Observations from the Barracks | The "Fast and Slow" Debate: A Thought-Provoking Transformation in Scientific Research
News Sample Ten Years to Forge a Sword
■ Gao Jinjie PLA Daily Reporter Jia Qilong
Late at night, a brightly lit office in a certain institute of the Academy of Military Sciences' Systems Engineering Research Institute. Inside, Associate Researcher Lin stares intently at the flickering parameter indicators on her screen, her fingertips rapidly entering data on the keyboard, row after row of critical figures flowing precisely into a vast database. For her, this working scene has been the norm throughout years of scientific research.
Ten years ago, Associate Researcher Lin anchored her research direction in the field of digitalization — a direction requiring long-term investment and deep foundational work. When "speed" became the pursuit of the era and many peers gravitated toward short-term, quick-yield projects, she held firm against reminders that "basic research doesn't show results easily, so why persist": "Digitalization is the 'foundation' of the future battlefield. Only by consolidating the base can victory be assured."
In year one, at a critical juncture of restructuring the digital battlefield construction system and transforming its model, the field had many gaps and the challenges were formidable. Associate Researcher Lin volunteered and took the lead in shouldering the relevant research responsibilities.
In year two, she focused on shortcomings in research demonstration, threading digital thinking throughout the entire chain of project argumentation, strictly controlling the full process from project initiation through iterative development to operational application, effectively avoiding redundant construction and blind investment. At the same time, she closely integrated the practical results of key research topics, systematically organized industry standards, refined technical specifications, and produced a series of replicable and scalable practical models.
These results were not "dazzling," but they were "useful" — providing strong support for her own unit's digital construction while also laying a solid foundation for system building, standardized operation, and iterative upgrading across the same field.
……
In year five, Associate Researcher Lin's team encountered a critical "bottleneck": data resources were scattered, collaborative linkage was weak, and generating systemic capability was difficult. Targeting this "hard bone," the team set out to use intelligent technology to break through systemic barriers and push static data into motion and vitality. They regularly conducted frontline research, closely aligned with troop needs to identify root causes, diligently studied cutting-edge technologies such as big data and intelligent algorithms, and continuously optimized the system architecture through repeated practice.
To overcome core technical bottlenecks, Associate Researcher Lin led the formation of a dedicated breakthrough team, leading key personnel in a shoulder-to-shoulder fight. Facing the pressure of "dense difficulties and no short-term results," she encouraged everyone: "There are no shortcuts in scientific research — only by settling the mind and calming the spirit can one gnaw through the hard bones." After nearly a thousand days and nights of deduction, debugging, and optimization, one technical obstacle after another was broken through, and the full-domain data transmission link was successfully connected!
In year eight, the data link was already flowing without obstruction. She firmly resisted the tendency to "prioritize form over practicality," adhered to the standard of simplicity, practicality, and usability, led the team deep into grassroots units for visits, patiently listened to user feedback, and — targeting problems such as redundant processes and insufficient system compatibility — refined the platform architecture and streamlined operational steps with painstaking care, driving the efficient conversion of results into combat capability.
……
In year ten, Associate Researcher Lin and her team kept their eyes fixed on the critical nodes of the data link, dynamically optimized the system's operational mode, and finally broke through the "last mile" of converting digital results into applied use.
From "slow, careful work to build the foundation" to "lightning-fast display of effectiveness," the perseverance of "ten years to forge a sword" teaches us: true speed comes from a solid foundation, and true achievement lies in withstanding the test of actual combat.
The night is deep, but the light in the office still burns. Associate Researcher Lin's "contest" with data continues. That unextinguished light illuminates the figure of a research vanguard soldier on the journey to strengthen the military who is committed to innovation — and it will surely illuminate the path toward the future intelligentized (智能化) battlefield.
Reporter Investigation The "Fast and Slow" Debate: A Thought-Provoking Transformation in Scientific Research
■ PLA Daily Reporter Jia Qilong
Research personnel from a certain institute of the Academy of Military Sciences' Systems Engineering Research Institute conduct field pipeline laying tests. Photo by Li Hua
Military scientific research is a long journey in which "marathon" and "sprint" are intertwined. How to grasp the rhythm precisely and find the optimal solution between respecting objective laws and meeting urgent needs? The Academy of Military Sciences' Systems Engineering Research Institute has vividly written its answer to the "fast" and "slow" debate through a thought-provoking practice of scientific research transformation — and the core secret lies in using the correct view of political achievement (政绩观) as both the "fixed star" and the "baton."
