Learning how we all learn differently

I'm more used to running workshop games and simulations than participating, and the opening session of today's Contactivity knowledge management event was quite a learning experience. The aim of the simulation, led by Martin Laycock, was to take us through the challenges of an organisation upgrading its business support IT system.
We worked in teams making choices on what to do about poor teamwork, management refusal of support, lack of employee commitment and limited levels of commitment. We had cards, counters, calculators and worksheets. Once we had made decisions we could work out whether we were improving the project or not through some simple formulae. Supporting software produced impressive graphs. In the hour and a half available we could only get a taster of the full Cayenne simulation designed by Celemi. It was pretty heavy-duty kit compared with some of the stuff Drew Mackie and I use in our games.
People I talked to agreed that the challenges were realistic - just the sort of thing they had struggled with in real projects. However, I felt uncomfortable about the exercise, and I don't think it was just misplaced professional jealousy. I had the sense that there was a box of 'correct' answers in the background ... a manual for project management that we were being tested on.
As Drew and I tried to emphasise in our recent engagement game, there is seldom a right answer about 'what works' - it depends very much on the context, the purpose of the project, and overwhelmingly the people involved. In the Cayenne simulation I felt there was an over-emphasis on methods and too little scope for creative strategies.
Still, I'm not sure I'm right. Maybe the type of project being simulated doesn't have much room for manoeuvre. Most people seemed to enjoy the exercise and find it useful. Celemi have a strong reputation for careful research in designing their simulations.
Talking at lunch to one of the facilitators who does a lot of work using this type of simulation, I asked how he found people responded. The message I got was that in many organisations people often expect to be talked at - and told what to do. Learning through simulation can be unusually liberating ... but there is still a demand for structure and delivery of 'content'. Conversation and insights from other participants isn't enough.
Conversely I found I learned more from the informal chats I had after the simulation, than from my workbook and worksheets. That reminded me how different we all are in the ways we prefer to communicate and learn.As George Bernard Shaw put it: "Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same."

In future I'll pay more attention to people at my sessions if they say it didn't work for them.
I can't unfortunately make it to tomorrow's conference sessions, where organiser Ed Mitchell has laid on a range of different approaches with knowledge cafe from David Gurteen and open space from Martin Leith. Diversity is all.