issue70 [0710G +U Aug小组]第18次作业

cofeebeanUID: 2289548

题目：ISSUE70 - "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."
字数：411          用时：00:45:00          日期：2007-8-11 17:02:46

How does an enterprise keep its vitality and advance with the society? It is suggested that measures should be taken to change leader after five years which I cannot agree more with.

  Through millions of cases in political, business and any other realm, people gradually realize that the authority lasting for a long time and without challenges would unavoidably result in corruption. For example, Hitler is a good case in point. Since he was the highest leader in German and democratic election system hasn't been set up at that time, no one in the country can question his military action drove by his own ambition. Because of the greedy of human nature, seldom leader can maintain the highest moral standards facing enormous interests causing by the strong authority.

  New leadership in any profession not only brings new ideas and vitality into any enterprise but also makes leaders more responsible for their work. We can find this benefit from China Reform in 1980s. Before the reform leaders in national enterprise can stick to his authority for almost ten or even twenty years. During their leadership they can manage the factory and workers by the old measures and ideas ten years ago. This situation resulted in the low efficiency of productivity which leaders didn’t care about since they didn’t need to be responsible for. After the reform, the system to change leadership in several years has set up, and leaders nowadays have to develop their own ideas since they have the duty to improve the productivity efficiency otherwise they will be replaced by new leaders.

  However, it is not necessary to set a general limitation of five years in all different realms since the specific limitation can be determined by various professions and enterprises. In business and political realm it may be proper for leaders to step down after five years, while in education it might be suitable to give leaders a little longer time since in this area some certain set of measures should last for a longer period before showing efficiency. Another important problem with this issue is that measures also should be taken to keep the inherence of different polices of former and latter leaders. Leaders should pay more attention to go on with the work of their precedents than setting up a new set of rules.

  It is wise and popular in democratic society for any enterprise to keep revitalization by changing leadership periodically, facing the limitation of human nature.

wm23UID: 2245087

How does an enterprise keep its vitality and advance with the society? It is suggested that measures should be taken to change leader after five years which I cannot agree more with.(应该是with more吧)

  Through millions of cases in political, business and any other realm, people gradually realize that the authority lasting for a long time and without challenges would unavoidably result in corruption. For example, Hitler is a good case in point. Since he was the highest leader in German and democratic election system hasn't been set up at that time, no one in the country can question his military action drove by his own ambition. Because of the greedy of human nature, seldom leader can maintain the highest moral standards facing enormous interests causing by the strong authority. （感觉举希特勒不是很好。因为这个人在上台前就是一个狂热的战争贩子和种族主义者，在他上台前就已经表现出他的这些习性了，而非执政时间长了导致的。而且对他不存在统治长短的问题，而是是直接就不应该让他上台。而且当时的德国也被希特勒的演讲弄的疯狂了，很多人都很支持他发动战争）

  New leadership in any profession not only brings new ideas and vitality into any enterprise but also makes leaders more responsible for their work. We can find this benefit from China Reform in 1980s. Before the reform leaders in national enterprise can stick to his authority for almost ten or even twenty years. During their leadership they can manage the factory and workers by the old measures and ideas ten years ago. This situation resulted in the low efficiency of productivity which leaders didn’t care about since they didn’t need to be responsible for. After the reform, the system to change leadership in several years has set up, and leaders nowadays have to develop their own ideas since they have the duty to improve the productivity efficiency otherwise they will be replaced by new leaders.

  However, it is not necessary to set a general limitation of five years in all different realms since the specific limitation can be determined by various professions and enterprises. In business and political realm it may be proper for leaders to step down after five years, while in education it might be suitable to give leaders a little longer time since in this area some certain set of measures should last for a longer period before showing efficiency. Another important problem with this issue is that measures also should be taken to keep the inherence of different polices of former and latter leaders. Leaders should pay more attention to go on with the work of their precedents than setting up a new set of rules.

  It is wise and popular in democratic society for any enterprise to keep revitalization by changing leadership periodically, facing the limitation of human nature.

总评：45分钟写出这样文章很不错了，（值得我学习），各个段的分论点都很明确，而且结构也很合理。不过在举例方面，有点小问题，比如正文部分第一段的例子也可以用，但稍有点问题。另外结尾可以再长一点，丰富一些。加油！

chenxuegangUID: 2224928

411 字是少了吗？我认为有点少！