"Scientific research has its own laws — it can neither be rushed nor dragged out. What cannot be rushed is the reverence for objective laws; what cannot be dragged out is the mountain-heavy mission of preparing for war and the urgency of fighting for every second." The institute's leadership cut to the heart of the matter.
The "Slow" Effort — Settling Down to Build the Foundation
In the past, the baton of "counting papers" and "tallying awards" caused some research to drift away from the target of winning wars. "Short, flat, and fast" (短平快) projects were highly favored, while "hard bone" projects targeting battlefield pain points and tackling "chokehold" (卡脖子) problems were shunned because they were "hard to produce results" and "high risk."
"The root cause is a deviation in the view of political achievement — the 'baton' of the evaluation system was swung in the wrong direction. If you evaluate a researcher only by how many papers they published and how many awards they won, then don't blame everyone for chasing hot topics and doing things that easily produce results." The institute's Party committee identified the crux of the problem with precision. A profound reshaping of concepts and institutional reform was then set in motion.
"The political achievement of military scientific research is not on the display boards in exhibition halls, but in the actual effectiveness on the battlefield; not in the certificates on the awards podium, but in the useful 'sharp weapons' in the hands of officers and soldiers!" They decisively broke with convention and actively reconstructed a scientific research evaluation system centered on the rate of contribution to combat capability (战斗力贡献率). At the source of project initiation, they strengthened "dual demonstration" of operational requirements, with research topics drawn from the most urgent problems facing the troops; during execution, they implemented "embedded" scientific research, with mandatory requirements for the length of time researchers spend on visits to units; at results acceptance, the gold standard is "whether it is usable, effective, and solves real problems," with conversion rate and satisfaction as hard metrics.
Simultaneously, a "clear the inventory, adjust the structure" campaign — like a warrior cutting off his own wrist — unfolded across the institute. Director Ma of a certain research institute still clearly remembers the decision made at the Party committee meeting: under pressure, they proactively cut several ongoing projects with low relevance to their core responsibilities and limited projected contribution to combat capability, and adjusted the direction of more than ten task areas.
Director Ma acknowledged frankly: "As a research institute undergoing a functional transformation, instead of competing for more tasks, we actually handed back 'dishes' already on our plate — at the time, many people didn't understand." Yet this was entirely in line with the top-level design of the institute's Party committee. The institute organized experts from various fields and spent several months conducting a major "combat capability contribution rate" assessment of inventory projects, ultimately proactively cutting multiple "thankless" (鸡肋) projects and precisely directing precious resources — funding, talent, and equipment — toward core research directions bearing on "control of the cognitive domain" (制脑权) and "control of the information domain" (制信息权) in future warfare. This act of "cutting, discarding, and letting go" (断舍离) cleared space and built up reserves for winning "tomorrow's war."
In this institute, there is a group of "long-termists" who command deep respect — their figures are a vivid footnote to the practice of the correct view of political achievement. Academician Wang of the Chinese Academy of Engineering has led his team anchored to a key domain of electronic warfare for 30 years without wavering, quietly cultivating the field. They endured the loneliness, advancing step by step from basic theory to system integration, taking the lead in building a secure and reliable "battlefield nerve center." A core member of the team acknowledged frankly: "If we had chosen popular topics and directions that were easy to publish papers in back then, the personal 'returns' might have been greater. But Academician Wang always said: our value lies in solving real problems on the battlefield and increasing the odds of winning."
There are many more "sword forgers" like Academician Wang in this institute. Senior Engineer Wang, in order to solve the energy problems of remote island reefs, has gone deep to the frontlines on multiple occasions. She boldly proposed a new integrated renewable energy solution; when she could not find a construction crew, she rolled up her own sleeves and led people to install and commission the equipment; to enable the troops to operate and use it independently, she insisted on writing manuals and teaching hands-on. Her choice is simple and burning with conviction: "The endpoint of military scientific research is to make results take root at the combat post."
The true meaning of "slow" is also rooted in a work style with feet planted in the soil. On the northern border defense line, research teams wearing self-developed special clothing patrolled with officers and soldiers for hours in bitter cold, recording physical sensation data; in the rainforests of Motuo, Tibet, small detachments followed soldiers through leech-infested zones and torrential currents to determine the extreme support requirements of equipment. No design without entering the combat post; no project initiation without smelling gunpowder smoke. They measured battlefield needs with the solid steps of "slow," and collected high-value data with the rigorous attitude of "slow."
"Slow work produces fine results" (慢工出细活) — this ancient maxim has been given new battlefield meaning in the practice of this institute: the "slow effort" of enduring loneliness in scientific research is precisely what forges the "fast response" capability of fighting for every second and defeating the enemy on the battlefield.
