7 ms·

You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills

30 points by csdrane 13y ago

jstanley 13y ago
"With the exception of the STEM fields, I would argue that soft skills actually are more important than how smart you are." So you're saying "apart from fields where you have to be smart, it doesn't matter if you're smart"?
- RougeFemme 13y ago
  Or - it matters, just not as much.
- jmduke 13y ago
  What an ironic way of proving the OP's point! (Put another way: this is why so many STEM people get a bad rap.)
- agentultra 13y ago
  I was about to point out the same thing. Except in my experience you still need good soft skills to succeed in STEM-related fields. Pure technical ability and raw intellect will only get you so far. You still have to deal with politicking amongst peers.
- outside1234 13y ago
  its also important in STEM fields. how many executives or open source project leads do you know with no people skills?
- mathattack 13y ago
  Take software development as an example. Half the battle is knowing what needs to be built, half the battle is knowing how to build it. The former aspect takes a lot of people skills. If it's a big project, the latter takes it too. I would guess that building bridges is similar. The best doctors have people skills too. "Bedside manner"
  - RyJones 13y ago
    The third half is being able to explain / budget / justify / sell your approach. That might be subsumed in your second half, not sure.
    - mathattack 13y ago
      It wasn't, but it should have been.
sieisteinmodel 13y ago
Makes it sound as if those things were mutually exclusive. They are not. I don't like the attitude of this article. Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness. This might not appear in a job interview (although good interviewers will notice), but it definately will later on. Thus: also read books.
- Aardwolf 13y ago
  In other words: Being smart is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition. And so is soft skills.
- AtlanteanTec 13y ago
  I think this article is trying to say "Dont just read books". Not that the soft skills and book smarts need to be mutually exclusive. It just that with the current traditional way of teaching, there is a lot more emphasis on book smarts, good grades and other academia than there is about teaching "street smarts". I completely agree that good soft skills or "street smarts" are no substitute for actual knowledge but sharp soft skills tend to land more interviews than being smart (Natural networking and all). Ultimately though, I agree with you. Soft skills and "book smarts" shouldnt be mutually exclusive.
- mcherm 13y ago
  > Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness. Sure they will. I work with quite a few people who have been very successful in their careers on the basis of their soft skills, and who are (how do I put this) "not notably smart" in classical book-learning skills.
- gadders 13y ago
  > Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness Ish. So for instance you can't be a complete fool, but if you hire people that are smarter than you are, and get them to work together as a team then soft skills can compensate for lack of smartness. Obviously, to do this you need to have a realistic view of your own limitations. Dunning-Kruger sufferers need not apply.
AtlanteanTec 13y ago
Thank you for this post. This actually resonated with me personally, because I felt like you were describing me in high school. I knew I was smart, I could ace tests easily without studying - and I didnt see the point in trying. And like you have said, I did not know anything about soft skills. No one ever talks about things like this. I feel like there is a disparity between the curriculum in schools and the skills necessary to be prepared for "the real world" and by-in-large a lot of this knowledge is just assumed. Everything from learning HOW to study (and not just what you need to study to pass tests) to real world "skills" like balancing a budget. But hey, if you've taken the mandatory economics class, you know what bear and bull markets are so you should be set for life. Ah, but I digress. Anyway, I for one, would love to read this your book. However, I cant see very many teenagers looking in the self-help section to pick up a book that will help them. While I completely agree that teenagers need to be made aware of, what I would call, "life lessons", a self help book might not be the best approach to getting the material out there.
- stg 13y ago
  Sorry for the diversion, but what is/was it like to be able to ace a test without really studying for it? The only emotion I can ever recall feeling when staring down at an exam is abject fear as every fact I knew drained out of my head. I was always a relatively bright kid, but never super smart. When I worked hard, I got top grades and when I slacked, I didn't. At some point I stopped working hard and drifted through education, getting a mediocre degree on the way (on the upside, I have great soft skills). From discussions with other gifted people, I get the impression that most of them worked really, really hard, even if they didn't realise it. But I have heard the odd person who maintains it all came naturally. Is this you?
