jianmiezhan-jizhong-bingli

"For people, it is better to cut off one finger than to hurt ten; for the enemy, it is better to annihilate one division than to rout ten." — Strategic Issues in China's Revolutionary War (December 1936)

"Concentrating troops seems easy, but it is quite difficult to implement. Everyone knows that using superior forces to defeat inferior ones is the best method, yet many people cannot do it. On the contrary, they often disperse their troops. The reason is that the leaders lack strategic vision, are confused by complex circumstances, thus are dominated by the environment, lose their autonomy, and adopt a coping attitude." — Strategic Issues in China's Revolutionary War (December 1936)

1. It is not ordinary "focus" but forming an "absolute advantage" — concentrating 2-6 times more resources than the opponent in key local areas to ensure a decisive strike.
2. The goal is "annihilation" (complete resolution) rather than "rout" (partial progress). Instead of ranking third in 10 markets, it is better to rank first in 1 market. The third place has no barriers, while the first place has pricing power and ecological effects.
3. Strategically "use one to fight ten" (overall resource disadvantage), tactically "use ten to fight one" (resource advantage in key local areas). The overall situation can be weak, but key local areas must be strong.
4. Why is concentration so difficult? Because "leaders lack strategic vision and are confused by complex circumstances" — every opportunity seems unwilling to give up, every threat seems to need to be addressed, resulting in being led by the environment and losing the initiative.
5. Concentrating troops does not mean giving up other directions — allocate minimal resources to secondary directions to contain the enemy, and concentrate the main force on the sole main attack direction. "At any given time, there should be only one main direction of deployment, not two."
6. After concentration, "wait patiently for the right moment" — do not attack immediately after concentration, but wait for the best opportunity to strike. Mao Zedong waited for several days in the first counter-encirclement campaign and 25 days in the second. It is better to wait than to fight an uncertain battle.

• Problem: At the end of 1930, the Kuomintang launched the first counter-encirclement campaign. The Red Army had far fewer troops than the enemy and faced attacks from multiple enemy routes.
• Method Application: Mao Zedong initially wanted to attack Tan Daoyuan's Division, but the enemy did not leave their favorable positions. He advanced twice and withdrew twice patiently. After waiting a few days, he found Zhang Huizan's Division which was easier to attack, concentrated his troops, and annihilated them in one battle. He preferred to retreat and wait patiently for the right moment.
• Conclusion: Concentrate absolutely superior forces to attack one enemy route instead of dividing troops to resist multiple routes. Waiting patiently for the best opportunity is more important than rushing to act.
• Result: The first four counter-encirclement campaigns all achieved victory by concentrating troops and defeating the enemy one by one.

• Problem: In 1933, the "Left"-leaning line divided the Red Army into two fists to attack two directions simultaneously.
• Method Application (Negative): Disperse the main force into two strategic directions, attempting to win at the same time.
• Conclusion: As a result, one fist was idle and useless, the other was over-fatigued, and neither performed well. "No matter how many troops you have, at any given time, there should be only one main direction of deployment, not two."
• Result: After abandoning the "Two Fists Striking" strategy, the Red Army adopted the strategy of concentrating troops and achieved victory in the counter-encirclement campaign. The fifth counter-encirclement campaign again dispersed troops, leading to the loss of all base areas.

1. Multiple concurrent opportunities with difficulty in trade-off: Multiple customer/market/product opportunities arise at the same time, and resources are insufficient to pursue all. Users may say: "5 good customers came at the same time, which one to pursue" "We want both ToB and ToC" "Should we enter two markets at the same time".
2. Dispersed resources leading to mediocrity across the board: The team is working on several things at the same time but does not do any of them deeply or thoroughly. Users may say: "We did everything but are not good at anything" "The investment in each direction is insufficient".
3. Psychological barrier of fearing abandonment: Rationally knowing to focus but emotionally unwilling to give up any opportunity. Users may say: "We can't let go of this or that" "It's a pity to give up any of them".
4. Competitive scenario of using limited resources to fight stronger opponents: Facing opponents with far more resources than us, we need to find a way to concentrate our forces. Users may say: "The opponent has invested 10 times more resources than us" "How to win with limited resources".
5. Tactical recklessness: Wanting to act immediately after concentrating resources without waiting for the best opportunity. Users may say: "Resources have been concentrated, let's act quickly" "We can't wait any longer".

