Communication
Skills
in
Software
Engineering:
A
Multivocal
Review
Dannilo
Rabelo
Universidade
Federal
do
Pará
dannilo.cabral@gmail.com
Deisy
Peres
Universidade
Federal
de
Pernambuco
deisyperes@gmail.com
Emmanuel
Dias
Universidade
Federal
do
Pará
emmanueldias@defensoria.apdef.br
Thayssa
Rocha
Universidade
Federal
do
Pará
thayssa.rocha@icen.ufpa.br
Enne
Rebeca
de
Freitas
Universidade
Federal
do
Pará
enne.freitas@icsa.ufpa.br
Kiev
Gama
Universidade
Federal
de
Pernambuco
kiev.gama@gmail.com
Gustavo
Pinto
Universidade
Federal
do
Pará
gpinto@ufpa.br
June
10,
2026
1
arXiv:2606.10320v1 [cs.SE] 9 Jun 2026
Abstract
Communication
skills
are
increasingly
recognized
as
essential
in
Soft-
ware
Engineering,
yet
discussions
about
them
remain
fragmented
across
academic
and
gray
literature.
This
fragmentation
is
problematic
because
it
limits
a
broader
understanding
of
how
communication
is
valued,
taught,
and
applied
in
both
educational
and
professional
settings.
Through
a
multivocal
literature
review,
we
found
strong
convergence
between
aca-
demic
and
gray
sources
in
treating
communication
as
a
core
competency,
while
also
identifying
differences
in
emphasis,
with
academia
focusing
on
conceptualization
and
empirical
evidence
and
gray
literature
stressing
practical
consequences
and
emerging
industry
practices.
1
Introduction
Traditionally,
Software
Engineering
(SE)
emphasizes
the
mastery
of
technical
skills
(e.g.,
programming,
algorithms,
system
design).
However,
over
the
years,
a
new
trend
has
emerged,
demonstrating
that
the
success
of
software
projects
depends
not
only
on
technical
abilities
but
also
on
the
human
factor
and
inter-
personal
skills
[
1
],
among
which
communication
holds
a
prominent
position[
2
].
Communication
in
this
context
refers
to
a
range
of
competencies
that
encompass
the
ability
to
clearly
and
effectively
explain,
transmit,
and
receive
messages
where
requirements
are
fully
elucidated
[
3
].
In
modern
and
multidisciplinary
development
teams,
the
effective
exchange
of
information
is
vital
for
task
coor-
dination,
conflict
resolution,
and
ensuring
that
everyone
works
with
a
shared
understanding
of
the
project
objectives[4].
This
primacy
of
communication
has
been
widely
debated
in
both
academia
and
the
industry.
On
the
one
hand,
researchers
often
fail
to
consider
the
daily
challenges
faced
in
development
teams;
on
the
other,
industry
professionals
are
unaware
of
research
findings
that
could
guide
them
in
improving
processes
and
developing
competencies.
Since
in
SE
the
human
competencies
and
heavily
context-dependent,
it
is
essential
that
industry
practice
provides
concrete
exam-
ples,
but
also
that
academia
contributes
structured
models
for
their
development
and
evaluation.
Given
this
scenario,
the
purpose
of
this
work
is
to
bridge
these
two
sources
of
knowledge,
seeking
to
answer
the
following
research
questions:
•
RQ1:
How
are
communication
skills
in
Software
Engineering
discussed
and
valued
across
different
sources
(academic
and
gray
literature)?
•
RQ2:
Which
divergences
and/or
convergences
exist
between
the
perspec-
tives
of
the
academic
literature
and
the
gray
literature
on
the
topic?
To
address
RQ1
,
we
examined
representative
academic
studies
and
industry
reports
that
discuss
the
importance
of
communication
in
the
SE
context.
This
allowed
us
to
identify
the
main
arguments,
evidence,
and
focuses
of
each
domain.
Subsequently,
for
RQ2
,
we
compared
the
findings
from
both
sources
to
highlight
convergences
and
divergences
in
how
each
community
perceives
and
values
communication.
2
2
Communication
as
a
Core
Competency
in
Soft-
ware
Engineering
Recent
studies
in
SE
treats
communication
as
a
core
professional
competency,
often alongside technical expertise.
Studies based on job advertisements[
5
,
6
,
7
,
8
],
systematic
reviews[
9
],
and
employer
perceptions
show
that
communication,
teamwork,
and
collaboration
are
perceived
as
demanded
skills
in
the
software
industry.
