Why Soft Skills Often Don’t Stick—And What We Can Do About It

Team Science – With a Twist

At TeamPath, we like our advice backed by evidence. But let’s be honest—academic research on teams can be a bit dry. So we’ve asked AI to turn top team science papers into podcast-style conversations. 

The result? Something like John and Gail from Pitch Perfect—if they swapped a cappella commentary for team dynamics. John’s blunt and occasionally inappropriate. Gail’s sharp and slightly over it. Together, they break down the science so you don’t have to. It’s research, with a little banter.

Disclaimer: These episodes are AI-generated. While we aim for accuracy, the bots may occasionally go rogue.

Soft skills training often fails to change real behaviour at work—but a powerful behavioural science model may offer a path forward. The COM-B model helps us see how to design learning that actually sticks.

Based on: “Making soft skills ‘stick’: a systematic scoping review and integrated training transfer framework grounded in behavioural science” by Hamzah, Marcinko, Stephens, & Weick (2024).

‍

Key Findings

‍

Organisations spend billions on training soft skills—things like communication, leadership, resilience. Yet most of us can relate to this two-part story:

1. You attend a soft skills workshop.
   
   
2. A month later… nothing’s really changed.
   
   

This isn’t just anecdotal—it’s a documented issue called the soft skills transfer problem. Even when people learn new skills, they don’t necessarily use them. So how do we bridge that gap between training and real-world behaviour?

That’s the question this paper set out to answer. Through a scoping review of 91 studies, the authors explored what actually helps people apply soft skills at work. They identified 69 distinct factors and mapped them against a well-established model from behavioural science: the COM-B model.

COM-B stands for:

• Capability – Do people have the knowledge, skills, and mental bandwidth to act?
  
  
• Opportunity – Do their environments make it possible and socially acceptable to act?
  
  
• Motivation – Do they want to act, both consciously and unconsciously?
  
  

The insight here is simple but profound: behaviour (including using soft skills) doesn’t just depend on learning. It depends on conditions. And by understanding those conditions, we can design learning and development that works.

‍

Current Thinking

‍

This paper is part of a broader trend: using behavioural science to improve workplace learning. COM-B has already been used to change behaviours in healthcare, public health, and policy. Applying it to leadership or communication skills may seem new—but it fits.

Soft skills aren’t just ideas. They’re behaviours—complex, often automatic ones. That means they’re influenced by things like habits, norms, emotions, and context. COM-B helps us make sense of all that.

The model also gives us a more sophisticated toolkit. For example, it suggests that:

• If capability is the issue, training and education might help.
  
  
• If opportunity is the barrier, we might need to restructure the work environment or add social support.
  
  
• If motivation is low, nudges, incentives, or persuasive techniques might be needed.
  
  

Importantly, the model helps us move beyond “training” as the only solution. It encourages us to think systemically.

‍

Why This Is Interesting for Team Path

‍

For TeamPath—and anyone committed to practical, evidence-based team development—COM-B is more than a framework. It’s a mindset shift.

Here’s how it’s influencing our thinking:

‍

1. We’re seeing soft skills as habits, not knowledge.

That means we’re less focused on “what people know” and more interested in “what people do”—and why they do it (or don’t). COM-B helps us zoom in on the real barriers to behaviour change.

‍

2. Asking better questions about context.

Sometimes the issue isn’t that people lack training. It’s that they don’t have the space or support to act on it. The COM-B lens helps us spot these invisible barriers—like norms, culture, or workload—that can quietly block change.

‍

3. Learning to design smarter interventions.

Not every solution has to be a course. COM-B opens up a wider range of tools: feedback loops, environmental cues, social modelling, even small nudges that keep skills top of mind. We’re experimenting with more of these, and learning as we go.

4. Staying humble.

What this model really drives home is that change is hard—and complex. There’s no one-size-fits-all fix. But by paying attention to capability, opportunity, and motivation, we can get closer to understanding why something isn’t sticking, and what might help.

‍

We’re not sharing this model because it solves everything. We’re sharing it because it gives us a better map. One that helps us navigate the messy, human process of learning and change.

If we want to build teams that actually apply what they learn—not just enjoy the workshop—then COM-B gives us a practical, compassionate way to start.

We’re learning. We’re testing. And we’re finding that the journey is just as valuable as the tools.

This podcast includes content generated with the help of artificial intelligence. While we've done our best to guide and review the conversation, there may be occasional errors or inaccuracies. Please listen with that in mind and always double-check any critical information. Thanks for your understanding!