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

Change is inevitable in all walks of life. One of the many ways to implement modification is bringing new faces to take the lead. It can be a very productive and persuasive tactic but not necessarily desirable. The guaranteed path to success for any organization is revitalization, the source of which can be variable.

Stating that success of an organization can be met by changing the individuals is surely not a weighted argument. An enterprise facing serious financial predicaments cannot make up for the loss by changing leadership. Replacement of equipment, hiring fresh and motivated staff, training the already experienced staff with state of the art technologies can help achieve the desired targets. It is highly risky and uncertain about how the operations of an organization will continue under new leadership.

In all fields including business, politics, education, government, the fate of the people in power is decided by their subordinates. Considering civil war in Syria since March 2011, it is crystal clear that a leader should not look forward to completing course of his duty. Clashes between President Bashar Al-Assad and the rebels who want him out have taken 40,000 lives. The mutiny started when peaceful protestors, demanding release of 15 children who were kidnapped and tortured for drawing antigovernment graffiti’s on the wall, were attacked by the forces. When such is the case, the leader should then and there resign considering the positive aftermath of this action. On the other hand, referring to US elections President Barrack Obama was reelected even after the economic and military incompetence of George Bush era. But that was what Americans wanted.

Sometimes it becomes inevitable that the person in power continues his headship for the great rewards that the company is earning under it. Apple made the most of Steve Job’s insightfulness and management. It survived a possible bankruptcy and then captured the market with products like Ipad and Iphone. Surely everyone wanted Steve Jobs to run his company and bring more laurels down the lane.

Clearly, history signifies that changing leadership depends on the circumstances and is not a mandatory requirement for success. Leaders are required to give their best and if their dependents are not gratified then they should themselves walk out in the interest their post. Time limits are insignificant in this case.