By saying that someone `has good soft skills` they usually mean merely nice communication. And it makes sense in some cases, however, is incorrect by the form. The trick is that the aforesaid does actually mean that someone had just made a nice one-time personal impression on the teller.
Whereas to be a really effective communicator means not just to be a nice person to someone, but to use communication as an instrument to achieve your goals. That’s about listening and persuasion skills, courtesy and making a personal impression, understanding human psychology, being well-informed, prepared, and focused on a goal, conflict management skills, etc. One needs to master a really great stack of communication skills that have their own names.
However, communication skills are just a part of what we call soft skills. We could speak about leadership, directiveness, analytical skills, conceptual thinking, service orientation, quality focus, stress tolerance, GTD, language skills, and so on. The list is long and specific to every profession though.
Soft skills are nothing less than just a common simplification name for general managerial competencies. In order not to mix the original and a copy we’ve started disclosing competencies in the next post (please, follow the link to continue reading): https://faq.hravity.com/2019/05/competences-as-core-of-modern-hr.html
And that is all...
To summarize: it is a more correct way to say `competencies` instead of `soft skills. Effective communication is not `soft skills` or a `soft skill` but a specific global structured cluster of skills. If you are a manager, one `soft skill` can be your `hard skill`.
Now live with it, read the books, and let the force [of competence] be with you :)