Issue70 =August Rush=小组第6次作业 by 尾羽

尾羽UID: 2482591

70."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." 70． 在任何领域，商业、政治、教育、政府，掌权者应该在5年任期后下台。对任何公司企业来说，取得成功最保险的途径就是聘用新生的人担当领导
反对
正：一个领导人长时间居于掌控权利的同一位置，对机构发展是不利的，容易滋生贪污腐败
（1）很多国家和地区隔几年就要举行一次大选（比如美国是4年），就是为了公民监督领导人的工作是否尽职尽责，是否有从中捞取个人好处的行为。
（2）新人会给整体带来活力，一个也许是美好的新开端（Obama）

反：但并不意味着在所有领域，掌权者无论如何都要在5年后下台。
（1）对一个企业来说，有很多事情不是三五年就能完成的，如果常常更换领导人，可能因为个人志向不同，而使得原本目标明确的努力，在每逢换届后，都前功尽弃。
（2）在政治上，由于频繁选举，当人们对此过分关注时，有可能会引起社会财力过度消耗，经济萧条，动荡不安，甚至引起战争。(近的台湾蓝绿争权战、泰国红衫军占领机场、远的洪都拉斯前总统塞拉亚被罢免并驱逐出境)

反：企业的成功与否不可能只取决于领导人，更不可能取决于新的领导人。
（1）老人有丰富的经验来应对各种问题。而新手通常还要通过学习甚至犯错误才能取得成就，这种代价通常是企业不愿额外付出的。
（2）虽然不能忽视领导人把企业带向成功的重要性，但更重要的是团队合作。

尾羽UID: 2482591

Word:647     time: 2 hours
I find that the speaker’s dual claim cannot be acceptable on both counts. The former claim that leaders in all professions who are on the most superior position with power should never be consistent beyond five years, with appealing in some aspects, is an over-statement at best. And the latter one claims that revitalization via new leadership is the most confident path to lead the success of the enterprise which is also lacking of the adequate evidences to support.

To begin with, admittedly, it is definitely passive to the development neither of enterprise nor of country that abusing power excessively would breed criminal case which is the most likely to be corruption. I have to concede that people in authority have more opportunities to stand by the edge of criminal who also have more opportunities to use the power by exchanging material for illegal response. In my observation, to eliminate the corruption happens as far as possible, in America, is one of the reasons why the president election would be held quadrennially and the senators in the Congress are elected every two years. By the public supervision, they have to learn more steadily self-control to restrain the avarice to grow up in human nature. Moreover, a new broom would bring significantly brand new vitality that may infuse a more encouraging spirit for forward working and even the effort for recovering, such as the new president of American Barack Obama.

However, I think the answer to the question: should leaders in all areas set down after five years could not be affirmation. For one thing, some tasks made by the present leader of a company may not be accomplished in five years. That is to say, due to personal aim and interesting, if a new leader was born, the enterprise target might be changed to another direction which is distinctive different to the former one. For that matter, the employees of this company would only see new leader one by one rather than any accomplished piece of work, let alone the development of the enterprise. On the other hand, financial resources of a government might be drained seriously by over frequent political election. People would pay more attention to the election rather than their own business that may result a dramatically decline in economy. For instance, according to a new report The World Competitiveness Yearbook2009 released by the leading global business college IMD in May, Taiwan is one of the “some economies suffered important reversals” which ranks 23rd with falling 10 places. In my opinion, except the strike by the global financial tsunami, too much election campaigns, parades and serious confliction between proponents of Democracy Progressive Party and Nationalist Party were major villain to distract the main focus from economy and people’s life.

Ultimately, from my point of view, the determination to the success of enterprise neither merely depend on the new leader nor the leader. New leader have to spend extra time or money to adapt the process or situation of work and even make mistakes at times while the old one could be sophisticated to manage business. Companies usually are not willing to pay such expenditure. In addition, we could not ignore the importance of leadership while the teamwork collaboration can be more essential to the success of the enterprise. For that matter, I would say that Bill Gates could never build up and grow up the Microsoft empire without his perfect employees.

In sum, I do disagree with both the speaker’s claim. Leaders in all profession are not necessary to step down after five year at the helm. Because certain tasks cannot be completed in five years and over frequent election would result in catastrophes to the country. Furthermore, due to the flaw of new leaders, enterprise would not be lead to the surest success which should be contributed by the good cooperation of teamwork.