  - adeaver 13y ago
    > Sorry for the diversion, but what is/was it like to be able to ace a test without really studying for it? Fairly anti-climatic. For someone that it comes easy too there is no real emotion or sense of accomplishment. It would be like trying to explain the color green to someone that was born blind.
seanccox 13y ago
If the thesis is, 'people need soft skills to get and succeed at their jobs', then wouldn't the article serve that thesis by articulating how one could obtain those skills? Instead, we have a citation of Kanye West, and as a result, the tone of the article is fairly anti-intellectual. For high school students looking to develop soft skills: http://bit.ly/1b60sBm http://bit.ly/1b60sBm http://bit.ly/13Rjiay http://bit.ly/13Rjiay http://abt.cm/14nWouk http://abt.cm/14nWouk
- gadders 13y ago
  Also "How to Win Friends and Influence People" and: http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/6-habits-of-remarkably-likeable-people-185252090.html http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/6-habits-of-remarkabl...
UK-Al05 13y ago
The word "Soft Skill" is so undefinable, it is often used to attack people you simply don't like.
candybar 13y ago
The problem with articles like this is that it inspires precisely the wrong reaction. The best way to develop "soft skills" of the sort that matter is to stop caring about developing "soft skills" and to be genuine and be in touch with who they are internally. Don't worry about presenting yourself - care about who you are inside and seek to present it genuinely. Social fluence comes naturally when you stop pretending.
- RougeFemme 13y ago
  Well. . .depends on what you include in "soft skills". The approach you describe works for some soft skills, but not all. For example, I don't think you can really be taught to be naturally empathetic. Some people may seem more empathetic because they are better at reading people, etc. But I don't think you can teach empathy. You can teach some skills that fall under the umbrella of communication - and I would call them soft skills. Effective facilitation of discussions. . .recognizing when you need to re-word what you're saying on the fly - and then doing it. . .looking for the value in differing opinions/approaches,even if you don't always find it. . .those are soft skills. Some people are naturally good in those areas; others need to be taught. Some may never be "good" or "best", but they can improve.
contrarain 13y ago
I found the quoted verse at the top so wrong, I had to create a throwaway to comment. You're so smart, you're studying, you're 52, and when you die, you'll have nothing to clutch in your grave but your degrees. Being 52 and in school is fucking awesome. You're old, you're not doing it because it's making you money. You're doing it for the pursuit of knowledge. You're doing it to learn from the fruits of labor of all that have come before you. You might make another discovery. You might not. But at this point, uncovering new things for its own sake is just fucking awesome. But, says Kanye, but, says the rich and famous role model of yours: I'm smooth, I hustle, and when I die, I'm hugging my platinums in my grave. Maybe I'll even have a statue of me on my tombstone. Maybe there's a subtext that I'm not getting. Maybe this is an alcoholic 52 year old who decided on a whim that he's gonna get smarter and somehow that's going to make him rich, and that's what West is talking about. But that's not what you're quoting. What you're quoting is a reflecting of your acknowledgement of that belief. You're smart. Soft skills are important. Know what, I'm smart too, and I have soft skills, and I find the mentality conveyed in those verses pure, culture-destroying toxic. Maybe you're after hustle... But hustle is not "soft skills".
thatswrong0 13y ago
> The number one way to ace an interview is to get the other person to like you. Anecdotal evidence: I'm a college student and got my software engineering internship this summer because, according to the recruiter, I was better at communicating and more personable than the other candidates. Among people in my major (CS), I would say I'm pretty average in terms of intellect, so I actively work at these sorts of 'soft' skills to give myself some advantage.
ekm2 13y ago
Most people who ace tests without studying are usually just good auditory learners.In a school situation where classroom attendance is mandatory,they excel because it hones their style.Visual learners,the bookworms on the other hand ,endure the classes until after school when they can start taking in knowledge the best way they know how:by reading. The first group always assumes they are smarter, which is not necessarily true.High IQ people belong to both groups.

