703743

research-article2017
JMEXXX10.1177/1052562917703743Journal of Management EducationBeenen et al.

Research Article
Journal of Management Education
2018, Vol. 42(1) 34­–54
Interpersonal Skills in © The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
MBA Admissions: How sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1052562917703743
https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917703743
Are They Conceptualized journals.sagepub.com/home/jme

and Assessed?

Gerard Beenen1, Shaun Pichler1,

and Shahin Davoudpour2

Abstract
Employers and students concur that soft skills or interpersonal skills are
critical to managerial success, yet we know little about how MBA program
admissions professionals conceptualize and assess these skills in the context
of global management education. Such practices have key implications
for interpersonal skills curriculum and training in MBA programs around
the globe. A survey of 182 MBA admissions professionals from 24
countries revealed surprising agreement in how interpersonal skills were
conceptualized, and suggest interpersonal skills and soft skills are not
synonymous. Results also indicated that only 30% of U.S. and international
MBA programs use specific criteria to assess applicants’ interpersonal skills,
with the remainder using nonspecific criteria or no assessment method.
We discuss the need for more rigorous assessment of interpersonal skills
in MBA admissions, closer coordination between admissions officers and
curriculum developers, and tighter alignment between interpersonal skills
assessment and MBA curriculum and learning outcomes.

Keywords
interpersonal skills, management education

1California State University, Fullerton, CA, USA

2University of California, Irvine, CA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Gerard Beenen, Department of Management, Mihaylo College of Business and Economics,
California State University, 800 N. State College Blvd., Fullerton, CA 92831, USA.
Email: gbeenen@fullerton.edu
Beenen et al. 35

Although employers and management education researchers agree that “soft

skills” or interpersonal skills are a key component of what effective managers
do (Azevedo, Apfelthaler, & Hurst, 2012; Graduate Management Admissions
Council [GMAC], 2005; Halfhill & Nielsen, 2007; Riggio & Tan, 2014;
Rubin & Dierdorff, 2009, 2011), there is some controversy regarding the
extent to which MBA programs and business students value such skills
(Navarro, 2008; Rynes, Trank, Lawson, & Ilies, 2003). Along with technical
skills (e.g., functional expertise) and conceptual skills (e.g., strategic think-
ing), interpersonal skills are one of three primary competency dimensions
that are integral to managerial work (Dierdorff, Rubin, & Morgeson, 2009).
In fact, skills such as coaching and developing others, team building, and
conflict resolution are among the most salient skills that come to mind when
people think about managerial work. They also are relatively less of a focus
in MBA curriculum than technical and conceptual skills (Rubin & Dierdorff,
2009). Given the sparse coverage of interpersonal skills in MBA curriculum
(Navarro, 2008; Rubin & Dierdorff, 2009), it is no wonder they are the very
skills that MBA graduates lack (Fisher, 2007; Ghannadian, 2013). This lack
of soft skills training has financial implications for employers. For instance,
a deficit in soft skills in the United Kingdom (Hurrell, 2016) could have a
detrimental impact on Britain’s economy (Clarke, 2016).
On the other hand, the degree to which MBA programs emphasize interper-
sonal or soft skills is likely to vary across business schools. MBA program
offerings and faculty activities for Association to Advance Collegiate Schools
of Business (AACSB)–accredited schools are supposed to be guided by each
individual school’s mission, and some schools emphasize interpersonal skills
more than others (Rubin & Dierdorff, 2009). For instance, Bennis and O’Toole
(2005, p. 104) argued that MBA programs are more likely to focus on skills
that professional managers need, including interpersonal skills, when they are
not housed in research universities. There also is a growing awareness among
business schools that interpersonal skills should play a more prominent role in
their curriculum (Baldwin, Bedell, & Johnson, 1997; Rynes et al., 2003).
Nearly all business schools sampled required at least one organizational
behavior course, with almost 30% requiring two or more courses (Rubin &
Dierdorff, 2009). A survey of top 50 U.S. business schools found that 60%
required coursework covering interpersonal skills topics (e.g., communica-
tions [Navarro, 2008]). These findings suggest that at least some graduate
business programs view interpersonal skills as a priority for their graduates—
though perhaps not as high of a priority as technical or conceptual skills.
In fact, some business schools and MBA programs reportedly evaluate
interpersonal skills development (Beard, Schwieger, & Surendran, 2008;
Hoover, Giambatista, Sorenson, & Bommer, 2010; Ingols & Shapiro, 2014;
Kretovics, 1999). To meet AACSB learning outcome assessment standards,
36 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

