This year, North Farm's General Manager Wu Fang-Ming did two things most companies wouldn't dare: in June, he brought three section chiefs into a CSM classroom; in August, he sent all 30 of his senior executives into the same room — a group whose average tenure exceeds 30 years. Taipei Agricultural Products Marketing Co., the 52-year-old company that has kept Taipei's produce supply running for half a century, chose to operate on its own most senior people first. What actually needs to loosen isn't the system. It's the unspoken sentence: "I've done this for 30 years." Is this company ready to speak a different language?

北農總經理吳芳銘今年做了兩件多數企業不敢做的事：6月，先帶3位課長坐進CSM教室；8月，再把30位一級主管全數送進同一間教室——這群主管的平均年資超過30年。臺北農產運銷股份有限公司，一家撐起全台北市果菜供應超過半世紀的52年老公司，選擇先拿自己最資深的一群人開刀。真正要鬆動的，不是制度，是那句沒說出口的「我做了30年」。這家公司，準備好換一種語言說話了嗎？

"That's not my job." Most executives hear that sentence, frown for a second, and move on to the next meeting. Wei-Hsiung Hsieh, General Manager of Taiwan's #1 premium kitchen appliance brand, Shih Lei Industrial, didn't. He locked 18 of his managers in a classroom for two days and personally wrote three case studies pulled straight from his own company's real conflicts. But before those cases ever hit the table, the two days had already given eighteen people one shared language: how to judge what matters, how to prioritize, how to align across departments, and how to turn an idea into a proposal someone else would actually put their name behind. Without that language, hard questions just test who has the thickest skin. With it, the same questions become a real proving ground for judgment. The certification is simply what people walk away with once the two days are over — it was never the point. Who in your organization is still waiting for someone else to speak first?

「這不是我的事。」多數老闆聽到這句話，會皺一下眉，然後繼續開下一個會。世磊實業的總經理謝維雄沒有。他把 18 位主管關進教室兩天，親手出了三道取自公司真實現場的考題——但考題丟出來之前，兩天已經先給了十八個人同一套語言：怎麼判斷、怎麼排序、怎麼對齊、怎麼把想法講成別人敢背書的方案。沒有這套語言，出題只是考膽量；有了它，出題才是訓練判斷力的真實戰場。認證，是兩天結束時自然帶走的副產品，從來不是目的。你的組織，還在等誰先開口？

You can build an exquisite dashboard for your company — monthly reviews, tracked indicators, corrective actions — while your own body remains the one system with no dashboard at all, managed entirely by feel. Thirteen years and twelve methods proved the cost to me: every one worked, every one came back, until I half-believed I was simply the kind of person who gains weight from drinking water. That is not a body type. That is the conclusion a man reaches after being fooled by his own methods for thirteen years. The problem was never willpower. It was that I kept using a sprint to solve a structural problem — every method designed the losing part and skipped the part that matters: how you come back to eating normally. One run through CNFCD: 8.6 kg gone in 91 days, almost all of it fat, and body fat now at 18%. For those three months I was extremely disciplined and followed the consultant's guidance exactly — yet it never once felt like dieting, because everything I ate was food I love: steak, lamb chops, chicken drumsticks, lobster. What changed was not my resolve. It was that I finally let my body's real signals into my decisions.

你可以把公司的儀表板做得極精細，卻讓自己的身體成為那個只靠感覺管理的系統。十三年、十二種方法證明了代價：每次都瘦得下來，每次都胖回去，最後甚至相信自己「喝水也會胖」。那不是體質，是被自己的方法騙了十三年得出的錯誤結論。問題不是意志力不夠，是我一直在用衝刺解決結構問題——所有方法都設計了「怎麼瘦下來」，沒有一套設計「怎麼不再胖回去」。走完 CNFCD 這一輪，91天減8.6公斤、幾乎全是脂肪，體脂率現在18%。這三個月我非常有紀律，完全照顧問的建議執行，卻從沒一刻覺得自己在減肥——因為吃的全是牛排、羊排、雞腿、龍蝦這些我愛的東西。改變的不是決心，是我終於讓身體的真實訊號進入決策。

A man from Taiwan won the only member-elected seat on the Scrum Alliance global board, out of an electorate of 1.5 million. Taiwan holds roughly 3,000 of those votes — two in a thousand. Most people will say: congratulations, a proud moment for Taiwan. Then they move on to the next meeting. But the part worth stopping for is not that I won. It is what I won — a seat that expires on December 31, and a salary I returned in full on day ten. Giving it back is not virtue. Once a position starts feeding you, what you say at that table stops being entirely your own. So here is my question: the last vote you cast in a meeting room — was it for the company, or for your position in it?

一個台灣人，在一百五十萬人的票源基數裡，拿下 Scrum Alliance 全球會員直選的唯一一席董事。台灣大約三千票，佔千分之二。多數人看到會說：台灣之光，恭喜。然後繼續開下一個會。但值得停下來的不是我贏了，是我贏到的東西——一張到十二月三十一日就到期的席次，還有一份我在第十天全數捐回組織的全薪。捐回去不是清高。一個位子只要開始餵養你，你在那張桌子上講的話，就不再完全是你自己的。所以我想問：你上一次在會議室投的那一票，是為了公司，還是為了你在這家公司的位置？