This
evidence
suggests
that
communication
is
not
peripheral,
but
a
central
condition
for
effective
professional
performance
and
project
success.
Academic
work
also
highlights
the
educational
dimension
of
this
problem.
Researchers
argue
that
Software
Engineering
courses
have
historically
under-
emphasized
communication
training,
despite
market
expectations
for
oral,
writ-
ten,
and
collaborative
abilities
[
10
,
11
].
More
recent
studies
propose
breaking
communication
down
into
sub-skills
such
as
technical
writing,
active
listening,
intercultural competence, and negotiation, which can then be taught and assessed
more
systematically[12].
Gray
literature
reinforces
the
same
core
message,
but
from
a
more
practical
and
immediate
perspective.
Blogs,
company
reports,
and
professional
platforms
frame
communication
as
essential
for
collaboration,
leadership,
promotion,
and
day-to-day
engineering
work,
including
documentation,
stakeholder
alignment,
and
feedback
exchange
[
13
].
At
the
same
time,
gray
literature
appears
to
anticipate
emerging
practices
such
as
asynchronous
communication,
technical
storytelling,
and
living
documentation,
which
are
still
less
visible
in
formal
academic
research
[14,
15,
16].
3
Research
Methodology
To answer the proposed research questions, we conducted a Multivocal Literature
Review
(MLR)
[
17
],
integrating
evidence
from
both
academic
literature
and
gray
literature
sources.
The
research
process
was
divided
into
three
stages:
(1)
Definition
of
research
question;
(2)
Search
and
select
studies;
(3)
Extracting
and
synthesizing
data.
The
first
step,
called
definition
of
research
question
,
initially
involves
delimited
narrowing
the
scope
of
the
investigation
to
focus
specifically
on
com-
munication
skills
in
SE.
We
improved
RQ1
to
encompass
not
only
whether
communication
is
important
(which
the
literature
already
indicated),
but
also
how
it
is
discussed
and
valued,
that
is,
which
specific
aspects
of
communication
are
mentioned,
in
which
contexts
(teamwork,
customer
relationships,
etc.),
and
what
evidence
is
available.
For
RQ2,
we
defined
"databases"
as
synonymous
with
knowledge
bases
or
sets
of
sources,
in
this
case,
including
formal
academic
literature
versus
industry
grey
literature.
For
the
second
stage
Search
and
select
studies
,
we
conducted
searches
in
four
scientific
databases
between
January
2024
and
March
2024.
(IEEE
Xplore,
ACM
Digital
Library,
Scopus,
Google
Scholar)
using
keywords
such
3
as
“software
engineering
communication
skills”,
“soft
skills
software
developers”,
“software
engineering
teamwork
communication”.
Over
the
results
we
applied
filters
for
studies
published
mainly
in
the
last
decade
(2013
to
2023),
but
without excluding older seminal references.
We selected relevant research articles,
including:
empirical
studies
on
skills
demand
(analysis
of
job
advertisements
[
5
,
8
]),
systematic
reviews
on
soft
skills
[
9
],
and
specific
research
on
communication
(e.g.,
studies
on
collaboration
in
distributed
teams,
communication
teaching).
In
the
third
stage,
called
extracting
and
synthesizing
data
For
each
selected
source
(both
academic
and
gray),
we
performed
an
analytical
reading,
extracting
the
central
points
related
to
communication
skills.
In
the
formal
academic
literature,
we
reviewed
15
key
academic
articles,
ensuring
geographical
diversification
(studies
in
South
America,
North
America,
Europe,
and
Oceania)
and focus (industry,
education,
and agile methods).
We prioritized recent and/or
highly
referenced
content
within
the
community.
To
embrace
the
gray
literature
we
conducted
searches
on
Google
and
in
repositories
of
technical/popular
blogs
using
the
terms:
e.g.
“importance
of
communication
software
developer”,
“software
engineer
communication
soft
skill”,
“how
software
engineers
learn
communication”.
We
identified
influential
blog
posts,
articles
on
IT
career
sites,
discussions
on
the
Stack
Overflow
1
Blog
and
Medium,
and
reports
from
organizations
(e.g.,
research
by
the
Association
of
American
Colleges
&
Universities
cited
via
Inc.com).
