Here's my one piece of feedback: It's all well and good if you look at places where Scrum has failed, but if you don't look at places where Scrum has succeeded,

Here's my one piece of feedback: It's all well and good if you look at places where Scrum has failed, but if you don't look at places where Scrum has succeeded, and offer an analysis there, the research is meaningless. Currently it feels like you're limiting your scope of research to places where Scrum has failed. Is it any surprise, then, that your research has supported your thesis?