Service needs assessment of employment-related soft skills for transition age youth with disabilities

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Work-related soft skills can be an important factor for successful employment outcomes, particularly for individuals with disabilities.

OBJECTIVE:

This study conducted a survey on the needs of important work-related soft skills for employment success of transition age youth with disabilities.

METHODS:

183 participants included 27 individuals with disabilities, 32 family members of individuals with disabilities,35 disability service providers, 47 disability advocates and 42 employers, completed surveys to identify a list of soft skills by importance for transition age youth with disabilities to succeed at work.

RESULTS:

All five groups noted the top two skills: asking for help and responding to feedback, as most important. Employers also rated interview skills as third most important skills, while the other four groups advocated requesting for accommodations and negotiating conflicts as the third and fourth most important skills.

CONCLUSIONS:

Findings indicated soft skills being critical to work success for transition age youth with disabilities, with some skills potentially being more important. Vocational counseling implications were discussed.

Keywords

Needs survey soft skills transition age youth employment

1 Introduction

Employment directly impacts one’s quality of life and wellness, particularly for individuals with disabilities. Employment not only provides material and financial resources, but also promotes health, self-worth, peer respect, and community participation and integration (Angrave & Charlwood, 2015; Boreham et al., 2015; Julià et al., 2017; Stephens et al., 2005). Youth with disabilities experience significant barriers to employment. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act [WIOA section 7(42) of the Act and §361.5(c) (58)] defines transition age youth with a disability as an individual with a disability who is not younger than 14 or older than 24. There are significant gaps in both labor force participation rates and employment rates for young people with and without a disability (Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS], 2019). The labor force participation rates for youth with a disability are 13.5%among youth aged 16 to 19, and 45.5%among those aged 20 to 24; while they are 35.8%and 73.4%respectively among youth without a disability (BLS, 2019). Therefore, addressing employment barriers among youth with disabilities early and providing them with the support to remain successful in the workplace, will help them maximize employment participation as adults (Harkin, 2013; Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1990, Section 701).

Youth typically embark on major adult life activities such as employment around age 15 or 16 (Davis, 2003; Davis et al., 2012; U.S. Government Accountability Office [USGAO], 2008). Transition age youth with disabilities struggle to secure permanent, paid employment during the same embarkation (Rogers et al., 2006; Rusch & Braddock, 2004). This process is further complicated by a dearth of effective services that aid in the transition into adulthood (USGAO, 2008). There are many contributing factors to this lower rate of employment of transition-age youth with disabilities including work skills, gaps in work history, inadequate long-term support, fear of disability disclosure, lack of transportation, and managing disability-related barriers (Davis et al., 2012; McDonnall, 2011; Noel et al., 2017; Riesen et al., 2014).

The purpose of this study was to utilize a needs assessment to identify the most important soft skills for transition age youth with disabilities for work success, from the perspective of various disability-related stakeholders including persons with disabilities, family members, advocates, providers and employers. The literature on soft skills rarely presents a range of stakeholder perspectives. By utilizing a range of perspectives regarding soft skills, this paper makes a unique contribution to the soft skills literature and their importance for individuals with disabilities. The following introduction will discuss soft skills, employer perspectives, and the importance of including the perspective of individuals with disabilities for service systems and interventions.

1.1 Soft skills

Soft skills are generally defined as an array of social/interpersonal skills that enable employees to get along with their colleagues, make critical decisions, and solve problems (Grugulis & Vincent, 2009). Soft skills empower individuals in the workplace to communicate with and collaborate effectively with coworkers and supervisors, which also contributes to higher job satisfaction and overall functioning (Boreham et al., 2015; Kyllonen, 2013). Studies identified soft skills as essential skills for employment for youth with a variety of disabilities as well, including autism, psychiatric, and visual impairment. These essential skills include communication skills such as having reciprocal conversations, making small talk, self-advocacy skills such as resolving interpersonal conflict, appropriate interpersonal skills such as general social awareness and respecting personal space (Higgins et al., 2008; Lee & Carter, 2012; Lindstrom et al., 2013; Wallace & Tauber, 2004). For example, Blades et al. (2012) conducted a review of relevant literature to determine what types of employability skills for young people were critical to employment success. They determined there were eight common soft skills applicable to a wide range of jobs. Specially, they identified core areas of soft skills including: (a) confidence; (b) self-esteem; (c) communication; (d) teamwork; (e) reliability; (f) positive attitude; (g) planning; and (h) problem solving. The researchers noted in their review that the measurement and assessment of these skills were inconsistent or absent, and suggested more formal evaluation of these important skills in future studies.

Employers desire job candidates who possess certain soft skills (Mager, 2017). Employers are seeking candidates with strong communication, organization, teamwork, and critical thinking skills to name a few high-demand skills (Bauer-Wolf, 2019; Berger, 2016; Mager, 2017). Researchers have documented that employers often consider these largely interpersonal skills to be as important as formal/technical qualifications. Having these skills may provide prospective employees an opportunity to set themselves apart from other candidates (Blades et al., 2012; Mager, 2017). Interestingly, a LinkedIn survey of 291 hiring managers in the U.S. revealed that 59%believed candidates with those skills were difficult to find (Bauer-Wolf, 2019; Berger, 2016). Some employers have gone so far as to provide soft skills training for employees. Bishop (2019) developed a soft skills training that has helped to increase time management, communication, and teamwork among workforce trainees. Indeed, employers have reported a positive impact on productivity after implementing soft skills training for their employees (Bishop, 2019).

