Issue 70: expecting your comments

[Voyage0714]

This is my article for issue 70, any comments are welcome, thank you!

TOPIC: ISSUE70 - "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

The speaker asserts anyone in power should step down after five years, regardness regardless the profession he or she is involved with. I agree with this assertion to some extent because this regulation of alternating leader, could bring several benefits, especially in political realm. could bring several benefits. However, this assertion may go to extreme if applied to any profession without considering certain circumstances that would be exception. I will discuss my point of view in detail as below.

Admittedly, there are several compelling reasons for the leader to step down after five years' administration. These reasons may be devideddivided into two aspects. Firstly, every individual has limited intelligence and energy to stay in the position of a leader. After five years, the leader may be exhausted with his creative idea and intelligence to propel the improvement of the institution. Secondly, to change a leader within five year may be a good measure to avoid correction, which is easily bring about through too long time's administration. What happen in politic may aptly illustrate these two points. In American and China and most of other countries, the tensuretenure of a the leader is four or five years. This is because that most people believe that these time is quite enough to show whether this leader is effective, and whether his or her political view will bring genenal general benefit to the society. On the other hand, this measure can effectively prevent the leader from going to tyranny, and guarantee the power would not be used abuselyabused. For these two reasons, I agree with the speaker that the time for a leader to administrate should be limited within a time range.

However, if this regulation is applied any profession, such as business and education, the speaker may go to extreme, ignoring some compelling reasons that a longer time's administration of an individual will benefit the company and university in a larger extent. For example, for a company to survive and thrive for a long time, the object of the company should be fixed and it may need persistent efforts of all the employee to realize the object. Bill Gates has had administrated the company of Microsoft from when he was a compuscampus students, and the company expanded its products and improved its technique with his leadership. There is no denying that Bill Gates's long time administration guarantee the goals of the company were not changed, which is quite significant to the success of this company. The things would be the same in education. For a university to obtain lasting fame, the characteristic of the university should not change. For example, our university, ** was established fifty years ago, and it goal is to provide excellent graduates in technology for our country, and several generation's leaders and teachers have made their efforts to realized this goal. A continual leader with rich experiences in administrating such a university is surly helpful to realize this goal, although it is not possible for one to stay in his position for such long time.

Finally, several other circumstances may need a leader to stay in his or her position for longer time than five years. For example, some scientific project may need more time than five years to reach its goal. The government of China has made long time effort in subsiding the research of Hybrid Rice, which is hopeful to solve the food problem of China, and even the world. This project has been under the leadership of Yuanlongping, the famous professor who have sovledsolved many difficulties in this project. To change the leader of such project will be a big loss, and the reasons for changing the leader can be compensate by introduce new faculties to tche research group and effective way to supervise their research. For this matter, the leader in power should not be changed simply in five years, considering the negative effect it would bring to the project.

In conclusion, whether a leader should step down in five years should be determined in a case by case basis. In some cricumstancescircumstances, this mearsure would be effective to bring general benefits. However, when the negative effects is considered, which may far more than the positive effect, the leader can stay in his or her position in a longer time.