Some professions just don't merit soft skills

[peterbirks]

There are few publications that I look forward to receiving more each month than The Actuary (10p in sarcasm box), but at least I used to know where I was with the publication. Actuaries, after all, are not seen as the most sociable of people. Indeed, inter-personal skills are not, I would hesitate to claim, at the top of their list of "things to do well". They'd rather lose a friend than get a number wrong in a risk calculation.

So it was with horror that I opened this month's issue and saw that the (female) editor, was waxing lyrical about the "Momentum 2008" programme, saying that it

looks great, including sessions on emotional intelligence and managing professional relationships. we should not underestimate the importance of soft skills and I hope that these sessions are well attended. After all, it is no good having a full toolkit if you do not have the soft skills to employ them.

One could observe, albeit with the cynical journalist's eye, that there are rather too many people in the world today with great soft skills and a totally empty toolbox, getting up every morning to well-paid jobs gained entirely through interpersonal skills rather than skills at the actual job.

I would also claim that there are certain groups of professionals wghere any display of soft skills would rather worry me, and actuaries (along with claims adjusters) are two of these.

If my house has been virtually dstroyed in a hurricane, and a claims adjuster turns up, the last thing I either want or expect from him (they are usually male) is to be mainly concerned with "how I am feeling". Indeed, if he showed such a concern, I would be certain that it would be a prelude to a stitch-up on my claim.

Similarly with actuaries. If an actuary comes across as friendly, I'm suspicious, not pleased.

"Emotional intelligence"? No thanks.

_______________

Comments

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

Well, there's nothing wrong with the occasional, non-business-related, pleasantry; you know, along the lines of "Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"

However, "emotional intelligence" is a clear scam, promoted (like "the end of history") to sell books and lecture tours. What on earth does it mean? Why should we agree with Greenspan (the other one) and Goleman that it even exists?

But it's curiously appealing to those who think themselves intellectuals whilst having the critical thinking capacity of an overripe melon. I'm not referring specifically to politicians, although it's noticeable that "emotional intelligence" strikes a firm polemical chord with those who think that old fashioned "intelligence" equates to "elitism," ie the opposite of the "elitism" which actually exists -- city stitch-ups, continuation of the inbred and mentally deficient aristocratic layer, you name it. Emotional intelligence is basically balls.

I find it harder to criticise "soft skills." After all, there's nothing wrong with a bit of dialogue and some well-applied make-up; maybe with a back-story and a highly-acclaimed cinematographer. "Hard skills" can be overrated, since you're really only focussing on one aspect of the performance, and there are significant dangers of friction (possibly with family members, or even pets) and obsessive behaviour.

I look forward to an article in Actuary Monthly illuminating this aspect of the great skills divide.

Gonzo skills are, of course, something altogether different; in so many ways. In so many ways.

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

I think my major concern isn't so much on the merits of soft skills (although, really, if an actuary can't be an obsessive behaviourist, who can?) as on the fact that, in modern 'office politics' they are focused on to the exclusion of hard skills -- particularly those boring hard skills of making sure that things get done (rather than making people feel better about the fact that things aren't getting done).

Complaints departments in call centres have people very well trained in making people feel better even though their problem hasn't been solved (a soft skill), but quite often the company is not very good about actually solving the problem (a hard skill). This papers over the cracks for a while, but eventually the whole business collapsed (e.g., NTL).


PJ_____________

Don't get me started

[(Anonymous)]

As someone who is married to a Learning & Development consultant I get to see a lot of HR bumpf, most of which ends up scattered on the bedroom floor (but enough about my sex life).

For the sake of my marriage I can't comment at length on what I think of it all but suffice to say that Personnel (I am a person, not a "human resource") strikes me as a profession desperate to justify its own existence, and largely failing.

My wife continues to believe there is a solution to everything, it is just a matter of understanding a problem and devising a suitable strategy to address it. Several years of our kids not turning out the way we thought they would or we wanted them to (to put it mildly) has not disabused her of the notion that human beings can be transformed, rather than gently pushed in a new direction, by a sound psychologically based improvement programme.

Of course, it could just be that we are crap and lazy parents.


Johnny H.