For transition age youth with disabilities, a focus on building work-related soft skills is especially important because this is a critical period when they are developing life skills and striving to engage in social roles such as “worker” (Davis, 2003; Davis et al., 2012; USGAO, 2008). Fortunately, preliminary studies have supported that soft skills can be successfully taught to transition age youth with disabilities. Clark et al., (2019) found high school students with disabilities were able to improve their soft skills using the curriculum UPGRADE Your Performance, which uses research-based practices to teach soft skills. The soft skills in the study were defined as attitude and cooperation, reliability, teamwork, and communication (Clark et al., 2019). Another study by Bobroff and Sax (2010) discovered that peer tutors teaching interview skills to transition-age youth with disabilities resulted in improved interview skills. Their sample consisted of six students with disabilities (ages 18 to 22), three males and three females. Additionally, the study sample included Caucasian and Hispanic participants, who had a range of disability types, from Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) to Severely Emotionally Disturbance. However, larger studies including more diversity in terms of gender, age, and disability would be needed in order to generalize their findings.

Existing studies on soft skills or vocational soft skills training have focused on students with emotional disturbances, learning disabilities, and youth with ASD (Hillier et al., 2011; Murray & Doren, 2013). A review of the literature on soft skills training/vocational/social skills training did not identify studies that specifically addressed what soft skills were the most important for transition age youth to succeed at work. Existing literature has provided generalized vocational and social skills training without emphasis on any specific observable and measurable behavioral skills. Most developed curricula addressed soft skills in a general way. For example, Murray (2013) utilized WAGES, which is a job-related, social skills curriculum consisting of 33 comprehensive lessons in four domains: self-regulation, teamwork, communication, and problem solving. It usually takes 3–4 times a week for 4.5 months. This curriculum may be difficult to implement at a vocational rehabilitation agency setting due to the intensity of the curriculum. Additionally, WAGES applied to high school settings; therefore, for older transition age youth in community settings, it may be harder to implement. There is a need for the field to develop other types of curricula that are user-friendly, easy to implement with shorter duration, and are informed by stakeholders’ input.

It is important to use a patient-centered and public involvement approach when planning the development of soft skills curriculum and training techniques (Brett et al., 2010; Del Campo et al., 2010; Kastner et al., 2015; Oaseem et al., 2012; Tong et al., 2012). Individuals with disabilities, family members, service providers and advocates serve as the end-users for the soft skills training modules. Public and end-user involvement in research has been frequently endorsed in the development of interventions and medical devices (Coon et al, 2016; Crawford et al., 2002). The idea behind the statement ‘nothing about us without us’ (Charlton, 1998) suggests that stakeholders such as persons with disabilities, their families, advocates, and providers are important when designing future interventions. Service systems are composed of people who hold varying values, roles (i.e. provider, advocate, family member, service-user), and beliefs within a social, political, and environmental context. This plurality of roles contributes to the knowledge that determines systems and practices. By actively inviting these roles and views into the development of a service system or intervention, more dynamic knowledge can be generated, implemented, and utilized to improve interventions and service planning (Shiekh et al., 2014). This ethical approach could result in more efficient interventions, systems, and planning. Moreover, leaving individuals with disabilities out of service planning is an example of systemic discrimination. A needs assessment of what soft skills transition-age youth with disabilities find most important and essential for employment is one method to provide more inclusive service planning that address the values, concerns and priorities of end-users (Grundy et al, 2019). This rationale aligns with the principle of patient and public involvement in guideline development (Armstrong et al, 2018). Patient and public involvement in the development of service planning discourages systematic discrimination against individuals with disabilities and respects their rights in healthcare decisions and leads to more person-centered disability services (Armstrong et al., 2018; Staley, 2009; Sweeney et al., 2009; Wicks et al., 2018; Wiering et al., 2017).

The rationale in conducting this needs assessment was due to a lack of effective skills teaching methods in the field. Existing prevalent curriculum approaches to soft skills were often developed without a systematic needs assessment. A larger needs assessment, based on multiple perspectives of end-users, such as individuals with disabilities and their family members, service providers, employers, and advocates will provide a varied and comprehensive assessment of service needs faced by transition aged youth with disabilities seeking employment. This study addressed the existing gap in the literature on soft skills curriculum development informed by needs assessment of end-users. Although previous studies have identified soft skills that are important for transition aged youth with disabilities, their conclusions were based on literature reviews (Higgins et al., 2008; Lee & Carter, 2012; Lindstrom et al., 2013). Moreover, existing models of employment skills teaching (i.e. UCLA Workplace Fundamentals) attempt to teach multiple skills simultaneously with great intensity and duration instead of focusing on a single crucial skill within a short duration (Nuechterlein et al., 2020; Wallace & Tauber, 2004). Soft skills training can be delivered via a Direct Skills Teaching (DST) approach, which integrates cognitive and behavioral techniques and allows participants to be more active in the teaching experience (Cohen et al.,1985; Ellison et al., 2002; Shern et al., 2000). DST is a promising practice for individuals with psychiatric disabilities and implements a structured curriculum including detailed content outlines and lesson plans (Cohen et al., 1985; Rogers et al., 2006). Studies utilized two DST based interventions for individuals with disabilities to help build work-related soft skills, when delivered in four group sessions (1-1.5 hours each), demonstrated feasibility, practicality, and usefulness (Oursler et al., 2021; Lu et al., 2020; Oursler et al., 2019). This current study on needs assessment was conducted to better understand the most important and desired soft skills for transition-age youth with disabilities as an initial step to inform the development of employment skills teaching curricula using the DST approach. Additionally, there is a lack of skills teaching methods in the field, since many available skills teaching models do not clearly define a skill as knowledge and behavior and do not address a single critical skill, but rather an array of skills. Our needs assessment is an initial step in the ultimate aim to develop an effective, time-efficient, feasible and practical approach of employment skills teaching method which focuses on one crucial skill at a time.

