[i习作temp] issue70 [戮力同心小组] 第四次作业 by 10 jiangzuodong [复制链接]

jiangzuodong
UID：2371192

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 288
注册时间: 2007-7-28
精华: 0
帖子: 2

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-7-30 18:10:55 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

issue70 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.

After reading this issue, I can not agree with the speaker's opinion. Although I agree that new leadership can bring revitalization to the enterprises, the opinionthat the power step down every five years is unconvincing and unlogical to me. Whether a enterprise should choose a new leadership depends on the case of realistic.

Firstly, I admit that the new leadership has his own advantages, which can greatly improve the level of the entreprise. New leaders can provide new power and innovative things to the enterprise, because they owns more energy ,more advanced ideas, and more fearless spirit, all of which are the force for the entreprises to progress. For example, the former president of American , Roosevelt, he is a success leader in American history for his great feat. When he began to be the president, he face a very difficult situation, the Great Depression. Roosevelt as a new leader take a serious of new and effecitive actions to control the dangrous situation. As a result, he helped the USA prevail the Great Depression by his new ideas, powful actions and great courage. Therefore,in some cases, a entreprises can benefit a lot from a new leader, regardless their shortage of experiences.

Although the new leader has its own merits, we can not overlook the importance of the old leaders, because they have more experiences and are more familar with the work and the enterprises. A successful leader must master the basic situation of every part in the enterprise. However, this process need much time and the leader must experience many practice circumstances. In common circumstances , an old leader often understand more practical experiences. So the more experiences are the advantages for the old leaders.

Nevertheless, I oppose the speaker's opinion that changing the leader every five years, because there is not any evidence to support it is justifiable.To the contrary , I think it will harm the enterprises. Five years is not long time for a successful leader to control the enterprises thoroughly. If after five years, the original leader was changed , it will be a great waste for the enterprised ,because a new leader also need the same time to know the enterprises. Certainly , if the original leader is avaliable , the enterprises should change him as soon as possible. So this problem depend the reality from case to case.

In sum, new leadships will actually have positive influence on the enterprise, which can not be ignored. But the new leaders are lack of practical experiences and information of the enterprises. So changing the leader too quickly is harmful and unreasonable. I think five years is not long enough to judge a leader, and whether to change the leader does not depend a fixed time but the abiliy of the leader.

回应
0

使用道具举报

liyi2321
UID：2252012

高级会员

Rank: 5 Rank: 5

声望: 34
寄托币: 1426
注册时间: 2006-9-13
精华: 3
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2007-7-31 13:39:33 |只看该作者

After reading this issue, I can not agree with the speaker's opinion. Although I agree that new leadership can bring revitalization to the enterprises, the opinion that the power step down every five years is unconvincing and unlogical (illogical) to me. Whether a enterprise should choose a new leadership depends on the case of realistic.
（核心观点：企业是否应该选择新领导取决于具体的实际情况）
Firstly, I admit that the new leadership has his own advantages, which can greatly improve the level of the entreprise. New leaders can provide new power and innovative things to the enterprise, because they owns more energy ,more advanced ideas, and more fearless spirit, all of which are the force for the entreprises to progress. For example, the former president of American , Roosevelt, he is a success leader in American history for his great feat. When he began to be the president, he face a very difficult situation, the Great Depression. Roosevelt as a new leader take a serious of new and effecitive (effective) actions to control the dangrous situation. As a result, he helped the USA prevail the Great Depression by his new ideas, powful (powerful?) actions and great courage. Therefore, in some cases, a entreprises can benefit a lot from a new leader, regardless their shortage of experiences.
(enterprise拼写很多都错误了，自己更正吧。观点1：承认新的领导有很多优势，举例罗斯福对经济危机的有利措施，论证还是不错的，不过就是拼写错误太多。)
Although the new leader has its own merits, we can not overlook the importance of the old leaders, because they have more experiences and are more familar (familiar) with the work and the enterprises. A successful leader must master the basic situation of every part in the enterprise. However, this process need much time and the leader must experience many practice circumstances. In common circumstances, an old leader often understand more practical experiences. So the more experiences are the advantages for the old leaders.
（论证了老领导的有时，说理还是可以的，就是论证的力度不够，缺乏例子。感觉有点空说理的味道）
Nevertheless, I oppose the speaker's opinion that changing the leader every five years, because there is not any evidence to support it is justifiable.To the contrary , I think it will harm the enterprises. Five years is not long time for a successful leader to control the enterprises thoroughly. If after five years, the original leader was changed , it will be a great waste for the enterprised ,because a new leader also need the same time to know the enterprises. Certainly , if the original leader is avaliable , the enterprises should change him as soon as possible. So this problem depend the reality from case to case.
（这里你要注意issue和argument的区别，最好减少对题目观点的评论性文字，用更多的文字阐述自己的观点并且论证自己的观点。）
In sum, new leadships (leaderships) will actually have positive influence on the enterprise, which can not be ignored. But the new leaders are lack of practical experiences and information of the enterprises. So changing the leader too quickly is harmful and unreasonable. I think five years is not long enough to judge a leader, and whether to change the leader does not depend a fixed time but the abiliy (ability) of the leader.

整体感觉：拼写错误有点多，希望你以后粘贴文章前先用word的拼写检查把基本的拼写和一些语法错误更正一下，拼写错误太多很影响成绩的。
你的第二段写的很好，相比之下，剩下两个正文段就差一点了，缺乏有效的例子，而且第三段对题目观点的评论有点多。相反自己的观点就显得很单薄，缺乏论证。

使用道具举报