> Workgroups in a Japanese factory, for instance, are expected to modify their techniques and tools to improve production

If you go through the Fukushima disaster handling, that doesn't seem to have happened at all. In fact, people seemed to be super inflexible and actions seemed to have a long authorization chain.

The Toyota Production System wasn't actually that free, it expected people to report the changes before they happen and had plenty of opportunities for a manager to step in and stop it. Anyway, I'm not sure how widely it was adopted in Japan, the system famously came from there, but the country isn't famous for applying it.

I feel like it's a totally different scenario. In usual times, you can afford to innovate - trade some risk for potential improvement.

In disasters, you want to follow the established procedure, to minimize risk in an already confusing and unusual situation.