The "Fast" Action — Moving with Thunder to Plan for Victory in War
Driven by the mission of preparing for and winning wars, in critical domains where victory or defeat hangs in the balance and breakthroughs are urgently needed, this institute displays a different posture: moving at the sound of orders, racing against time, running the "acceleration" of scientific research with the force of thunder.
In conversion and application, they race against the clock. The value of scientific research results is ultimately reflected in serving the troops and enhancing combat capability. The institute has established the concept that "delivery is not the endpoint — winning is the goal." After a certain type of informatized system went online, the team continuously tracked its use by the troops, fixing problems overnight and pushing updates. "The troops cannot wait, and the battlefield even less so!" This style of "rapid response" has won the trust of frontline officers and soldiers.
In emergency research, they move at the sound of orders. In early 2020, the COVID-19 epidemic struck Wuhan. A certain institute received orders and rushed to provide support; Engineer Zhang put down his bowl and chopsticks, shouldered his pack, and became one of the "those who go against the tide." The field tent-type mobile detection laboratory he helped develop was assembled and commissioned within 24 hours, withstanding the severe test of actual operations and demonstrating the emergency response capability of military science and technology.
In serving the frontline, they act with swift decisiveness. This institute regards serving the troops and guaranteeing victory in war as its sacred duty. To solve the survivability problem of a certain type of armored fighting vehicle, Senior Engineer An led the team in signing a military pledge. They immersed themselves in the laboratory fighting day and night, successfully developing a new high-performance barrier explosion-proof material. Tests showed that the application of this material effectively reduced the risk of the vehicle being destroyed on the battlefield and improved the survivability of officers and soldiers.
What needs "acceleration" most is talent development. At graduation season, leadership proactively going to "double first-class" (双一流) universities to "compete for" talent is not news at this institute. The experience of Associate Director Li of a certain research institute is quite representative: upon learning that a top doctoral graduate with exceptional potential in the field of unmanned intelligent swarms had become a target competed for by multiple organizations, she immediately took action, traveling across Beijing, Shanghai, and Xi'an within three days, engaging in in-depth communication with the candidate, and winning him over with the institute's major projects and its environment for getting things done. After this doctoral graduate joined the institute and led a research topic, in less than three years the relevant results entered strategic decision-making. In recent years, this institute has recruited more than one hundred high-quality civilian personnel (文职人员), with doctoral degree holders accounting for more than 80%, and a young scientific research force is rising rapidly.
This kind of "speed" is efficient execution and precise application of force on the premise of respecting objective laws — a combination of scientific research capability and fighting spirit. "Slow is true skill, reflecting resolve and depth; fast is true ability, demonstrating responsibility and efficiency. Being able to settle the mind when slowness is called for, and being able to charge forward and win when speed is called for — that is the proper state of being." The institute's leadership summarized.
The "Unified" Wisdom — Grasping the Dialectics of Scientific Research
"Fast" and "slow" appear contradictory, yet in the military scientific research practice of this institute they have achieved harmonious unity. What is the secret? The answer is clear and firm: use the correct view of political achievement as the "fixed star" and the "baton," anchoring the starting point and the destination of all work in serving the generation of combat capability and serving the preparation for war.
They treat engineering-based talent cultivation as an incubator for "seeking speed through slowness," innovating a "talent + engineering" model. When construction of a certain strategic-level planning system was launched, a cohort of young doctoral graduates from prestigious universities was directly incorporated into the core team to participate deeply throughout the entire process. Facing the challenge of a mega-system, they learned by doing and trained through combat, with capabilities growing rapidly. Four years later, the project successfully went online, and they had grown into research backbones — two of them were recognized as "Military Youth Science and Technology Talents" (军队青年科技英才). "Using major engineering projects to drive talent cultivation looks slow on the surface, but what is cultivated is 'ready combat power' (即战力) aligned with battlefield needs — it is actually the 'fast track' for talent development." A leader of the institute acknowledged frankly.
They use joint collaboration to build an accelerator for "clenching fingers into a fist" (攥指成拳), powerfully driving large-scale cross-institute and cross-disciplinary collaboration. In the development of a large integrated information system, the Party committee unified scheduling, with multiple units deploying their best forces, breaking down barriers, and complementing each other's strengths, significantly compressing the development cycle and ensuring breakthroughs at critical nodes. This is a vivid embodiment of the institutional advantage of "concentrating strength to accomplish great tasks."
In recent years, practicing the correct view of political achievement has gradually been internalized as a conscious commitment among the broad community of research personnel. A young assistant researcher said with deep feeling: "When I first arrived and we discussed research topics, I habitually asked 'is this easy to publish papers on?'; now, my focus is 'does the military urgently need this, where will it be used, and what will the battlefield effect be?'" From caring about where papers are "published" to focusing on where results are "used" — a change of one character reflects a fundamental shift in the value coordinates of research personnel, and a powerful return of the original aspiration of scientific research toward preparing for war.