new services that assess soft skills improvements for business students are
emerging (e.g., BizEd, 2016). Some MBA programs and employers are even
including interpersonal skills in their selection processes (Bommer, Rubin, &
Bartels, 2005; Hedlund, Wilt, Nebel, Ashford, & Sternberg, 2006; Rubin,
Bommer, & Baldwin, 2002; Sackett, Schmitt, Ellington, & Kabin, 2001;
Sternberg, 2004) to increase predictive validity and reduce subgroup differ-
ences. One reason why many MBA programs require work experience is the
assumption that such experience is positively associated with interpersonal
skill development, which should predict academic performance and success-
ful job placement (Dreher & Ryan, 2004, p. 87). Research has shown inter-
personal skills among MBA students predicts work performance above and
beyond general mental ability (Zimmerman, Triana, & Barrick, 2010). Yet
the most widely used MBA entrance exam—the GMAT—does not assess
interpersonal skills at all (see www.gmac.com).
If interpersonal skills are important for the employability of MBA gradu-
ates, it follows that MBA admissions professionals should have procedures in
place to assess applicants’ interpersonal skills, or at least their capacity to
develop these skills. As gatekeepers who manage the inflow of aspiring MBA
students and graduates, MBA program admissions professionals play a cru-
cial role in both conceptualizing and potentially evaluating these skills. Yet,
to our knowledge, there has been no systematic investigation of how MBA
program admissions professionals define and assess such skills. Additionally,
for MBA faculty interested in remediating curriculum gaps in the coverage of
interpersonal skills, admissions screening practices are key inputs to course
design, content, and delivery. For instance, if MBA programs do a rigorous
job of ensuring that applicants already have strong interpersonal skills, it may
be possible to justify or at least explain the lack of coverage of such skills in
many MBA programs. On the other hand, if assessment of these skills in the
admissions process is sorely lacking, it is important to consider ways to
improve assessment practices and align them with curriculum and learning
outcomes aimed at developing MBA graduates’ interpersonal skills.
Furthermore, in a global economy and in a world of global management
education, culture may be a potential boundary condition for the relevance of
these skills. Increased globalization challenges the North American perspec-
tive that has dominated management education. Research showing cross-
cultural skills are a key driver of expatriate success (e.g., Black & Mendenhall,
1990; Varma, Pichler, Budhwar, & Biswas, 2009) suggests it is possible that
cultural norms are relevant to the conceptualization and relative importance
of managerial interpersonal skills. For instance, nonverbal cues in communi-
cation differ substantially across cultures, implying the skills of deciphering
those cues may be at least partly culturally bound (e.g., the nine ways to say
“no” in Japanese culture; Robbins & Judge, 2017). For this reason, managers
Beenen et al. 37

should be able to interpret culture-specific cues in interpersonal exchanges

(Earley & Peterson, 2004; Offermann & Phan, 2002). It is possible that inter-
personal skills are viewed with varying degrees of importance by MBA
administrators who may not adhere to a North American perspective.
Finally, understanding which interpersonal skills matter to MBA admis-
sions professionals includes understanding what they are not. For instance,
subject matter experts have suggested soft skills include both skills that are
interpersonal (e.g., communication skills, interpersonal skills), and those
that are not (e.g., decision-making and problem-solving skills; Kantrowitz,
2005). In contrast to “hard skills” that are typically more quantitative or
technical in nature, “soft skills” are an inherently vague description that con-
jures up skills that are allegedly less rigorous and important (Levinson,
2016), more difficult to measure and train, and not exclusively interpersonal
in nature. Since interpersonal skills and soft skills often are used inter-
changeably (Halfhill & Nielsen, 2007; Hunt & Baruch, 2003; Riggio & Tan,
2014; Robles, 2012), it is important to explore their degree of potential over-
lap and relative distinctiveness.
In consideration of these issues, this study aimed to answer four research
questions:

Research Question 1: To what extent do MBA program admissions offi-

cers in United States and international MBA programs have consistent
views in conceptualizing interpersonal skills?
Research Question 2: What practices do they use to assess these skills
during the admissions process?
Research Question 3: To what extent are “soft skills” and “interpersonal
skills” synonymous for these MBA program admissions officers?
Research Question 4: What are the implications of these assessment
practices for MBA course design, content, and delivery?

In the rest of this article, we answer these questions with a study of MBA
program admissions professionals from 24 countries. Using unaided recall,
study participants were asked to identify which specific “soft skills” they
viewed as important for MBA students. This allowed us to assess the degree
of overlap between soft skills and interpersonal skills, and to assess the rela-
tive importance of these skills as measured by the frequency with which each
were mentioned. Participants also were asked how they assess such skills
during the admissions process. Our results suggest soft skills and interper-
sonal skills have substantial overlap, although they are not synonymous, and
that there is consistency regarding how interpersonal skills are conceptual-
ized and assessed across both United States and internationally based MBA
programs. Although there is a consensus of which interpersonal skills are
38 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

viewed as important by these stakeholders, little is being done to assess them

during the admissions process, or to develop them within MBA programs.
Consequently, we conclude with suggestions on how to facilitate alignment
between MBA admissions and training to enhance interpersonal skills assess-
ment and curriculum.

Method
Study Sample and Questions
Our sample included graduate business school admissions directors and
deans, and associate deans. The GMAC sent an online survey to MBA admis-
sions professionals at 1,365 schools to understand how graduate business
schools define and assess soft skills by asking them a series of open-ended
questions. Respondents included admissions professionals, program direc-
tors, and associate deans who were responsible for MBA admissions. This
unaided recall approach ensured respondents were not biased by a list of
predefined skills that were presented to them. It also allowed us to determine
if soft skills were synonymous with interpersonal skills, or whether they rep-
resented a broader set of skills that may include but not be limited to interper-
sonal skills. Respondents were asked, (1) “What soft skills do you look for in
MBA applicants?” and (2) “What methods do you use to assess these soft
skills during the admissions process?”
A total of 182 admissions professionals from 182 schools (13.3% of 1,365
schools surveyed) representing 24 countries provided completed responses to
the first question, and were used in our analysis of defining soft skills and
interpersonal skills. Respondents were from the United States (63%), Europe
(26%), Asia and the Pacific Islands (4%), Canada (3%), Australia and New
Zealand (2%), Latin America (1%), and the Middle East (1%). A total of 115
admissions professionals from 115 schools (8.4%) responded to the second
question. Respondents were from the United States (60%), Europe (31%),
Asia and the Pacific Islands (2%), Canada (4%), Australia and New Zealand
(2%), and Latin America (2%). This sample included but was not restricted to
schools accredited by the AACSB.
To assess the representativeness of the mix of U.S. and non-U.S. schools
in our sample, we analyzed the current mix of U.S. and non-U.S. schools
accredited by the AACSB. Out of 777 currently AACSB-accredited schools
worldwide, 517 (66.5%) are located in the United States. The fact that 63%
of Question 1 responses and 60% of Question 2 responses were from U.S.
MBA programs (compared with 66.5% for AACSB-accredited schools) sug-
gests our sample responses were approximately representative of the mix of
U.S. and non-U.S. business schools.
Beenen et al. 39

