"The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition." - Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or dis

This topic raises the controversial issue of whether it is good to educate young people for leadership by focussing on a proper sense of cooperation rather than competition. Indisputably, cooperation is an important asset for leadern in all fields to foster teamwork throughout different departments in an institution. Nevertheless, competition brings young potential leaders to go the extra mile in terms of efficient and diligent work and shows who actually brings the competences to lead numerous employees. Hence, I generally disagree with the statement made and would argue that it is important to focus on cooperation, but not on a bigger extent than competition.

First, competition motivates people to work harder in order to stand out of the crowd. Since leaders have to be prepared for long shifts, serve as a role model for other workers underneath them and connect ideas with a bright and logical thinking, it is crucial that they know how to deal with situations of high pressure. I would like to point out that these assets get taught in a society where competition shows who is ought to be a good leader. To illustrate, for instance an example of a highly competitive leadership university program show who can work harder on their own to achieve better grades and organize themselves the best. Competition between the students let a person working the most or showing the best results stand out and prove to be a good role model and leader. Therefore, I generally disagree that competition should not be treated with a lower imporatnce than cooperation.

Secondly, competition within a society lowers the risk for free-riders to show that they could be good leaders. In group work, the tasks are usually not distributed evenly since the people have different standards when it comes to working times and time-investment into a project. Since it is hard to evaluate every person individually after a team has submitted their results, the grades are often biased by an unbalance of working time. As an example, people who are participating in NGOs or other institutions focussing on the society's welfare can provide a wrong signalling. This can happen by showing all participants of a group in the same way, without any insight who could be the most competent person for a future job in a leading position. Thus, I think that competition let's the risk of free-rider issues plunge to better evaluate who is the most hard working person and has the best odds to be a good role model and leader.

Admittidly, a sense of coopeation is important for leaders as well. They have to make sure that, for instance, different specialized departments in a company work together smoothly to achieve more efficient results and have good relationships with other leaders, from other parties, to get them partnering with his or her company. However, competition is at least as crucial as cooperation when it comes to the preparation of young people to become leaders since it has to be sure who is actually equipped witht he competences to make a good leader, or who just is good in free-riding or is not able to work extra hours to serve as a proper role model within the institution he or she is working at.

In conclusion, a sense of competition and cooperation is important for leaders to learn from the society before they start in their job. Both have a different role in what they show in a good leader, like if he can go the extra mile or whether he can connect different groups to work efficiently together, and are important in different situation. Thus, I generally disagree with the statement that one asset is more imp