The Soft Skills “Debate” Is Over

The rapid infusion of AI into almost every aspect of our working world, from health care to manufacturing to design, has resurfaced an old debate about which skills we’ll really need for the workforce of the future. If automation can power an assembly line, complete patient intake, and draft social media posts, what kind of jobs should we be training the next generation to do, and what skills will they need to perform them? What are the skills that are “inherently human” that we need to be doubling down on?

The power of AI may be new, but these questions aren’t. When I first joined the Department of Labor in the early 1990s, one of my first assignments was to help roll out the findings from “What Work Requires of Schools,” a report that named three foundational skills and five workplace competencies that young people needed to develop to succeed in the world of work. The skills, which included utilizing and allocating resources, teamwork and negotiation, and identifying tools for different tasks, launched years of discussion—and my ongoing fascination and frustration—about how we examine, discuss, and implement strategies around what we now commonly refer to as “soft skills.”

The term, coined by the U.S. Army in the early 1970s to differentiate between interpersonal and machinery skills, provokes strong reactions. I’ve fielded many questions throughout my career over which is more important, “soft” or “hard” skills, and the concept has gone through several rebrandings; “durable skills,” “foundational skills,” “employability skills,” and even “21st-century skills” are all used widely across industries.

But time has proven that it doesn’t matter what we call them, or even precisely which ones are most important—the core list still looks a lot like it did 30 years ago. What we need to focus on today is how we teach them in educational settings, and assess them in the workplace. Because durable skills—my preferred term—are essential. And in an automation-focused future, they’ll be even more so.

Despite research that confirms demand for skills like critical thinking, leadership, collaboration, and communication is growing, companies are struggling to find them among young hires. A report from the Society of Human Resources Management observed that while four-year colleges were once considered a sure source for soft-skill development, now nearly 3 in 4 employers say they have a hard time finding graduates with the durable skills they need. And even though more companies are embracing skills-based hiring practices, the ability to accurately assess durable skills remains elusive.

The need, however, is urgent; in an increasingly AI and automation-driven workforce, durable skills remain a uniquely human strength and hold significant value.

A new report estimates AI could impact nearly 300 million jobs globally, in some cases automating up to 45% of required tasks. “Increasingly, machines will perform tasks they are better suited to perform than humans, such as computation, data analysis, and logic,” one expert told the Pew Research Center. “Functions requiring emotional intelligence, empathy, compassion, and creative judgment and discernment will expand and be increasingly valued in our culture.”

So how do we both teach durable skills and create equitable, transferable ways of assessing them? Perhaps ironically, immersive learning innovators have made great strides in using artificial intelligence to build human interpersonal skills. The recent Meta Future of Work Summit highlighted new uses of augmented and virtual reality as an education and training tool; two featured companies, Embodied Labs and Talespin, are using immersive learning technology to help health care workers develop communication skills, emotional intelligence, and empathy.

Longtime leaders in the education field are also making profound changes to their approach: Earlier this year, the Carnegie Foundation announced a partnership with the testing and assessment company ETS to explore developing new, skills-focused assessment tools for K-12 and postsecondary education, recognizing that the century-old concept of the “credit hour” as a display of mastery isn’t sufficient for today’s learners.

Employers, too, recognize the value of professional social capital—which can help build durable skills through relationships, networking, and mentoring—as a proven accelerant to learner and worker success, with particular value for Black learners and workers who experience occupational segregation.

A shared language, recognized by employers, educators, and workers, is another step to creating universal standards for describing, teaching, and assessing skills. Some organizations, like Colorado’s America Succeeds, have already started this work. Through a partnership with CompTIA and Common Group, they’re developing a rubric for durable skills used throughout a learner’s journey to the workforce.

One common argument in the old skills debate is that effective communication, critical thinking, and interpersonal skills are hard to teach or even innate qualities that some people possess and others do not. I would argue that we can learn anything, and we need to structure our learning and workforce systems to ensure the development of both durable and job-based skills. Because in reality, both job-focused skills and durable skills are critical for success in today's workplace. However, as new technology emerges to disrupt entire industries and professions, the skills most relevant across job types—durable skills—will become increasingly important.

New technology has already disrupted how we think about the skills we possess as workers, and the skills we require as employers. Let’s disrupt our thinking again, and move away from the idea of one type of skill having greater value than another. In the 21st-century economy, the competitive advantage will go to employers who value critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication—and the employees who can adapt, shift mindsets, and bring these skills to an ever-changing future of work.