Callista wrote:
I disagree--just so long as you don't outright annoy others, there are many jobs where your "soft skills" are near irrelevant. If you're a janitor it matters how well you clean. If you're a factory worker, your error rate matters. If you're a researcher, it matters whether you can publish good research and explain your work to people who can give you grant money. Communication is always a useful skill, but in many jobs, if you're incompetent, you won't be keeping the job unless you've got one heck of a silver tongue. Most bosses will be happy to keep a dependable, competent, socially awkward worker who doesn't bother anybody else and gets the job done.
Theoretically, you're right.
However, for janitorial jobs that don't require a lot of interaction, you compete with people who have no education at all and don't even need to have language skills, with all the typical consequences.
As a researcher, you need to do a lot of networking nowadays. The idea that you can just sit in your lab and do the work is naive. It's true that you have to be good in your field, but it's not enough.
The problem is that there is a huge number of people who are educated and competent enough. Out of those, the ones with good social skills will always win, even for jobs where they aren't strictly necessary. Employers would rather take someone with average but decent technical skills and some social skills than someone who is brilliant at what they do but has a lot of problems with social interaction.