10
items
of
gray
literature
were
included,
among
them:
personal
blogs
of
senior
developers
(e.g.,
Chintan
Khetiya,
2021),
corporate
articles
(Stack
Overflow,
2022;
WeCP,
2025),
and
opinion
articles
from
specialized
websites.
We
ensured
that
the
chosen
sources
directly
addressed
the
relevance
of
communication
or
offered
practical
examples
related
to
SE.
For
each
selected
source
(academic
and
non-academic),
extracting
the
central
points
related
to
communication
skills.
In
academic
literature,
the
focus
has
been
on
the
results
and
conclusions
of
studies,
for
example,
whether
the
article
listed
"communication"
as
one
of
the
most
important
skills,
and
what
the
evidence
was
(percentage
of
job
openings,
interviews,
etc.),
and
in
what
context
(developer,
tester,
manager
roles).
In
the
gray
literature,
we
extracted
key
statements
(e.g.,
“communication
is
the
most
important
skill”)
and
the
justifications
provided
(why
the
blog
author
believes
this,
what
examples
were
given).
This
information
was
organized
into
a
categorized
structure,
where
we
identified
dimensions
such
as
the
relative
importance
of
communication,
valued
types
of
communication
(oral/written,
internal/external),
effects
of
poor
communication,
tips
for
improvement,
etc.
This
categorization
helped
group
similar
findings
and
also
highlight
differences
in
emphasis
between
sources.
We
used
a
spreadsheet
to
tabulate
the
findings,
with
separate
columns
for
source,
type
(academic/gray),
and
extracted
points.
All
the
considered
papers
and
articles
from
the
grey
literature,
as
well
as
the
categorization
construction
spreadsheet,
can
be
found
at
the
supplementary
1
A
question
and
answer
website
for
professionals
and
enthusiasts
in
the
field
of
computer
programming.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions
4
information
repository
2
.
Data
selection
was
performed
by
the
first
author
and
validated
by
the
last
author.
The
data
extraction
from
the
selected
sources
and
subsequent
coding
and
categorization
were
performed
manually
by
the
first
and
last
author.
As
a
methodological
limitation,
it
is
worth
noting
that
the
selection
of
the
gray
literature,
while
careful,
does
not
guarantee
complete
coverage,
as
the
universe
of
blogs
and
posts
is
virtually
infinite
and
dynamic.
We
sought
to
mitigate
this
by
choosing
widely
read
sources
that
resonate
with
frequent
topics
in communities (measured by shares, comments, etc.).
In the academic literature,
our
search
was
limited
on
English
written
papers.
Nevertheless,
we
believe
the
collected
sample
captured
the
main
perspectives
and
answer
RQ1
and
RQ2
.
4
Results
The
analysis
of
the
results
reveals
that
both
the
academic
and
gray
literatures
converge
in
recognizing
communication
as
a
central
competency,
but
with
dis-
tinct
focuses.
Academia
concentrates
on
teaching
methodologies,
quantitative
measurement,
and
curricular
integration,
empirically
demonstrating
how
com-
munication
affects
learning
and
technical
performance.
The
gray
literature,
in
contrast,
emphasizes
immediate
practical
consequences,
such
as
the
risk
of
dismissal,
lack
of
promotion,
or
rework,
in
addition
to
bringing
up
emerging
industry
practices
like
storytelling
and
continuous
feedback.
4.1
RQ1:
How
are
communication
skills
in
SE
discussed
and
valued?
The
synthesis
of
the
studied
sources
reveals
a
strong
consensus
on
the
crucial
importance
of
communication
skills
in
Software
Engineering.
Both
academic
re-
searchers
and
industry
professionals
describe
communication
as
an
indispensable
component
of
the
software
engineer’s
profile,
although
they
use
slightly
different
voices
and
focuses.
Below,
we
summarize
the
main
points
observed:
Communication
as
a
Top
Soft
Skill:
Several
formal
studies
place
commu-
nication
at
the
top
or
among
the
first
places
in
the
lists
of
soft
skills
demanded
by
the
software
market.
Florea
&
Stray[
8
],
when
analyzing
job
openings
for
testers
globally,
found
that
communication
was
the
most
cited
skill
category
by
employers,
surpassing
others
like
problem-solving
and
teamwork.
Matturro[
5
]
identified
effective
oral
communication
as
one
of
the
five
most
relevant
skills
in
IT
job
postings
in
Uruguay.
