I am not easily infuriated, but for a long time, that virtue was tested to breaking limits. The tests came whenever I introduce myself as a – Personal Development Consultant. For the most time, the response was always – “Oh, you are a soft skills trainer?” That irked me to no end!
According to the Wikipedia online dictionary ‘soft skills’ is “The ability to engage and interact effectively with others, obtain acceptance, build consensus, and provide assistance, direction and leadership”. If that were true how dare anyone refer to them as soft skills?’
Soft skills’ presupposes that people can learn the skills easily and quickly. That, by no means is the case with the attitude and behaviours above. Behaviours are so difficult to learn. At least it is for me and I dare say, for the majority of people.
For example, if consensus building was that easy, why is there so much disaffection in the world? Annoyingly, leadership skill is classified as a soft skill; if this were so, how come there are so many ineffective and ineffectual leaders? Why isn’t every leader a Mandela, Awolowo, Churchill, Lincoln, Gandhi or MLK or Nkrumah, Mother Teresa, Queen of Sheba?
Perhaps ‘soft skills’ is so called relative to those other skills i.e. learned academic skills. If this were the case then, at a first glance, it can be argued that the process of learning is the distinguishing factor. For academic programmes, there is a structure and a process of accreditation – certificates et al. I suspect that ‘soft skills’ is so called because it does not attract such rigorous procedure. Being that presumed ‘hard skills’ – medicine, engineering, architecture, performing arts deal with objects and facts; it is easier to learn. For example mathematics is governed by principles and formulae, hence they are easy to master, it is also possible for a surgeon to master his craft, and for an architect to master her trade than for a person to master the art of leading.
On the other hand, ‘soft skills’ deals with attitude, behaviours and interaction with others, therefore it is much difficult to master because you cannot always guarantee that people will behave in set ways all the time. Could it be because people think that ‘soft skills’ can be acquired within a short time that is responsible for this name? For example, is it true that a few courses in leadership skills over a few weeks can make a person a great leader? I don’t think so. Whereas these courses are organised, it is important to factor in that participants on them have a lifetime of leadership references. Seminars and workshops only serve to tie past learning together.
I dare to say that it is better for people to have abundant ‘soft skills’ and no academic skills than the other way round. We have heard or read of people with little of ‘other skills’ i.e. college education, but who managed to create a great life for themselves and thousands of others. Just as we have people with several ‘hard skills’ who are non-entities.
To this end I would like to submit that there are no soft skills, rather there are only hard skills – incredibly difficult to learn. Being that ‘soft skills’ are independent and that ‘hard skills’ require a lot of other skills to be meaningful, I would like to suggest a reversal of names.