In a recent LinkedIn Thread, in replying to a post on how Root Cause Analysis relates to Scrum @alshall wrote this:
Simple. You can’t do root cause analysis without an underlying theory as to why things work. This is missing from Scrum. Adding such a theory would be a great benefit to those doing Scrum. Not so much because it would provide for better RCA, but because it would create opportunities to substitute better practices than what Scrum prescribes as their immutable roles, events, artifacts and rules.
But perhaps more importantly, it encourages thinking, not following. Everyone, of course, wants there to be thinking as it relates to creating products. But we also need to think how our approach to that is being improved.
I added the bold emphasis. So that should be a point to ponder! Is Scrum successful because it promotes followers rather than thinkers? And followers are exactly what classical management wants, isn’t it. Is that the real secret of Scrum’s success?