Let's stop referring to critical thinking as a 'soft skill'
Reflection on how critical thinking is viewed
I don’t know whether it’s just me being pedantic or perhaps feeling strongly about the phrase ‘soft skills.’ It makes me cringe more than the average person when I hear it. Since the start of this year, I have noticed many more posts on LinkedIn discussing critical thinking, often followed by ‘top 10 soft skills.’ I believe the narrative needs to change.
When I think of the word ‘soft', these objects come to mind: a blanket, a teddy bear, a feather, fluffy socks, candy floss, and cotton wool, etc. However, when I consider critical thinking, the word ‘soft’ is far from the association I would form. I would argue that it doesn’t quite make sense. This is because critical thinking is a skill that many take years to master, requiring conscious effort, growth, and development to maintain. For this reason, I believe we need to accord it the importance it deserves. According to the World Economic Forum, it’s the most sought-after skill and ranked among the top ten in the world.
Also, by calling something a ‘soft skill’ are we implying that those skills grouped under this heading lack the rigour of ‘hard skills?’
Skills in their own right
Simon Sinek discusses hard and soft skills as opposites, and if we categorise them into these two groups, it suggests that they are working against each other. He talks about hard skills (which enable us to perform our specific job roles) and human skills (which help us to become better individuals). I feel that, where necessary, a better way to refer to critical thinking skills collectively would be as a transferable, adaptable, or inquisitiveness-building set of skills. This provides specificity and allows us to better articulate the type of skills we are discussing.Â
Does the narrative need to change?
I think personally, for the society we now operate in, we have far more nuanced set of skills that go beyond the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ skills camp. Of course, some of you may argue it’s not that deep but merely a semantic choice, however, if we delve deeper, we can see the impact of such labels.
What’s the harm in label?
‘Hard’ skills typically refer to those skills which you have learned to do and ‘soft’ skills would be your traits. When we are asked to give examples for job applications or interviews, we wouldn’t necessarily divide the skills. We would be intertwining our discussion with both sets of skills built in. More often than not, a ‘hard’ skill can be something that can also be developed within a job role, whereas a ‘soft’ skill is usually something the prospective employer would like you to bring with you upon starting a new role.
There is therefore this disconnect between what we mean, what we require in society and how we portray skills and therefore how they are then treated.
Skills to have the attention they deserve
Although I am referring mainly to critical thinking skills, I do believe all skills need to have the attention they deserve. As individuals we all have our own unique set of skills and they shape our professional journey. I’ve had the privilege of meeting students, educators and professionals from all different discipline areas, but what really makes them unique are their skills that they have built and refined over time.
I’d love to know what you think about the ‘soft skills’ language.