Despite the growing importance of soft skills in today’s job market, many organizations still don’t treat them as a priority in professional development and recruitment strategies. This is a surprising paradox, especially in light of research showing that 85% of professional success is based on well-developed soft skills, while only 15% comes from technical skills. This analysis provides a comprehensive look at the reasons for the marginalization of soft skills in the business environment, covering issues such as terminological problems, measurement challenges, historical and cultural factors, discrepancies in training investments, and issues with self-assessment and development. Research indicates that despite the increasing demand for interpersonal skills in the digital and automation era, structural and perceptual issues still present significant barriers to organizations prioritizing these key skills.
Terminology and Perception: The Semantic Problem of Soft Skills
The Trap of Naming and Its Consequences
The term “soft skills” itself represents a fundamental problem in the process of valuing them in the business environment. In the minds of many business leaders and professionals, hard skills – such as computer programming or analytical abilities – are instinctively seen as more valuable than soft skills in the workplace. This terminological trap creates a false impression that interpersonal competencies are somehow less important or demanding, which is a serious error in assessing their real value. The semantic distinction between “hard” and “soft” skills unintentionally devalues the importance of the latter, suggesting that they are optional or supplementary rather than crucial for professional effectiveness. It is worth noting that some business circles are attempting to overcome this language barrier by introducing alternative terms, such as “durable skills,” which better reflect their fundamental significance for long-term professional success.
Referring to certain attributes in the workplace as “soft” also undermines the difficulty of mastering them, as well as the effort and time needed to develop these competencies. As a result, organizations may fail to recognize the need for systematic investment in developing these skills, mistakenly treating them as natural predispositions rather than competencies that require intentional and continuous improvement. This terminological issue may partially explain why, despite the acknowledged value of soft skills in various studies and publications, their development still does not become an investment priority in many organizations.
Socio-Cultural Factors in the Marginalization of Soft Skills
The perception of soft skills is deeply rooted in social and cultural conditions that further reinforce their marginalization. Due to social influences concerning which professions are (in)appropriate for men and women, soft skills have been culturally classified as “feminine” and are therefore often perceived as less demanding or valuable than other attributes. This gendering of soft skills significantly contributes to their undervaluation in business environments dominated by traditionally masculine values such as competitiveness, assertiveness, and technical proficiency.
Perceptual issues extend to academic and training environments as well. Despite the knowledge that 85% of professional success comes from well-developed soft and interpersonal skills, and only 15% from technical skills and knowledge (hard skills), there is a significant discrepancy in the allocation of training resources in favor of the latter. This gap between the recognized value and actual priority reflects deeply ingrained cultural beliefs about the relative value of different types of skills. Research conducted among students in Serbia shows that young people without work experience often misjudge their readiness for the job market, failing to see the gap in soft skills, which only deepens the problem.
Challenges in Measuring and Defining Soft Skills
Difficulties in Quantifying and Objectively Assessing
One of the main reasons why soft skills are not a priority in the workplace is that they are extremely difficult to measure precisely, while business organizations typically focus on what can be easily measured and directly linked to financial outcomes (efficiency, productivity, and profitability). In contrast to hard skills, which can often be assessed through standardized tests, exams, or certifications, evaluating soft skills requires more subtle and complex methods of assessment, which may be perceived by managers as less objective or reliable in a business context.
The difficulty in measuring soft skills leads to significant challenges in determining their specific economic value for organizations. Without clear metrics and indicators, organizations find it difficult to justify significant investments in the development of soft skills, particularly in result-oriented environments where decisions are made primarily based on hard, measurable data. This “invisibility” in traditional performance measurement systems significantly contributes to the systemic undervaluation of soft skills in the business context, despite research showing their significant impact on indicators such as team productivity, employee retention, and overall organizational performance.
Definition Issues and Challenges in Knowledge Transfer
Soft skills are also much harder to define precisely compared to hard skills, which are typically more specific to a particular field and easier to measure. This definitional ambiguity significantly hinders organizations from determining exactly which soft skills are needed for various roles or how to effectively develop them in the context of specific business challenges. Without a clear taxonomy of soft skills, organizations often struggle to develop targeted and effective development programs or to understand how specific soft skills contribute to professional success in different positions.
An additional barrier is that soft skills are much harder to transfer or teach compared to hard skills. While someone with a specific hard skill can relatively easily pass on their knowledge to others through standard training or documentation, developing soft skills requires a more non-standard, intensive, and often long-term approach, including coaching, mentoring, hands-on experiences, and reflection. This difficulty in knowledge transfer may discourage organizations from making significant investments in the development of soft skills, particularly when training resources are limited or when there is strong pressure to achieve quick, measurable results.
Historical and Cultural Factors in the Undervaluation of Soft Skills
The Legacy of the Industrial Revolution and Its Contemporary Implications
Historical conditions play a fundamental role in shaping the modern approach to soft skills in the business environment. Until recently, there was virtually no room in the workplace for emotions and interpersonal competencies, and the reasons for this phenomenon are probably more sociological and anthropological than psychological. This tendency to marginalize emotional and interpersonal aspects of work has deep roots in the Industrial Revolution and the work ethic that this transformative period in history shaped. In an era when production efficiency was the absolute priority, emotions were widely seen as inefficient, undesirable, and potentially harmful to workplace productivity.
The creation of the production economy and the design of efficient production lines was based on the fundamental assumption that there was no place for emotions and “soft” aspects of work because they were seen as inefficient and disruptive to optimal production processes. This historical emphasis on mechanical efficiency, standardization, and predictability has deeply ingrained itself in corporate culture, creating a lasting bias against skills that are seen as more “soft” or human-centered. Although the modern business environment has significantly evolved toward a knowledge and service-based economy, this historical legacy still exerts a strong influence on how organizations value and invest in different types of skills.
Evolution of the Economy and Changing Requirements of the Modern Job Market
Despite historical tendencies to undervalue soft skills, the evolution of the economy towards a service, knowledge, and innovation-based model creates an increasing demand for these competencies. Forecast studies indicate that by 2030, even 66% of all jobs will be in professions requiring highly developed soft skills. This fundamental structural change in the labor market highlights the growing importance of interpersonal and adaptive skills in an economy increasingly dominated by services, intercultural cooperation, and continuous innovation.
Research conducted by the World Economic Forum shows that by 2025, skills such as emotional intelligence, creativity, and adaptability will be some of the most sought-after on the global job market. Similarly, a McKinsey & Company study predicts that by 2030, up to 30% of existing jobs may be automated, making interpersonal skills even more crucial for adaptation and professional development in a rapidly changing economic environment. Studies also show that in the age of artificial intelligence and automation, it is precisely soft skills that will distinguish humans in the job market and will be the hardest to replace with advanced algorithms. Despite these clear trends, many organizations have not yet adjusted their training and development priorities to reflect this fundamental change in the nature of work and job market demands.
Discrepancies in Training Investments
The Gap Between Recognized Value and Actual Resource Allocation
One of the most telling indicators of the lack of prioritization for soft skills in business is the striking discrepancy in the allocation of training resources. Despite the widespread knowledge that 85% of professional success is based on soft skills, U.S. employers allocated only 27.6% of their training budget to developing these competencies. This glaring gap between the recognized value of soft skills and actual investments in their development vividly illustrates how deeply ingrained traditional training priorities favor hard skills, despite the changing demands of the job market.
Studies suggest that organizations may not see the potential return on investment in systematically developing soft skills. However, a 2017 study by the University of Michigan convincingly shows that professionally designed soft skills training improves productivity and retention of valuable employees by an average of 12%, while also generating an impressive ROI of 256%. This significant gap between the proven potential return and actual investments suggests that many organizations may not fully understand the long-term economic value of systematically developing soft skills among employees at all levels.
