issue70

eenbrUID: 2259468

"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."
分三段：
1。在位过长的不好，两个例子正反论述
2。没有必要限定在位时间，要具体分析
3。新的领导层不一定有新思维，老的领导层可以不断换思维。
As the saying goes "Absolute power leads absolute corruption", I agree with the speaker's statement that revitalization through new leadership is exceeding important for any organizations to succeed. However, I do not believe it is reasonable to change those in power strictly every five years. The tenure should depend on one's individual quality, spirit, vigor, achievement and so on.

In the first place, change is the basic principle in the world, so are any organizations, specially their leaders. With the passing of time, older leaders may find themselves tired of daily business, and lack of original ideas to handle problems encountered. On the other hand, younger people full of pluck, vigor, as well as abundant up-to-date knowledge make themselves the best candidates to approach those complicated problems. Besides, revitalization of leader ensures that corruption, depravation, and abuses of rights are less likely to occur. Take for example, the first president of United State, Washington, who set a good example for his successors by refusing to elongate his presidency for another third term. After that, most presidents of United States have their tenure no more than eight years. No one could deny that it is such restriction on presidency that assures the status of United States as the most advanced country in the world. On the contrary, Napoleon's failure is partly due to his endless term as the top leader of France, since no one has enough power to persuade or restrict the behavior and will of this top leader who has the absolute power. Such lessons are untold in history, which teach the people a negative example while demonstrating the importance of revitalization of leadership in any organizations.

In the second hand, it is neither necessary nor advisable to restrict the tenure of any leader within five years. Successful leaders, with great accomplishment and famous reputation, beyond question, are the best man for the position of a leader. Veteran leaders with unique leadership style always have valuable experience and enough skills to face unanticipated events and weather a crisis. Toosevelt, the thirty-second President of the United States, elected to four terms in office, is the central figure of the 20th century because of his excellent contribution during a time of worldwide economic crisis and world war. Toosevelt's story is good evidence that the tenure of leadership should not be constant and decided on a case by case basis.

Finally, it is entirely possible that the new leadership may have the same leadership style with that of its predecessor. For that matter, the change of leadership does not mean a influx of new ideas, spirit and concept, and in turn this shift in leadership seems meaningless. On the other hand, veteran leaders could always change their leadership style according to different conditions, to lead the organization to success. For instance, Welch has been Chinaman and CEO of General Electric for 20 years, and during his tenure, he gained a solid reputation for uncanny business acumen and unique leadership strategies. He could always alter his style, and as a result, his long tenure  does not lead GE to fail, by contrast, GE increased its market capitalization greatly during his tenure. From this story, we can see that veteran leaders' success stems form their skilled and shifted leadership style, which cannot be provided by any other new leadership. Qualified veteran leadership is the assurance of the success of the each organizations either in politics, education and government, and there is no need at all to force them leave their position when they serve the organization for more than five years.

For the reasons given above, I firmly believed that it is a must to change leadership of any organization, but the tenure for the veteran leadership should be decided on a case by case basis.

[ 本帖最后由 eenbr 于 2007-7-18 01:21 编辑 ]

sanliangmmUID: 2363921

刚看了一段，写得非常熟练阿~赞文采~pfpf 现在要去上自习了 赫赫 回来再继续看
As the saying goes "Absolute power leads absolute corruption", I agree with the speaker's statement that revitalization through new leadership is exceeding（exceedlingly） important for any organizations to succeed. However, I do not believe it is reasonable to change those in power strictly every five years. The tenure should depend on one's individual quality, spirit, vigor, achievement and so on.
In the first place, change is the basic principle in the world, so are any organizations(organization), specially their leaders. With the passing of time, older leaders may (might 一般用might比用may委婉)find themselves tired of daily business, and lack of original （你的意思是novel 或者new么 original用这里好像不太好）ideas to handle problems encountered. On the other hand, younger people full of pluck（怪怪的 用brave就挺好啊）, vigor, as well as abundant up-to-date knowledge（which） make themselves the best candidates to approach(solve) those complicated problems. Besides, revitalization of leader ensures that corruption, depravation, and abuses of rights are less likely to occur. Take for example, the first president of United State, Washington, who set a good example for his successors by refusing to elongate his presidency for another third(去掉third ) term. After that, most presidents of United States have their tenure no more than eight years. No one could deny that it is such restriction on presidency that assures the status of United States as the most advanced country in the world. On the contrary, Napoleon's failure is partly due to his endless term as the top leader of France, since no one has enough power to persuade or restrict the behavior and will of this top leader who has the absolute power. Such lessons are untold in history, which teach the people a negative example while demonstrating the importance of revitalization of leadership in any organizations.(讲repalcement的好处这一段层次挺好，例子也丰富，语言上更娴熟的话就perfect啦 )

In the second hand, it is neither necessary nor advisable to restrict the tenure of any leader within five years. Successful leaders, with great accomplishment and famous reputation, beyond question, are the best man for the position of a leader. Veteran leaders with unique leadership style always have valuable experience and enough skills to face unanticipated events and weather a crisis. Toosevelt（Roosevelt）, the thirty-second President of the United States, elected to four terms in office, is the central figure of the 20th century because of his excellent contribution during a time of worldwide economic crisis and world war. Toosevelt's story is good evidence that the tenure of leadership should not be constant and decided on a case by case basis.
（如果例子能讲的更透点就好了，感觉例子和整段话有点游离感，其实这个例子很好，感觉分析得不够）

Finally, it is entirely possible that the new leadership may have the same leadership style with that of its predecessor. For that matter, the change of leadership does not mean a influx（好词！） of new ideas, spirit and concept, and in turn this shift in leadership seems meaningless. On the other hand, veteran leaders could always change their leadership style according to different conditions, to lead the organization to success. For instance, Welch has been Chinaman and CEO of General Electric for 20 years, and during his tenure, he gained a solid reputation for uncanny business acumen and unique leadership strategies. He could always alter his style, and as a result, his long tenure  does not lead GE to fail, by contrast, GE increased its market capitalization greatly during his tenure. From this story, we can see that veteran leaders' success stems form（好！） their skilled and shifted leadership style, which cannot be provided by any other new leadership. Qualified veteran leadership is the assurance of the success of the each organizations either in politics, education and government, and there is no need at all to force them leave their position when they serve the organization for more than five years.（这段特别好！例子很好 赞）
For the reasons given above, I firmly believed that it is a must to change leadership of any organization, but the tenure for the veteran leadership should be decided on a case by case basis.（有点马虎）


[ 本帖最后由 sanliangmm 于 2007-7-18 20:02 编辑 ]

sanliangmmUID: 2363921

by the way 你改的时候最好再改了地方标出红色来 要不然看不清楚~赫赫