Rotations and New Leadership

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.


“If it ain’t wrong, don’t fix it.”

Being a strong believer of this fact, I do not think that people in power should step down occasionally. Honestly, it makes no sense. Let us take Samsung for an example. Over history, there have been only two heads of Samsung; and we all know what that resulted in. This is the most brilliant examples that defies the above presented motion. On the other hand, those in power should remain in power, taking help from newbies and tyros, to revitalize their perspective and to be at par with the problems of the newer generation.

‘The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new innovations.’ This modification of the latter sentence makes the claim somewhat acceptable. Leadership does not need to change; we are all led by some principles, some values and some goals; not by some people. In fact, nowadays, even the leaders accept this fact, that they do not lead the enterprise, but only represent it in the global industrial perspective. Be it the field of business, politics, education or government, as long as the system is fault-free, we should not try to experiment with it.

On the other hand, changing hands in power is actually harmful. For example, whenever leaders plan out their rule, they have a set of short-term plans and another set of long-term plans. Often these long-term plans extend for more than five years. In such cases, it is often frequent to see a lot of short-term plans being implemented in order to lay the base for a long-term plan, however, the long-term plan is never spurred into action because of the very fact that by the time it is time to implement the plan, the rule is already changing hands.

If we take up any field, a constant leadership often helps us build a trust in the leader, and consequently in the field. A parent would more often than not want to send his child to a school that has a good reputation, and more importantly, a good Principal who is heading it. This reputation comes after years of service, and after one has proven his or her mettle in the respective field. It does not build overnight. Imagine the head of a school changing after every five years. A student in his school life will hence witness three Principals, which really does not make sense, if the school was running fine in the first place. Same is the case with business. A company might not want to risk failures if it is really prospering and earning a lot of profit under a particular leader.

Revitalizing any enterprise with an array of new concepts, ideas and innovations is very important for anything to succeed. However, in my opinion, making those in power step down after five years is not really an optimal solution to this problem, rather, I would go to the extent of saying that it is not a solution at all, for as long as things don’t go wrong, or become problematic, it is really a waste of time trying to fix it or alter it without any rhyme or reason.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.