Coding Taxonomies, Procedures, Analysis, and Results

Coding responses to Question 1 (“What soft skills do you look for in MBA
applicants?”) required a comprehensive and parsimonious guiding taxonomy.
Numerous skills have been classified as interpersonal including, among others,
communication (Riggio, Riggio, Salinas, & Cole, 2003; Robbins & Hunsaker,
2009; Whetten & Cameron, 2015), self-management and emotional intelligence
(Caruso, Mayer, & Salovey, 2002; Rubin et al., 2002; Whetten & Cameron,
2015), leadership and political influence (Dierdorff & Rubin, 2006; Ferris et al.,
2005; Robbins & Hunsaker, 2009), and negotiation and conflict management
(De Dreu, Evers, Beersma, Kluwer, & Nauta, 2001). In perhaps the most com-
prehensive review to date, Klein, DeRouin, and Salas (2006) identified over 400
specific workplace interpersonal skills. They proposed a complex definition1
and taxonomy of interpersonal skills consisting of 12 subdimensions organized
under two higher order dimensions of communication (listening, oral, written,
assertive, nonverbal) and relationship building (cooperation/coordination, trust,
intercultural sensitivity, service orientation, self-presentation, social influence,
conflict resolution/negotiation). Although comprehensive, their definition
includes overlap with conceptual or technical skills (e.g., “complex perceptual
and cognitive processes,” writing, coordinating), and at least one skill—service
orientation—that may not be common in MBA programs. As a coding frame-
work for interpersonal skills, we adopted a taxonomy that is both parsimonious
and comprehensive and focuses on five key skills: self-management, communi-
cating with others, supportive relationship development, motivating others, and
conflict management; that is, “competencies that help managers understand,
communicate with, motivate and influence others, and resolve conflicts in goal-
directed organizational settings” (Pichler & Beenen, 2014, p. 14). These five
skills provide comprehensive coverage of interpersonal managerial competen-
cies identified by Rubin and Dierdorff (2011), and are generally consistent with
Klein et al.’s (2006) dimensions (e.g., communication, relationship building,
conflict resolution/negotiation). They also are consistent with interpersonal
skills recently identified for workforce preparedness and management education
(Azevedo et al., 2012; Jackson & Chapman, 2012).
We used the following coding procedure for Question 1 (“What soft
skills do you look for in MBA applicants?”). Two members of the research
team reviewed responses for consistency with our a priori taxonomy of five
interpersonal skill themes (managing self, communicating, supporting,
motivating, managing conflict; Pichler & Beenen, 2014), and by identify-
ing responses that diverged from these themes to find any new emergent
themes or subcategories contained in the data. New themes and subcatego-
ries that emerged from the data were discussed, and the process was
repeated until no new themes or subcategories were found. This resulted in
40 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

Table 1.  Coding Taxonomy.

Specific microskills coded under the corresponding category in
Response response to the question, “What soft skills do you look for in
category successful MBA applicants?”

Managing-self, Self-management and awareness Self-management (continued)

13% •• Accountability •• Sense of humor
•• Professionalism/ •• Exudes a positive
appearance attitude
•• Receiving feedback •• Shows confidence
•• Flexibility Interpersonal ethics
•• Professional development •• Honesty
•• Maturity •• Respect
•• Determination •• Trust
•• Organizational skills •• Ethical reasoning
•• Stress management •• Values and ethics
•• Emotional intelligence
•• Self-awareness
Communicating, •• Candor in communicating •• Assertiveness
25% •• Listening •• Written communication
•• Communicating clearly •• Presentation/speaking
•• Intercultural skills
communication •• Interviewing skills
Supporting, 24% •• Being approachable •• Social intelligence
•• Being open-minded •• People skills
•• Encouraging teamwork •• Coaching and mentoring
•• Showing empathy •• Sensitivity to diversity
Motivating, 13% •• Motivating others •• Providing vision
•• Influencing •• Providing goals
•• Leading •• Giving feedback
Managing conflict, •• Political skills •• Diplomacy
7% •• Negotiation •• Networking
•• Conflict resolution •• Etiquette
•• Issue selling
Judgment and •• Judgment •• Analytical skills
decision making, •• Decision making •• Strategic management
9% •• Project management •• Intuition
•• Problem solving •• Creativity
•• Critical thinking •• Applying knowledge
•• Transferring knowledge
Miscellaneous, •• Do not know •• No clear definition
20% •• Nonspecific (e.g., provided (e.g., “the
“nontechnical skills”; opposite of knowledge”;
“skills without a wrong or “something useful but
right answer”) not taught academically”)

Note. N = 182 MBA program professionals with 603 coded responses.

the development of a coding taxonomy with seven themes and 62 subcate-

gories (see Table 1) that included two new themes representing a broader
superset of soft skills that were not distinctly interpersonal (i.e., judgment
Beenen et al. 41

Figure 1.  Comparison of U.S. and non-U.S. responses (interpersonal skills only).
“What soft skills do you look for in successful MBA applicants?”
Note. Excludes judgment and decision making and miscellaneous responses (see Table 1). U.S.
sample includes 292 coded responses distributed across 116 MBA program professionals.
Non-U.S. sample includes 132 coded responses distributed across 66 MBA program
professionals (182 total responses). Differences between U.S. and non-US respondents were
not statistically significant.

