In any field – business, politics, education and government – those in power should step down After five years

Business, Politics, Education and Government are the pillars of any nation. Growth and prosperity of a nation is directly or indirectly decided by these four factors. Experience, Intelligence, creativity and enthusiasm play a vital role to excel in these fields. Adept knowledge will help direct these fields to achieve National growth. Thus to assert that those is power in these fields should step down in five years is a very biased approach.

For an organization to bloom leadership is considered a key factor and the person holding that position needs to be familiar with it to the very core. This depth knowledge can only be achieved through years of work and thus stepping down after five years would result in loss of this knowledge and hinder growth of organization. For instance, after Balasaheb Thackeray stepped down from the leadership, his party shivsena saw a downfall and is not considered a vital party anymore. In other instance, history saw a debacle of Maratha empire after the demise of great King Shivaji Maharaj.

In the field of education leaders function is to train young minds and thus it becomes extremely important that it is been done by the most experienced person who not only has knowledge of the field but also knows how to convey it to different people. Five years is nothing but only the start in this career.

Long term tenure, as much of a boon, can also be a bane. Those in power for long time can get indulged in corruption, thus obstructing the progress of organization. As someone rightly quoted, “Die legend or live long enough to see yourself become a villain”. In politics or in government, there are chances the long term leaders dig their roots so deep into it that the power just flows through same family line and democracy seems to be like a aristocracy. Congress in India can be considered an apt example of democracy as aristocracy. Also a prolonged leadership hinders entry of youth into organization whose creativity, new ideologies, a fresh approach remain unfolded.

Tenure of leadership in organizations cannot be a fixed yardstick but should depend on the organizations progress. A stagnant progress definitely calls for revitalization but it should not be done as a part of pre defined process. An abrupt end in tenure wont just hinder organizations growth but will affect a country as whole.