2 Methods

2.1 Participants

Study participants needed to meet at least one of the following criteria: 1) a person with a disability; 2) a family member of someone with a disability; 3) a disability-related service provider such as counselor, case manager, social worker or nurse; or 4) an advocate who is a person who supports or advocates for people with disabilities; or 5) an employer/human resources manager. A total of 183 eligible individuals completed the study. The study received IRB approval.

2.2 Procedure

Participants were recruited in two ways. Fifteen participants were recruited from the State Rehabilitation Council of New Jersey for the Department of Labor and Workforce Development- New Jersey Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Services. Council Membership is in accordance with Section 105 of the 1998 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act and New Jersey Executive Order 110 and reflects a diverse range of disability groups, geographical areas, racial, ethnic and gender groups. Each member is appointed by the Governor of New Jersey. The Council represents a broad spectrum of individuals who are concerned with the vocational needs of people with disabilities and who support the objectives of the public rehabilitation program in New Jersey. Council members include: (a) advocates; (b) business employers; (c) VR service recipients; (d) community rehabilitation program representatives; (e) VR counselors; (f) family members; and (g) people with disabilities.

The rest of the participants, 170 in total, were contacted by students to complete a survey either in person or over the phone. Students were instructed to contact the following groups: advocates, providers, individuals with disability, family members, and employers to complete the survey over the phone. Students were instructed to contact people by phone and collect data via live phone interviews. Data was not collected through an online survey. Students came from a diverse background from the undergraduate Psychiatric Rehabilitation program and the graduate Rehabilitation Counseling program. The sample was a sample of convenience. The sample, as a result, was not a homogenous sample, because students did not sample from the same agency or same location (i.e. city, town, state), date, or time. Data was collected over several semesters (2017–2020). There was not a list of potential participants given by the research team. Data of the percentage of those people who were contacted but refused to participate was not collected and therefore unknown. The students informed participants that the survey was being conducted as part of an assignment for a course for extra credit. The survey was completely voluntarily and anonymous. If a person expressed interest, the student scheduled a time to conduct the survey. The participant gave their verbal consent prior to survey administration.

2.3 Instrument and data collection

Participants were asked to identify themselves as any of the following, as they applied: a person with disability, a family member, a service provider, an employer/human resources manager and/or an advocate. Participants who identified themselves as a person with a disability were asked to indicate the type(s) of disability. This survey was designed to be anonymous. Since other demographic information was not going to be analyzed, a larger demographic questionnaire was omitted as to not deter individuals from participating. The participants were provided a definition of work-related soft skills; “soft skills refer to interpersonal skills, time management skills, emotional regulation skills that are relevant to job performance.” The participants were also informed that transition age youth referred to youth age 14 to 24 with disabilities.

Participants were asked to identify degrees of importance in a list of soft skills from 1 (not important), 2 (somewhat important), 3 (very important), to 4 (extremely important). The pre-selected soft skills were: (a) presenting qualifications to assist in getting the job; (b) conversing with others directed toward the lunch hour and breaks; (c) responding to feedback for interactions with the supervisor; (d) using a planner to organize work activities based on employer input; (e) asking for help when assistance is needed on the job; (f) requesting accommodations; (g) requesting time off for sick leave or vacation time; (h) negotiating conflicts with others on the job; (i) getting a job with a criminal conviction; and (j) other skills that allowed participants to add specific skills that were not on the list. This list was established based on clinical experiences and case examples of members of the research team who provided employment-related services to individuals with disabilities or a supervisor of rehabilitation counselors. Additional resources used were existing publications on behaviorally defined work-related soft skills (i.e. Phillips et al., 2014; Riesen et al., 2014).

Additionally, there were open-ended questions for additional soft skills that people could suggest. The list included necessary skills that are behaviorally specific. For example, instead of communication skills at interviews, a relevant, behaviorally specific skill would be presenting qualifications at interviews.

Frequency and descriptive analyses were conducted using SPSS 26.

