Issue 70 求拍~一定回改~

forkidUID: 2845790

I concede the author's broad assertion that it is helpful for an organization to hire leads of new generation. The trouble of new leadership, however, is also significant. Otherwise, five years is a proper tenure of a leadership, since neither problems of over long nor too short would occur with keeping the tenure of five years. Besides, such tenure should be varied according to the area and function of the profession.
First and foremost, it is essential for an organization to revitalize for new leaders in time, since over long tenure for a leader may bring some significant problems. No one is a perfect one; it is unavoidable for a leader to have some errors or decision inappropriate to the development of the profession, although he/she may have never meant to be harmful for his organization and members. Even his/her decision was wise at a certain time, no one has the ability to make sure that it is always useful for the development of the organization, since the condition varies usually more quickly than human thoughts. If the tenure is over long, these errors will expand so that the organization will suffer risk or crisis. To revitalize in time will solve this problem, for the new leaders always have more chances to put right the flaws of the previous leader.
Significant problems: 多个问题，但文中指提到了 have errors and inappropriate decisions,是否可以细分有哪些errors和problems 比如一成不变的管理层，会阻碍新的想法，会不利于提拔新人，容易滋生腐败等等……
Nevertheless, it is also harmful for a profession to replace leadership too frequently, which will result in unstable for an organization. Stability is an important factor of the success of an organization, and relative stabilization of leadership is the fundamental condition of the stability of an organization. If the leader of a profession was changed over frequently, the feeling of uncertainty would have spread through the minds of its members, and consequently the development of this organization will be influenced badly. Therefore, it is also essential for the leadership to keep relatively stable during a certain period.
这段和开头的The trouble of new leadership, however, is also significant.不符合了。新的管理层和频繁更换管理层是两个概念。新管理层也有会不少问题，楼主可以想想。：）How can we balance the contradiction about the tenure of a leader? After thousands of experiments within the professions in history, it is easy to get that five years is a good era. Such longitude of tenure avoid the problems of both too long and too short, since during the five years, it is relative stable for an organization to have a healthy development and the replacement after five years avoids the errors of the leadership. For most democratic counties all over the world, it is always five years that is the tenure of a leadership of presidents. Five years is indeed a good period.
However, such tenure should be adjusted as the condition of profession. For education and scientific research, where knowledge is always the goal of the faculty, it is helpful to have a relatively long tenure. For instance, for Cavendish laboratory in Cambridge University, the tenure of Chief Professor is always 15 years. Otherwise, it is useful for a business company to change the leadership relatively frequently, since the finance condition always varies fast. Consequently, it is essential for every profession to design a proper tenure, which may be either longer or shorter than 5 years.
结尾呢？- -b

没有修改词句，因为自己这方面也很薄弱，希望对楼主有帮助。祝好！

forkidUID: 2845790

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1135296-1-1.html
麻烦看下Issue 1 多谢。