12 The Myth of Hard & Soft Skills
Take-home Message — Realization 1
The adjectives hard and soft imply a hierarchy and don’t adequately describe skills.
The adjectives hard and soft are often used to describe skill sets. The technical skills are hard, unemotional, objective tool-based, hands-on craft, whereas the emotional, subjective, ironically named touchy-feely skills are the soft skills. Let’s begin by examining what we really mean when we refer to hard skills.
12.1 Two Complementary Skill Sets: Hard & Domain-specific
When we consider what are called hard skills, it appears that we use the term to refer to two distinct skill sets. That is, we often consider hard skills as being synonymous with domain-specific skills. These are not synonymous, but rather distinct complementary skill sets. I define these two groups as:
- Hard skills
-
Generic technical skills which are shared among many STEM disciplines. This includes not only fundamental principles such as the scientific method itself and deductive thinking but also generic standard operating procedures within a broad field. Mastery of these skills is a core requirement and as such they are considered entry-level skills, being taken for granted among the STEMian community.
- Domain-specific skills
-
Niche — often, but not necessarily technical — skills necessary for a specific STEM discipline. Sometimes these skills can be so niche, such as troubling-shooting legacy systems, or site-specific adjustments to standard protocols, that the number of individuals who are even aware that such a skill exists may number in the single digits. This makes these skills also deep-level.
Since Domain-specific skills are described as nicne, we may be tempted to also call them high-value skills, but I refrain from doing so, since this places focus on a false hierarchy of high-low. This is precisely the kind of thinking I advocate for moving away from, as I’ll describe below.
The table below provides an imagined example in the case of experimental biology.
| “Hard” Skills | Domain-specific | |
|---|---|---|
| Setting: | When working with specific datasets | When conducting experiments |
| Skills: | Programming, Data management, Computers & servers, Analysis methods, Result interpretation | Laboratory methods & instruments, Reagents, Animal handling, Experimental design |
By failing to distinguish these two sets of skills, the perceived value of hard skills is raised from a common generic & entry-level skill set to a niche & deep-level skill set thus also raising their perceived values. This is significant once we appreciate the role and distinct nature of “soft” skills.
12.2 The Hard/Soft Skills Hierarchy
The word hard in the term hard skills (which we have seen is often used to also describe domain-specific skills) recalls for us positive or high-value words and concepts — things that are both necessary & laudable.
In contrast, the word soft in the term soft skills recalls for us negative or low-value words and concepts — things that are optional and/or unimpressive.
An example of these associated words and concepts is provided in the table below.
| “Hard” & Domain-specific Skills | “Soft” Skills |
|---|---|
| Essential | Optional |
| Difficult | Easy |
| Technical | Emotional |
| Objective | Subjective |
| Logic | Intuition |
| Evidence | Anecdote |
| Precise | Imprecise |
| Acquired knowledge | Innate ability |
| Quantifiable | Non-quantifiable |
| Predictable | Unpredictible |
| Specialized | Generic |
Let us return to our scenario of an experimental biologist and add a description for these soft skills.
| “Hard” Skills | Domain-specific | “Soft” Skills | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setting | When working with specific datasets | When conducting experiments | When communicating results |
| Skills | Programming, Data management, Computers & servers, Analysis methods, Result interpretation | Laboratory methods & instruments, Reagents, Animal handling, Experimental design | Visual media, Oral presentations, Written papers |
Hard is the language of logic & reason, cornerstones of rational thought. On the other hand soft is emotional & intuitive, that which rational thought sits squarely in contrast to. It is hardly surprising then that STEMians are uneager to embrace skills labelled as soft, it speaks against the very foundation of rational thought, which birthed the modern era. Thus, we promote generic hard skills to a high-value position, making it something possible yet difficult to attain, and at the same time demote soft-skills to a low-value position.
12.3 Soft as Low-value
We can see when we consider how training in soft skills are often provided. Training in soft skills is sometimes provided by individuals with poor technical, hard, or domain-specific skills, confirming that they are easy, subjective and unnecessary to study. Attending long courses and demonstrating practical ability are essential for hard skills, but often optional or not even available for soft skills, which are often taught in the context of a short workshop, in isolation from actually performing the work necessary, as an afterthought that one shouldn’t waste too much time on. Thus, training in hard skills often neglects to reveal how and where soft skills contributed to the success of a STEM project. This demotion to a low-value position also supports a lackluster training of soft skills, as both teacher and student are demotivated by the devaluation of the topic.
12.4 Outdated & Misogynistic
Thus far, we’ve seen how a hierarchy exists between hard and soft skills. But it’s also a dichotomy which fails to accurately describe the many methods, carried out on a daily basis, where hard and soft skills act in synergy and by necessity. For example,
- Data visualization
-
which combines domain-specific knowledge, statistics, programming, communication and design, among other skills
Broadly-defined skills, that combine elements of both hard and soft skills are also poorly served by this dichotomy. For example,
- Research design
-
combines deep technical understanding with critical & creative thinking and the collection, organisation & synthesis of knowledge
It is my position that the terms hard and soft are outdated to the modern STEM landscape. In addition, I would also argue that combining associations of hard as masculine and soft as feminine traits with the value hierarchy, described above, reinforces a male-centric STEM ecosystem and is inherently misogynistic.
12.5 Summary
The point here is that by conflating generic hard skills with nicne domain-specific skills, the overal value-perception of hard skills is raise, but these are fundamentel entry-level skills that are shared among many disciplines. The elevation further emphasises the hierarchy between hard and soft skills, diminishing the perceived value and importance of soft skills in the sciences. In the next section I’ll discuss why this
12.6 Exercises
- Begin with generic hard skills. Review this chapter and consider your own experiences in STEM. What do you consider to be fundamental technical skills of STEMians? That is, what do you take for granted when you speak to someone in STEM, regardless of their field of study?
- Consider your field of study. What would you describe as a domain-specific skills? Are there skills that you have which are specific to your project or position? Skills which even close colleagues do not posess? This can include mastery of a particularly difficult piece of equipment, and the ability to repair it, or an acute ability to understand error messages and debug code. Think of those skills which may come naturally to you, but also those for which you have worked hard to develop.
- Building on the previous exercise, consider a field of study within STEM that is outside your range of expertise. What are the unique skills that people in that field posess for which you find confusing?