3 Results

185 participants were included in this study, for which 183 produced usable data. Two participants’ data were excluded because one did not provide their role affiliation, while another did not provide ratings for more than 5 out of the 10 skills. The analysis is therefore based on 183 participants: 27 (14.8%) identified as individuals with disabilities, 32 (17.5%) as family members with disabilities, 35 (19.1%) as service providers, 47 (25.7%) as advocates, and 42 (23.0) identified as employers/human resources managers. For those who reported multiple roles, we coded the person’s principal roles in this order of importance: individuals with disabilities, followed by family members, providers, and advocates. The priority role was assigned according to the role proximity to the person with a disability. For example, an individual with disabilities would be the priority role rather than an advocate, in the event that the individual identifies as both. Among the 27 individuals who self-identified as having a disability, 15 also endorsed other roles such as provider, family member, advocate, or in combination, for example, advocate and provider, or advocate, family member and provider. In those cases, we counted the person’s principal role as an individual with disabilities. Using this method of classification, the final sample included 27 individuals with disabilities, 32 family members, 35 providers, 47 advocates and 42 employers. Of the 27 individuals with disabilities, 17 individuals provided information on the type of disability: 15 with psychiatric disabilities only, while 1 with physical disability, 1 with both physical and psychiatric disabilities. The psychiatric disabilities reported included: schizophrenia, anxiety disorders, autism spectrum disorder, bipolar disorders, borderline disorders, depressive disorders, and ADHD. Table 1 provides the breakdown of the percentages of the participants in terms of the roles they assumed.

Table 1
Breakdown of participants (N = 183)

N %

Classification while allowing multiple roles

Individuals with disabilities 27 14.8

Psychiatric disabilities 15 8.2

Physical 1 0.5

Multiple disabilities 1 0.5

Missing 10 5.5

Family member 32 17.5

Provider 35 19.1

Advocate 47 25.7

Employer 42 23.0

	N	%
Classification while allowing multiple roles
Individuals with disabilities	27	14.8
Psychiatric disabilities	15	8.2
Physical	1	0.5
Multiple disabilities	1	0.5
Missing	10	5.5
Family member	32	17.5
Provider	35	19.1
Advocate	47	25.7
Employer	42	23.0

With regard to the responses of individuals with disabilities (n = 27), the degrees of important work-related soft skills was [listed from the “Extremely Important (4)”, “Very Important (3), Somewhat Important (2), to “Not Important (1)”]: (a) responding to feedback (M = 3.66; SD = 0.68); (b) asking for help (M = 3.63; SD = 0.74); (c) requesting accommodations (M = 3.41; SD = 0.69); (d) other skills such as self-disclosure, communication skills, dependability, time management skills, and understanding work culture (M = 3.33; SD = 1.41); (e) presenting qualifications (M = 3.22; SD = 0.8); (f) negotiating conflicts (M = 3.07; SD = 1); (g) using a planner (M = 2.85; SD = 0.9); (h) requesting time off (M = 2.85; SD = 0.84); (i) getting a job with a criminal conviction (M = 2.77; SD = 1.02); and (j) conversing with others (M = 2.63; SD = 0.79). Full list findings in Table 2.

Table 2

Top four soft skills for success at work for transition-age youth regarded by stakeholders (N = 183)

	Mean ratings	SD of rating
	Persons with disabilities (n = 27)
Responding to feedback	3.66	0.68
Asking for help	3.63	0.74
Request accommodations	3.41	0.69
Other skills	3.33	1.41
	Family (n = 32)
Asking for help	3.78	0.49
Responding to feedback	3.59	0.62
Request accommodations	3.38	0.88
Presenting qualifications	3.22	0.79
	Provider (n = 35)
Asking for help	3.69	0.53
Responding to feedback	3.46	0.65
Request accommodations	3.43	0.81
Negotiating conflicts	3.37	0.84
	Advocate (n = 47)
Asking for help	3.74	0.49
Responding to feedback	3.55	0.65
Request accommodations	3.45	0.75
Negotiating conflicts / other skills^*	3.43	0.68 / 0.85
	Employer (n = 42)
Asking for help	3.95	0.22
Responding to feedback	3.57	0.55
Presenting qualifications	3.55	0.71
Request accommodations / other skills^*	3.40	0.77 / 0.99
	Total (N = 183)
Asking for help	3.77	0.50
Responding to feedback	3.57	0.62
Request accommodations	3.42	0.77
Presenting qualifications / negotiating conflicts / other skills^*	3.31	0.76 / 0.84 / 1.10

Note. 1 = not important; 2 = somewhat important; 3 = very important 4 = extremely important; ^*denotes skills that had the same mean rating.

For family members (n = 32), the list from the most important to the least important was the following: (a) asking for help (M = 3.78; SD = 0.49); (b) responding to feedback (M = 3.59; SD = 0.62); (c) requesting accommodations (M = 3.38; SD = 0.88); (d) presenting qualifications (M = 3.22; SD = 0.79); (e) negotiating conflicts (M = 3.19; SD = 0.91); (f) other skills (identified by participants as: time management, communication skills, team work skills, accountability, and responsibility; M = 3.00; SD = 1.33); (g) using a planner (M = 2.97; SD = 0.93); (h) requesting time off (M = 2.71; SD = 0.82); (i) conversing with others (M = 2.73; SD = 0.93); and (j) getting a job with a criminal conviction (M = 2.69; SD = 1.23).

