issue70 我们的九月 第十六次作业

juzijuntuanUID: 2231815

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 592          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2006-8-10

Nowadays, some claim that in any profession those in power should step down after five years, and the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. While I hold the opposite point of view that though admittedly revitalization is beneficial to success for enterprise, new leadership is not surely contribute to success, and leadership should not shift so frequently, for it causes anxiety morale in faculty which is damage to work and the effectiveness of a policy will not certainly put into practice in such a short time.

As a threshold matter, it is true that revitalization is advantageous for success of enterprise, especially when the former leadership is deficient and unsuccessful, a new leadership is required and benefit. Since a new leadership usually introduces to a new policy and improvement on almost every aspects of the crew such as morality of crew and style of management, the changes generally will spur faculty and correct flaws, thus contributing to success for the enterprise. For example, the amendment of management of Lenovo is a great change in the success of the enterprise. Besides, the new leadership is efficient on the prevention of monopolization and arbitrariness of the powerful leaders, for they are unlikely to possess on power for longtime. Thus, the shifting of leadership benefits enterprise.

However, a new leadership is not the surest path to success for any enterprise, and too frequent change in leadership is damaging not only enterprise but also in any profession. It is the matter of fact that the effectiveness of a new policy will not be put into practice so fast, for it takes time for both crew to adapt the new policy and the lack experience for a new leader. And some policy is designed for the goodness of development of enterprise,（有利于长远发展 不会说~~） and the effectiveness will turn out with long-term process. The plan to control population in China, for instance, the consequence is recognized after about 20 years after it had been executed. Therefore, five years is sometimes not enough for the policy to be effective. Once the policy is aborted, the effort for it will waste, and too much waste will not lead to success. Hence, enterprises as well as any professions should keep a comparably long-term leadership.

Moreover, the swifting leadership has the disadvantage of anxiety morale, which it brings up. Generally, a new leadership results in the change of crew and policy. For one hand, the crew have to worry about their position, whether they have the chance to promote or demote, or simply be fired, which will leading to an anxiety of moral and influence emotion and efficiency of work. For the other hand, a new policy resulting from the new leadership will cause the change of policy on aspects, such as wage, promotion, vacation and so on, closely related to the profile of every employees, which make them too worried to work concentrative. As a result, such change exerts a bad atmosphere on crew to be work devotional.

To sum up, according to what had been discussed above, a conclusion could be drawn safely that though the change of new leadership is beneficial to the success of enterprise, too frequent change and short-time leadership is not surely leading to success, and even is damaging to enterprise and professions, for it cause the anxiety moral among crew which will make them not work devotional, and the long-term policy will not be effective. Thus, it is wise to trust a leader and let he/she possess a suitable term.

badouUID: 2240203

Nowadays, some claim that in any profession those in power should step down after five years, and the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. While I hold the opposite point of view that though admittedly revitalization is beneficial to success for enterprise, new leadership is not surely contribute to success, and leadership should not shift so frequently, for it causes anxiety morale in faculty which is damage to work and the effectiveness of a policy will not certainly put into practice in such a short time.

As a threshold matter, it is true that revitalization is advantageous for success of enterprise, especially when the former leadership is deficient and unsuccessful; a new leadership is required and benefit. Since a new leadership usually introduces to a new policy and improvement on almost every aspect of the crew such as morality of crew and style of management, the changes generally will spur faculty and correct flaws, thus contributing to success for the enterprise. For example, the amendment of management of Lenovo is a great change in the success of the enterprise. Besides, the new leadership is efficient on the prevention of monopolization and arbitrariness of the powerful leaders, for they are unlikely to possess on power for longtime. Thus, the shifting of leadership benefits enterprise.

However, a new leadership is not the surest path to success for any enterprise, and too frequent change in leadership is damaging not only enterprise but also in any profession. It is the matter of fact that the effectiveness of a new policy will not be put into practice so fast, for it takes time for both crew to adapt the new policy and the lack experience for a new leader. And some policy is designed for the goodness of development of enterprise,（有利于长远发展 不会说~~Is ”the long-term interest” appropriate?） and the effectiveness will turn out with long-term process. The plan to control population in China, for instance, the consequence is recognized after about 20 years after it had been executed. Therefore, five years is sometimes not enough for the policy to be effective. Once the policy is aborted, the effort for it will waste, and too much waste will not lead to success. Hence, enterprises as well as any professions should keep a comparably long-term leadership.

Moreover, the swifting(swift is adj, so maybe “changing” is better) leadership has the disadvantage of anxiety morale, which it brings up. Generally, a new leadership results in the change of crew and policy. For one hand, the crew have to worry about their position, whether they have the chance to promote or demote, or simply be fired, which will leading to an anxiety of moral and influence emotion and efficiency of work. For the other hand, a new policy resulting from the new leadership will cause the change of policy on aspects, such as wage, promotion, vacation and so on, closely related to the profile(profit?) of every employees(all employees), which make(hte subject is the change of, so it should be “makes”?) them too worried to work concentrative. As a result, such change exerts a bad atmosphere on crew to (delete "be") work devotional.

To sum up, according to what had been discussed above, a conclusion could be drawn safely that though the change of new leadership is beneficial to the success of enterprise, too frequent change and short-time leadership is not surely leading to success, and even is damaging to enterprise and professions, for it cause the anxiety moral among crew which will make them not work devotional, and the long-term policy will not be effective. Thus, it is wise to trust a leader and let he/she possess a suitable term.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Admire~~~~
Fluent writing!


A advice:
Copying the sentences of the title and using these sentences in the first paragraph seems improper.
This is the opinion of the author of 《北美范文》 ^^
Maybe u can change ur first sentence into :
Nowadays, some claim that in any profession the leadership should be passed to new leaders after five years, so that revitalization can bring success to the enterprise.

[ 本帖最后由 badou 于 2006-8-11 20:41 编辑 ]