Soft skills are usually harder because you can’t manufacture social situations at will to practice. Also, it’s not as safe to fail because of that, so the pressure is higher.
Whereas a project to learn a technical skill, we can come up with them and dial up/down the difficulty to accommodate for our comfort level.
So interesting how a mix of both is so important, but sometimes hard to come by!
Culturally, people are consistently advised to build hard skills. This is a good suggestion, but only if you complement them with all those other aspects which I refer to as "appreciating skills".
A lot of professionals even see basic stuff like "self-promotion" or "great communication" or "sales" as "fluff".
They don't understand their value, therefore they don't invest the time to master them.
Very true. I remember reading a bunch of project management books a few years back and only one emphasized soft skills. Which is quite interesting because project management is really 80% soft skills.
I wonder if “practice” can come from frequently changing your environment. For example, compare someone with a 20 year career at 3 companies versus someone with 12 years of experience at 6 companies. The latter would likely encounter more variance and have more practice even though they have had fewer years working. This is assuming practice makes a person better
If you change a lot, I agree you have exposure to many more view points. That's value in that.
At the same time, you are essentially incapable to "endure". Resilience is an important component of business success in my view.
So... Maybe find some balance?
Also, if you want to get to an executive position, normally you have to "grow" into those within a company. After a certain level, it is typically hard to get hired into it. It depends on your goals really.
It seems like there are journey phases in consulting that parallel product management. With new PMs they want to learn the technical side, how to get software features built. Then they realize the importance of communication with developers, designers, customers, and business stakeholders in getting the right thing built. Without communication it’s tough to build software that’s desirable, feasible, and importantly - to keep the lights on - viable.
Communicating effectively is the heart of getting good work done.
Very interesting. Somebody on Twitter was asking me today:
"I think of myself as pretty good relationally, but sometimes lack on the hard skills. Tough question but what would you say the split is between EQ/IQ skills in a management consultant role?"
My answer:
"I firmly believe in "soft skills", which aren't soft but hard as rock! The key point to understand is that soft skills only become important after you are known for something.
If you are all soft skills and no hard skills, then you are "wishy washy". Not valuable. Not irreplaceable. Not irresistible. A nice guy who probably will always have a job, but nothing more."
Soft skills are usually harder because you can’t manufacture social situations at will to practice. Also, it’s not as safe to fail because of that, so the pressure is higher.
Whereas a project to learn a technical skill, we can come up with them and dial up/down the difficulty to accommodate for our comfort level.
So interesting how a mix of both is so important, but sometimes hard to come by!
I would say it is EXTREMELY hard to come by as a balanced mix!
Why do you think that is?
Culturally, people are consistently advised to build hard skills. This is a good suggestion, but only if you complement them with all those other aspects which I refer to as "appreciating skills".
A lot of professionals even see basic stuff like "self-promotion" or "great communication" or "sales" as "fluff".
They don't understand their value, therefore they don't invest the time to master them.
Very true. I remember reading a bunch of project management books a few years back and only one emphasized soft skills. Which is quite interesting because project management is really 80% soft skills.
I wonder if “practice” can come from frequently changing your environment. For example, compare someone with a 20 year career at 3 companies versus someone with 12 years of experience at 6 companies. The latter would likely encounter more variance and have more practice even though they have had fewer years working. This is assuming practice makes a person better
You make a valid consideration! I'm undecided.
If you change a lot, I agree you have exposure to many more view points. That's value in that.
At the same time, you are essentially incapable to "endure". Resilience is an important component of business success in my view.
So... Maybe find some balance?
Also, if you want to get to an executive position, normally you have to "grow" into those within a company. After a certain level, it is typically hard to get hired into it. It depends on your goals really.
A good path might be a lot of variance at the beginning to understand the rules of the game and then double down if that's the desire!
I'd say agencies or agency-like businesses can be a great way to bring variance because there is usually a lot of volume of people and projects.
Absolutely. That’s why so many job ads say “agency experience preferred” or sometimes even required.
I'm glad we reached the conclusion that consulting is the best job in the world.
It seems like there are journey phases in consulting that parallel product management. With new PMs they want to learn the technical side, how to get software features built. Then they realize the importance of communication with developers, designers, customers, and business stakeholders in getting the right thing built. Without communication it’s tough to build software that’s desirable, feasible, and importantly - to keep the lights on - viable.
Communicating effectively is the heart of getting good work done.
Very interesting. Somebody on Twitter was asking me today:
"I think of myself as pretty good relationally, but sometimes lack on the hard skills. Tough question but what would you say the split is between EQ/IQ skills in a management consultant role?"
My answer:
"I firmly believe in "soft skills", which aren't soft but hard as rock! The key point to understand is that soft skills only become important after you are known for something.
If you are all soft skills and no hard skills, then you are "wishy washy". Not valuable. Not irreplaceable. Not irresistible. A nice guy who probably will always have a job, but nothing more."
Wow, provocative! How will they always have a job if they don't have the hard skills?
You hire for attitude and train for skills. If you can't build up on the skills in teaching you, then what's next?