A book I think is crucial is Creativity, Inc. (the Pixar book). The most important piece of its perspective, I think, is the idea that managers can screw things up in a bajillion ways, and that it takes consistent work and focus to create an environment where people WANT to bring up problems, WANT to bring in ideas, and WANT to do their best work.
Another valuable book is Moral Mazes -- it's a tough read, but the takeaway is that managers are almost universally insecure, like INSANELY insecure, because they don't really produce something tangible, they produce the feeling of stability and predictably and (most important) loyalty in THEIR managers, and how the heck do you measure that? They're always one misunderstanding or failure to anticipate a problem or to quell some fussing away from being fired, or shut out of promotion. They exist in a terrifying state of status uncertainty. If they're not careful -- like REALLY, REALLY, affirmatively, pro-actively careful -- they'll create an environment where the people under them, who have front-line knowledge to bring, will suppress problems and avoid difficult conversations because they'll know how upset their manager will get. This can be incredibly costly. A good manager has to be brave, not just for themselves, but for those under them who need bravery to speak up. And that manager needs to go to bat every single time someone under them is right -- even if it costs the manager their job.
Of course, few managers understand this advice or have the slightest spine to stand up for what they (internally think they) believe in. It's much more common to find managers who deal with "the wrong person" under them having a good point (and feeling embarassed, or worried that a superior will feel embarassed) by covering for it by getting angry.
I really liked this -- it's so true about my road to programming (pseudo-) expertise. Almost everything I've been paid to do, I first did on a hobby level, just messing around with my own projects and ideas.
The "what do we do after Scratch" question is tricky! There's no super clear answer (and a big market opportunity!)
It is important for people getting deeper into programming to learn a text-based language. But I do want to say that you don't need to stop using Scratch -- lots of adults use it, and it's really great for many things... e.g., this memory portrait of my mother sewing when I was young https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/646805603
Several comments here have hit on the visual UI as an element of Scratch that other languages don't have as readily.
Another element is the sharable context: you can make a Scratch project with others' enjoyment in mind; your project doesn't have to have another purpose besides being fun to play with.
So for moving on to other programming languages, I think the key is to identify compelling projects and to find (or build) small communities which will use those projects.
E.g.:
* sites like replit and Glitch and Github Pages and val.town where the whole idea is to make a small program (or piece of a program), publish it instantly, share it with others and remix others' programs
* making a choose your own adventure-style or Zork-style text game
* Advent of Code https://adventofcode.com provides a massive multiplayer experience where you know you're solving the same project as thousands of other people
Another valuable book is Moral Mazes -- it's a tough read, but the takeaway is that managers are almost universally insecure, like INSANELY insecure, because they don't really produce something tangible, they produce the feeling of stability and predictably and (most important) loyalty in THEIR managers, and how the heck do you measure that? They're always one misunderstanding or failure to anticipate a problem or to quell some fussing away from being fired, or shut out of promotion. They exist in a terrifying state of status uncertainty. If they're not careful -- like REALLY, REALLY, affirmatively, pro-actively careful -- they'll create an environment where the people under them, who have front-line knowledge to bring, will suppress problems and avoid difficult conversations because they'll know how upset their manager will get. This can be incredibly costly. A good manager has to be brave, not just for themselves, but for those under them who need bravery to speak up. And that manager needs to go to bat every single time someone under them is right -- even if it costs the manager their job.
Of course, few managers understand this advice or have the slightest spine to stand up for what they (internally think they) believe in. It's much more common to find managers who deal with "the wrong person" under them having a good point (and feeling embarassed, or worried that a superior will feel embarassed) by covering for it by getting angry.