Characterisation in Learning Design: Making Scenarios Feel Human

Some scenario-based learning looks polished but still feels… empty.

You meet a character named Jordan who says things like:

“Hello, I’m your colleague. Please select the correct response.”

Jordan has no backstory, no tone, no spark. He exists purely to deliver choices.

Now imagine a different version.

Jordan’s been under pressure for weeks, juggling deadlines and short on sleep. His manager’s been on him about a late report, and this morning his inbox is full of new requests. When a teammate casually asks,

“Hey, did you finish that update yet?”,

he snaps:

“You know what, maybe if I wasn’t fixing everyone else’s mistakes, I would’ve!”

The room goes quiet. He realises instantly he’s overreacted, but the damage is done.

In this version, Jordan isn’t a placeholder. He’s human. Learners recognise that moment, the flash of frustration and the regret that follows. The scenario stops being about clicking the right option and becomes about managing emotion, relationships, and recovery.

That’s the difference between flat characters and human ones.

Flat characters deliver information. Human characters make you care. And caring is what makes learning stick.

Reflective question: When was the last time one of your learning characters felt like a real person rather than a name on a slide?

Why Characterisation Matters in Scenario-Based Learning Design

Strong characterisation turns a scenario from an activity into an experience. It creates empathy, emotional engagement, and realism, the conditions where learning transfer actually happens.

When characters have dimension, motives, tone, flaws, and humour, learners recognise them instantly. They think,

“I know someone like that” 

or

“I’ve done that before.”

We once created a character named Jack Tyson, a rural contractor buying farm tools. His quote,

“If it holds up in the back of my ute and cuts clean every time, I’m in”,

made people laugh out loud. Not because it was silly, but because it was authentic. Everyone knew a Jack. His humour, directness, and priorities told a story far richer than any bullet point about buyer segments.

Characterisation makes learning feel grounded in real life. It’s what turns compliance into connection.

Tone, Flaws, and Fit: The Building Blocks of Believable Learning Characters

Great learning characters aren’t perfect. They’re recognisable. They make mistakes, contradict themselves, and reveal personality through tone.

In one eLearning module about alcohol and workplace safety, a character was written with just a touch of humour, admitting he’d been out partying the night before and was now paying for it. The line got a laugh, but it also made the risk relatable. It said,

“This could be you.”

Tone is critical. Humour can lighten a topic or make it more accessible, but it should always fit the learning purpose. A sales scenario might allow for warmth and wit; a safety scenario might use humour sparingly to create realism, not levity.

Flaws are what make characters memorable. A team leader who interrupts too often. A colleague who’s well-meaning but disorganised. These small imperfections turn caricatures into humans and help learners connect.

Reflective question: Do your learning scenarios feature people with real tension and tone, or just polite placeholders guiding the learner to the right answer?

Designing Scenario-Based Learning for Depth Without Distraction

Characterisation doesn’t mean writing a novel inside your course. It’s about depth, not drama.

Good scenario-based learning design adds context, not complexity. Dialogue should sound like real conversation, short, natural, and purposeful. Every line should support a decision, reveal intent, or highlight emotion.

One of the biggest mistakes in learning design is letting story overshadow the skill. The goal isn’t to entertain but to immerse the learner just enough to make the content stick.

Use small cues to add depth:

• A quick line that hints at backstory (“She’s been covering two roles since January.”)

• A habit or phrase that defines personality (“He checks his watch before answering.”)

• A visible consequence that reflects real workplace pressure (“The client’s already waiting on a response.”)

And always test tone. Read the dialogue aloud. If it sounds like something a real person would say, you’re on the right track. If it sounds like a training manual, keep refining.

Reflective question: Are your learning stories helping people feel the problem, or simply telling them what to do?

Matching Character and Tone to Learning Purpose

The idea for this section came from an unexpected place, an aerial silks competition I did with my daughters over the weekend. After we performed, the judges gave us detailed feedback about characterisation: how our movement, expression, and energy needed to fit the mood and story we were trying to tell. It struck me that often learning design fails to do this- the characterisation is flat or inappropriate, too bland or too cheesy.

Every scenario has a story, and that story only works when the tone and characters match the intent.

In learning design, characterisation is never one-size-fits-all. The tone, emotion, and personality of your characters should fit both the topic and the learner’s world.

Serious or sensitive learning content needs characters who show emotional realism.

Imagine Tanya, a team leader worried about a colleague who’s withdrawn after a personal loss. She doesn’t need to cry on screen or deliver a speech. She just needs believable emotion: concern in her words, hesitation in her tone, a sense of care. In a suicide prevention or wellbeing module, that quiet authenticity connects learners far more than scripted sympathy ever could.

Compliance learning benefits from characters who make the rules feel human and real.

Take Ethan, a machinery operator who spent the night out celebrating a friend’s bucks party. The next morning, his crew is called in for a random blood alcohol test before starting their shift. He laughs it off at first, until he remembers that operating heavy equipment with any trace of alcohol in his system is a dismissible offence. It’s not slapstick or overblown; it’s everyday, plausible, and personal. The risk feels real because the situation could happen in any workplace.

Skills-based learning works best with characters who mirror everyday relationships.

Think Leila, a new team leader preparing to give feedback to Dave, a long-time employee who trained her when she first joined. Dave’s methodical approach is reliable but slow. The newer team members are now outpacing him, and doing it with higher quality. Leila respects Dave and knows how much pride he takes in his work, but she also needs to have a difficult conversation about performance and adaptability. It’s a realistic, layered scenario that gives learners a safe space to practise timing, tone, and empathy.

Technical or legislative learning also benefits from grounded characterisation.

Picture Raj, a maintenance supervisor on a night shift. One of the machines in his section has stopped unexpectedly, halting production. He’s under pressure to get it running again, but the restart checklist requires a full lockout and tag verification. He’s tempted to skip it, reasoning that the machine’s only been down for a few minutes. But a voice in his head reminds him of an incident two months earlier, when a contractor was nearly injured doing the same thing. His hesitation, that one moment of internal debate, turns a procedural rule into a human decision.

Another essential principle in learning design is consistency. Every time a new scenario introduces a different name or face, learners have to pause, reset, and re-establish context. That cognitive load wastes time and attention. Using a recurring cast, or at least maintaining consistent tone and setting, helps learners stay focused on the decision, not the setup.

If you do change characters, do it with intent: to shift perspective, show hierarchy, or contrast points of view. Random variation adds noise.

Good characterisation doesn’t make content longer; it makes it sharper. It brings just enough humanity to make the learning believable, and that’s what turns compliance, skills, and technical modules into experiences people actually remember.

Reflective question: Do your learning characters fit the tone and intent of the story you’re telling, or do they change so often that learners never have a chance to connect?

The Art of Subtle Storytelling in Learning Design

In good learning design, characterisation is like seasoning, a little goes a long way. The best scenarios feel effortless because every story element has purpose.

The goal is to make characters real enough that learners forget they’re part of a simulation. To make them care about what happens next, even if the story only lasts five screens.

Because people don’t remember policies, they remember people.

And when learners care about the people in your scenarios, they start caring about the decisions they make.

Final reflective question: How could your next learning experience move people the way a powerful story does - emotive, memorable, and deeply human?