“軟”技能很難衡量，而且需求甚大。有辦法教授嗎？
Anne Fisher
2019-05-27
雇主難以聘請到足夠的高情商員工，并耗費了大量的精力，向大量現有員工灌輸“強力技能”。圖片來源：PeopleImages Getty Images
|
毋庸置疑的是，所謂的軟技能，也就是那些難以衡量的能力，例如同理心、適應能力和善于溝通想法，需要一個新的名稱。Skillsoft的產品開發業務副總裁海德·阿貝利稱，“‘軟’聽起來沒有氣勢，或者聽起來不如‘硬技能’或專業技術重要。這個觀念是絕對錯誤的。”該公司致力于設計和交付培訓課程，服務對象涉及全球160個國家的1.4億名雇員?！拔覀儗⑵浞Q為‘強力技能’，因為沒有它們的支持，人們的專業技術難以得到充分的發揮?！?/p>
培訓公司D2L的聯合創始人及首席測略官杰瑞米·奧格表示：“我將其稱為持久技能。”該公司的客戶包括沃爾瑪、寶潔、Fidelity和美國運通。他指出，專業技術的平均生命周期如今約為18個月。作為對比，像創造力、適應力和時間管理這類持久技能永不會過時?！斑@些技能在公司的任何部門都能發揮作用，離開了公司也是一樣?！?/p>
強力技能、持久技能、人事技能、人際技能、情商，無論叫哪一種名字，它們如今都有著龐大的需求。然而，雇主目前難以聘請到足夠的高情商員工（包括新畢業的大學生），而且耗費了不俗的精力，向大量公司現有員工灌輸這種“強力技能”。那么問題來了：這些技能能夠傳授嗎？
這一點很重要。在公司開展數字化、自動化，并不斷調整的過程中，打造一個可供員工溝通其理念的企業文化對于公司競爭力至關重要。培養合作和創意思維亦具有同樣的重要性。
與此同時，對于雇員來說，隨著越來越多的任務被算法取代，持久技能如今已經成為了一種職業保險。研究顯示，同時擁有技術專長和強大人事技能的員工不僅可以隨意選擇工作，而且其收入也要高得多。
至于人事技能的培訓是否有助于人們改變其個性因素，這一點我們很難說，例如拒絕接受新事物，或對于社交技能一竅不通。目前，還沒有一個標準可以用于評估培訓前后的技能水平。
反而，業界對于進步的衡量十分主觀。例如，高管們在完成Skillsoft有關及時提供有效反饋的課程之后，我們向其直接下屬詢問：老板是否有所改進或改進了多少。當然，這種做法存在明顯的缺陷。如果一位員工對老板有異議，另一位是老板的高爾夫球球友，他們很容易給出迥異的評分。
即便如此，這些評估超出了大多數普通雇員的水平。海德·阿貝利指出，培訓公司和其客戶“有必要開展更多的同行評議，而且我們需要搜集和分析數據?！?/p>
各大公司對于如何衡量有潛力雇員的人事技能更加不知所措。奧格說：“雇主大多依靠的是面試中所獲得的求職者信息，然而，數十年的研究表明，人們在面試中的表現和其之后的實際表現基本上沒有多大的關聯?！?/p>
即便人們的本性并不會出現多大的變化，但這并不是說其行為亦無法改變，只不過當前沒有可靠的量化指標。要想讓“強力技能”培訓發揮最大的影響力，它應該涵蓋學習、反思和實踐這三大要素，阿貝利說道。線上Skillsoft課件的內容包括向人們展示如何在真實商業環境中互動的視頻，它是其他兩大要素的出發點，也是阿貝利認為最有可能產生成效的環節。
她說：“例如，在孩童時代，你不會愿意與他人分享玩具，如今也是一樣?？赡苓@就是你的基本性格，而這也是反思如此重要的原因。對其進行反思，詢問自己為什么自己如今仍會讓在此類事情妨礙自己的工作。然后，提醒自己要提升合作意識，并進行實踐、實踐，再實踐。”
她說，這聽起來并不是件容易的事情，的確如此。“然而，學習任何新事物都必須有所付出。”
奧格把改善并非與生俱來的人事技能比作學下象棋。他說：“你可以閱讀規則手冊，記住不同的策略等等。但了解游戲規則的唯一方式就是不斷地去玩游戲，最好是與水平更高的對手進行廝殺?！闭浅鲇谶@個原因，D2L開展持久技能培訓的方式側重于經理和同僚的教授與輔導，因為他們能夠隨時指出進步（或不足）。
請注意：為了讓所有的實踐都能有所回報，雇員需要培養一種奧格所稱的“心理安全”。改變是困難的，而且人們傾向于在新習慣養成之前遵從老習慣（尤其在遇到壓力的時候）。他說，為了給處于實踐期的雇員創造一定的容錯空間，“請務必將有關學習和開發舉措的反饋與績效評估徹底區分開來?！比绻e誤會導致雇員失去升職或提拔機會，那些正在嘗試新行為（尤其是那些并非與生俱來的行為）的人就不會愿意對其進行實踐。
然而，如果一個個性特別突出的人拒絕做出任何改變怎么辦？例如，接受同理心培訓的經理似乎并未有任何長進。阿貝利的答案：那就開展更多的培訓、反思和實踐。
她說：“任何人都能夠學會強力技能，這一點與個性無關。當然，沒有金剛鉆是攬不了瓷器活的，但他們可以獲得這方面的能力，因此，他們至少不會對機構造成破壞?！保ㄘ敻恢形木W） 譯者：馮豐 審校：夏林 |
No doubt about it, so-called soft skills—those hard-to-measure talents like empathy, adaptability, and a knack for communicating your ideas—need a new name. “‘Soft’ sounds weak, or somehow less important than ‘hard’ or technical skills. That’s completely wrong,” says Heide Abelli, senior vice president for product development at Skillsoft. The company designs and delivers training courses to about 140 million employees in 160 countries around the world. “We refer to them as ‘power skills,’ because, without them, people’s technical skills aren’t running on all cylinders.”
