【TRANSFORMER】_ISSUE70_0814

blade134UID: 2328542

9点上传

yesrushUID: 2443769

The leader plays an essential role in a community, no matter a company or a country. The speaker claims that those in power should step down after five years, considering that new leadership would bring revitalization. I concede that the limitation of term is beneficial in the fresh idea. However, I disagree with the statement for three aspects: First, not allowing a leader in the same position carry other equally benefits. Second, the speaker neglects the detrimental effect of replacing leader frequently. Finally, we should solve the problem through adapting a variety of circumstances.

I agree with the statement insofar as a new leader tends to bring vitality. The old leader, especially those in the position for a long time, are inclined to stuck in their way. While the new leader, perhaps a younger person, may hold a modern view of how the world works, and even put forth an innovative idea. Taking the statement, that a new broom sweeps clean, into account, such system will inject fresh vigor to the community.

However, the statement undervalues another important benefit of limiting the term of leadership. Just as Sir. Acton says ”Absolute power leads to absolute corruption.”, a leader is likely to abuse the power when he is not fear of being deprived of power, inevitably posing the corruption problems. That is another reason for the establishment of such system. For example, Washington, the first president of American for eight years, albeit made a consequential contribution in Revolution American as the commander, refused to run the third term for president. Not only he earned respect and esteem from American contemporary, but also is regarded as a person who using power prudently and modestly by the later generation.

Notwithstanding the foregoing positive influence by stepping down those in power, the change of leadership poses certain problems.

One of the pressing problems is that the rookie lacks experience, which can be only gained through long time management. It might be tempting to think that the fresh prospective can be brought from a new leader, however, such certain is unwarranted since it is well known that the experience is more essential than vitality in the management position. The term of leadership should not be too short. Otherwise, once the green hand becomes an experienced leader, it is unfortunately that one has to leave the position because of the limitation of term.

Another serious problems lies in that the leader is more likely to focus on the short term business rather than the long term one. If a mayor is allowed to work in one’s position only three years, how one would do in order to maximize the achievement during the short term of office? Perhaps he would encourage the business man to open up more industrial factory regardless its potential threat to environment, for the purpose of raising the employment in the city immediately. One is quite possible to win citizens’ applause in one’s term, nonetheless, one leaves the environmental problems to the subsequent mayor.

After weighing the advantage and disadvantage of stepping down leaders, how to decide the term of those in power? We should evaluate this situation in different circumstance. In the business sphere, the leadership need to be changed frequently in that the company can keep pace with the changing business matters. When it comes to the education area, lifetime tenure is needed to help the faculties accumulate their experience in the research area. In the realm of politics, like American, the policies that a president can only reselected for one term sounds a good idea. But the situation is not constant. Roosevelt, for instance, served in the president position for four terms, considering that the stable state is extraordinary necessary during the World War I when he is president.

In sum, stepping down those in power can create the energetic atmosphere by the new leader and prevent the power into corruption, however, keeping a leader in the same position can enhance stable and long term values. The best way of solving this problem lies in the different condition of areas.

blade134UID: 2328542

Some people maintain that we should choose new leadership to replace the old one in order to keep us moving forward. In fact, changing is what we need, but we can not ignore the fundamental ability of those old leaders.

Admittedly, turning into a new leadership will improve vitality. The new leader is usually younger than the former one. Young dose not only mean more powerful working energy but also the new ideas about how to develop continually. Take political as a typical example. Many countries, most of them have developed very fast, have an alternative institution, usually 4 years or 5 years. In the alternative year, people need to decide which leader is worth to take the president's office in the next four or five years, the most important, whether s/he can help them find the flaws of the past, and search new developing points in future, both of which are very helpful to continue development.

However, in some cases, the enterprises have progressed rapidly in five years. so it is a little hasty to make their leaders step down immediately. The development can be affected by many factors, including the eptitude of leaders, developing trends of the profession, and the accommodation of the enterprise itself. Microsoft, the largest software company in the world, has developed in an amazing speed for almost twenty years in the leading of Bill Gates, a titan in Information Technology era. Such miracle can attribute to the leadership of Bill Gates, who has a wonderful vision - put a computer at every family's desk; the rapid and success transform of the company, from a tiny operating system company to an office software manufacturer and to the web application leader; and the prosperity of the Information Technology, which has lasted for more than thirty years. With these factors, a leader can take effective leadership for a long time so it is hard to make conclusion that leaders in all professions should step down after five years. Furthermore, the leaders can plan for some long-term destinations if he can have worked longer, which may have great contribution to society after decades.

Even when those leaders retired, the experience of them is very essential for keeping us go forward. Former leaders may know the advantages and disadvantages of the society and know how to avoid making wrong decisions more clearly. In the financial recession these days, our president, Mr Obama, took advices from our former president, Bill Cliton, who had had a wonderful performance in economy when he was president. What Obama has obtained is not only the useful advices and experience of the former president, but also the confidence from people who can not sure if he can deal with this challenge for he have no successful economy experience before.

In sum, new leaders bring vitality to us whereas elders help us moving forward steadily. Without any of each, it is inconvincible that we will have a brilliant future.

之前对题目理解错了，修改了很多地方