The article was about our annual briefing, a meeting at which we reflect on the previous year's accomplishments (plus any areas where we fell short) and look forward to the coming year.
Of course, the danger is that you play it safe in writing the article, focusing entirely on the positives. However, by mentioning areas where improvement are sought, or where you fell short, you're indirectly referring a areas where things went wrong. Negative points can also be couched in positive diction, the classic example being where 'accidents' become 'incidents'.
The biggest problem with writing up such a meeting is the tendency to fall back on facts and figures that are mentioned in isolation rather than by adding tangible comparisons. Much better that I write something along the lines of: 'Last year our Company's transport mileage was equal to X trips to the moon and back, whilst man hours worked were equal to building Y Great Pyramids.'
Lastly, be careful of acronyms and initialisms. Not everyone reading will know what they mean, so better to say 'there were zero First Aid Cases (FACs)' than just 'there were zero FCAs', whatever they might be!
Anyhow, the point of this piece is...I wrote up a 650-word article the morning after the event, in just over an hour. By doing it so soon after the event (from brief notes and so quickly), I gave the article more vitality and freshness - even if before editing it did say the meeting occurred in 3013!
Below are links to my two Global Short Story Competition winners, my short-listed story for the National newspaper, Abu Dhabi, and my Canterbury Tale published by Coscom Entertainment: