Agile got widespread adoptions because of the micromanagement undertone of it, starting with the daily scrum. It's a slippery slope, way to easy to over do. The risk is it starts something to be gamed/incentivized instead of actual progress.
I would put things differently: micromanagers leveraged the agile and scrum buzzwords to justify and convey an aura of legitimacy to micromanaging.
I mean, how many orgs forced daily meetings where workers are forced to enumerate what they did and delivered in a short time frame, but mysteriously left out the part where a feedback cycle exists to revise plans other than performance evaluation plans?
Agile is very open to attack when it veers from a list of useful practices to try out in a given context and instead turns into dogma.
This is one example how processes supercede people even though that is against the original agile manifesto.
It seems to me, that all these buzzwords and meetings are just a way to always keep you "busy" (or at least looking busy), to always have some kind of fire below your feet so you don't "slack off" (or have a bit of free time to actually gain or sharpen the skills you need for the same company...). I'm just tired of this. In a way, good teams will be good, and bad teams will be bad, doesn't really depend on whatever process they have.
Often it seems that people talk about the 'micromanagement' and 'wasted time' as if they would not enjoy the daily. To me this is a warning, that something within the setup is not right. In general, micromanagement requires hierarchy, but I don't recall from the Scrum Guide [1] that a manager should be present or that directions should be given. So who is managing who?
If done right, there should be absolutely no reason why there should be negative emotions involved: The devs get together and talk about their work and the challenges they want to share. It is about fostering communication.
Because the daily standup can only be X minutes, someone always gets cut off, causing negative emotions.
On the one hand, it is the reason why Scrum is so successful in corporate environments, on the other hand it is also somewhat non-agile. That is why I tend to call Scrum the least agile Agile Methodology and a good starting point for Agile transformations.
Just don't forget to keep moving on as your Retros lead you the way.