their reign.
In contrast, a long term leadership can sometimes be harmful. When people stay in power for long, in order to have the hold on power they can bring in an unsuitable situation in any country. Examples of dictatorship by Hitler and many other dictators are evidence of such acts. This is the very reason that most of the monarchies & dictatorships have now been replaced by democracy. Moreover, this is the very reason why leadership shall be placed under continuous review so that leadership will have the fear that if they don't perform well they will be replaced at any time. This will ensure that leadership is under the right hands.
In sum, changing leadership every five years just for the sake of bringing in change makes very little sense and will, in contrast, bring instability. There is also no warranty that an institution will perform better under new leadership especially when it's running properly in the first place. The right thing to do is to continuously review leadership and provide provision where it can be replaced upon incompetency to check any act of malice.
- 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. 58
- Xyz 16
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain. 66
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. 50
- Educational Institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 524, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...dership will have the fear that if they dont perform well they will be replaced at a...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, moreover, really, second, secondly, so, well, while, in contrast, what is more, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2538.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 522.0 442.535393258 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86206896552 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77988695657 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72636128563 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461685823755 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 792.0 704.065955056 112% => 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: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.6219178257 60.3974514979 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.52 118.986275619 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.88 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.96 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.187935213886 0.243740707755 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0572169164185 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0438315857752 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118756612987 0.150359130593 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391534109482 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.1639044944 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.