TameFlow appears a Moral effort at its root

Which, for me, is a good thing. Work should be “good” work. I am often reminded of Deeming’s saying that any attempt to improve a specific process should be designed to also improve the process for everyone in the company.
As a moral effort, it could probably use some version of rule number one. Part of being a Doctor is, before all else, to do no harm. Judaism has a similar stance, any rule or commandment of behavior can be set aside if it will involve harm to others.
Judaism sometimes extends this to a rule of “not saying bad things about others”…it’s interesting to think about the effect this kind of practice would have in shaping shared mental models. It does not mean that you can’t disagree or oppose, it means that you have to express yourself “within” the mental model you share with the person you are disagreeing with or opposing (and the effort will probably reshape and strengthen the mental model and a side effect).

Might appear so, but there is no moral intent at all in TameFlow. The source of TameFlow was how to make teams and organizations “hyper-productive.” If the pursuit of that then turns out to be a morally viable path, in anyone’s view, then that is a side-effect.