In
the
gray
literature,
this
prioritization
appears
assertively:
blogs
frequently
proclaim
communication
as
“the
most
important
skill”
or
“the
#1
characteristic”
for
professional
success,
even
above
technical
talents.
2
https://figshare.com/s/13ffc6100bb9539d22e1
5
Justifications
for
Importance:
The
sources
converge
in
explaining
why
communication is so
vital.
The
most
cited reason
is
that software development is
inherently
a
collaborative
effort.
Projects
are
rarely
conducted
by
isolated
indi-
viduals;
on the contrary, they require the coordination of multidisciplinary teams,
interaction
with
clients
and
users,
and
the
integration
of
different
modules
and
ideas.
Thus,
communicating
well
becomes
a
condition
for
aligning
expectations,
avoiding
rework,
and
ensuring
cohesion
in
the
final
product.
Academic
studies
emphasize
that
teams
with
better
internal
communication
tend
to
have
fewer
coordination
failures
and
higher
productivity,
especially
in
agile
methodologies
where
information
flows
quickly
in
daily
stand-ups
and
reviews.
On
the
industry
side,
it
is
frequently
cited
that
communication
failures
generate
conflicts,
delays,
and
loss
of
quality—"misunderstandings
can
derail
projects,"
while
professionals
with
good
communication
can
facilitate
discussions
and
group
problem-solving.
Valued
Different
Facets
of
Communication:
Communication
in
SE
is
not
treated
as
a
monolith;
several
specific
facets
are
discussed.
Oral
communication
(spoken)
is
vital
in
meetings,
presentations,
and
daily
interpersonal
interactions.
Written
communication
is
highlighted
in
relation
to
software
documentation,
writing
clear
emails,
reports,
and
using
collaborative
tools
(wikis,
tickets)
com-
prehensibly.
For
example,
industry
sources
point
out
that
an
engineer
who
"excels
at
written
communication
can
produce
documentation
that
is
not
only
informative
but
easy
to
understand
even
for
non-engineers."
Active
listening
is
another
sub-skill
emphasized,
especially
in
the
context
of
teamwork:
knowing
how
to
listen
to
colleagues
and
clients
to
understand
needs
and
concerns.
Some
materials,
primarily
academic
ones,
mention
foreign
language
communication
(English)
as
crucial
in
globalized
development
environments
where
teams
and
clients are international.
Finally,
the ability to give and receive constructive feed-
back
appears
as
a
highly
cited
communication
attribute,
as
in
modern
practices
(e.g.,
code
review,
agile
retrospectives),
developers
are
expected
to
professionally
critique
each
other’s
work
and
incorporate
criticism
without
personal
friction.
Consequences
of
Communication
Failure:
Development
teams
suffer
from
loss
of
information,
which
can
result
in
incorrectly
implemented
functionalities,
bugs
that
take
time
to
be
identified
due
to
lack
of
reporting,
or
even
security
failures
when
requirements
are
not
clearly
transmitted.
Industry
blogs
mention
“telephone
game”
scenarios
where
a
failure
to
clarify
doubts
led
to
months
of
work
in
the
wrong
direction.
From
a
personal
standpoint,
developers
with
communication
difficulties
can
become
isolated
within
the
team,
failing
to
share
knowledge
(which
harms
both
them—as
they
miss
out
on
recognition—and
the
team—which
loses
opportunities
to
reuse
solutions).
This
isolation
can
also
generate
friction:
e.g.,
a
developer
who
cannot
explain
their
design
might
receive
criticism
and
take
it
personally,
creating
a
tense
environment.
Several
blog
authors
explicitly
recommend:
"if
you
want
to
avoid
unnecessary
conflict
and
stress,
improve
your
communication,"
pointing
out
that
many
technical
conflicts
are,
in
fact,
communication
problems.
6
In summary, the answer to RQ1 is that communication skills are unanimously
considered
of
enormous
importance
in
Software
Engineering,
receiving
attention
in
both
scientific
studies
and
practical
discussions.
They
are
valued
for
their
direct
contribution
to
effective
collaboration,
clarity
in
defining
and
meeting
requirements,
and
a
good
organizational
climate.
4.2
RQ2:
Convergences
and
Divergences
Between
Aca-
demic
and
Gray
Literature
Upon confronting the findings of the two knowledge bases examined, we identified
a
predominantly
convergent
landscape:
both
domains
explicitly
recognize
the
critical
value
of
communication
skills
in
Software
Engineering.