For service providers (n = 35), the list from the most important to the least important was: (a) asking for help (M = 3.69; SD = 0.53); (b) responding to feedback (M = 3.46; SD = 0.65); (c) requesting accommodations (M = 3.43; SD = 0.81); (d) negotiating conflicts (M = 3.37; SD = 0.84); (e) other skills (identified by participants as: time management, positive attitude, personal hygiene, interview skills, asking for clarification, professionalism, and following through with a task; M = 3.29; SD = 1.14); (f) using a planner (M = 3.17; SD = 0.75); (g) presenting qualifications (M = 3.06; SD = 0.8); (h) requesting time off (M = 2.74; SD = 0.82); (i) getting a job with a criminal conviction (M = 2.74; SD = 1.12); and (j) conversing with others (M = 2.31; SD = 0.76).

For advocates (n = 47), the list from the “Extremely Important (4)”, “Very Important (3), Somewhat Important (2), to “Not Important (1)” was: (a) asking for help (M = 3.74; SD = 0.49); (b) responding to feedback (M = 3.55; SD = 0.65); (c) requesting accommodations (M = 3.45; SD = 0.75); (d) negotiating conflicts (M = 3.43; SD = 0.68); (e) other skills (identified as: time management, communication, socialization skills, interpersonal skills, flexibility, boundaries, and understanding workplace culture; M = 3.43; SD = 0.85); (f) presenting qualifications (M = 3.36; SD = 0.76); (g) using a planner (M = 3.02; SD = 0.95); (h) getting a job with a criminal conviction (M = 2.92; SD = 1.00); (i) requesting time off (M = 2.83; SD = 0.79); and (j) conversing with others (M = 2.62; SD = 0.92).

For employers (N = 42), the list from the “Extremely Important (4)”, “Very Important (3), Somewhat Important (2), to “Not Important (1)”: was: (a) asking for help (M = 3.95; SD = 0.22); (b) responding to feedback (M = 3.57; SD = 0.55); (c) presenting qualifications (M = 3.55; SD = 0.71); (d) requesting accommodations (M = 3.40; SD = 0.77); (e); negotiating conflicts (M = 3.36; SD = 0.85); (f) requesting time off (M = 2.90; SD = 0.85); (g) using a planner (M = 2.86; SD = 0.90); (h) getting a job with a criminal conviction (M = 2.80; SD = 1.08); and (i) conversing with others (M = 2.38; SD = 0.99).

Taken all together, the top two soft skills identified by individuals with disabilities, family members, advocates, providers and employers as most important for success at work for transition age youth were: (1) asking for help; (2) responding to feedback. Employers also rated presenting qualifications at interviews, requesting accommodations and negotiating conflicts as between “very important” and “extremely important”. While for individuals with disabilities, family members, providers and advocates, the next three important soft skills relevant to success at work for transition age youth were: (1) requesting accommodations; (2) presenting qualifications and (3) negotiating conflicts. Using a planner, requesting time off, getting a job with a criminal conviction and conversing with others received ratings of lesser importance compared to the other skills among all five groups.

4 Discussion

Youth with disabilities experience significant barriers in employment, and the unemployment rates increase as they age without intervention. Therefore, early interventions for addressing employment barriers and providing support to remain successful in the workplace is expected to help them achieve greater opportunity of employment participation as adults (Harkin, 2013; Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1990, Section 701). Individuals with disabilities, family members, providers, advocates and employers provided ratings of importance for a pre-selected set of nine soft skills and one additional soft skill named by the participant. The needs assessment conducted by this study provides an empirical foundation for prioritizing training and service activities for transition-age youth with disabilities. Findings also may help reduce ambiguity in service provision for transition-age youth to develop soft skills necessary for success at work.

The skills of asking for help and responding to feedback were the most important soft skills among individuals with disabilities, family members, providers, advocates, and employers. However, degrees of importance may have differed among these groups. Individuals with disabilities endorsed responding to feedback as the top soft skill required to be successful at work. These individuals then identified asking for help as the next two most important soft skills after responding to feedback. Individuals with disabilities, family members, advocates, providers and employers largely agreed regarding what soft skills are important. Those skills considered as very important or extremely important included asking for help, responding to feedback, requesting accommodations, negotiating conflicts, and presenting qualifications at interviews. However, employers placed more importance on interview skills (i.e., presenting qualifications at interviews) while the other four groups emphasized the skills requesting accommodations and conflict management as of greater significance than interview skills.

Results suggest the need to provide skills training in the areas of help seeking, properly responding to feedback, requesting accommodations, conflict management and interview skills as very important/extremely important for transition age youth with disabilities to succeed at work. This study provides insight that from employers’ perspective, they found interview skills as of greater importance for hiring decisions than other skills such as requesting accommodations, and conflict management skills.

Providers of Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) services can be mindful of these skills as they work with youth with disabilities. Previous studies on soft skills do not include a series of modules that cover various aspects in employment when it comes to interviews, interactions with colleagues and supervisors, and handling job responsibilities. The skills of responding to feedback, asking for help, and requesting accommodations at work, were highly valued work-related soft skills for transition-age youth with disabilities by the individuals with disabilities who participated in this study. Employers reported the importance of interview skills for transition age youth with disabilities. Providers working with transition-age youth with disabilities would benefit from evidence-based training curriculum on these particular sets of skills.