Impact on Organizational Effectiveness and Competitiveness
Inadequate investment in developing soft skills can have far-reaching negative effects on overall organizational effectiveness and competitiveness. Studies show that organizations that consciously build a culture focused on developing soft skills experience an average 12% increase in productivity and a 27% improvement in workplace morale. These measurable benefits clearly highlight the strategic value of investing in soft skills, not only for individual employee development but also for overall performance and organizational atmosphere.
A report from the National Center for Biotechnology Information presents even more convincing data, showing that organizations with strong soft skills outperform their direct competitors by an average of 31%. This significant financial performance gap suggests that the systematic undervaluation and underinvestment in developing soft skills can have a direct, measurable impact on competitiveness and long-term profitability in an increasingly complex and demanding business environment. Research conducted among organizations in Southeast Asia further supports this thesis, showing that companies that treat soft skill development as a strategic priority achieve better results in international markets.
Issues with Self-Assessment and Soft Skill Development
Overestimating Own Competencies and Its Consequences
An important factor contributing to the lack of prioritization for developing soft skills is the common tendency among employees and job candidates to significantly overestimate their level of interpersonal competencies. This unrealistic self-assessment can lead to a false sense of competence, discouraging both individuals and organizations from investing in the systematic development of these skills. A study by SMG/KRC on self-assessment among students clearly confirms this tendency to inaccurately assess soft skills, creating a significant cognitive barrier in the professional development process.
The lack of realistic, critical evaluation of one’s soft skills means that job candidates often fail to make conscious efforts to develop and systematically improve them, which in the long run significantly reduces their chances of professional success and advancement in the modern job market. This self-deceptive confidence in one’s interpersonal skills can lead to a negative cycle of inadequate development, where neither individuals nor organizations recognize the crucial need for continuous improvement of soft skills. Research conducted among business students in Eastern Europe shows that they often aren’t aware of the competency gap in soft skills until they gain their first professional experience, highlighting the need for better integration of business practice with academic education.
Challenges in Recruitment and Systemic Development of Soft Skills
The undervaluation of soft skills is also evident in the serious recruitment challenges faced by modern organizations. In ManpowerGroup’s “Talent Shortage” survey, 34% of companies pointed to significant difficulties in finding employees who are resilient to stress and capable of quickly adapting to changing business conditions. Similarly, a 2021 ManpowerGroup report warns that 81% of companies are struggling to find employees with the optimal mix of skills – both hard and soft – pointing to a systemic competency mismatch in the modern job market.
These growing recruitment challenges clearly highlight the gap between evolving organizational needs and available talent, suggesting that both educational systems and development programs within organizations may not be keeping up with the rapidly changing demands of the modern job market. At the same time, other studies show that 77% of HR managers are willing to hire employees with a high level of soft skills, even if their hard skills are somewhat underdeveloped. This clear recruitment preference further underscores the growing recognition of the practical value of soft skills in the business environment, despite structural barriers to their systematic development and objective assessment.
Implications for the Future of Business and Education
Directions for Change and Strategies to Overcome Barriers
A comprehensive analysis of scientific and business research clearly indicates that despite the growing recognition of the fundamental importance of soft skills for organizational success, there are still many deeply ingrained structural, cultural, and perceptual barriers that prevent them from being treated as an absolute priority in organizational development strategies. Complex challenges related to measuring, defining, and effectively transferring soft skills, combined with historical biases and significant discrepancies in training investments, create a complex ecosystem that systematically marginalizes these key competencies.
Overcoming historical biases and structural barriers in prioritizing soft skills will require coordinated, long-term efforts from all stakeholders: educational institutions, business organizations, and policymakers. The first fundamental step in this process should be a comprehensive change in terminology and overall perception to better reflect the actual value, complexity, and strategic importance of these skills in the context of the modern economy. Next, organizations must develop and implement more precise, objective methods for assessing and systematically developing soft skills, while aligning their training investments with the proven value of these competencies.
