When declining birthrates and AI are simultaneously rewriting the rules of the education industry, the real risk isn’t a shrinking market—it’s companies still using old decision-making models to navigate a new world.

A few weeks ago, I shared on my blog that all 27 core executives of Nani Publishing, including the chairman and two vice presidents, completed CSPO training together.

This signifies one thing: a 70-year-old publisher is beginning to view the education industry through a product-thinking lens. But product thinking is only the first step. The real question is: once a product direction is defined, how does the team work together effectively?

That’s why Nani has taken the next step. The 27 core executives—from the chairman and two vice presidents to the Scrum Team—completed CSM training together.

This isn’t just a class. It’s a key first step in a 360° learning program to start building a shared organizational language.

當少子化與 AI 同時改寫教育產業規則時，真正的風險不是市場萎縮，而是企業仍用舊的決策模式面對新的世界。
幾週前，我在部落格分享南一 27 位核心主管含董事長及兩位副總經理一起完成 CSPO 培訓。
那代表一件事：一家 70 年的出版社，開始用產品思維重新看待教育產業。但產品思維只是第一步，真正的問題是：產品方向確定後，團隊如何一起運作？
因此南一再次展開第二個動作。27 位核心主管從董事長、兩位副總經理到Scrum Team與 一起完成 CSM 培訓。
這不是一堂課。而是學習 360 計畫開始建立共同組織語言的關鍵一步。

Many senior executives have experienced the same frustration: the strategy is clear, the market direction is visible, the organization has capable people—yet progress still stalls. Meetings are frequent, but real alignment is rare. Departments appear to collaborate, but beneath the surface they are often pulling in different directions. The issue is usually not execution alone; it is that the organization lacks the ability to think together.

This realization has become increasingly clear to me in recent years. If *The Fifth Discipline* describes the capability framework for building a learning organization, then in real companies, the element that actually enables these capabilities to function is a rarely discussed one—**facilitation**. It is not simply a technique for running activities; it is the capability that allows honest conversations to surface, makes mental models visible, and helps teams reach higher-quality collective judgments.

In the age of AI, this becomes even more important. As analysis and execution are increasingly handled by machines, the truly scarce human capability is collective judgment and shared learning. That is precisely why I have committed myself so strongly to CAF. The most competitive leaders of the future will not be those who give the best commands, but those who can design how people think together.

很多高階主管都經歷過同一種痛：策略明明清楚，市場方向也看到了，人才也不差，但事情就是推不動。會議很多，真正的共識卻很少；跨部門看起來在合作，實際上卻在彼此拉扯。問題往往不只是執行，而是組織沒有能力一起思考。這也是我近年越來越深的體會：如果說《第五項修練》描述的是建構學習型組織的能力架構，那麼在真實企業裡，真正讓這些能力運作起來的，其實是一套很少被討論的能力——引導（Facilitation）。它不是帶活動的技巧，而是一種讓真話浮現、讓心智模式被看見、讓團隊形成高品質判斷的關鍵能力。尤其到了 AI 時代，當分析與執行越來越能被機器接手，人類真正稀缺的，反而是集體判斷與共同學習的能力。這也是我為什麼如此堅定投入 CAF：因為未來最有競爭力的領導者，不只是最會下指令的人，而是最能設計集體思考的人。

As declining birthrates and AI simultaneously rewrite the rules of the industry, the real risk isn’t falling revenue—it’s leadership teams still operating with an annual budget mindset and long, rigid planning cycles. At Nani Publishing, the chairman personally led 27 core executives through CSPO training. The goal wasn’t to collect certifications, but to rebuild the language of executive decision-making.

In just three months, the organization shifted from one-shot, waterfall-style development to an MVP-driven, iterative approach. For the first time, product priorities were ranked by data rather than seniority, and decision cycles for key initiatives became noticeably shorter. When market uncertainty rises, speed of decision-making becomes a competitive advantage.

If you’re still on the sidelines watching digital transformation unfold, the real question isn’t whether to adopt new tools. It’s whether your leadership team is ready to think like product owners—and take responsibility for the next three years of revenue structure and platform advantage.
(This success case has been publicly shared with the consent of the Chairman.)

當少子化與AI同時改寫產業規則，真正的風險不是營收下滑，而是決策思維仍停留在年度預算與長週期規劃。南一書局由董事長親自帶領27位核心主管共學CSPO，目的不是拿證照，而是重建高階決策語言。

三個月內，他們從一次到位的瀑布式開發，轉向MVP小步迭代，產品優先順序首次以數據而非資歷排序，關鍵專案決策週期明顯縮短。當市場不確定性升高，決策速度就是競爭力。

如果你還在觀望轉型，真正該問的不是要不要導入工具，而是決策層是否準備好用產品思維，為未來三年的營收結構與平台優勢負責。
(本成功案例經董事長同意公開)

What truly holds organizations back has never been a lack of agile methods. The real issue is this: in uncertain situations, who is willing to make the call—and own the consequences?

RSG Taipei 2026 isn’t a forum for learning the next new tool. It’s a closed-door dialogue designed for leaders—a space to explore how to make decisions, build alignment, and lead a team through to the finish line in an era with no standard answers.