Family members, advocates, providers and employers all rated the skill of asking for help as the most important soft skill to be successful at work for transition-age youth, while individuals with disabilities rated the skill of responding to feedback as the most important soft skill to be successful at work for transition age youth. Due to our sample being of convenience, the discrepancy could be because the participants with disabilities were mostly individuals with psychiatric disabilities. It is not unusual for family members and advocates to value different skills compared to individuals with disabilities themselves. Services planning and delivery consist of people with different values, priorities, and concerns. Individuals with disabilities often desire more information and involvement in decision-making, support from professionals, organization and integration among services, advance directives, and peer support. Relatives also want information and support, and good communication with services. Although family members also value shared information, support, and communication with professionals, they prefer more supportive and intensive interventions, whereas individuals with disabilities value independence (Cleary et al., 2006; Klein et al., 2007; Noble et al., 2004). Unfortunately, advocates and service providers may have difficulty determining the priorities and needs of individuals with disabilities (Drake et al., 2010; Noble et al., 2004). Family inclusion can result in decreased frustration among care givers and improved relationships with individuals with disabilities (Wonders et al., 2019). Practitioners discover more informed decision making when families are involved while consumer report greater satisfaction with family support (Bee et al. 2015; Rapaport et al. 2006). Having multiple stakeholders’ inputs and integrating perspectives of key stakeholders including employers will help prioritize service activities and reduce ambiguity in training and service activities. Providers and family members may lack familiarity of employers’ perspectives of what is required for transition age youth to be successful at work (Pierce, 2019). Our findings help integrate the skills prioritized among groups of stakeholders and provide an integrated view of service needs of transition-age youth for success at work. It is important to provide both trainings on skills that individuals with disabilities consider as the most important as well as on those skills prioritized by family members, advocates, employers and providers to allow greater informed decision making.

4.1 Limitations

Many individuals with disabilities in the study had psychiatric disabilities, and there was a low incidence of other types of disabilities, such as physical disabilities, developmental disabilities, or sensory disabilities. As a result, the survey’s findings may not have adequately identified the soft skills needed among various disability groups. This was a limitation of the study and makes it difficult to generalize the results to individuals with other types of disabilities. Future studies should purposefully include a wider range of disabilities.

5 Conclusion

Overall, this study’s findings found broad agreement among individuals with disabilities, family members, providers, employers and advocates that work-related soft skills are critical to employment success in transition age youth with disabilities. However, participants identified degrees of importance of pre-established list of soft skills. This pre-established list of soft skills could have influenced participants’ responses. Future studies may wish to use open-ended questions to elicit ideas on important soft skills from stakeholders. Despite these limitations, the current study suggests that specific soft skill areas to be developed or improved may include asking for help, responding to feedback, interview skills and requesting accommodations. This information may be useful in planning training curriculum of soft skills for transition-age youth with disabilities for the workplace and giving priority to teaching the most important soft skills for success at work.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable contributions made by Elizabeth Meyers and Brian Gerrity.

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethical declaration

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey RBHS Newark Health Sciences (approval number: Pro2018001863; title: Service Needs Assessment).

Funding

None to report.

Informed consent

Not applicable (exempt study).

References

Angrave,

, & Charlwood,

(2015). What is the relationshipbetween long working hours, over-employment, under-employment and the subjective well-being of workers? Longitudinal evidence from the UK. Human Relations, 68(9), 1491–1515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726714559752

Bauer-Wolf,

, (2019, January 17). Survey: Employers want soft skills from graduates. Inside Higher Education. https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2019/01/17/survey-employers-want-soft-skills-graduates

Bee,

, Brooks,

, Fraser,

, & Lovell,

(2015). Professionalperspectives on service user and career involvement in mental healthcare planning: A qualitative study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(12), 1834–1845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.07.008

Berger,

, (2016, August 30). Data reveals the most in-demand soft skills among candidates. LinkedIn. https://business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/blog/trends-and-research/2016/most-indemand-soft-skills

Bishop,

(2019, April 25). The need for soft skills training grows as automation transforms the workplace. Forbes.

Blades,

, Fauth,

, & Gibb,

(2012) Measuring employability skills: A rapid review to inform development of tools for project evaluation. London, UK: National Children’s Bureau. http://www.partners4value.lt/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Measuring-Employability-Skills.pdf

Bobroff,

, & Sax,

(2010). The effects of peer tutoringinterview skills training with transition-age youth withdisabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 33(3), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2010-0523

Boreham,

, Povey,

, & Tomaszewski,

(2015). Work and socialwell-being: The impact of employment conditions on quality of life. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(6), 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1027250

Brett,

J. O.

, Staniszewska,

, Mockford,

, Seers,

, Herron-Marx,

, & Bayliss,

(2010). The PIRICOM Study: A systematic review of the conceptualisation, measurement, impact and outcomes of patients and public involvement in health and social care research.

10.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Persons with a disability: Labor force characteristics 2019 https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/disabl.pdf

11.

Carter,

, Swedeen,

, Moss,

, & Pesko,

(2010). “What are you doing after school?”: Promoting extracurricular involvement for transition-age youth with disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45(5), 275–283.https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1053451209359077

12.

Charlton,

J. I.

(1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley, University of California Press.

13.

Clark,

, Konrad,

, & Test,

(2019). Teaching soft skills to students with disabilities with UPGRADE your performance. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 54(1), 41–56.

14.

Cleary,

, Freeman,

, & Walter,

(2006). Carer participationin mental health service delivery. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 15(3), 189–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0349.2006.00422.x

15.

