Ah. Well while a refinery is technically in the category of manufacturing, my father wasn't part of the oil refining process itself.
He was initially construction, and later maintenance on—well—all of the pipes.
So the situation wasn't as iterative. It was more, for ex:
* We need a new line for X process.
* Draft plans for new line.
* Receive [unwanted] feedback from fitters familiar with existing lines (having been in and out of them for n years)
* Disparage feedback and double-down on drafted plans
* Fitters implement plans
* Line fails (a number of times this step has nearly cost people their lives)
* Feedback of failure reverts to engineers
* Redraft plans with practical considerations applied
* Fitters implement fixed plans
AFAIU that even somewhat aligns with lean manufacturing—in that they adhered to the designed process according to the authority, and when defects were found they iterated.
I think the main complaint is that the fitters at this point act as almost an extension of the machine itself explaining why something will not work, and the given authority rejected any input at the outset—acting as the old priest caste, if you will.
I worked briefly for Toyota (subman. Toyoda Iron Works) and the process wasn't much different. The stakes were just lower as the parts were smaller, cheaper, and faster to adjust. If I, as an operator, attempted to raise issue with the engineering team I would have been laughed out of the room in the same way. †
† the engineering team had us set every M part aside for inspection 2-3 times a day so they could come check calibration. There was no other direct feedback loop that way from ops.