However,
subtle
divergences
also
emerge
in
how
the
topic
is
approached
and
elaborated.
We
can
summarize
the
answer
to
RQ2
in
the
following
points:
4.2.1
Convergences
(Points
of
Agreement):
Communication
Drives
Collaboration
and
Effectiveness:
One
point
of
agreement
is
the
view
that
communication
enables
other
essential
practices,
such
as
effective
teamwork,
collective
problem-solving,
and
aligning
expectations
with
stakeholders.
Academic
sources
quantify
this
by
showing
correlations
or
the
concurrent
frequency
of
mention
of
“communication”
and
“teamwork”
in
job
requirements.
Industry
sources
report
this
connection
in
the
form
of
stories
and
maxims
("good
communication
=
cohesive
team").
In
short,
there
is
consensus
that
communication
is
the
foundation
for
collaboration
(and
the
two
words
often
appear
together
in
discussions,
reinforcing
this
conceptual
convergence).
Need
to
Develop
Communication
Skills:
Both
researchers
and
practition-
ers
advocate
for
the
necessity
of
improving
software
engineers’
communication
skills.
There
is
a
mutual
recognition
that
not
all
professionals
naturally
ar-
rive
with
this
competence
well-formed,
and
that
deliberate
efforts
are
required.
Academia
proposes
educational
interventions
(communication
courses,
use
of
active
methodologies
focused
on
soft
skills,
etc.),
while
the
industry
suggests
in-service training,
mentorship,
and behavioral assessments.
Although the strate-
gies
vary,
both
agree
on
the
diagnosis:
traditional
education
has
not
placed
sufficient
emphasis,
so
actions
are
welcome
to
bridge
this
gap.
4.2.2
Divergences
(Differences
and
Distinct
Emphases):
Empirical
vs.
Tacit
Approach:
A
marked
difference
lies
in
the
style
of
evidence.
The
academic
literature
treats
the
importance
of
communication
empirically
and
analytically:
it
presents
survey
data,
job
vacancy
percentages,
results
of
educational
experiments,
etc.
In
contrast,
the
gray
literature
often
relies
on
personal
experiences,
anecdotal
cases,
and
general
advice.
For
example,
to
state
that
communication
is
crucial,
an
academic
article
might
say,
“X%
of
job
advertisements
require
communication,
the
second
most
cited
skill,”
while
7
a
blog
will
say,
“if
you
don’t
communicate
well,
you
won’t
be
promoted;
look
at
cases
of
people
fired
for
it.”
Both
convey
the
same
message,
but
the
form
of
argumentation
differs:
the
former
appeals
to
the
authority
of
numbers
and
studies,
the
latter
to
practical
wisdom
and
storytelling.
This
divergence
reflects
the
distinct
audiences
and
purposes
of
each
literature.
For
the
purposes
of
our
study,
there
is
no
contradiction
in
content,
but
rather
in
emphasis
and
form.
Granularity
and
Conceptualization:
Academic
research
tends
to
conceptu-
alize
and
subdivide
"communication"
into
more
refined
categories,
discussing,
for
instance,
"synchronous
vs.
asynchronous
communication,"
"communication
in
the
requirements
domain
vs.
communication
in
code
coordination,"
or
"in-
tercultural
communicative
competence."
These
nuances
rarely
appear
in
blogs
or
opinion
articles,
which
typically
treat
communication
more
generically.
Gray
literature
frequently
lumps
everything
under
the
umbrella
of
"soft
skills"
or
"communication
and
teamwork"
without
clearly
delineating
types.
Contextualization
of
English
and
Culture:
We
note
that
the
concern
with
English
communication
and
intercultural
competence
appears
prominently
in
the
international
academic
literature
(given
the
reality
of
global
teams
and
outsourcing).
Studies
emphasize
that
fluency
in
technical
English
and
the
ability
to
engage
in
intercultural
communication
are
important
differentiators,
especially
for
non-Anglophone
countries
working
on
distributed
projects.
The
gray
literature
focused
on
communication
did
not
place
such
explicit
emphasis
on
this—possibly
because
many
blogs
already
assume
English
proficiency
(since
they
are
written
in
English)
or
because
this
aspect
is
treated
separately
in
discussions
about
“English
for
programmers.”
