There are multiple problems with referring to critical, life-enhancing social skills as ‘soft’. One that is almost universally ignored in the skills literature, is that social skills are spoken about in generic terms, without analysing their detail, diversity and complexity.
I raised this issue in my submission to Jobs and Skills Australia about their proposed National Skills Taxonomy. Their discussion paper asked about the level of granularity that would be suitable for definitions and nomenclature. In other words, how much detail to provide on specific skills.
Take the skill of communication. Some writers may split this skill into written and verbal, but few, if any, identify the considerable diversity of this skill category, nor the qualifications, training, and mastery required. Existing skills taxonomies reflect this problem.
The skill of interviewing
One sub-skill of communication is the skill of interviewing people.
The skill of interviewing includes knowledge of diverse types of questions and when and how to use them effectively; strategic preparation based on desired outcome, context, relationship with the interviewee; flexibility; rapport-building; emotional competence; problem-solving; critical thinking; moral and ethical decision making; communication skills; conflict resolution; empathy, creativity.
Interviewing has common elements that are expressed differently depending on context (e.g. recruitment, crime suspects, medical patients, news story). The Australian Skills Classification (ASC) defines ‘interview people to gather information’ as a specialist task for Police Officer (0.8% of time and 15.6% for Detective), for a Journalist ‘interview others for news’ (3.3%), and for a GP it is implied by ‘diagnose medical conditions’.
A search by skills gives the skill cluster ‘Collect information from people’, under ‘Communication and collaboration’. This then leads to the same specialist tasks.
A comparable search on O*NET identifies the skill of ‘Active listening’, involving ‘asking questions as appropriate’ for all three jobs.
Placing a skill as part of a task does not specify that a skill is required to perform the task nor what it is. Reducing interviewing to ‘asking questions as appropriate’ implies asking questions is the only part of the interviewing skill, and assumes knowledge of what ‘appropriate’ means.
Interviewing involves multiple skills
Many jobs involve interviewing, both formally and informally. Interviewing is not one skill, but encompasses a range of skills, some of which are used in multiple contexts and are adjusted for that context. Crafting questions will be subtly different for a researcher, journalist, or police officer.
Regardless of how often interviewing is performed (i.e percentage of time), the skill still needs to be performed well. Diagnosing a medical condition is more than collecting information. Conducting qualitative research is more than a preparing a list of questions. Both require advanced listening skills, building rapport, considering power and cultural issues, and addressing ethical issues such as confidentiality, privacy, and informed consent.
Journalists need well-researched, authoritative, well-structured questioning techniques. Eric Hunter criticised ABC journalists for delivering ‘90 per cent of their questions in the long-discredited “leading question” format’, which is akin to putting words in the guest’s mouth. Hunter also criticises interviewers for using double-barrelled questions or for tacking on a possible answer (‘is it because?’).
Then there’s employment interviews. Many a job interview is performed poorly for lack of preparation, unhelpful or unprofessional questions, and ineffective processes.
Nothing is gained by calling skills ‘soft’ or generic. To inform, educate, and support people in understanding skills, all skills need to be treated equally, and their interrelationships recognised and explained.