30 points by csdrane 13y ago

"With the exception of the STEM fields, I would argue that soft skills actually are more important than how smart you are." So you're saying "apart from fields where you have to be smart, it doesn't matter if you're smart"?

RougeFemme 13y ago
Or - it matters, just not as much.
jmduke 13y ago
What an ironic way of proving the OP's point! (Put another way: this is why so many STEM people get a bad rap.)
agentultra 13y ago
I was about to point out the same thing. Except in my experience you still need good soft skills to succeed in STEM-related fields. Pure technical ability and raw intellect will only get you so far. You still have to deal with politicking amongst peers.
outside1234 13y ago
its also important in STEM fields. how many executives or open source project leads do you know with no people skills?
mathattack 13y ago
Take software development as an example. Half the battle is knowing what needs to be built, half the battle is knowing how to build it. The former aspect takes a lot of people skills. If it's a big project, the latter takes it too. I would guess that building bridges is similar. The best doctors have people skills too. "Bedside manner"
- RyJones 13y ago
  The third half is being able to explain / budget / justify / sell your approach. That might be subsumed in your second half, not sure.
  - mathattack 13y ago
    It wasn't, but it should have been.

sieisteinmodel 13y ago

Makes it sound as if those things were mutually exclusive. They are not. I don't like the attitude of this article. Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness. This might not appear in a job interview (although good interviewers will notice), but it definately will later on. Thus: also read books.

Aardwolf 13y ago
In other words: Being smart is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition. And so is soft skills.
AtlanteanTec 13y ago
I think this article is trying to say "Dont just read books". Not that the soft skills and book smarts need to be mutually exclusive. It just that with the current traditional way of teaching, there is a lot more emphasis on book smarts, good grades and other academia than there is about teaching "street smarts". I completely agree that good soft skills or "street smarts" are no substitute for actual knowledge but sharp soft skills tend to land more interviews than being smart (Natural networking and all). Ultimately though, I agree with you. Soft skills and "book smarts" shouldnt be mutually exclusive.
mcherm 13y ago
> Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness. Sure they will. I work with quite a few people who have been very successful in their careers on the basis of their soft skills, and who are (how do I put this) "not notably smart" in classical book-learning skills.
gadders 13y ago
> Good soft skills will not compensate lack of smartness Ish. So for instance you can't be a complete fool, but if you hire people that are smarter than you are, and get them to work together as a team then soft skills can compensate for lack of smartness. Obviously, to do this you need to have a realistic view of your own limitations. Dunning-Kruger sufferers need not apply.

AtlanteanTec 13y ago

Thank you for this post. This actually resonated with me personally, because I felt like you were describing me in high school. I knew I was smart, I could ace tests easily without studying - and I didnt see the point in trying. And like you have said, I did not know anything about soft skills. No one ever talks about things like this. I feel like there is a disparity between the curriculum in schools and the skills necessary to be prepared for "the real world" and by-in-large a lot of this knowledge is just assumed. Everything from learning HOW to study (and not just what you need to study to pass tests) to real world "skills" like balancing a budget. But hey, if you've taken the mandatory economics class, you know what bear and bull markets are so you should be set for life. Ah, but I digress. Anyway, I for one, would love to read this your book. However, I cant see very many teenagers looking in the self-help section to pick up a book that will help them. While I completely agree that teenagers need to be made aware of, what I would call, "life lessons", a self help book might not be the best approach to getting the material out there.

stg 13y ago
Sorry for the diversion, but what is/was it like to be able to ace a test without really studying for it? The only emotion I can ever recall feeling when staring down at an exam is abject fear as every fact I knew drained out of my head. I was always a relatively bright kid, but never super smart. When I worked hard, I got top grades and when I slacked, I didn't. At some point I stopped working hard and drifted through education, getting a mediocre degree on the way (on the upside, I have great soft skills). From discussions with other gifted people, I get the impression that most of them worked really, really hard, even if they didn't realise it. But I have heard the odd person who maintains it all came naturally. Is this you?
- adeaver 13y ago
  > Sorry for the diversion, but what is/was it like to be able to ace a test without really studying for it? Fairly anti-climatic. For someone that it comes easy too there is no real emotion or sense of accomplishment. It would be like trying to explain the color green to someone that was born blind.

