jianmiezhan-jizhong-bingli

R — Original Text (Reading)

"For people, injuring ten of their fingers is not as good as breaking one of their fingers; for the enemy, defeating ten of their divisions is not as good as annihilating one of their divisions." — "Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War" (December 1936)

"Concentrating forces looks easy, but it is quite difficult to carry out. Everyone knows that using more to defeat fewer is the best method, yet many people cannot do it; on the contrary, they often disperse their forces. The reason lies in the fact that the leader lacks a strategic mind, is confused by a complex environment, and is therefore dominated by the environment, loses the ability to act independently, and adopts a policy of merely responding." — "Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War" (December 1936)

I — Methodological Skeleton (Interpretation)

It is not ordinary "focus" but the formation of "absolute superiority" — concentrating 2-6 times the opponent's resources in a key local area to ensure a single strike kills.
The goal is "annihilation" (thorough resolution) rather than "defeat" (partial advance). Rather than being third in 10 markets, it is better to be first in 1 market. Third place has no moat; first place has pricing power and ecosystem effects.
Strategically "one against ten" (overall resource disadvantage), tactically "ten against one" (resource advantage in key local areas). The overall situation may be weak, but the key local area must be strong.
Why is concentration so difficult? Because "the leader lacks a strategic mind and is confused by a complex environment" — every opportunity seems impossible to give up, every threat seems to require a response, and as a result one is led by the environment and loses the initiative.
Concentrating forces is not abandoning other directions — secondary directions use the minimum resources to contain, while the main force is concentrated on the single main direction of attack. "At any one time, there should be only one main direction of use, not two."
After concentrating, one must "act with prudence and wait for the opportune moment" — it is not attacking as soon as one concentrates, but waiting for the best timing to strike. In Mao Zedong's first counter-encirclement campaign, he waited several days; in the second, he waited 25 days. Better to wait than to fight a battle without confidence.

A1 — Application in the Book (Past Application)

Application 1: The first counter-"encirclement" campaign — waiting for the opportune moment and then concentrating to annihilate

Problem: At the end of 1930, the Kuomintang launched the first "encirclement" campaign. The Red Army's forces were far fewer than the enemy's, and they faced attacks from multiple enemy routes.
Use of the method: Mao Zedong first wanted to attack Tan Daoyuan's unit, but the enemy did not leave its favorable position, so he advanced twice and patiently withdrew twice. After waiting several days, he found Zhang Huizan's unit, which was easier to attack, concentrated his forces, and annihilated it in one battle. Better to retreat and yield than to act rashly; act with prudence and wait for the opportune moment.
Conclusion: Concentrate absolutely superior forces to attack one route of the enemy, rather than dividing forces to resist each route. Patiently waiting for the best opportunity to fight is more important than rushing to strike.
Result: The first four counter-"encirclement" campaigns all achieved victory by concentrating forces and defeating the enemy one by one.

Application 2: The negative lesson of "striking with two fists"

Problem: In 1933, the "Left" deviationist line divided the Red Army into two fists striking simultaneously in two directions.
Use of the method(negative): Dispersing the main force into two strategic directions in an attempt to seek victory simultaneously.
Conclusion: The result is one fist left idle and useless, one fist overworked and exhausted, and neither fight is fought well. "No matter how many troops one has, at any given time there should be only one main direction of use, not two."
Result: After abandoning "fighting with two fists," adopting the strategy of concentrating forces achieved victory in the counter-"encirclement and suppression" campaign. In the fifth counter-"encirclement and suppression" campaign, dispersing forces again led to the loss of all base areas.

A2 — Trigger Scenarios (Future Trigger)

Multiple opportunities arise concurrently and cannot be chosen among: Multiple customer/market/product opportunities appear at the same time, and resources are insufficient to do them all. Users will say: "Five good customers came at once, which one do I pursue?" "We want both ToB and ToC." "Should we enter two markets at the same time?"
Resources are dispersed and everything is mediocre across the board: The team is doing several things at the same time, but each is done without depth or thoroughness. Users will say: "We did everything but are not good at anything." "Investment in every direction is insufficient."
Psychological barrier of fear of giving up: Rationally one knows to focus, but emotionally one is unwilling to give up any opportunity. Users will say: "I can't lose this one, and I can't let go of that one either." "Giving up any one of them feels like a pity."
Competitive scenario of using the small to defeat the large: Facing an opponent with far more resources than oneself, one needs to find a way to concentrate strength. Users will say: "The opponent invests 10 times the resources we do." "How can we win with limited resources?"
Tactical rash advance: As soon as one concentrates, one wants to act immediately without waiting for the best timing. Users will say: "The resources are already concentrated, let's act quickly." "We can't wait any longer."

Language signals: When users mention words such as "trade-off," "focus," "concentration," "all in," "dispersion," "doing everything," "hard to choose," "too many opportunities," etc., this skill should be activated.