• vs Contradiction Analysis Method: This skill = how to concentrate resources to fight an annihilation battle (execution level), the latter = how to find the main contradiction (judgment level)
• vs Protracted War Three-Stage Model: This skill = how to fight specific battles (tactical level), the latter = how to plan the overall war (strategic level)
• vs Piano Playing Work Method: This skill emphasizes "concentrating on one point to completely solve the problem", while the latter emphasizes "multi-track coordinated advancement with rhythm"

• List all current opportunities/threats/directions, and evaluate each one: (1) Strategic value (How big is the leverage effect after success?) (2) Win probability (Can we form an absolute advantage with existing resources?) (3) Time window (Is the opportunity permanent or fleeting?)
• Select the one with the highest strategic value and where an absolute advantage can be formed as the main attack direction. Demote other directions to "containment directions" and only allocate maintenance resources.
• Stop point: If multiple "equally important" directions are selected, it means the judgment is not in place. Use the Contradiction Analysis Method to find the real bottleneck — there can only be one real bottleneck.
• Completion standard: Produce a sentence: "The main attack direction is ___, with ___% resource investment. The containment directions are ___, with ___% resource investment. The reason for the choice is ___."

• Concentrate more than 80% of manpower, funds, and attention on the main attack direction. Ensure that an absolute resource advantage over the target (customer/market/problem) is formed in this local area.
• Do not rush to act after concentration — set "trigger conditions": What signal will prompt us to strike with all our strength? (e.g., the target customer sends a clear purchase intention, the competitor makes a major mistake, etc.)
• Continuously collect information and improve preparations during the waiting period.
• Completion standard: Resource allocation is completed, trigger conditions are set, and the preparation checklist is finalized.

• Once the trigger conditions are met, invest all resources without leaving a way out. The goal is "annihilation" — completely win this customer/market/problem, not "give it a try".
• Signs of annihilation: Win a benchmark customer and become its preferred supplier; rank first in a niche market with a significant gap from the second place; completely solve a technical/product problem so that it no longer recurs.
• After successful annihilation, use the results (benchmark cases/market share/experience accumulation) as leverage to accumulate resources for the next main attack direction.
• Completion standard: Produce an "Annihilation Result Report" — "Our main attack target is ___, we invested ___ resources, and the result is ___ (completely resolved/partially resolved/failed). The lessons learned are ___. The suggested next main attack direction is ___."

1. Exploration period/extremely high uncertainty: Concentrating all resources too early when the direction has not been verified is gambling. First use a small force to test and verify, then concentrate resources.
2. Core business that must be maintained across multiple fronts: Some businesses must maintain operation (delivery for core customers, compliance requirements), and cannot let the core business collapse for the sake of concentration.
3. When the opponent is also concentrating: If the opponent also concentrates superior forces on your main attack direction, head-on confrontation is not a good choice — you need to change direction or use guerrilla tactics.

• "Two fists striking"(ce18): The most hidden dispersion — it seems to only split into two routes, but essentially it is still resource dispersion. "Two fists seem aggressive, but in reality one is idle and the other is fatigued."
• Six-way division of troops(ce04): The most extreme dispersion — "full-line resistance" seems heroic, but it is actually military equalitarianism. Fear of losing any position, resulting in losing everything.
• "Resist the enemy outside the country's borders"(ce11): Unwilling to give up any direction — "unwilling to lose part of the land, resulting in losing all land". Kidnapped by sunk costs, dare not make strategic abandonment.
• Impulse of quick victory theory(ce05): Concentrated resources but eager for quick success — "When the situation improves slightly, the sound of strategic decisive battle is blown". Concentration does not mean attacking when you want; waiting is as important as concentration.

• Mao Zedong emphasized concentrating troops, but in some periods he also made mistakes of over-concentration leading to the collapse of other directions (such as the 1947 Northern Shaanxi battlefield). Lesson: The premise of concentration is that "secondary directions can be maintained" — if concentration leads to the collapse of the core business, then concentration is suicide rather than strategy. A balance must be found between "maintaining the core business" and "concentrating for breakthrough".

• Contradiction Analysis Method (composes-with): The Contradiction Analysis Method is a diagnostic tool (finding the main contradiction), while concentrating superior forces is a treatment tool (concentrating resources to solve the main contradiction). A complete chain of "diagnosis → treatment".
• Spark Base Area (contrasts-with): Concentrating troops emphasizes "focusing on one point to completely solve the problem", while base area construction emphasizes "expanding from one point to the whole in a wave-like manner". Focus and expansion need to be flexibly switched according to the stage: use the base area methodology in the expansion period, and use concentrating troops in the assault period.
• Dialectical Balance Framework (contrasts-with): Concentrating troops pursues "absolute focus on a single point" (only do one thing), while dialectical balance pursues "dynamic balance of multiple goals" (do both but adjust the proportion). Use concentrating troops when resources are extremely limited and trade-offs must be made; use dialectical balance when there is room for resource maneuver.
• Strategy-Tactics Dialectics (composes-with): Strategy-Tactics Dialectics explains "why to concentrate troops to launch local attacks" (offense in defense), while concentrating superior forces provides specific operational methods for "how to concentrate". A combination of principles and operations.