In order to maintain the vitality of an entrprise, such as government and business, some people suggest that, the leadership should be replaced after five years. They illustrate that altering leaders is the best way for any enterprises to reach their success. Indeed, new leader would infuse fresh blood and bring new ideas for the business or government. However, regarding the drawbacks of switching leadership and other reasons which are responsible for the devitalization of enterprise, I can not completely agree with this claim.Besides the leader's limited competence, many other factors are responsible for the devitalization of an enterprise. As for government, corruption, onerous tax policy, and incompetence in solving people's problem efficiently can be fatal problems. Take Qin Dynasty which is a period of significance in Chinese hitory for example, people in that time were suffering onerous tax and tyanny, this situation served as a catalyst for farmer revolution, and finally, rebellion promoted the denouement of Qin. As for business,such as automobile companies and communication equipment manufacrurers, the decline in quality of productions, the out-of-date design, or the rivalry from other competitors can be the reasons for customers to turn in favor of the products from other companies. And the customers' inclination may lead the consequence of devitalization to the company. The fadding of Nokia can be the best illustration. When the large-screen smart phone which is based on IOS or Android system, bacomes increasingly popular, Nokia still produce cell phones with traditional appearance, which, is not capable of appealing the customers' interests. And eventually, Nokia, the former master in the field of mobile phone, gradually vanished from people's sight. This is because the creativity of the designing team was limited, and the leader was
not the only one to blame.Though leader is responsible for the divitalization of an enterprise, altering leadership may anticipate unfavorable consequence, yet methods other than switching leader can promote the development. On the one hand, lacking of experience, the new leader may not be adept enough to make decision for the entire enterprise. For instance, John Sculley, former executive of Pepsi cola later persuaded by Steve Jobs to take the position of Apple computer's CEO, leaded Apple to the edge of bankruptcy, because his experience in selling sugar water was not suitable for the computer market. On the other hand, the relationship between the new leader and the employees may not be as good as that between the employees and the former leader when he/she  was in the position. Moreover, adopting other methods such as innovativeve perspective, technology development, and keeping up with the trend of market can make the old company revitalized with energy. McDonald's  and KFC are the perfect exanmples. Though the menu of the tradition has never been changed, they always promote some new products or souvenirs to suit the momentous events currently taking place in the world, such as the Olympics and FIFA world cup. Combined with pleasant environment, those eye-catching products subtly increase the sale of their traditional fast food.Apart from those defects of switching leaders, the change would definately introduce some innovative perspective, and brand new guideline for the enterprise's development, and those factors can serve as opportunity for the business or the goverment to realize their goals. In that sense, as for government, it may benefit from replacing leaders every few years to make people keep their faith in the government. Because the new leader is elected by people's vote, he/she is, to some extent, capable of satisfying people's requirement.Admittedly, new leader would sometimes benefit the enterprise, whereas regarding the drawbacks of replacing leadership and other method which could promote the development, leaders should not be replaced by people without contemplation.