and decision making, miscellaneous). For example, specific responses like

“critical thinking” or “project management” represented subcategories that
did not fit any of the five interpersonal skill themes, but were consistent
with the new theme of “judgment and decision making.”
After the coding taxonomy was developed, two trained coders working
independently, without knowledge of where each respondent was from,
coded 603 specific skills or other attributes under these seven themes. There
was an average 88% agreement between coders with any discrepancies rec-
onciled through discussion. Table 1 displays all 62 skills or other attributes,
and distinguishes “interpersonal” and “soft skills.” Figure 1 shows results
only for those responses classified as interpersonal skills.
Skills coded as judgment and decision making were consistent with
Dierdorff et al.’s (2009) taxonomy of conceptual skills (e.g., strategic deci-
sion making), and not coded as interpersonal. Skills coded as miscellaneous
included personality attributes and other uncertain responses (e.g., “I don’t
know what soft skills are”). Table 1 shows 29% of the coded responses for
“soft skills” were not interpersonal in nature, indicating MBA program pro-
fessionals defined soft skills more broadly than interpersonal skills.
42 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

Figure 1 compares how often each interpersonal skills dimension was

mentioned by U.S. and non-U.S. MBA administrators. There were few dif-
ferences with the largest for self-managing (14% for U.S. vs. 17% for non-
U.S.) and managing conflict (11% vs. 8%), and all others showing a 2%
difference. Chi-square difference tests found none of these differences were
significant. Overall for the combined total, supporting was the most fre-
quently mentioned skill (35%), followed by communicating (22%), motivat-
ing (18%), managing self (15%), and managing conflict (10%).
For Question 2 (“What methods do you use to assess these soft skills dur-
ing the application process?”), two researchers carefully reviewed each
response to identify themes that would indicate the specificity of assessment
criteria used. Based on this approach, four themes emerged as a coding
schema ranging from low to high specificity: (0) not assessed (e.g., “no spe-
cial method experience”; (1) assessed based on some nonspecific criteria
(e.g., “interview discussions”); (2) assessed based on some specific criteria
without indicating use of a quantitative methodology (e.g., “targeted selec-
tion interview method”; (3) assessed based on some specific criteria using a
quantitative methodology (e.g., “a competency model and the behavioral
event interview developed by David McClelland”). Two trained coders work-
ing independently, without knowledge of where each respondent was from,
coded the data using this schema with 82% agreement. All discrepancies
were resolved by discussion between the coders.
Figure 2 displays the results for Question 2. Consistent with Question 1
responses, a chi-square difference test found there were no significant differ-
ences in the distribution of assessment criteria specificity between the U.S.
and non-U.S. samples. For instance, very few non-U.S. and U.S. respondents
(2.2% vs. 2.9%) reported using a specific quantitative methodology to assess
soft skills (Code 3), while the majority (71% vs. 71.7%) reported not assess-
ing these skills or using no specific criteria to assess them (Codes 0 and 1).
Exactly 26.1% of respondents for the U.S. and non-U.S. respondents reported
using specific, nonquantitative criteria (Code 2).

Discussion
A variety of management education stakeholders from recruiters to business
school administrators agree that soft skills, including interpersonal skills, are
perhaps the most important set of skills for success in management education
and practice (e.g., Dierdorff & Rubin, 2009; Pichler & Beenen, 2014). Yet
there is little research examining the extent to which interpersonal skills are
distinct from soft skills and to our knowledge, no research on how MBA
admissions professionals in the United States and abroad conceptualize and
Beenen et al. 43

Figure 2.  U.S. and non-U.S. soft skills assessment techniques for MBA applicants.
“What techniques do you use to assess soft skills during the applicant interview process?”
Note. N = 115 Total responses from MBA program professionals (70 U.S. and 45 non-U.S.).
Differences between U.S. and non-US respondents were not statistically significant.

assess these skills. We addressed these important gaps in the literature to shed
light on the types of skills on which MBA programs might want to focus.
Our analysis of GMAC data indicated that MBA admissions professionals
viewed interpersonal skills as a distinct subset of soft skills. This is important
because these terms have been used interchangeably in the literature and by
management educators (Halfhill & Nielsen, 2007; Riggio & Tan, 2014).
Some respondents even found soft skills either too vague to define, or did not
have an a priori understanding of what soft skills are. Although further
research may be needed to define more precisely what the broader superset of
soft skills includes, our results clearly indicated interpersonal skills and soft
skills should not be used interchangeably. In management education, soft
skills may include both the interpersonal and conceptual components of man-
agerial skills such as creative thinking or strategic decision making (Dierdorff
et al., 2009).
Our results also suggested U.S. and non-U.S. MBA administrators report
the same sets of managerial interpersonal skills as important, with no dif-
ferences in the frequencies with which each skill was mentioned. To our
knowledge, no other research has compared how managerial interpersonal
skills are defined in different countries. Given the unaided recall methodol-
ogy used in this study, frequency is a reasonable proxy for importance. We
44 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

found responses from non-U.S. and U.S.-based MBA admissions profes-

sionals yielded no differences in how frequently specific interpersonal
skills were mentioned. We acknowledge some interpersonal skills may be
expressed differently across cultures. Nonetheless, in graduate manage-
ment education, it appears that U.S. and non-U.S. MBA admissions profes-
sionals agree about the relative importance of a core set of five managerial
interpersonal skills (managing self, communicating, supporting, motivat-
ing, managing conflict).
This is good news for business school faculty and administrators. Despite
important differences across cultures in how interpersonal skills are expressed
(e.g., Varma et al., 2009), our results suggested that management educators
can potentially focus on a consistent set of skills. This does not mean that
management education programs that offer interpersonal skills training
should necessarily leverage similar pedagogies. In fact, it is likely that man-
agement students in different cultures will benefit differentially from differ-
ent types of learning, training, and development systems. For instance,
management students in the United States may be much more likely to engage
in more active pedagogies, such as role-plays, than students from more
Confucian cultures, such as China or Japan (Volet, 1999). Consequently,
more research is needed on cultural differences in the expression of these
skills, their antecedents and outcomes, and conditions under which these
skills may be more or less effective or relevant for managerial performance.
Along with agreement in how interpersonal skills were conceptualized by
MBA admissions professionals, there also was consistency in how U.S. and
non-U.S. business schools assessed these skills among program applicants.
The largest proportion of respondents (67%) suggested applicant assessments
and interviews were used, with no specific criteria identified. Only 26.1%
indicated use of specific criteria or structured interviews, which is a more
valid predictor of success than unstructured interviews (Schmidt & Hunter,
1998). Very few reported using specific quantitative methods (2.6%) for
assessing students’ interpersonal skills. These results suggest a strong need
for a validated, widely used measure of these skills, whether it be a survey-
based measure or other assessment method, such as a situational judgment
test (Lopes et al., 2011). Such a measure could be used for both assessing
applicants, and student learning outcomes over the duration of their MBA
programs. We hope this research stimulates future work in this area.

Integrating Interpersonal Skills Into MBA Curricula

Although interpersonal skills are an educational priority for the primary
accrediting body for MBA programs (AACSB), MBA programs tend not to
Beenen et al. 45

differentiate themselves based on such priorities (Navarro, 2008). In fact,

these skills are substantially underrepresented in MBA programs, even
though they are among the most important skills identified by managers
(Murphy, Putter, & Johnson, 2014; Rubin & Dierdorff, 2009, 2011). Our
results suggest this lack of attention to interpersonal skills extends to MBA
program admissions practices. If management educators are charged with
developing these skills in MBA students, it is important to have a baseline
understanding of how proficient students are with these skills. The lack of
attention given to both assessing and developing these skills indicate MBA
faculty and administrators must overcome some key obstacles, including
facilitating effective assessment and curriculum alignment, and navigating
the political barriers to revising MBA curricula.

Improving Assessment and Curriculum Alignment.  Our research showed a clear

need for more effective assessment of interpersonal skills for MBA programs
that consider such skills a priority for their graduates. This points to the need
for greater standardization, and more deliberate and structured assessment
practices during the admissions process. At the same time, admissions offi-
cers should adapt these practices to accommodate potential language barriers
or cultural differences such as lower assertiveness in student teams with some
Asian populations (Beenen & Pichler, 2016). It also points to the need for
greater alignment between assessing students’ interpersonal capabilities, and
curriculum content focused on building on the strengths and remediating the
deficiencies identified by such assessment practices.
Since about 70% of respondents in this study appeared to use assess-
ment criteria that were nonspecific, there is substantial room for improve-
ment in interpersonal skills assessment for MBA applicants. For MBA
programs that use unstructured interviews to assess these skills, it is
important to recognize the biases and limitations that are linked to this
method (Dana, Dawes, & Peterson, 2013). These can be addressed in part
by standardizing and structuring the interview to address the specific skills
being evaluated (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). The question remains, which
specific skills should be assessed?
Although schools may want to decide which skills they view as important
for their graduates, the fact that there was agreement in the frequency with
which five key interpersonal skills (managing self, communicating, support-
ing, motivating, managing conflict; Pichler & Beenen, 2014) offers a starting
point for a comprehensive and parsimonious assessment model. There are
other more complex options with varying degrees of overlapping skills that
could serve as candidate skill models also. These include Hogan and Lock’s
(1995) seven skills (sensitivity to others’ needs, flexibility, perceptiveness,
46 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

instilling trust in others, consistency across interactions, accountability,

effective communication); Hayes’s (2002) nine skills (self-awareness, listen-
ing, helping, facilitating, asserting, influencing, negotiating, working with
groups, and managing relationships); or 12 subdimensions of two higher
order skills of communication (listening, oral, written, assertive, nonverbal)
and relationship building (cooperation/coordination, trust, intercultural sensi-
tivity, service orientation, self-presentation, social influence, conflict resolu-
tion/negotiation; Klein et al., 2006).
Whichever model is selected, the important point is MBA admissions
committees should standardize their selection process to ensure candidates
are evaluated with minimal bias. The gold standard may be a multimethod
approach that relies on structured interviews, survey self-report, and other-
report (e.g., current or former supervisors or instructors of applicants) and
behavioral responses to interpersonally challenging scenarios. With numer-
ous scales and subscales addressing a broad range interpersonal skills, the
field currently lacks a concise standardized psychometric self or other-report
survey, pointing to the need to develop such an instrument. This is not uncom-
mon with such complex skills as interpersonal skills (see Demaray et al.,
1995) and may point to the need for a standardized survey as part of a larger
set of multimethod assessments (Boyatzis & Saatcioglu, 2008).
An equally important step to improving assessment is to align assessment
outcomes with instructional outcomes. For instance, students who demon-
strate a need to develop supportive relationship development skills or conflict
management skills should be directed to courses and other instructional inter-
ventions focused on developing those specific skills. A core required people
management course could focus on any of the skill models noted above, with
1 or 2 weeks focused on each specific skill. Students who demonstrate obvi-
ous strength in specific skill areas can be peer mentors. Extracurricular activ-
ities, case analysis competitions, and internships also can be leveraged to
develop interpersonal competence. Online portfolios or other administrative
structures that are linked to students’ application files may be needed to
ensure students meet competency requirements and address gaps that may
have been identified during the application process. In other words, capturing
longitudinal data that demonstrates interpersonal skill improvements through-
out the duration of an MBA program would provide compelling evidence that
students are developing these skills.

Effective Instruction: Information, Demonstration, Practice, and Feedback and Eval-

uation. Integrating interpersonal skills into MBA curricula should rely on
four key elements supported by the science of learning, training and develop-
ment: information, demonstration, practice, and feedback and evaluation
Beenen et al. 47

Table 2.  Key Elements for MIPS Education and Development (Bedwell, Fiore, &
Salas, 2014).