The
Portuguese
content
analyzed,
e.g.,
Lancetti et al.[
18
],
reinforces the importance of English and cultural respect,
but
this
is
an
article
in
proceedings.
Curiously,
Brazilian
developer
blogs
talk
a
lot
about
the
need
for
English,
but
as
a
skill
separate
from
“communication”
(focusing
on
reading
documentation,
etc.).
Thus,
there
is
a
slight
divergence
in
emphasis:
academia incorporates language and culture within the communication
package,
while
practitioners
often
treat
language
as
a
separate
competence.
Breadth
of
Effects
Considered:
When
discussing
the
consequences
of
(not)
having
communication
skills,
the
sources
also
vary
in
scope.
Academic
research
usually
links
communication
to
project
performance,
employability,
and
learning.
The
gray
literature,
in
addition
to
these,
adds
impacts
on
daily
dynamics
and
job
satisfaction.
For
example,
a
widely
discussed
aspect
in
professional
forums
is
that
communicating
well
makes
the
work
environment
better,
reduces
friction,
increases
trust
among
colleagues,
etc.,
which
boosts
morale
and
talent
retention.
Academic
literature
tends
not
to
capture
"morale"
or
"climate"
so
directly
(they
are
difficult
to
measure,
although
some
qualitative
studies
mention
them).
Therefore,
professionals
also
emphasize
the
human
and
well-being
side:
“Teams
that
communicate
well
enjoy
working
together
more,”
which
does
not
always
appear
in
articles
focused
on
productivity
metrics
or
project
success.
This
is
8
not
a
contradiction,
but
a
difference
in
focus:
academia
looks
at
tangible
results
(productivity,
software
quality),
while
the
industry
also
perceives
intangible
results
(pleasant
environment,
personal
growth).
In
general
terms,
we
did
not
identify
conflicting
divergences
in
the
central
content—that
is,
there
is
no
case
where
one
side
says
"communication
is
crucial"
and
the
other
says
"it
is
not
that
important."
The
divergences
are
more
about
perspective
and
detail.
Garousi
&
Rainer[
14
],
when
discussing
the
relationship
between
gray
and
academic
literature,
point
out
that
each
complements
the
other—academia
brings
rigor
and
conceptual
models,
while
the
industry
brings
topicality
and
applicability.
Our
study
precisely
reflects
this
in
the
context
of
communication:
we
found
complementarity,
not
opposition.
In
conclusion
of
RQ2,
we
would
say
that
the
academic
and
gray
knowledge
bases
converge
in
the
fundamental
message
that
communication
skills
are
indis-
pensable
in
Software
Engineering,
diverging
only
in
the
style
of
presentation
and
contextual
emphases.
This
finding
reinforces
the
reliability
of
the
knowledge:
when
both
systematic
research
and
practical
wisdom
point
in
the
same
direction,
we
have
certainty
that
investing
in
communication
is
beneficial
for
software
professionals
and
organizations.
5
Discussion
The
results
of
this
multivocal
review
highlight
that
the
topic
of
“communication
skills
in
software
engineering”
is
a
point
of
rare
alignment
between
theory
and
practice.
Communication emerges as a common denominator—universally valued
and
treated
as
a
strategic
competence
in
software
development.
In
this
section,
we
discuss
the
implications
of
these
findings,
explore
possible
reasons
for
the
identified
divergences,
and
offer
critical
interpretations
in
light
of
the
area’s
current
context.
Why is there so much convergence?
Unlike technical topics where academia
and industry sometimes diverge (e.g., adoption of certain methodologies or tools),
in
the
case
of
soft
skills,
both
sides
daily
experience
the
human
challenges
of
projects.
It
is
reasonable
to
assume
that
SE
researchers
are
also,
for
the
most
part,
software
professionals
or
ex-professionals,
or
they
interact
with
companies
to
conduct
studies.
Thus,
there
is
a
more
direct
exchange
of
perceptions.
Fur-
thermore,
communication
problems
are
easily
recognizable.
It
is
not
uncommon
for
project
managers
or
professors
to
witness
a
project
fail
due
to
a
misunder-
standing.
This
tangibility
facilitates
consensus.
As
Garousi
et
al.[
19
]
pointed
out,
the
lack
of
communication
between
communities
harms
both;
curiously,
communication
is
precisely
the
remedy
pointed
to
for
integrating
academia
and
practice.
