You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
blog.chrisdrane.com
You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#2"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"?
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#3Makes 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.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#4"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"?
Or - it matters, just not as much.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#5"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"?
What an ironic way of proving the OP's point!
(Put another way: this is why so many STEM people get a bad rap.)
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#6Thank 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.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#7Makes 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.
In other words: Being smart is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition. And so is soft skills.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#8"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"?
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.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#9Makes 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.
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.
Re: You're Smart. So What?: Examining the Importance of Soft Skills
#10Makes 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.
> 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.