Distinguish from adjacent skills：

vs Contradiction Analysis Method: this skill = how to concentrate resources to fight a war of annihilation (execution level), the latter = how to find the principal contradiction (judgment level)
vs Three-Stage Model of Protracted War: this skill = how to fight a specific campaign (tactical level), the latter = how to plan the overall war (strategic level)
vs Piano-Playing Work Method: this skill emphasizes "concentrate on one point and solve it thoroughly," while the latter emphasizes "advance on multiple lines in a coordinated and rhythmic way"

E — Executable Steps (Execution)

Step 1: Identify the main direction of attack

List all current opportunities/threats/directions and evaluate each one by one: (1) Strategic value (how great is the leverage effect after success?) (2) Chances of winning (can existing resources form an absolute advantage?) (3) Time window (is the opportunity permanent or fleeting?)
Select the one with the highest strategic value and the ability to form an absolute advantage as the main direction of attack. Downgrade other directions to "containment directions," allocating only maintenance resources.
Stop criterion: If multiple "equally important" directions are selected, it means the judgment is not yet in place. Use the Contradiction Analysis Method to find the true bottleneck—there can be only one true bottleneck.
Completion standard: Produce one sentence: "The main direction of attack is ___, investing ___% of resources. The containment direction is ___, investing ___% of resources. The reason for the choice is ___."

Step 2: Concentrate resources and wait for the timing

Concentrate more than 80% of manpower, capital, and attention on the main direction of attack. Ensure that in that local area an absolute resource advantage is formed over the target (customer/market/problem).
After concentrating, do not rush to act—set "action conditions": when what signal appears do we strike with full force? (e.g., a target customer expresses a clear purchasing intent, a competitor makes a major mistake, etc.)
During the waiting period, continuously gather information and improve preparations.
Completion criteria: Resource allocation is complete, action conditions are set, and the preparation checklist is fully listed.

Step 3: Annihilation-style execution

Once the action conditions are met, commit fully with no fallback. The goal is "annihilation"—completely taking this customer/market/problem, not "giving it a try."
Signs of annihilation: winning a benchmark customer and becoming its preferred supplier; reaching first place in a niche market with an obvious gap over second place; completely solving a technical/product problem so it no longer recurs.
After successful annihilation, use the results (benchmark case/market share/accumulated experience) as leverage to accumulate resources for the next main direction.
Completion criteria: Produce an "Annihilation Results Report"—"Our main target was ___, we invested ___ resources, and the result was ___ (fully solved/partially solved/failed). The lesson learned is ___. The suggested next main direction is ___."

B — Boundary

Scenarios not to use

Exploration period/extremely high uncertainty: When the direction has not yet been validated, concentrating all resources too early is gambling. First use a small force for trial and error, then concentrate after validation.
The base that must be maintained on multiple fronts: Some businesses must keep operating (delivery to core customers, compliance requirements); the base cannot be allowed to collapse just for the sake of concentration.
When the opponent is also concentrating: If the opponent has likewise concentrated superior forces against your main direction, head-on confrontation is not a good choice—you need to change direction or switch to guerrilla tactics.

Failure modes (from counterexamples)

"Striking with two fists" (ce18): The most hidden form of dispersion—it looks like only two routes are split, but in essence resources are still dispersed. "The two fists appear enterprising, but in reality one is idle and one is exhausted."
Six-way troop division (ce04): The most extreme dispersion—"defending the entire line" looks heroic, but is actually military egalitarianism. Fearing the loss of any position, one loses them all.
"Defending the enemy outside the national gates" (ce11): Unwilling to give up any direction—"unwilling to lose part of the land, one loses all the land." Held hostage by sunk costs, one dares not make strategic abandonment.
Quick-victory impulse (ce05): Resources have been concentrated but one is eager for quick success—"as soon as the situation improves slightly, the clamor for strategic decisive battle is raised." Concentration does not mean striking when the time comes; waiting and concentration are equally important.

Author's blind spot

Mao Zedong emphasized concentrating forces, but in certain periods he also made the mistake of over-concentration leading to the collapse of other directions (such as the northern Shaanxi battlefield in 1947). Lesson: the premise of concentration is that "secondary directions can be maintained"—if concentration causes the base to collapse, then concentration is suicide rather than strategy. A balance must be found between "maintaining the base" and "concentrating for breakthrough."

Related skills

Contradiction analysis method (composes-with): The contradiction analysis method is a diagnostic tool (finding the principal contradiction), and concentrating superior forces is a treatment tool (concentrating resources to resolve the principal contradiction). The complete chain of "diagnosis → treatment."
A single spark can start a prairie fire base area (contrasts-with): Concentrating forces emphasizes "focusing on one point to resolve it thoroughly," while base area construction emphasizes "expanding in waves from one point to the whole." Focusing and expanding need to be flexibly switched according to the phase: use the base area methodology during expansion phases, and concentrate forces during breakthrough phases.
Dialectical balance framework (contrasts-with): Concentrating forces pursues "absolute focus on a single point" (doing only one), while dialectical balance pursues "dynamic balancing of multiple objectives" (doing both but adjusting the proportions). When resources are extremely limited and a choice must be made, use concentration of forces; when resources allow room for maneuver, use dialectical balance.
Strategic-tactical dialectics (composes-with): Strategic-tactical dialectics explains "why one should concentrate forces for local offensives" (offense within defense), while concentrating superior forces provides the specific operational method for "how to concentrate." The coordination of principle and operation.