- UID
- 782390
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-7-17
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
8 Claim: 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.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
提纲：
（+）换领导的优点:更新血液，防止领导傲慢自大，阻碍组织发展
（-）反驳reason：可能由于新领导不熟悉情况，和员工没有感情基础，而从前的领导又谦虚好学，就没有必要频繁更换领导。
（-）进一步反驳claim: 不能粗暴地推广到每一个领域，有一些领域需要系统的稳固性
（*）要广义地对待成功和革新，不要局限在换不换领导这个问题上。
The claim that leaders should be changed every five years in every field in the society is based on the reason that revitalization through new leadership is the surest path to success for success. However, the speaker get the rush conclusion resulting from narrowly understanding of ‘revitalization’. Actually, changing leadership is the only way to revitalize the group, also not the surest way to succeed for every field.
Admittedly, revitalization through leadership may yield positive influence on organizations. On the one hand, with changing leaders timely, leaders’ arrogance from success before can be prevented well, which helps an organization or enterprise be lead by a clear mind. On the other hand, because every thing tends to run in stereotype system after existing for a long time, revitalization through new leadership give the entity an opportunity to exchange ‘blood’ of it, with new management idea and mode.
However, we can’t slur that all the positive effects talked above are only ‘possibilities’, there is no reason to support such a ‘surest’ relationship between changing leaders and success. What’s more, we must face the possible risk following changing leaders ‘every five years’ as the speaker asserted in the issue.
First, changing leaders may result in negative effect. So-called revitalization through leadership means replacing the ‘old’ one with a ‘new’ one. Even hoping optimistically that such a change can work well, new leaders may be not better, even worse than the old one, who are familiar with everything about the group, have strong emotion foundation with members and also modestly accept others’ suggestions and critics. There is no more compelling example to illustrate it than Steven Jobs in Apple. Wishing to change new management style, the stockholders’ meeting once replaced Jobs, the ‘veteran’ in Apple, with a new leader. However, continual declination of the sales volume coerced Apple Corporation to invite Jobs comes back to the Boss chair, for his right method and extradinary creativity. So you can see it, more than often, changing leaders doesn’t equal to success, maybe a venture of backfire.
Second, even if such revitalization through new leadership does succeed in many cases, it is too rush to extend it to every area, especially for the fields needing stable system for a long term. Because of certain differences between two leaders’ ideas, there must be some original policies or systems will be interrupted. For instance, in the field of education, with main leadership changed every five years, the text books and teaching syllabus may vary in a big degree, which is bad for students resulting from some knowledge learned twice or never. So considering the particularity between different field, such a recommendation to change leaders every five years in all occupations is unpractical.
Therefore, we should view success method wider than only changing leaders. Actually, success is the result from members’ competence, responsibility, support from policy, as well as opportunities, but far from solely changing leaders. Besides, even revitalization is necessary, but we should take the ‘revitalization’ with a broader view. Learning new relative knowledge, experience and abandoning the factors negative to development is the truth behind revitalization. Realistic methods to obtain such goal should be considered by a promising group but not only mechanically changing leader.
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-8-16 12:59:17
收藏
收藏