The event is part of the Scrum Alliance RSG initiative. I’m hosting it in my role as Taiwan’s International Scrum Ambassador, with tangible support from 18 senior leaders across industries as “Givers.” This isn’t sponsorship for brand exposure—it’s shared ownership of a conversation they believe matters.

We’re operating RSG as a real-world agile product: align on vision and value first, then validate impact through real dialogue. That’s why participation is referral-based, with no public ticket sales, and a strict cap of 150 seats—reserved for leaders who are willing to take responsibility for decisions and outcomes in high uncertainty.

For executives who have been through CSM/CSPO—or who come from a PMP background—this is the conversation that moves agility beyond methods and into the levels of responsibility, influence, and governance.

企業真正卡住的，從來不是敏捷方法不夠，而是在不確定的情境下，誰願意承擔判斷、承擔後果。

RSG Taipei 2026，並非教新工具的論壇，而是一場專為管理者設計的閉門對話：在沒有標準答案的時代，如何做決策、聚合共識，並帶隊走完全程。

本活動由Scrum Alliance所發起，我以台灣國際 Scrum 大使名義承接，並獲 18 位跨產業企業高層以「Giver」身份實質支持——不是贊助曝光，而是對這場對話價值的共同承擔。

RSG 以「真實世界的敏捷產品」來經營：先對齊願景與價值，再透過實際對話驗證影響力。因此採推薦制、不售票，限額 150 席，只邀請願意在高度不確定中，為決策與結果負責的管理者。

對曾走過 CSM／CSPO、或具 PMP 背景的主管而言，這是一場把敏捷從方法，推進到責任、影響力與治理層次的關鍵對話。

If Scrum makes sense, why do so many organizations still feel stuck?

Scrum hasn’t failed.
In fact, many leaders understand the framework well.
What often holds organizations back is something more subtle: where leaders choose to stand during critical conversations.

Over the past three years, I’ve supported nearly 400 CEOs through their CSM and CSPO journeys. I’ve seen how clearly leaders can grasp the language and structure of agility — and yet still experience a familiar frustration: meetings run smoothly, alignment seems present, but execution continues to hit invisible walls.

This isn’t a failure of Scrum or Agile frameworks.
It’s a signal that understanding the blueprint is only part of the journey.

Through learning deeply from global facilitation mentors — including Srdjan Pavlovic, Anu Smalley, and Kate Megaw — I came to recognize a deeper constraint that many mature organizations face: the quality of conversations during execution. As complexity increases, decisions become harder, tensions surface, and responsibility quietly drifts — not because people don’t care, but because leaders lack a shared way of holding those moments well.

This is where Agile Facilitation becomes critical.

Certified Agile Facilitator (CAF) focuses on how leaders create the conditions for teams to think together, decide together, and take shared ownership. It shifts leadership from directing outcomes to enabling responsibility — especially in complex, high-stakes situations.

This reflection is for leaders who have moved beyond Agile 101, yet sense that “we should be further along by now.”
Not because the framework is broken — but because the next stage of growth requires a different leadership stance.

If you already understand agility, this is the next step — from knowing Agile to making it work, consistently.

如果 Scrum 明明合理，為什麼這麼多組織仍然感覺卡住、動不起來？

Scrum 並沒有失敗。
事實上，許多領導者對這個框架理解得相當清楚。
真正讓組織停滯的，往往是一個更細微、卻更關鍵的因素：
在關鍵對話中，領導者選擇「站在什麼位置」。

過去三年，我陪伴將近 400 位 CEO 走過 CSM 與 CSPO 的學習旅程。我親眼看見，許多領導者能清楚掌握敏捷的語言與結構，卻仍反覆遭遇一種熟悉的挫折感：
會議進行得很順、表面看起來也有共識，但執行階段卻一再撞上看不見的牆。

這並不是 Scrum 或敏捷框架的問題。
而是一個訊號，提醒我們：理解藍圖，只是旅程的一部分。

在向多位國際引導導師深入學習的過程中——包括 Srdjan Pavlovic、Anu Smalley 與 Kate Megaw——我逐漸看清許多成熟組織共同面對的一個深層限制：執行過程中對話的品質。
隨著複雜度提高，決策變得更困難、張力開始浮現，而責任也悄悄地被稀釋。這並不是因為人們不在乎，而是因為領導者缺乏一套「能好好承接這些時刻」的共同方式。

也正是在這裡，敏捷引導（Agile Facilitation）變得關鍵。

Certified Agile Facilitator（CAF）關注的，不是教領導者如何給出答案，而是如何創造條件，讓團隊能一起思考、一起決策，並對結果共同承擔責任。它讓領導力從「指揮結果」，轉向「促成責任」，特別是在高不確定性與高風險的情境中。

這篇反思，寫給那些早已走過 Agile 101，卻仍隱約感覺「我們應該走得更遠了」的領導者。
不是因為框架壞了，而是因為下一個成長階段，需要一種不同的領導站位。

如果你已經理解敏捷，
那麼這會是下一步——
從「知道 Agile」，走向「讓它真正、持續地運作」。