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 e

The statement that the businessman, the politician or the governor who are in the pinnacle of a work should consider that the opportunity of other people to gain the work is in their decision to come down from the ladder of power and let the job revitalization through the new leadership is not cogent and doesn’t sound persuasive in many aspects. The claim that has proposed must be surveyed meticulously and each deficiency of its cogency should be considered comprehensively.

The fact that someone shouldn’t have the whole power in his/her hands is true, but it is not true that they should retire and say farewell to their field of expertise after five years, because their experiences in the business, a job or politics will be helpful for other people. Employees who are fervid to be the boss should consider that in first years of the work they are novices and should let a member f community who knows each defect of the work, be able to decide for the whole community. Someone may argue that there might be employees who have a great base of experience which can replace with the boss but the fact is that the most appropriate person of the community will become boss and it is not just about the experience, but it is about the relationship with people, veracity and knowing tastes of the customers. Therefore, whether the work is dealing with business or politics, experiences and being appropriate for the work are decisive factors which won’t let a boss decline from his/her position after five years and admit other members of the community to take debacle decisions.

In some countries, as the Great Britain or Spain, still monarchs are in charge to sovereign the majority of the country due to the fact that they are symbols of the culture, the history and personality of their countries but their power to intervene in each aspect of their countries’ issues is limited. Therefore, it could be a good way to maintain people who are at the highest point of power but limit their power with other means, and it is a bad choice to force these kinds of people to leave their work after five years because not only they have experience but also they are the symbol of the community. The symbols of power in the community can be as the emblem of the community and make a personality for the whole community. A rootless tree will fall and this is also true for communities. Preserving bosses after five years will enhance the value of the firm, business or group and will show the stability of the community but by changing the in five years just to pay attention to different decisions, the community will confront with the crisis of lack of personality.

There are many people who think that by changing the people in power after five years other people can have the opportunity to affect the job or business by making betterments, but the fact is that in many examples like educational institutions, five years is a short period for someone to strengthen the basis of the work. Principles of schools need to enact laws in their institution to breed children properly and if the principle has become changed after five years, children cannot completely adapt themselves with the new principle. Furthermore the claim that five year is enough isn’t persuasive because it is possible that the proficiency of five years is equal to 2 years or 10 years in specific circumstances. Therefore, further considerations will be essential to gather reliable information and decide what period is good to accept someone in the pinnacle and the highest position of the job.

To sum up, developments of the society is not completely depended to changes in the leadership but a stable leadership is an essential factor for societies to continue their path. The fact is that by consulting with the leader who has experience, societies can make the path of the development clear.