"Oh no, two meetings have 'clashed'!" Not long ago, Zhao, the section chief of the discipline inspection section of the Anshun Detachment of the PAP Guizhou General Corps, was carrying a freshly prepared meeting request to report to the leadership when he ran straight into Hao, the section chief of the operations and training section, who had come to submit his own meeting request. His heart tightened involuntarily — the meeting he was responsible for organizing had already been postponed once, and he had no idea whether it would be approved this time.
Not long before, the detachment Party committee had issued a notice to convene a work-deployment meeting, with the aim of converting the training results from the higher-level "Military Grassroots-Level Construction Outline (军队基层建设纲要)" and reviewing the work of organs and grassroots units in building according to the outline. To that end, the various organ departments had prepared lengthy review materials — but after the detachment Party committee deliberated, it sent all the materials back, with the comment that they talked too much about concepts and too little about concrete facts, too much about work completed and too little about actual results achieved, and that such a review was of little value.
The Party committee decided to postpone the meeting and required each department to re-evaluate the work of organs and grassroots units in building according to the outline, using as the basis "what was done, how much was done, and whether officers and soldiers recognize what was done" — it could not be allowed that doing more or less, doing well or poorly, doing or not doing all looked the same.
After in-depth investigation and research, each department produced a set of materials that were factually clear and substantively detailed. Section Chief Zhao was brimming with confidence as he prepared to re-submit the meeting agenda — only to encounter the "clash" described at the outset. The work-deployment meeting overlapped in time with multiple other meetings, and how to hold them and which to hold first became a thorny problem.
Before long, the detachment Party committee studied the matter and reached a decision: postpone the meeting again, and combine the several meetings with conflicting schedules into a single meeting. This approach left the departments responsible for organizing the meetings somewhat at a loss: if these several meetings were merged, who would be the lead organizer? How should the materials be drafted? Would it cause thematic confusion and undermine effectiveness?
The detachment Party committee's position was unambiguous: holding meetings in rapid succession and holding them repeatedly not only consumes enormous amounts of officers' and soldiers' time but also affects work efficiency. The content of these several meetings already overlapped in part; condensing each individual meeting into a single agenda item would not affect the overall outcome. The meeting would be led by one Party committee member, with multiple departments jointly preparing materials — troublesome as that might be, it would save time for grassroots units and resolve problems. It was better for the organs to do more "legwork" than to have grassroots units "run back and forth."
"Comrades, as reviewed and approved by the detachment Party committee, I will now begin by reviewing and commenting on the results of the earlier work by organs and grassroots units in building according to the outline…" The work-deployment meeting, delayed twice, opened with a brief introduction by a standing committee member of the detachment.
"A certain company optimized and innovated its duty management methods." "A certain section resolved the employment problem for the family members of five officers and soldiers who had relocated to follow their spouses." "A certain company carried out its duty to maintain order at a scenic area in a strict and orderly manner." … The review was concrete and specific, with named individuals and named events, well-reasoned and well-grounded; problems were identified with sharp precision, and work deployment was clear and unambiguous.
The meeting was compact, but its quality and effectiveness were not diminished. Li Wei, an officer of a certain company, remarked with feeling: "This meeting was substantive and honest. I now have a clear sense of how to carry the next phase of work forward."
"Running a good meeting is only the beginning," said one of the detachment's standing committee members. The detachment Party committee will continue to take the lead in upholding a working attitude of speaking truthfully, doing practical things, and seeking real results (说实话、办实事、求实效), driving the transformation from a "good meeting culture (好会风)" into a "good work style (好作风)," and ensuring that work produces real results and generates combat effectiveness (战斗力).