Making soft skills ‘stick’: a systematic scoping review and integrated training transfer framework grounded in behavioural science

Soft skills training often does not yield the desired behaviour changes at work – a phenomenon known as the soft skills transfer problem. Meanwhile, behavioural science interventions have proven successful in changing behaviours in various contexts. The aim of the present research is to develop an integrated soft skills training transfer framework grounded in behavioural science. The COMPASS (Capability, Opportunity and Motivation of Professionals’ Application of Soft Skills) model integrates two leading frameworks in the fields of professional development and behavioural science: Baldwin and Ford’s training transfer framework and the COM-B behaviour change model. To probe the viability of the COMPASS model, we conducted a systematic scoping review, which identified 91 eligible articles derived from 2,632 screened abstracts. From this review, 69 factors emerged that were each assessed for their evidence in promoting soft skills training transfer. Mapping the factors onto the COMPASS model shows that the model captures the literature well. Crucially, we show that all constituent elements of the model likely contribute to training transfer. The COMPASS model provides an overarching theoretical grounding in the literature on behaviour change. We discuss how practitioners can leverage this work to promote soft skills transfer

Leader oversight bias in justice and hypocrisy evaluations of organisational diversity practices

Misalignment in diversity and inclusion (D&I) occurs when organisations make claims that they do not uphold through their practices. In the present study, we probed a leader oversight bias which may lead to ignorance of misalignment and, consequently, lower perceptions of organisational hypocrisy. Through an online experiment, we randomly allocated 198 participants to the role of either a leader or non-leader in a fictional organisation. T-tests showed that leaders perceived their organisation as less hypocritical than non-leaders. This effect was sequentially mediated by anticipated justice following exposure to a gender diversity statement, and perceived justice following exposure to organisational practices. Contrary to our predictions, gender did not moderate this effect. Our results demonstrate that leaders may perceive their organisations as more just and less hypocritical even when this may not be the case, because they attempt to confirm their prior, more favourable justice anticipations. This research calls for establishing better cross-hierarchical communication structures in organisations and for more effective management of leadership oversights. Future studies can examine this bias in field settings and isolate its driving mechanisms