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 ext

It is popularly believed that in order to succeed in any field people in power ought to step down after five years because revitalization via new leadership is the shortest way to success. Although I accept that revitalization may increase chances of enterprise's success, I cannot agree with the rest of the prompt due to the reasons described in details below.

To begin with, new leaderships may indeed revitalize an enterprise, in particular, when previous governor faces a stalemate which he or she has not managed to solve. In this case, a new leader who possesses a new prospect and ideas may address existing problems more effective than the former leader. In fact, this practice is widespread in many fields from politics to business. To illustrate an idea we may take a look at, for instance, any business if a CEO makes loses, he or she will be substituted by new governor who should cope with the situation.

However, although I admit importance of revitalization of leadership for an enterprise, I cannot agree that leaders should inevitably step down after five years in charge because this policy may significantly hurt success of enterprise, for instance, if a leader makes profit and one’s company in a good shape, why should we substitute this efficient leader on a new one? Moreover, the policy may dramatically undermine motivation of leaders because if you know that your future is not determined by your efficiency, there is no need to work hard. In other words, implementation policy in its current conditions may bring rather unexpected negative results than positive ones.

Furthermore, we have other means which may be used in order to enhance chances on success of an enterprise. For example, business may use the expertise of its workers as a hint to solve business problem. Perhaps, Japanese firms, in particular, car makers have demonstrated that paying attention to ideas of employees' is a way to success. In fact, Honda has a policy which allows any worker to speak plainly his or her ideas how to improve the enterprise. The implementation of the policy in American mills of the corporation has given positive results because employees not only give a valuable piece of advice but also feel that they are a part of the enterprise as well. Consequently, the proposed policy is not a panacea and it does not suit for all cases.

In conclusion, although revitalization may increase chances on success in an enterprise, it is mistaken to aver that revitalization ought to be driven by mechanical pattern due to the fact that the policy undermines the motivation of governors and makes unclear the role of governor’s efficiency on his or her fate. Finally, proposed policy is not unique method and therefore other ways may and should be used to steer business to success.