Doctrine Political Work

What Should a "Good Leader in the Workshop" Look Like — Investigation Report on Grassroots Workshop Development ①

“工作室里的好领导”该是啥样——关于基层工作室建设的调研报告①

PLA Daily (解放军报) 8 August 2026

Summary

The 'Maker' workshop at an unidentified Naval Aviation University station, guided by Deputy Station Commander Zhang and Chief of Staff Li, produced 12 innovation results in two years — including an automatic bird-deterrent device displayed at a higher-authority exhibition — by enforcing a 'triple gate' approval process (feasibility analysis, parameter verification, process simulation) that blocks rank-based project imposition. The article documents a named institutional pathology in PLA grassroots workshops: leaders treating them as vanity projects or political-achievement incubators, a pattern the station claims to have corrected by separating technical authority from administrative rank. The framing points to an ongoing 政治整训 (political rectification training) campaign targeting formalism and bureaucratism, with this case offered as a model — though the article does not identify the unit, theater, or how widely the 'triple gate' standard has been adopted elsewhere.

Translation

In recent years, as the work of training for combat (练兵备战) has deepened, grassroots workshops (基层工作室) sprang up like mushrooms after rain, becoming an important handle for units to drive innovation. Yet after a period of time, some of these grassroots workshops bore abundant fruit while others produced little and gradually became window dressing. Both set up the same stage to perform — so why were the results worlds apart? What deeper problems does this reflect? Starting today, the Grassroots Dispatch (基层传真) section launches a series of investigation reports on the state of grassroots workshop development, going deep to the front lines to dissect individual cases and search for better solutions to activating grassroots innovation. We invite your attention.

— The Editors

What Should a "Good Leader in the Workshop" Look Like

— Investigation Report on Grassroots Workshop Development ①

■ Liu Huawei, Zhang Yidong, Zhong Xia

In the deep of a midsummer night, the "Maker" workshop at a certain station of the Naval Aviation University was still ablaze with light. When the data on the display finally stabilized, Senior Sergeant First Class Wang Zhan let out a long breath — under the sustained guidance of the station's leadership, he and his team had gnawed through another hard bone, successfully debugging a detection device for a certain type of equipment.

"When the workshop was first established, we were like crossing a river by feeling for the stones," Wang Zhan recalled. The soldiers had been riveted to the front lines of flight support year-round; the bottlenecks and sticking points in their missions were crystal clear to them. But turning ideas into blueprints and blueprints into prototypes was no easy matter — gaps in their theoretical foundation became a bottleneck problem. Once, when they wanted to optimize a circuit design, several soldiers spent two days poring over textbooks and still could not find a way in.

Later, word came that the station's Party committee had deliberated and arranged for Deputy Station Commander Zhang to take the lead in guiding the workshop's development. Wang Zhan felt uneasy and for a time held out little hope: "I've seen plenty of cases where leaders lend their names to something — can you really count on them?"

Why did he feel this way? It turned out that Wang Zhan had learned from some sister units that individual leaders who joined workshops had failed to play their proper role: some treated establishing a workshop as a vanity project (面子工程), making a great fanfare at the founding and then rarely following up; some were eager to produce visible highlights and treated the workshop as an "incubator for political achievements (政绩孵化器)," rigidly demanding that officers and soldiers complete research topics within a set time without any consideration of technical feasibility; still others had no background in the relevant specialty yet, in order to demonstrate their competence, constantly had the uninformed directing the informed (外行指挥内行), "guiding" work according to their own thinking, causing some projects to be delayed again and again until they came to nothing. Thinking of all this, Wang Zhan had no confidence in the workshop's future.

What happened next, however, exceeded his expectations. Deputy Station Commander Zhang had been a technical backbone in his previous unit, and upon arriving at this posting he immediately brought his laptop and planted himself in the workshop. He quickly discovered that the design drawings of several soldiers contained fundamental errors of principle. "Let's stop for a moment and sort out this circuit." Deputy Station Commander Zhang pulled over a whiteboard and, drawing diagrams as he explained, started from the most basic circuit principles and taught technical standards hand in hand. During that period, the workshop frequently turned into a small classroom. Wang Zhan said with feeling: "Deputy Station Commander Zhang never casually issued orders. He just picked up the chalk and worked through the calculations with us. That kind of expert-guiding-expert (内行指导内行) mentorship is what we truly needed."