seanccox 13y ago

If the thesis is, 'people need soft skills to get and succeed at their jobs', then wouldn't the article serve that thesis by articulating how one could obtain those skills? Instead, we have a citation of Kanye West, and as a result, the tone of the article is fairly anti-intellectual. For high school students looking to develop soft skills: http://bit.ly/1b60sBm http://bit.ly/1b60sBm http://bit.ly/13Rjiay http://bit.ly/13Rjiay http://abt.cm/14nWouk http://abt.cm/14nWouk

gadders 13y ago
Also "How to Win Friends and Influence People" and: http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/6-habits-of-remarkably-likeable-people-185252090.html http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/6-habits-of-remarkabl...

UK-Al05 13y ago

The word "Soft Skill" is so undefinable, it is often used to attack people you simply don't like.

candybar 13y ago

The problem with articles like this is that it inspires precisely the wrong reaction. The best way to develop "soft skills" of the sort that matter is to stop caring about developing "soft skills" and to be genuine and be in touch with who they are internally. Don't worry about presenting yourself - care about who you are inside and seek to present it genuinely. Social fluence comes naturally when you stop pretending.

RougeFemme 13y ago
Well. . .depends on what you include in "soft skills". The approach you describe works for some soft skills, but not all. For example, I don't think you can really be taught to be naturally empathetic. Some people may seem more empathetic because they are better at reading people, etc. But I don't think you can teach empathy. You can teach some skills that fall under the umbrella of communication - and I would call them soft skills. Effective facilitation of discussions. . .recognizing when you need to re-word what you're saying on the fly - and then doing it. . .looking for the value in differing opinions/approaches,even if you don't always find it. . .those are soft skills. Some people are naturally good in those areas; others need to be taught. Some may never be "good" or "best", but they can improve.

contrarain 13y ago

I found the quoted verse at the top so wrong, I had to create a throwaway to comment. You're so smart, you're studying, you're 52, and when you die, you'll have nothing to clutch in your grave but your degrees. Being 52 and in school is fucking awesome. You're old, you're not doing it because it's making you money. You're doing it for the pursuit of knowledge. You're doing it to learn from the fruits of labor of all that have come before you. You might make another discovery. You might not. But at this point, uncovering new things for its own sake is just fucking awesome. But, says Kanye, but, says the rich and famous role model of yours: I'm smooth, I hustle, and when I die, I'm hugging my platinums in my grave. Maybe I'll even have a statue of me on my tombstone. Maybe there's a subtext that I'm not getting. Maybe this is an alcoholic 52 year old who decided on a whim that he's gonna get smarter and somehow that's going to make him rich, and that's what West is talking about. But that's not what you're quoting. What you're quoting is a reflecting of your acknowledgement of that belief. You're smart. Soft skills are important. Know what, I'm smart too, and I have soft skills, and I find the mentality conveyed in those verses pure, culture-destroying toxic. Maybe you're after hustle... But hustle is not "soft skills".

thatswrong0 13y ago

> The number one way to ace an interview is to get the other person to like you. Anecdotal evidence: I'm a college student and got my software engineering internship this summer because, according to the recruiter, I was better at communicating and more personable than the other candidates. Among people in my major (CS), I would say I'm pretty average in terms of intellect, so I actively work at these sorts of 'soft' skills to give myself some advantage.

ekm2 13y ago

Most people who ace tests without studying are usually just good auditory learners.In a school situation where classroom attendance is mandatory,they excel because it hones their style.Visual learners,the bookworms on the other hand ,endure the classes until after school when they can start taking in knowledge the best way they know how:by reading. The first group always assumes they are smarter, which is not necessarily true.High IQ people belong to both groups.