【Flyer杀G】小组-7.26作业ISSUE 70

wagner1985UID: 2838595

ISSUE 70
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."


Leadership is the position with the authority which can force others to act by their intention. In other words, if an organization is united or regulated by more of the few of leaders than the discussion among different classes, there is less compromise as well as individual judgment (creativeness) leafed during every process of the management. Perhaps, the hierarchy power is important for maintaining the function of some enterprise, while it is not imperative in any profession nor it could necessary to the success of some enterprises which periodically transform their powers. Therefore, the new leadership may not necessarily revitalize their work, for which I cannot agree with the statement.
        To begin with, even if there are some hierarchical management exists in the process of operation, while, essentially, in some organizations, the hierarchical power may not be imperative compared with their common works. For example, a school has to be leaded by a master. However, without leader, the teachers could still pass their knowledge to others in the classroom. On the other hand, in absence of the teachers, the leadership and school are useless, and no teaching can be fulfilled. In other words, the leadership or the job of leader has a lower threshold than the workers under the leadership. They just follow a fixed conformity and do not face any complicated situation, and even no clear success or loss could be attached to these works, say, the management of library or the works in the post office, however the power transformed, their management will not be so different from the previous leader.

        Furthermore, even if the establishment of new leadership is necessary for an enterprise, it cannot independently revitalize the group. In most cases, the leadership can hardly surpass the importance of cooperation. After all, individual wisdom yields the precision and completeness of the collection of a group of smart persons. The presidency of United States, which is regarded as the most powerful position, does not mean the total authority of making decision with single judgment. It needs sufficient deference with the variety of counselors, official leader of every department and senators. And the low official still have their autonomy to determine some issues within their power. So in a efficient government, democracy have their position and the leadership is more of coordination of different ideas than the authority with few compromises. Instead of referring the leadership as the autocracy to some level, even if we definite the leadership as the position with less authorized power, it cannot always takes the place of the democracy and some certain level autonomy of every member. Nor can we deny, sometimes, leadership itself is authorized by the democracy and leader comes from the election. At least, we cannot allegedly make sure the leadership is more important than the cooperation and democracy.
      Also, even if new leadership guarantees the efficiency of the enterprise, the new leadership cannot certainly bring the success, because the success is by far complicatedly determined by the multi-factors. For example, could the well-established leadership of a smart headmaster over a group of common IQ fellows compete with the group with only half-number but smart democratic people? To some extent, the story written by Herodotus has given us the answer: 300 Spartan warriors with freedom can withstand the attack of hundreds of thousands of Persians, though the leadership of Persian has been well founded. Nor can we neglect, in Waterloo, other than leadership, it is the false judgment made by another French general brought the loose of the campaign.
      To sum up, albeit no one can deny the importance of the leadership (and authority in some cases), however, it is neither of necessity nor the sufficiency for the operation of an enterprise, no matter in politic groups, the profit-earning institution, or government etc. Maybe some natural-born leader with talent can reach the glorious achievement, while the mere fact is not persuasive enough to refute the more universal law: the cooperation filled with the liberal people is more efficient and contribution. And even the hierarchy management itself is no more than an extreme case than cooperation.