Transformation of Education and Preparation for the Future of Work
The rapidly changing nature of work and the growing demand for advanced interpersonal and adaptive skills clearly suggest that organizations that fail to adjust their development priorities to these fundamental changes will inevitably find themselves at a competitive disadvantage. Research consistently shows that strategic investments in the systematic development of soft skills provide measurable, significant benefits for both individuals and organizations, including documented improvements in productivity, team morale, and long-term financial performance.
Educational systems at all levels must evolve to better prepare future employees for the complex demands of the workplace, where soft skills are no longer just a desirable addition, but an absolutely essential foundation for long-term professional success. As automation, robotics, and artificial intelligence take on more technical and routine tasks, it is advanced soft skills that will fundamentally distinguish humans in the job market of the future and will be the hardest to replace even with the most advanced technological systems. Organizations that recognize this strategic paradigm shift early and adjust their development priorities accordingly will be much better positioned to thrive in the rapidly changing business landscape of the digital transformation era.
Conclusions
A comprehensive analysis of research on soft skills in business reveals a deep paradox in today’s organizational environment – despite the proven value of these competencies for long-term success, they still do not receive the proper priority in company development strategies. The undervaluation of soft skills results from many interdependent factors: terminological and semantic problems, difficulties in measurement and quantification, historical conditions related to the legacy of the Industrial Revolution, discrepancies in training investments, and the tendency to overestimate one’s competencies among employees. Overcoming these barriers requires a systemic approach involving changes in perception, improvements in evaluation methods, increased investment in development, and better integration of education with business practice.
Digital transformation and automation further emphasize the strategic importance of soft skills, which are becoming a key differentiating factor in an era where many technical tasks can be performed by advanced systems. Organizations that are the first to break down historical biases and make the development of soft skills a true strategic priority will gain a significant competitive advantage in the rapidly changing business landscape. As recent research in human resources management shows, companies with a strong culture of appreciating and systematically developing soft skills achieve better financial results, higher team productivity, and greater adaptability in the face of the unprecedented challenges of today’s business environment.
Empatyzer – The Perfect Solution for the Discussed Problem
Component 1: Chat AI as an Intelligent Coach Available 24/7
The chat knows the personality, character traits, preferences, and organizational context of the user and their team. This allows it to provide hyper-personalized advice tailored both to the individual inquiring and the realities of their team. Recommendations are given in real-time, helping managers solve problems here and now, rather than waiting for training.
Component 2: Micro-Lessons Tailored to the Audience
Twice a week, users receive short, condensed micro-lessons via email, which can be absorbed in three minutes. The lessons are personalized – they either concern the manager themselves (e.g., their strengths and weaknesses and ways to utilize them) or their relationships and communication with the team. Practical tips include real scenarios, ready-to-use action techniques, and even specific sentence formulations to use in a given situation.
Component 3: Professional Personality and Cultural Preferences Diagnosis
The tool analyzes the user’s personality, their strengths and weaknesses, and their unique characteristics in the context of the team, company, and population. It helps understand one’s position in the organization, identify talents, and determine the best style of action.
Empatyzer – Easy Implementation and Immediate Results
Fast implementation – the tool does not require any integrations and can be launched in a company with 100–300 employees in less than an hour. No additional burden for HR – users do not generate additional questions or work for the HR department, significantly saving their time. Immediate value for business – the tool is designed to be quick, easy to implement, generate immediate results, and be cost-effective.
Why is “Empatyzer” Unique?
It understands not only the person asking but also their organizational surroundings – providing solutions tailored to real challenges. It is a comprehensive tool that combines coaching, education, and analysis in one, available without any effort from the user.
Looking for information on online communication training? Visit our homepage: online communication training .
Learn more about management training by visiting our homepage: management training .