Element Exemplary practices

Inform •• Instructor and self-set learning goals
•• Reading, lecture, discussion
•• Video/multimedia to illustrate concepts
Demonstrate •• Video/multimedia of others practicing
(positive and negative examples)
•• Instructor modelling of behavior
•• Case analysis and discussion
Practice •• Role-plays, simulations, mock press
conferences, experiential exercises
•• On-the-job practice
•• Reflection and debrief
Evaluation and feedback •• Self, peer, and instructor assessment
•• Interactive reflection and discussion
•• Complex integration across skills

(Bedwell et al., 2014; see Table 2). Information and demonstration confer
declarative knowledge that helps students understand conceptual foundations
of why each skill is important and how it operates. For example, reading an
article on active listening followed by video clips exemplifying active listen-
ing at its best and worst. A key challenge with teaching interpersonal skills is
the issue of how to simulate real-world interpersonal situations that students
may face. Practice addresses this challenge by providing students with oppor-
tunities to convert declarative knowledge into actual skills. For instance, an
experiential exercise in which students must actively listen to one another
while discussing inherently controversial topics on which there is vehement
disagreement (Whetten & Cameron, 2015). Feedback and evaluation provide
a necessary condition for learning as students remediate deficiencies and
focus on strengths. This includes standardized assessments of the declarative
knowledge acquired through informational and demonstrative approaches,
and experiential skills acquired through practice. It is also essential that feed-
back be given at multiple points in time so that learners can track their prog-
ress. Interpersonal skills training should ideally occur in multiple modules
across an MBA program, as should evaluation and feedback.

Overcoming Political Challenges.  The political environment of a business school

can affect the priority given to interpersonal skills training. For instance, in a
business school with a strong reputation in financial analytics, management
48 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

faculty may have greater difficulty advancing interpersonal skills curriculum

than they would in a business school with a strong reputation in leadership
development. Internal and external stakeholders in the former scenario may
be more resistant to changes that detract the school from its core identity and
competencies. In either setting, for this type of training to be accepted and
used, stakeholders must be persuaded that interpersonal skills will make a
measurable difference in the quality of graduates. Evaluating the training
intervention in a pretest–posttest format is important to demonstrate the busi-
ness case for the program’s return on investment (e.g., Hunt & Baruch, 2003).
We know that manager effectiveness (Dierdorff et al., 2009) and intrafirm
knowledge transfer (Kaše, Pauuwe, & Zupan, 2009) are enhanced by inter-
personal skills. These skills seem critical, therefore, both for management
education and for training and development in organizations (e.g., Tannen-
baum & Yukl, 1992). The gap between what managers do and what manage-
ment education offers has been an ongoing source of criticism (Murphy et al.,
2014; Pfeffer & Fong, 2002; Pfeffer & Sutton, 1999; Rubin & Dierdorff,
2011). Rubin and Dierdorff (2011) caution the solution to appropriately
aligning MBA curricula with what managers need is not in replacing a techni-
cally focused course with a people-focused one. As unpopular as it may be,
the best solution may entail additional content to prepare MBA graduates for
the managerial role. Many MBA programs pack their orientations full of
experiential activities aimed at interpersonal and leadership skills assessment
and development. Alternatively, voluntary extracurricular programs can pro-
vide motivated students with a path to acquire these skills while sidestepping
potential battles with resistant stakeholders as noted above. Finally, making
internships a requirement designed to give students the opportunity to apply
their interpersonal skills and receive feedback in a real business world setting
may be beneficial. Internships are common to fulltime MBA programs
(Beenen & Rousseau, 2010), though most do not require them.

Study Limitations and Contributions. A few limitations of this study high-

light the need for more research. First, the actual proportion of respondents
indicating they did not assess applicant soft skills may be higher than
reported. For example, 69 out of the 184 (about 37.5%) participants who
responded to the first question (“What soft skills do you look for in MBA
applicants?”), did not respond to the second question (“What methods do
you use to assess these soft skills during the admissions process?”). We
suspect some if not most of those who did not respond to the second ques-
tion also do not assess interpersonal skills of applicants and did not reveal
this due to self-presentation or social desirability bias. If this is the case, it
is possible the actual proportion of participants who do not assess
Beenen et al. 49

applicants’ interpersonal skills at all could be over 40%, and likely ranges
somewhere between 10% and 40%. Future research should attempt to
determine more precisely what percentage of MBA programs do not assess
interpersonal skills in their applicants.
Second, the unaided recall structure of the questions used in this study
limited our ability to analyze with greater precision the specific methods and
tools used to assess interpersonal skills. Future investigations may want to
consider exploring with greater precision which methods and tools MBA
admissions officials use when evaluating applicants’ interpersonal skills.
Finally, given that MBA programs abroad have been heavily influenced
by a North American MBA model, it is possible that our results reflect this
perspective more than a truly global perspective on managerial interper-
sonal skills. In other words, non-U.S. employers and managers may have
a different perspective on the nature of soft skills, managerial interper-
sonal skills and the relative importance of such skills than non-U.S. busi-
ness school admissions professionals who are entrenched in a North
American educational model. Future studies should consider investigating
whether MBA programs have narrowed and homogenized an otherwise
diverse, global perspective on the nature of managerial interpersonal skills.
For instance, it may be useful to examine differences in perceptions of
managerial interpersonal skills among a broader range of international
stakeholders including employers, managers, and MBA applicants who
have not yet been indoctrinated by a predominantly North American man-
agement education model.
Our study makes several contributions to research on interpersonal skills
in management education. First, to our knowledge this is the first study to
explore interpersonal skill assessment practices in MBA admissions. We
found robust consistency between U.S. and non-U.S. programs in how inter-
personal skills were both conceptualized by admissions professionals and
how they were assessed in the admissions process. Second, this was one of
the few studies to investigate the degree of overlap between “soft” and
“interpersonal” skills. Our results clearly showed the former is more broadly
construed and includes skills that are more conceptual in nature (e.g., cre-
ativity) or that are more focused on judgment and decision making (e.g.,
strategic thinking). Third, we have offered some specific suggestions on
how to improve assessment and training of interpersonal skills in manage-
ment education, including recommendations on enhancing alignment of
admissions processes and development of these skills in MBA programs. We
hope this article kindles further research efforts to further understand how to
conceptualize and assess these critical skills with a broader range of interna-
tional stakeholders.
50 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors would like to thank the
Graduate Management Admissions Council for their generous support of this research
through a Management Education Research Institute grant.

