I completely disagree with this assessment. Soft skills may be synonymous in some areas as “corporate protocol” or politics, but it’s really about effective com

I completely disagree with this assessment. Soft skills may be synonymous in some areas as “corporate protocol” or politics, but it’s really about effective communication — and that’s beneficial regardless of what you’re doing or what type of place you work in. >In any software company, if everyone could code, they would, and then they would realize soft skills are just an indirect way to influence what people code without knowing how to. This is completely untrue and is frankly, insulting. It’s not an either/or. You can know how to code or know how to architect a system or do design and also have soft skills. Moreover, the idea that non-coders can only have an indirect influence on what people code seems to be a fairy fundamental misunderstanding about how projects work. Plenty of people can code and don’t — and plenty of people who don’t code don’t have any interest in doing it — still have major roles in software development. Look at Steve Jobs. If anything, the soft skills are what allows a programmer or a program manager or PM or designer or architect to help express the case for any something is coded a certain way or why it isn’t. Being able to explain and communicate design decisions — and to be able to talk through problems and blockers is incredibly important, not just to push or influence a decision, but to solve problems or come up with new innovations.