"We seriously drew on the lessons of past work." In discussing the thinking behind the workshop's development, the station's Chief of Staff Li explained the considerations behind it. Through in-depth investigation, the station's Party committee reached a consensus: the workshop cannot have an "official's airs (官架子)" on display — the baton of innovation must be placed in the hands of those who know the field. In practice, they established a firm rule: for all project approvals, qualifications are judged not by rank but by standards — every project must pass a "triple gate" of feasibility analysis, parameter verification, and process simulation. Chief of Staff Li said: "In the past, some units would approve a project just because a leader proposed a topic, and the grassroots would have to carry it out with no one doing any verification of whether it was workable. Now we use the 'triple gate' to block 'seat-of-the-pants decisions (拍脑袋).' No one can use their rank to impose tasks, and we prevent idle spinning (空转) at the root."

Sergeant Intermediate Grade Chen Yiping felt this deeply. The project he was responsible for — improving a detection device — had stalled at one point due to module stability problems. When a section chief learned of this, rather than rushing to issue an order to "resolve it within a deadline," he proactively joined the team and participated throughout the technical solution deliberation. Under the section chief's professional guidance, the team redid the calculations and overcame the problem in just a few days.

Leaders who know the specialty can put their shoulders to the wheel; leaders who are not in the specialty can also pour their energy into the workshop. Every time the station's political commissar came to the workshop, his first words were always: "I'm a layman when it comes to the technology — tell me what difficulties need to be coordinated, and I'll find a way."

In the course of political rectification training (政治整训), such scenes have become the norm, and Wang Zhan and his comrades have maintained their full enthusiasm for the work. Now in the workshop, when leading cadres come to investigate, they do not casually offer guidance opinions but instead come with questions and humbly seek advice; when young soldiers encounter technical difficulties, their first instinct is not to plunge in blindly but to first consult with technical backbones.

Specialized collaborative work has produced the "chemical reaction" of innovation, and the creativity of officers and soldiers broadly has been activated. In just two short years since its founding, the workshop has achieved 12 innovation results, among them a certain type of automatic bird-deterrent device that made its debut at an innovative equipment exhibition organized by higher authorities and received recognition.

Brief Commentary from the Ranks (小兵快评)

In recent years, grassroots workshop development has been in full swing, yet the results have been as different as night and day: some produce innovation after innovation, while others are flashy but insubstantial, rarely producing results, and some have even sunk to becoming "vanity projects." Investigating the reasons, the practice of this station's "Maker" workshop offers one answer — when "official's airs" are set aside, officers and soldiers can conduct research without interference, concentrating their minds and efforts, and innovative vitality can truly burst forth.

Conducting political rectification training is precisely about vigorously correcting formalism (形式主义) and bureaucratism (官僚主义). Bringing "official's airs" into the workshop is in essence a projection of bureaucratic thinking (官僚思想) into the technical domain. Not only does it fail to advance the work, it easily causes the workshop to fall into idle spinning and wasted effort.

Setting aside "official's airs" does not mean abandoning leadership — it means transforming the style of leadership. The concept that "professional people do professional things" must be firmly established — leaders who are proficient in the specialty can strengthen substantive professional guidance, while other leaders can proactively ask "what can I help with," taking the lead in fostering a clean and refreshing innovation atmosphere of "not deferring to rank, only to facts (不唯上、只唯实)," so that the wisdom of grassroots officers and soldiers can fully emerge.

One who is skilled at eliminating harm examines its root; one who is skilled at treating illness cuts off its source. Clearing "official's airs" from the front lines of innovation is not only about relieving the workshop of its burden — it is also about fueling the development of combat effectiveness (战斗力建设).

(Liu Weiqi)