Note
1. They defined interpersonal skills as “goal-directed behaviors, including com-
munication and relationship-building competencies, employed in interpersonal
interaction episodes characterized by complex perceptual and cognitive pro-
cesses, dynamic verbal and nonverbal interaction exchanges, diverse roles, moti-
vations, and expectancies” (Klein et al., 2006, p. 81).

References
Azevedo, A., Apfelthaler, G., & Hurst, D. (2012). Competency development in
business graduates: An industry-driven approach for examining the alignment
of undergraduate business education with industry requirements. International
Journal of Management Education, 10, 12-28.
Baldwin, T. T., Bedell, M. D., & Johnson, J. L. (1997). The social fabric of a team-
based M.B.A. program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance.
Academy of Management Journal, 40, 1369-1397.
Beard, D., Schwieger, D., & Surendran, K. (2008). Integrating soft skills assessment
through university, college, and programmatic efforts at an AACSB accredited
institution. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19, 229-240.
Bedwell, W. L., Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2014). Developing the future workforce: An
approach for integrating interpersonal skills into the MBA classroom. Academy
of Management Learning & Education, 13, 171-186.
Beenen, G., & Pichler, S. (2016). A discussion forum on managerial interpersonal
skills. Journal of Management Development, 35, 706-716.
Beenen, G., & Rousseau, D. M. (2010). Getting the most from MBA internships:
Promoting intern learning and job acceptance. Human Resource Management,
49, 3-22.
Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J. (2005). How business schools lost their way. Harvard
Business Review, 83(5), 96-104.
BizEd Staff. (2016, June 21). Tools of the trade: Eye on soft skills. BizEd. Retrieved from
http://www.bizedmagazine.com/archives/2016/4/ideas-in-action/tools-of-the-trade
Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A
review and a theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management
Review, 15, 113-136.
Beenen et al. 51

Bommer, W. H., Rubin, R. S., & Bartels, L. K. (2005). Assessing the unassess-
able: Interpersonal and managerial skills. In K. Martell & T. Calderon (Eds.),
Assessment of student learning in business schools: Best practices each step
of the way (Vol. 1, pp. 103-129). Tallahassee, FL: Association for Institutional
Research and AACSB International.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Saatcioglu, A. (2008). A 20-year view of trying to develop emo-
tional, social and cognitive intelligence competencies in graduate management
education. Journal of Management Development, 27, 92-108.
Caruso, D. R., Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (2002). Emotional intelligence and emo-
tional leadership. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple
intelligences and leadership (pp. 55-74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Clarke, M. (2016). Addressing the soft skills crisis. Strategic HR Review, 15,
137-139.
Dana, J., Dawes, R., & Peterson, N. (2013). Belief in the unstructured interview: The
persistence of an illusion. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 512-520.
De Dreu, C. K., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E. S., & Nauta, A. (2001). A theory-
based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 22, 645-668.
Demaray, M. K., Ruffalo, S. L., Carlson, J., Busse, B. T., Olson, A. E., McManus, S.
M., & Leventhai, A. (1995). Social skills assessment: A comparative evaluation
of six published rating scales. School Psychology Review, 24, 648-672.
Dierdorff, E. C., & Rubin, R. S. (2006, December). Toward a comprehensive empiri-
cal model of managerial competencies. Technical report presented to the MER
Institute of the Graduate Management Admission Council. McLean, VA.
Dierdorff, E. C., Norton, J. J., Drewes, D. W., Kroustalis, C. M., Rivkin, D., & Lewis,
P. (2009, February 12). Greening of the World of Work: Implications for O*
NET®-SOC and new and emerging occupations. Retrieved from https://www.
onetcenter.org/dl_files/Green.pdf
Dierdorff, E. C., Rubin, R. S., & Morgeson, F. P. (2009). The milieu of manage-
rial work: An integrative framework linking work context to role requirements.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 972-988.
Dreher, G. F., & Ryan, K. C. (2004). A suspect MBA selection model: The case
against the standard work experience requirement. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 3, 87-91.
Earley, P. C., & Peterson, R. S. (2004). The elusive cultural chameleon: Cultural
intelligence as a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 100-115.
Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W., Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J.,
Douglas, C., & Frink, D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the political
skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31, 126-152.
Fisher, A. (2007). The trouble with MBAs: The attributes employers value most-
interpersonal skills-are the ones recent B-school graduates lack. Fortune, 155(8),
49. Retrieved from http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_
archive/2007/04/30/8405397/index.htm?postversion=2007042306
52 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