Walking into this institute, the spirit of researching for war and advancing toward war hits you in the face: on researchers' desks, alongside professional journals, are the latest exercise reports from theater commands; the most heated arguments in the conference room concern whether data is reliable in actual combat; on the results display wall, the most prominent position is given to a letter of thanks from a frontline unit — the letter mentions that a certain system reduced the unit's response time by 40%, effectively improving operational efficiency.
When research personnel break free from the rut of "short cycles, fast output" and shake off the shackles of "papers above all, awards above all," consciously taking the battlefield as the origin point, victory as the measuring stick, and objective laws as the standard, the innovation ecosystem of military scientific research will surely burst with vigorous vitality. The value of the Systems Engineering Research Institute's exploration of scientific research transformation guided by the correct view of political achievement lies not only in its rich output of results, but even more in having blazed a new path of high-quality development that conforms to objective laws and serves war preparation. This is precisely the vivid practice of the dialectics of "fast" and "slow" in the domain of military scientific research in the new era.
Reporter Dialogue PLA Daily Reporter in Dialogue with the Director of a Certain Institute of the Academy of Military Sciences' Systems Engineering Research Institute ——
"Gazing at the Stars" and "Keeping Feet on the Ground"
■ Wang Jiayin PLA Daily Reporter Jia Qilong
Chairman Xi has pointed out that political achievement is reflected both in driving development and in improving people's livelihoods and maintaining stability; both in visible achievements (显绩) that show results immediately and in latent achievements (潜绩) that lay foundations, build momentum, and serve long-term interests. This important statement provides the fundamental guidance for military scientific research units to establish and practice the correct view of political achievement. Under the new situation, how should military scientific research units position their view of political achievement? How should effectiveness be assessed? Recently, the reporter visited a certain institute of the Academy of Military Sciences' Systems Engineering Research Institute for an in-depth exchange with Director Zhu.
Reporter: Compared with frontline units and headquarters organs, the "political achievement" of research units seems more abstract. How do you understand it?
Director: The political achievement of research personnel is the "contribution rate" to the growth of combat capability. In the past, some research personnel harbored a misconception — they thought that basic research and frontier exploration meant "sitting on a cold bench" and were not as "glorious" as producing products. This was a deviation in the view of political achievement. Visible achievements and latent achievements are unified. Developing equipment that directly generates combat capability is a visible achievement, while basic research and frontier exploration that lay the foundation for the coming years are latent achievements. Therefore, we emphasize: we must use a "microscope" to focus on current urgent needs, while also using a "telescope" to perceive the future battlefield.
Reporter: Then, how should research personnel be guided to devote themselves to topics urgently needed by the troops?
Director: The key lies in calibrating the starting point. Our starting point can only be "for war," and the destination must be "for the soldiers." To this end, we have set hard requirements: first, we have established a "research-for-war orientation" (研战导向) project initiation mechanism, cutting "small, scattered, and weak" (小散弱) projects disconnected from combat capability and implementing a system of scientific research objective responsibility; second, we have reformed the evaluation system — not looking at the notebook but at the target, not privileging papers but emphasizing application. Last year, when the unit organized its excellence evaluation, one expert had not published many papers, but the equipment maintenance system he developed, after trial use by the troops, significantly improved operational efficiency. In the end, we unanimously decided: priority for merit citations and excellence recognition goes to comrades like this who "write their papers on the exercise and training ground"!
Reporter: Some research projects have long cycles and high risks. If years of hard work yield no results, how should this phenomenon be viewed?
Director: We must both pursue success and tolerate failure; both resolve present difficulties and break through historical problems. In scientific research exploration, proving that "this path does not work" is also a contribution. If, out of fear of failure, one only pursues the visible achievements of "short, flat, and fast" projects, core technologies will never achieve breakthroughs. Therefore, we encourage research personnel to bravely gnaw on "hard bones" and dare to take on "unfinished work."
Reporter: Please speak to how Party member cadres in military scientific research units should write their political achievements on the journey to strengthen the military.
Director: There is a saying I would like to share with everyone: we must both "gaze at the stars" in conducting scientific research, keeping our eyes fixed on the frontiers of world military science and technology; and even more so "keep our feet on the ground" to produce real results, ensuring that all achievements can withstand the test of the battlefield and of officers and soldiers — delivering a qualified answer to the Party and the people through achievements that can withstand the test of history!