Do I need to sign an individual conversation outline when patrolling?

Access to the personal dialogue outline requires signature. First of all, let's start with their work experience.

Before the conversation, carefully consult the resume of the cadres of the interviewee to understand their hometown, family status, study history, work experience and other basic information. And start with the topics they are familiar with, create a relaxed conversation atmosphere, eliminate strangeness, narrow the distance, dispel their vigilance, and guide them to open their hearts and tell the truth, tell the truth, tell the truth.

The second is to talk about your own vital interests.

Annual assessment, rank promotion, professional title evaluation, salary and treatment are related to the vital interests of cadres and workers. From the "unbalanced" topics such as slow promotion of ranks, unfair evaluation of professional titles and "basic competence" in the annual assessment, we can find out the outstanding problems in the management of the party, the party and the team by the party organizations of the inspected units.

The third is "one-on-one" conversation.

When talking with the person being inspected, whether it is "two-to-one" or "one-to-one" depends on the specific situation. If the task of conversation is heavy, and "one-on-one" conversation can gain the full trust of the interviewee and make the interviewee feel more confidential, with the consent of the group leader, "one-on-one" conversation can be carried out, which is easy to generate benign interaction and trace back to the source.

The fourth is to talk to a person repeatedly.

In individual conversations, some interviewees think fast and often beat each other with a hammer, reflecting the fragmentation and lack of logic in the description of the problem. If asked in real time, it may arouse their attention and silence. In order to find the problem accurately, after talking with it, you can repeatedly ask it for proof and questions. When adopting this method, more people can be invited to "accompany the conversation", so that the inspected unit can't understand the real intention, thus achieving the purpose of protecting the inspected person.

Fifth, many people confirmed this conversation.

This is a relatively concentrated problem, which requires people related to it to prove it in many ways. For example, when visiting a university, some people reported that individual school leaders interfered with the voting results at the evaluation site, so it is not enough to just listen to one side of the story. It is necessary to interview all members of the on-site review committee, let them restore the real situation at that time one by one, and issue original bill records to ensure conclusive evidence.

Sixth, talk about expanding the scope.

In order to more objectively and stereoscopically reflect the whole picture of the party organization of the inspected unit, we can expand the coverage of the conversation, extend the scope of understanding to the places where the inspected object has worked, talk with the old leaders who have left and retired during their term of office, or convene some NPC representatives and CPPCC members to listen to their opinions and suggestions.

Seventh, pay attention to talking with senior leaders.

On the basis of general conversation, adhere to the problem orientation, distinguish categories, decompose and refine, redraft the outline of the conversation, let the top leaders face the problem directly, focus on answering "portraits" and find out the true face and reasons of the problem.

Eighth, the question and answer of party affairs knowledge.

In the course of individual conversations, keeping a close eye on the lack of party building, we can ask some basic knowledge of party discipline and rules that party member cadres should know, such as how much the "three sessions and one lesson" content of party member's rights and obligations includes what the "two studies and one doing" study and education means, and find out the outstanding problems in the construction of grass-roots party organizations by testing the party affairs knowledge of the interviewees.

Ninth, talk about alternatives.

In view of the fact that some interviewees don't attach importance to it, have concerns, are unwilling or afraid to talk about it, we should adjust the outline of the conversation in time, change the way of asking questions, change the content of the conversation from "whether there is" to "what is there", and find clues in the process of explaining and enumerating specific examples.