Coon,

J. T.

, Gwernan-Jones,

, Moore,

, Richardson,

, Shotton,

, Pritchard,

, Morris,

, Stein,

, & Ford,

(2016). End-user involvement in a systematic review of quantitative andqualitative research of non-pharmacological interventions forattention deficit hyperactivity disorder delivered in schoolsettings: reflections on the impacts and challenges. Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 19(5), 1084–1097. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12400

16.

Crawford,

, Rutter,

, Manley,

, Weaver,

, Bhui,

, Fulop,

, & Tyrer,

(2002). Systematic review of involving patients inthe planning and development of healthcare. BMJ, 325, 1263. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1136/bmj.325.7375.1263

17.

Davis,

(2003). Addressing the needs of youth in transition toadulthood. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 30(6), 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1025027117827

18.

Davis,

, Koroloff,

, & Ellison,

(2012). Between adolescenceand adulthood: Rehabilitation research to improve services for youthand young adults. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 35(3), 167–170. https://doi.org/10.2975/35.3.2012.167.170

19.

Del Campo,

P. D.

, Gracia,

, Blasco,

J. A.

, & Andradas,

(2011). A strategy for patient involvement in clinical practice guidelines:methodological approaches. BMJ Quality & Safety, 20(9), 779–784. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs.2010.049031

20.

Drake,

R. E.

, Deegan,

P. E.

, & Rapp,

(2010). The promise ofshared decision making in mental health. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 34(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.2975/34.1.2010.7.13

21.

Gillard,

, Simons,

, Turner,

, Lucock,

, & Edwards,

(2012). Patient and public involvement in the coproduction ofknowledge: Reflection on the analysis of qualitative data in amental health study. Qualitative Health Research, 22(8), 1126–1137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312448541

22.

Grenwelge,

, Zhang,

, & Landmark,

(2010). Comprehensiveleadership training for youth with disabilities: A new and improvedyouth leadership forum model. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 42(4), 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005991004200407

23.

Grugulis,

, & Vincent,

(2009). Whose skill is it anyway?:“Soft” skills and polarization. Work Employment & Society., 23(4), 597–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017009344862

24.

Grundy,

, Keetharuth,

A. D.

, Barber,

, Carlton,

, Connell,

, Taylor Buck,

, Barkham,

, Ricketts,

, Robotham,

, Rose,

, Kay,

, Hanlon,

, & Brazier,

(2019). Public involvement inhealth outcomes research: lessons learnt from the development of therecovering quality of life (ReQoL) measures. Health and Qualityof Life outcomes, 17(1), 60. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1186/s12955-019-1123-z

25.

Harkin,

(2013). High expectations: Transforming the American workforce as the ADA generation comes of age. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pension. https://nccdd.org/images/Public_Policy/Public_Policy_Topics/Harkin_Report_on_Employment_New_Generation_2013.pdf

26.

Hillier,

, Fish,

, Siegel,

, & Beversdorf,

(2011). Socialand vocational skills training reduces self-reported anxiety and depression among young adults on the autism spectrum. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 23(3), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-011-9226-4.

27.

Higgins,

K. K.

, Koch,

L. C.

, Boughfman,

E. M.

, & Vierstra,

(2008). School-to-work transition and Asperger Syndrome. Work (Reading, Mass), 31(3), 291–298.

28.

Julià,

, Vanroelen,

, Bosmns,

, Van Aerden,

, & Benach,

(2017). Precarious employment and quality of employment in relation to health andwell-being in Europe. International Journal of Health Services, 47(3), 389–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/002073141770749

29.

Kastner,

, Bhattacharyya,

, Hayden,

, Makarski,

, Estey,

, Durocher,

,... Brouwers,

(2015). Guideline uptake is influenced by six implementability domains for creating and communicating guidelines: A realist review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68(5), 498–509.

30.

Klein,

, Rosenberg,

, & Rosenberg,

(2007). Whose treatmentis it anyway? The role of consumer preferences in mental healthcare. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 10(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487760601166365

31.

Kyllonen,

(2013). Soft skills for the workplace. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 45(6), 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2013.841516

32.

Lee,

, & Carter,

(2012). Preparing transition-age studentswith high-functioning autism spectrum disorders for meaningful work. Psychology in the Schools, 49(10), 988–1000. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21651.

33.

Lindstrom,

, Kahn,

, & Lindsey,

(2013). Navigating the earlycareer years: Barriers and strategies for young adults withdisabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 39(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-130637

34.

Lu,

, Oursler,

, Herrick,

, Beninato,

, Gao,

, Brown,

, & Durante,

(2020). Work-related interview skills training for persons with Substance Use Disorders. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, In Press.

35.

Mager,

(2017, December 4). Soft skills from the employer’s perspective: How to be an ideal job candidate. Catalyst for Business. https://catalystforbusiness.com/soft-skills-employers-perspective-ideal-job-candidate/

36.

McDonnall,

(2011). Predictors of employment for youths withvisual impairments: Findings from the second national longitudinaltransition study. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 105(8), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1110500802

37.

Murray,

, & Doren,

(2013). The effects of working at gainingemployment skills on the social and vocational skills of adolescentswith disabilities: A school-based intervention. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, (56), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355212452614

38.

