Issue70 [0710G Victors互助小组] 第7次作业

puzilongUID: 2308557

First, I do disagree the assertion of expiration for five years in the issue. About power change in business, politics etc, the complex process is never confirmed by a concrete number of year. Of course this point is not a big deal, let us put our eyes on the key---whether the new leadership is the best approach to revitalize an enterprise? In my opinion, we should treat renewal of  power with a balance view: new leadership should birth at a right time and right place.
     Let us talk about this example----Franklin Roosevelt, the only president of United States had been the position twelve years, in other word, he was voted as leader of U.S.A four times. According to the issue, Roosevelt never should be the president for so long at all, because government needed to be stepped down in power in order to remain vitalization. However, history proved that the thoughts is not a good idea. Think about the situation at that time, Hitler was overriding the whole European, Japanese just attacked Pearl Harbor so that American navy suffered a big destruction, the economy of this country was still  in rejuvenation from 1930s' economic recession. Facing the threat of war, Roosevelt had been being the most trustworthy leader in hearts of American in the different situation. To be frank, I really do not know what happened if American government was in turbulence because of power renewal. Roosevelt's successive vote to be president is a particular instance, at the same time, it absolutely verify one view: one good leadership is not necessary to resign sometimes. Roosevelt indeed should retire from the chair regardless of legally and regularly, but a very time did not permit a new leadership. That time a detailed plan to counterattack fascist had been drown out, and Roosevelt cabinet's series of new policies about economy like Tennessee Dam etc. All of this made American think Roosevelt and his cabinet was a right choice and it was in fact. And perhaps it was coincidence, when the world war II was going to end, he died who had finished his job. Apparently the example tell us this truth that when a leadership still work well, power renewal is not needed even harmful. Leader represents a group of people, what he do, say and determine represent his group, whose renewal is never depend on time but whether he remains a right deputy, is still competent  with his position---leader. After all this is not boyfriend or girlfriend option, you feel he/she boring and then can find a new one.
    But, the issue is not a very nonsense, renewal of leadership can revitalize an enterprise indeed.
    Renewal is a natural process for all the things. Anything will always become old in order to can not run well, so does leadership. If a leadership is in the position for too much time, it is inevitable into a stereotype especially thinking. This stereotype will let many things rigid and conventional even unreasonable. Here I must mention Chairman Mao. It is
true that he created people republic of China whoes feats are never forgotten, he is so brilliant as a leader, nevertheless at the late of his political career, also the late of his life, he did a lot of irrational determinations and made lots of mistakes like "Culture Revolution". Mao had been in a situation of stereotype, whose thinking had could not let him  be a good leader. Now that it is a natural process, we should follow it, otherwise just with agony.
     Therefore, as above words I said, renewal of leadership should birth at a right time.