ISSUE 6 写得不好，求拍！

jowett1985

In any field - business, politics, education, government - those in power should be required to step down after five years.

With the rapid development of technology and science, every organizations in the world, including business companies, governments and schools, are facing variety of change. So changing leader periodically is a useful way to keep the whole organization alive. But unfortunately, we can not resolve all problems with this institution only.


Leader is the power and strategies source of the whole company. Imaging a fast developing group, which can be analogized as a running train, the leader is the engine of the train. In order to keep the train running fast and steadily on the ground, we have to change and maintain the engine after a particular long distance.


New leader can bring a company new perspective on critical problems and ensure the superior make right decision according to the latest information and technology. No one could deny that every leaders in the history, including some famous ones such as Jobs and Gates, has its own limitation. When time goes by, the knowledge will eventually become banal and one day they will become the negative force for the development of the company. So many big companies, such as Apple and Microsoft, have written it down as a formal discipline.


However, changing leader can not avoid all the potential problems. Most long term policies, such as financial and diplomatic policy, need far more time to show its effect while five years is too short. So changing leaders frequently will disturb the execution of them. Considering most presents of countries in the world, many of them can lead their country more than five year ensuring they have enough time to realize their promise during the election.


Besides, nowadays, many famous companies are private, so changing leader is not practical in this situation. As a matter of fact, no matter in common sense or official law, we can not force the owner to abandon their control of their company, yet managing their own company is their inborn duty.


All in all, changing leader has benefits to improve the management of companies but it is not effective in all situations. We can figure out many alternative plans which can get the same effect.

竹林中人

1.恰恰是政治领导人必须有任期限制，否则会导致专制甚至独裁
2.商业领域很多领导人是很长的任期的，除非遇到现任领导人无法处理的问题。
3.对一个成熟的政府或者公司等机构组织，有自己成熟的运行机制和发展战略，不大会因为领导人的改变而改变。这些组织或者机构的发展更多的靠具体的执行人员和公司内部的团结合作和奋发有为。
第二段不痛不痒的，可以不要，个人觉得，内容偏少，建议你能分开了说，并具体些，不要笼而统之地一起说