Those of us who love CWPs basically get that it's about beauty, not about truth or goodness.
Those of us who love KenKen and Sudoku don't get it. We think that our passion if it's good for anything might be good for discovering some deep stuff about how nature or society works...this old blog post by me on the possible cosmic meaning of KK is a good specimen of that state of mind...[whoops...can't find it...knew I wrote it but not seeing it in the Value Comp archives...aha...now I see some semiincoherent musings on the managerial significance of the xwing logic used in KK and S on my computer...thought I got those musings sharpened up...maybe it's on my office computer...oh well]
Accordingly...
MetaRex is mellow...MetaKen is a crusader.
MetaRex can readily be part of a v. pleasant and congenial community if he behaves himself...MetaKen not so much.
[my 11811 KK notes
Xwing logic broadly defined is that once a given number is known to appear twice in two rows or columns in a Sudoku or a KenKen, it cannot appear anywhere else in the same rows or columns. The 2 x 2 KenKen below (a modified version of one appearing online (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/crosswords/kenken.html) can be used to illustrate that logic:
4x

2÷ 
2÷ 
4+ 
4x

3+ 
12x 
4+ 
6x

3+ 
12x 
2÷ 
6x

2 
2 
2÷ 
[KenKen rules—The numbers 14 must each appear once in each row and column; further, the adjacent boxes with math signs must be solved. So, for example, the 4+ boxes in the upper right must consist of 3 and 1 since 2 and 2 would mean that there are two 2s in the right column, contrary to KenKen rules.]
One way to solve the puzzle: As noted in the explanation of the rules, the two 4+ boxes must be 3 and 1; therefore the 2÷ boxes at the lower right are 4 and 2. The two 6x boxes in the lower left are 3 and. We now know that there are two 2s in the lower two rows in the 6x and 2÷ boxes. Therefore by Xwing logic, the 2 boxes in the lower row cannot include a 2 and must be 3 and 1. Therefore the bottom left box is 2; the puzzle solves readily from there.
Now, the interesting part for those of us who are science people rather than pure math people: Can the logical principle just applied be mapped onto reality in an interesting way?
The first tack that occurs to me: On the face of it, any math/logic result can be translated into a maximization result with arguable relevance to a manager/planner. The 4 x 4 KenKen suggests a situation in which a manager has to assign four people to two tasks. Suppose the numbers 14 correspond to four employees—let’s say teachers, to pick a line of work I know something about, with the rows and columns corresponding to certain roles they may be assigned.
MGR Lead/ Follow 
AND F 
BIL F 
CAR F 
DAV F 
AND L

Analysis, Detraction 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
BIL L

Analysis, Detraction 
Analytical, Boosting 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
CAR L

Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction

Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
Boosting, Creativity, 
Boosting, Detraction 
DAV L

Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction 
Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction

Analysis, Boosting Creativity, Detraction

Boosting, Detraction

Andrea—analytical and detracting only and as a follower with Bill
Bill—analytical and boosting only
Carol—boosting and creative only
David—boosting and detracting only and as a follower with Carol
Deductions using naked pair and xwing logic—Bill will be boosting; Carol will be creative; David LeadAndrea Follow will be creative; Carol LeadAndrea Follow will be boosting; Carol LeadDavid Follow will be detraction; David will be boosting; puzzle solves from there…