Ghannadian, F. F. (2013). What employers want, what we teach. BizEd, 12(2), 40-44.
Retrieved from http://www.bizedmagazine.com/archives/2013/2/features/what-
employers-want-what-we-teach
Graduate Management Admissions Council. (2005). Corporate Recruiters Survey:
General report. Reston, VA: Author.
Halfhill, T. R., & Nielsen, T. M. (2007). Quantifying the “softer side” of management
education: An example using teamwork competencies. Journal of Management
Education, 31, 64-80.
Hayes, J. (2002). Interpersonal skills at work (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hedlund, J., Wilt, J. M., Nebel, K. L., Ashford, S. J., & Sternberg, R. J. (2006).
Assessing practical intelligence in business school admissions: A supplement to
the graduate management admissions test. Learning and Individual Differences,
16, 101-127.
Hogan, J., & Lock, J. (1995, May). A taxonomy of interpersonal skills for business
interactions. Paper presented at the 10th Annual Conference of the Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.
Hoover, J. D., Giambatista, R. C., Sorenson, R. L., & Bommer, W. H. (2010).
Assessing the effectiveness of whole person learning pedagogy in skill acquisi-
tion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 192-203.
Hunt, J. W., & Baruch, Y. (2003). Developing top managers: The impact of interper-
sonal skills training. Journal of Management Development, 22, 729-752.
Hurrell, S. A. (2016). Rethinking the soft skills deficit blame game: Employers, skills
withdrawal and the reporting of soft skills gaps. Human Relations, 69, 605-628.
Ingols, C., & Shapiro, M. (2014). Concrete steps for assessing the “soft skills” in an
MBA program. Journal of Management Education, 38, 412-435.
Jackson, D., & Chapman, E. (2012). Empirically derived competency profiles for
Australian business graduates and their implications for industry and business
schools. International Journal of Management Education, 10, 112-128.
Kantrowitz, T. M. (2005). Development and construct validation of a measure of
soft skills performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta.
Kaše, R., Paauwe, J., & Zupan, N. (2009). HR practices, interpersonal relations, and
intrafirm knowledge transfer in knowledge-intensive firms: A social network
perspective. Human Resource Management, 48, 615-639.
Klein, C., DeRouin, R. E., & Salas, E. (2006). Uncovering workplace interpersonal
skills: A review, framework, and research agenda. International Review of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 21, 80-126.
Kretovics, M. A. (1999). Assessing the MBA: What do our students learn? Journal of
Management Development, 18, 125-136.
Levinson, E. (2016, February 16). Stop calling it soft skills! Association for
Talent Development. Retrieved from https://www.td.org/Publications/Blogs/
Management-Blog/2016/02/Stop-Calling-It-Soft-Skills
Lopes, P. N., Nezlek, J. B., Extremera, N., Hertel, J., Fernández-Berrocal, P., Schütz,
A., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotion regulation and the quality of social interaction:
Beenen et al. 53

Does the ability to evaluate emotional situations and identify effective responses
matter? Journal of Personality, 79, 429-467.
Murphy, S. E., Putter, S., & Johnson, S. (2014). Soft skills training: Best practices in
industry and higher education. In R. E. Riggio & S. J. Tan (Eds.), Leader inter-
personal and influence skills: The soft skills of leadership (pp. 276-310). New
York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Navarro, P. (2008). The MBA core curricula of top-ranked US business schools:
A study in failure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7,
108-123.
Offermann, L. R., & Phan, L. U. (2002). Culturally intelligent leadership for
a diverse world. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy & F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.),
Multiple intelligences and leadership (pp. 187-214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than
meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, 78-95.
Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (1999). Knowing “what” to do is not enough: Turning
knowledge into action. California Management Review, 42, 83-108.
Pichler, S., & Beenen, G. (2014). Toward the development of a model and a measure
of managerial interpersonal skills. In R. E. Riggio & S. J. Tan (Eds.), Leader
interpersonal and influence skills: The soft skills of leadership (pp. 11-30). New
York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Riggio, R. E., Riggio, H. R., Salinas, C., & Cole, E. J. (2003). The role of social and
emotional communication skills in leader emergence and effectiveness. Group
Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 83-103.
Riggio, R. E., & Tan, S. J. (Eds.). (2014). Leader interpersonal and influence skills:
The soft skills of leadership. New York, NY: Routledge.
Robbins, S. P., & Hunsaker, P. L. (2009). Training in interpersonal skills (5th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2017). Organizational behavior (17th ed.). Boston,
MA: Prentice Hall.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s
workplace. Business Communication Quarterly, 75, 453-465.
Rubin, R. S., Bommer, W. H., & Baldwin, T. T. (2002). Using extracurricular activity
as an indicator of interpersonal skill: Prudent evaluation or recruiting malprac-
tice? Human Resource Management, 41, 441-454.
Rubin, R. S., & Dierdorff, E. C. (2009). How relevant is the MBA? Assessing the
alignment of required curricula and required managerial competencies. Academy
of Management Learning & Education, 8, 208-224.
Rubin, R. S., & Dierdorff, E. C. (2011). On the road to Abilene: Time to manage
agreement about MBA curricular relevance. Academy of Management Learning
& Education, 10, 148-161.
Rynes, S. L., Trank, C. Q., Lawson, A. M., & Ilies, R. (2003). Behavioral course-
work in business education: Growing evidence of a legitimacy crisis. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 2, 269-283.
54 Journal of Management Education 42(1)

Sackett, P. R., Schmitt, N., Ellington, J. E., & Kabin, M. B. (2001). High-stakes test-
ing in employment, credentialing, and higher education: Prospects in a post-affir-
mative-action world. American Psychologist, 56, 302-318.
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods
in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of
research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.
Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Theory-based university admissions testing for a new millen-
nium. Educational Psychologist, 39, 185-198.
Tannenbaum, S. I., & Yukl, G. (1992). Training and development in work organiza-
tions. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 399-441.
Varma, A., Pichler, S., Budhwar, P., & Biswas, S. (2009). Chinese host country
nationals’ willingness to support expatriates: The role of collectivism, interper-
sonal affect and Guanxi. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,
9, 199-216.
Volet, S. (1999). Learning across cultures: Appropriateness of knowledge transfer.
International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 625-643.
Whetten, D. A., & Cameron, K. S. (2015). Developing management skills (9th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zimmerman, R. D., Triana, M. D. C., & Barrick, M. R. (2010). Predictive criterion-
related validity of observer ratings of personality and job-related competencies
using multiple raters and multiple performance criteria. Human Performance,
23, 361-378.