Is new leadership going to revitalize an organization, thus bringing success to it? Leadership to an organization is rudder to a ship, without too much emphasizing on the importance of leadership, I agree that those in power need to step down for better leadership when necessary. If leaders are making big mistakes, they need to step down anytime necessary. But if current leaders are leading their organizations to make significant progress, they need to stay in power for the sake of their organizations’ continuous progress.

New leaders can bring new ideas, innovation and other important resources to their organizations, which are important for the success of organizations. By the 1980s, Haier Group had debt of over CNY ¥1.4 million and suffered from dilapidated infrastructure, poor management, and lack of quality control. The company was on the verge of bankruptcy. Zhangruimin, the saver of Haier Group, introduced the sense of quality to its members by smashing 76 faulty refrigerators in front of everybody. The company started turning around in late 1980s with Zhangruimin’s disciplined management. As an avid reader of western and Japanese business, he brought Haier into international competition after cooperating with Germany Liebherr Group. This has been one of the most told stories where a new innovative leader saves an almost bankrupted company.

Under some extreme circumstances, those in power might need to step down before the end of their due time. Chairman Mao held leadership from the establishment of China till his death in 1976. Later in his leadership, he started becoming obsessive of power and started ‘culture revolution’, which brought disastrous results to china. During the Culture Revolution, many intellectuals were persecuted, all the resources were invested in producing steel and other heavy industry products, people were suffering from hunger and scared of being persecuted in case they said any word wrong. Right then, it was highly necessary for Chairman Mao to step down so that new leaders could amend the destructions caused by ‘culture revolution’, but the four-year residency wasn’t established then, so he resumed his misleading of China.

But if current leaders are leading their organizations to make continuous big progress, there is no need to require them to step down as usual. Leaders need to step down if the organization is stagnant or deteriorating, but leaders like Steven Jobs and Deng Xiaoping should resume their leadership to keep making further progress. Before Steven Jobs resumed his leadership of Apple in 1997, Apple was having trouble competing against Microsoft, it was certainly going downward. But Steven Jobs created iPod, iPhone, iPad, which have been taking the lead of digital consuming in many countries, through his innovative and visionary leadership. He was leading the company to surpass many other digital companies by coming up with a series of extremely popular products for almost fourteen years. Now that he is dead, people start wondering the direction and future of Apple Inc., market was showing their doubt and uncertainties about Apple’s future, unless some other leaders as innovative as Steven Jobs come to lead Apple, there will be on going uncertainties for Apple.

There is no fixed pattern of leaders’ termination. Those in power might need to step down anytime when they are bringing destructive effects on their organizations; those great leaders can help keep making improvements with their wisdom and their wisdom shouldn’t go waste by stepping down after four or five years. What matters the most to organizations is not regular change of leadership but great leaders in power.