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.

Do the chiefs in any field should be resigned after five years? Some people argue for the necessity of replacing those in power in a field every five years with a new member; while, others opine that the replacement should not apply, since the precedent power member is still capable. After weighing the evidence, it is certain that the powerful member should not be replaced by new one after five years. The power member should be remained in power, unless she lose her competence.

Some people opine that the power member of each organization should be replace by new one every five years. They believe that a person should not be stabled in power for long term; she would reveal her abilities during this five years and has established her opinions in that special field. So after five years the decisions would be converted to a pedestrian one that might be cause of engendering some wrecking effects. So a new member with distinct theories and more nobilities would be replaced. Furthermore, after five years the power person would be noticed about the some weaken or strengthen points of that field and some arcane detailed information which might pursue her to make benefit of them, and try to apply some frauds during her establishments.

As was stated already, there are some other people who contradict with the former group, not to recruit power members every five years; because, the power members would reach to a stable position after five years, and after that they would be more flourished in their profession. They would bolster the weak points and emphasize on their strengthen points to organize a complementary plan for their rudimentary hypothesize, which they have surveyed on during that five years. This would be like a farmer who established his field during a period of time and have cultivated on that, after being, the field, prepared for harvesting then the field would devote to another farmer for cultivating new crops. By replacing all power members in various fields with new ones, some chaos would engender in a society. For example, how to choose that eligible person every five years, in which people are satisfied with the decision; how to dedicate the new power person with staffs, who have been organized base on precedent chief.

Ultimately, after considering both sides of the issue, it must be concluded that the recruiting of the power members every five years should not be applied. Although the formers’ declaration in this case seem logical at first, the latters’ discussion seems more rationale and practicable. The example of the farmer have revealed some determinant flaws of former group, and also the example have strengthen more the latters’ opinion; not to replace the power member with new one after five years. Moreover, the condition should be prepared for her to executes her hypothesize in most competence way.