Reply To: In any field—business, politics, education, government— those in power should step down after five years. Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
TOEFL, IELTS, Personal Statement and CV Proofreading Services. › GRE Writing › In any field—business, politics, education, government— those in power should step down after five years. Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership. › Reply To: In any field—business, politics, education, government— those in power should step down after five years. Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
In different fields, it is undeniable that charismatic leadership (plays a vital role in) [ wordy – could facilitate ] the success of the enterprise. However, it’s[informal writing ] unreasonable to argue that the definite way to achieve success is through a change in leadership positions. Due to the (complexity and variety)[unclear ] of enterprise, it’s[ informal] also imprudent to argue that the people in power should resign every five years. Thus, in my perspective, the author of the claim and (reason)[unclear/article error ] is pessimistic and shortsighted( that he/she lacks the confidence and trust in leaders.)[grammatical error ]
Admittedly, new leadership could bring a fresh breeze to a certain enterprise. A new leader in any enterprise is likely to (bring innovations)[ unclear/rephrase ]. For example, if a college principal has worked in one school for more than twenty years, he( is likely to lack)[ wordy ] innovative ideas and diversified teaching experiences. The certainty that he doesn’t need to worry about losing the jobs [ word form error ](brings the laziness out of human beings)[unclear ]. Instead, suppose the old principle steps down and is replaced by a new principle. In that case, it’s more likely that he/she will implement different teaching methods (and school revitalization)[ unclear/unparallelism ] that students and faculty (will be benefited from)[rephrase ]. So it’s not hard to see that a new leadership definitely contributes[ preposition error ] an enterprise to some extent.
However, the author argues in [ preposition error ](the reason)[redundant ] that new leadership is doubtless the way to success. I believe the author should not rush to the argument without further investigation. First of all, there’s no certain causal effect between the new leadership and the success of a company or organization. Even if there have[grammatical error ] some associations, there’re [ avoid using there be, which is unclear ]many other ways for an enterprise to achieve success. First, an enterprise could (work on efficiency)[ unclear ]. For example, a company can inspect their supply chain management and try to increase its efficiency. If the company’s inefficiency decreases, the profits will be improved, and there will be less deadweight loss.[grammatical error/subjunctive ]
Moreover, I would disagree with the author’s claim that every leader should resign every five years. I wonder how the author could argue in such a definite number without further investigation. In my opinion, it’s too dogmatic to stipulate that every leader should step down every five years. For example, (a college often requires four years to complete)[ unclear ], [ punctuation error ]if a school changes a principal in the fifth year, then the new principal may have to stick to the old policy [grammatical error/subjunctive ]because the students might not be willing to adapt to a new one[unclear pronoun ].
In conclusion, even though leadership is inevitable in an enterprise’s success, people should not ignore other factors that lead to [ absolute statement/use conditional writing ]the same outcome. And[punctuation error associated with conjunction word ] the fives [ word form error ]years rule is an overly hasty decision that requires further discussion.