Noble,

L. M.

, & Douglas,

B. C.

(2004). What users and relativeswant from mental health services. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 17(4), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.yco.0000133832.42167.76

39.

Noel,

, Oulvey,

, Drake,

, & Bond,

(2017). Barriers toemployment for transition-age youth with developmental andpsychiatric disabilities. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 44(3), 354–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-016-0773-y

40.

Nuechterlein,

K. H.

, Subotnik,

K. L.

, Ventura,

, Turner,

L. R.

, Gitlin,

M. J.

, Gretchen-Doorly,

, Becker,

D. R.

, Drake,

R. E.

, Wallace,

C. J.

, & Liberman,

R. P.

(2020). Enhancing return to workor school after a first episode of schizophrenia: The UCLA RCT ofindividual placement and support and workplace fundamentals moduletraining. Psychological Medicine, 50(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718003860

41.

Qaseem,

, Forland,

, Macbeth,

, Ollenschläger,

, Phillips,

, & van der Wees,

(2012). Guidelines InternationalNetwork: Toward international standards for clinical practiceguidelines. Annals of Internal Medicine, 156(7), 525–531. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009

42.

Oursler,

, Lu,

, Gao,

, Herrick,

, Beninato,

, Hill,

, & Durante,

(2021). Work-Related interview skills training for persons served by Vocational Rehabilitation agencies in four states. Rehabilitation Research, Policy, and Education, In Press.

43.

Oursler,

, Lu,

, Herrick,

, Durante,

, Socha,

, & Crisafulli,

(2020). Direct skills teaching of work-relatedconversational skills for individuals with disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 63(4), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355219878501

44.

Phillips,

B. N.

, Kaseroff,

A. A.

, Fleming,

A. R.

, & Huck,

G. E.

(2014). Work-related social skills: Definitions and interventions inpublic vocational rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 59(4), 386–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000011

45.

Pierce,

(2019). What employers want: Employers are looking to community colleges for help in reaching soft skills. Community College Journal, 89(3), 20–25.

46.

Rapaport,

, Bellringer,

, Pinfold,

, & Huxley,

(2006). Carers and confidentiality in mental health care: considering therole of the carer’s assessment: A study of service users’, carers’and practitioners’ views. Health and Social Care in theCommunity, 14(4), 357–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2006.00631.x

47.

Rast,

, Roux,

, & Shattuck,

(2020). Use of vocational rehabilitation supports for postsecondary education amongtransition-age youth on the autism spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(6), 2164–2173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03972-8

48.

Riesen,

, Schultz,

, Morgan,

, & Kupferman,

(2014). School-to-work barriers as identified by special educators, vocational rehabilitation counselors, and community rehabilitation professionals. The Journal of Rehabilitation, 80(1), 33–44.

49.

Rogers,

, Anthony,

, & Farkas,

(2006). The choose-get-keepapproach to psychiatric rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 51(3), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.51.3.247

50.

Rusch,

, & Braddock,

(2004). Adult day programs versussupported employment (1988-2002): Spending and service practices ofmental retardation and developmental disabilities state agencies. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29(4), 237–242. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.29.4.237

51.

Staley,

(2009). Exploring impact: public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. National Institute for Health Research.

52.

Stephens,

, Collins,

, & Dodder,

(2005). A longitudinalstudy of employment and skill acquisition among individuals withdevelopmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26(5), 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2003.12.003

53.

Sweeney,

, Beresford,

, Faulkner,

, Nettle,

, & Rose,

(2009). This is survivor research. Pccs Books.

54.

Tong,

, Lopez-Vargas,

, Howell,

, Phoon,

, Johnson,

, Campbell,

, Walker,

R. G.

, & Craig,

J. C.

(2012). Consumerinvolvement in topic and outcome selection in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Health Expectations : an International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 15(4), 410–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00676.x

55.

Wallace,

, & Tauber,

(2004). Rehab rounds: Supplementingsupported employment with workplace skills training. Psychiatric Services, 55(5), 513–515. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.55.5.513

56.

Wicks,

, Richards,

, Denegri,

, & Godlee,

(2018). Patients’ roles and rights in research. BMJ (Online), k3193, k3193. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1136/bmj.k3193

57.

Wiering,

, de Boer,

, & Delnoij,

(2017). Patient involvementin the development of patient-reported outcome measures: A scopingreview. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 20(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12442

58.

Wonders,

, Honey,

, & Hancock,

(2019). Family inclusion inmental health service planning and delivery: Consumers’perspectives. Community Mental Health Journal, 55(2), 318–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-018-0292-2

Service needs assessment of employment-related soft skills for transition age youth with disabilities

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSIONS:

Keywords

1 Introduction

1.1 Soft skills

2 Methods

2.1 Participants

2.2 Procedure

2.3 Instrument and data collection

3 Results

Table 1 Breakdown of participants (N = 183) N % Classification while allowing multiple roles Individuals with disabilities 27 14.8 Psychiatric disabilities 15 8.2 Physical 1 0.5 Multiple disabilities 1 0.5 Missing 10 5.5 Family member 32 17.5 Provider 35 19.1 Advocate 47 25.7 Employer 42 23.0

4.1 Limitations

5 Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

Ethical declaration

Funding

Informed consent

References