“I call them durable skills,” says Jeremy Auger, a co-founder and chief strategy officer of training company D2L, which numbers Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Fidelity and American Express among its clients. He points out that the average lifespan of a tech skill now is roughly 18 months. Durable skills like creativity, adaptability, and time management, by contrast, never get obsolete. “You can take them with you anywhere in the company, or outside it.”
Power skills, durable skills, human skills, people skills, durable skills, E.Q.: Whatever you want to call them, they’re in big demand now. But, as employers scramble to hire enough high-E.Q. people (including new college grads), and launch massive efforts to instill “power skills” in vast numbers of the employees they’ve already got, one question leaps to mind: Can these skills be taught?
It matters. As companies grapple with digitization, automation, and constant change, creating a culture where people can communicate their ideas is crucial to competitiveness. So are collaboration and creative thinking.
Meanwhile, for employees, as more and more tasks are taken over by algorithms, durable skills are becoming a kind of career insurance. Studies show that people with both technical expertise and strong human skills not only have their pick of jobs these days, but they earn far higher salaries too.
But it’s hard to tell if human skills training helps people change aspects of their personality—being resistant to new experiences, or having tone-deaf social skills, for instance. At the moment, no one has yet come up with a standard way to assess those skills before and after training.
Instead, progress is measured subjectively. After executives complete Skillsoft courses in, for example, giving timely and effective feedback, their direct reports are asked whether, and by how much, the boss has improved. That has obvious disadvantages, of course. A staffer with an axe to grind, or another who’s the manager’s golf buddy, could easily distort the score.
Even so, those evaluations are more than what most rank and file employees get. Training firms and their clients “need to start doing more peer assessments,” says Heide Abelli. “We need to collect and analyze the data.”
And when it comes to gauging the human skills of prospective employees, companies are even deeper in the dark. “Employers rely heavily on what they can glean from candidates in job interviews,” notes Auger, “even though decades of research show that there is little, if any, correlation between how people come across in interviews and their performance later.”
That’s not to say that people can’t change their behavior—even if their fundamental nature doesn’t shift much, and even though reliable quantitative measures don’t (yet) exist. “Power skills” training makes the biggest impact, Abelli says, when it includes three elements: learning, introspection, and practice. The content of Skillsoft’s coursework, delivered online and including videos that show people interacting in real-life business situations, is the jumping-off point for the other two, which is where Abelli believes true change can happen.
“Let’s say that you didn’t like sharing your toys when you were a kid, and you still don’t,” she says. “Maybe that is just part of your basic personality. But this is where introspection is crucial. Reflect on it, and ask yourself why you’re now allowing it to get in your way at work. Then, make a conscious effort to get better at collaborating, and practice, practice, practice.”
If that sounds like hard work, she adds, it is. “But then, learning anything new takes work.”
Auger likens improving a human skill that doesn’t come naturally to learning to play chess. “You can read books about the rules, memorize different strategies, and so on,” he says. “But the only way you really learn the game is by playing over and over again, preferably against someone who’s better at it than you are.” For that reason, D2L’s approach to durable skills training puts a big emphasis on coaching and mentoring from managers and peers, who can point out progress (or the lack of it) in real time.
One caveat: For all that practicing to pay off, employees need a sense of what Auger calls “psychological safety.” Change is hard, and people tend to backslide into their old ways (especially under stress) until new habits take hold. To allow people some leeway for mistakes while they’re still in the practicing stage, he says, “make sure that feedback about learning and development efforts is entirely separate from performance appraisals.” Someone who’s trying out a new behavior—especially if it’s one that doesn’t come naturally—won’t want to practice it, if a misstep could cost him or her a raise or promotion.
But what if a personality quirk turns out to be impervious to change? A manager, for instance, who has been trained in empathy, doesn’t seem to have acquired any. Abelli’s answer: More training, introspection, and practice.
“Anyone can learn power skills, regardless of their personality,” she says. “True, someone may never be a rockstar at a particular skill, but they can get competent at it, so at least they’re not doing damage to the organization.” |