Original Chinese

近年来，随着练兵备战工作不断深入，基层工作室一度如雨后春笋般组建，成为各单位推动创新的重要抓手。然而一段时间后，这些基层工作室有的硕果累累，有的却成果寥寥、渐成摆设。同样搭台唱戏，为何效果天差地别？这背后折射出哪些深层次问题？即日起，基层传真版推出“关于基层工作室建设情况的调研报告”系列报道，深入一线解剖麻雀，探寻激活基层创新力的更优解。敬请关注。 ——编者 “工作室里的好领导”该是啥样 ——关于基层工作室建设的调研报告① ■刘华伟张依栋仲夏深夜，海军航空大学某场站“创客”工作室依然灯火通明。显示屏上的数据终于稳定下来，一级上士王占长出一口气——在场站领导的持续帮带下，他和团队又啃下一块硬骨头，成功调试出某型装备检测装置。 “工作室刚成立时，我们就像摸着石头过河。”王占回忆，战士们常年铆在飞行保障一线，任务中的堵点、卡点，他们心里清清楚楚。可要把想法变成图纸、把图纸变成样机没那么容易，理论基础的短板成为瓶颈难题。有一次想优化一个电路设计，几名战士翻了两天教材，还是找不到下手的地方。后来，听说场站党委研究安排张副站长牵头指导工作室建设，王占心里有些打鼓，一度没抱什么希望：“领导挂名的事见多了，能指望上吗？” 为何会有这样的想法？原来，王占此前从一些兄弟单位了解到，个别领导加入工作室时，未能发挥应有作用：有的把组建工作室当成面子工程，成立时热热闹闹，过后就少有过问；有的急于出亮点，把工作室当成“政绩孵化器”，硬性要求官兵限时完成课题，却不考虑技术可行性；还有的并非相关专业出身，却为体现水平，常常外行指挥内行，按照自己的思路“指导”，有的项目因此一拖再拖，不了了之。想到这些，王占对工作室的未来没了底数。然而，接下来的事却出乎他的意料。张副站长在原单位是技术骨干，如今一到任便带着电脑扎进工作室。他很快发现，几名战士的设计图纸存在原理性错误。“先停一下，咱们把这个回路捋清楚。”张副站长拖过白板，边画图边讲解，从最基本的电路原理讲起，手把手传授技术规范。那段时间，工作室常常变成小课堂。王占感慨：“张副站长从不随便发号施令，就拿着粉笔跟我们一起演算，这种内行指导内行的帮带，才是我们真正需要的。” “我们认真吸取了以往工作的经验。”谈及工作室的建设思路，该场站李参谋长道出背后考量。场站党委通过深入调研达成共识：工作室里不能摆“官架子”，必须把创新的指挥棒交到内行人手里。实践中，他们立下一条硬规矩——所有项目立项，不看职务看标准，必须通过可行性分析、参数验证和流程推演“三重关”。李参谋长说：“以前有的单位立项目，领导点个题，基层就得干，行不行没人论证。现在我们用‘三关’卡住‘拍脑袋’，谁也不能凭职务压任务，从根子上防止空转。” 中士陈一平对此深有感触。他负责的检测装置改进项目，一度因模块稳定性问题卡了壳。一名业务股长得知后，没有急着下“限期解决”的命令，而是主动加入团队，全程参与技术方案论证。在股长专业指导下，团队重新进行计算，仅用几天就攻克了难题。懂专业的领导扑下身子，非专业的领导也能对工作室倾注心力。场站政委每次到工作室，第一句话总是：“技术我是外行，你们看有什么困难需要协调，我来想办法。” 政治整训中，这样的场景已成常态，王占和战友们始终满怀工作热情。如今在工作室，领导干部来调研，不会随口提指导意见，而是带着问题虚心请教；年轻战士遇到技术难题，第一反应也不是盲目动手，而是先找技术骨干商量。专业化协作催生了创新的“化学反应”，广大官兵的创造力被激活。成立短短两年，工作室已取得12项创新成果，其中某型自动驱鸟设备在上级组织的创新装备展上一展身手，获得认可。小兵快评近些年，基层工作室建设如火如荼，成效却判若云泥：有的创新迭出，有的却华而不实，很少出成果，甚至沦为“面子工程”。探究其原因，该场站“创客”工作室的实践给出了其中一个答案——“官架子”放下来，让官兵不受干扰，凝心聚力搞研究，创新活力才能真正迸发。开展政治整训，就是要大力纠治形式主义、官僚主义。把“官架子”摆进工作室，本质上是官僚思想在技术领域的投射。不仅无法促进工作，还容易让工作室陷入空转虚耗。放下“官架子”，并非不领导，而是转变领导方式。要牢固树立“专业的人做专业的事”理念——可以让精通专业的领导多加强业务指导，其他领导多主动问需“我能帮些什么”，率先带动形成“不唯上、只唯实”的清爽创新氛围，基层官兵的智慧才能充分涌现。善除害者察其本，善理疾者绝其源。把“官架子”从创新一线清除，不仅是为工作室“减负”，更是为战斗力建设“加油”。（刘伟祺）