Our
findings
suggest
that,
at
least
conceptually,
this
integration
begins
with
agreement
on
its
importance.
Different
Perspectives:
The
divergences
in
emphasis
observed
can
be
in-
terpreted
as
a
result
of
each
community
viewing
the
problem
from
different
9
perspectives.
Academia
applies
a
scientific
viewpoint:
it
needs
to
define,
cat-
egorize,
and
measure
to
produce
generalizable
knowledge.
The
industry,
on
the
other
hand,
has
a
more
pragmatic
viewpoint:
it
needs
to
solve
immediate
problems
and
improve
effectiveness
in
the
short
term.
Therefore,
academia
speaks
of
"interpersonal,
written,
intercultural
communication
competencies..."
while
the
industry
says
"communicate
well
and
be
clear."
In
essence,
both
are
correct,
just
at
different
levels
of
analysis.
Leveraging
Complementarity:
Given
the
evidenced
complementarity,
an
opportunity
arises
to
combine
insights
from
both
sides
for
more
robust
solutions.
For example, corporate training programs could leverage tested academic method-
ologies
(evidence-based
communication
workshops,
360°
evaluations,
etc.)
while
maintaining
accessible
language
and
practical
examples
to
engage
participants.
Likewise,
academic
curricula
can
invite
industry
professionals
to
share
real-world
cases
of
communication
problems,
making
learning
more
concrete
for
students.
This rapprochement aligns with recent recommendations for multivocality,
where
guidelines
encourage
researchers
to
consider
blogs
and
other
artifacts
in
research
formulation,
and
practitioners
to
engage
in
collaborative
research.
Practical
Implications:
For
professionals
and
project
managers,
our
results
convey
a
clear
message:
investing
in
communication
skills
is
not
optional,
but
rather
critical
for
achieving
success
throughout
Software
Engineering.
This
implies
paying
attention
to
continuous
training,
for
example,
encouraging
devel-
opers
to
give
internal
tech
talks
to
practice
technical
communication,
promoting
an
open
feedback
culture
(perhaps
with
feedback
workshops),
and
recognizing
good
communication
behaviors
in
performance
evaluations.
Companies
can
include
communication
criteria
in
promotions
and
hiring
more
systematically.
For
educators
and
curriculum
designers,
the
convergence
between
industry
and
academia
on
this
point
legitimizes
increasing
the
workload
of
activities
focused
on
soft
skills
without
fear,
as
it
is
no
longer
about
"nice-to-have"
or
"it
will
be
a
differentiator,"
but
rather
"necessary-to-have."
Measurement
is
still
a
concern:
A
challenge
highlighted
in
the
sources
(especially
in
the
industry)
is
how
to
measure
and
evaluate
communication.
While
it
is
easy
to
test
programming
with
a
code
challenge,
assessing
whether
someone
communicates
well
is
more
subjective.
Some
organizations
use
group
dynamics
or
situational
questions
in
interviews
to
infer
this.
Academic
literature
suggests
competence
frameworks
that
can
help
clarify
criteria.
For
example,
evaluating
communication
in
terms
of:
clarity,
objectivity,
empathy,
listening.
Still,
it
is
a
contextual
skill—someone
might
communicate
well
in
writing
but
not
orally,
and
vice
versa.
This
indicates
that,
although
there
is
consensus
on
its
importance,
there
is
still
ground
to
explore,
not
only
on
how
to
develop
but
also
on
how
to
evaluate
this
skill.
This
is
a
fruitful
frontier
for
academia-industry
collaboration:
controlled
experiments
on
communication
training
techniques
and
their
impact
on
agile
teams,
for
example.
10
Impact
of
Local
Culture:
A
point
not
deeply
explored
in
the
sources,
but
noteworthy,
is
how
cultural
differences
can
influence
the
perception
of
“good
communication.”
In
more
direct
vs.
indirect
cultures,
the
form
of
feedback
changes—something
seen
as
clear
communication
in
the
US
could
sound
rude
in
Japan,
for
example.
International
academic
literature
touches
upon
this
by
discussing
“intercultural
competence”;
the
gray
literature
rarely
enters
into
this
merit,
tending
to
assume
Western
contexts.
For
a
global
company
or
distributed
remote
teams,
this
nuance
is
vital:
what
constitutes
good
communication
can
vary
culturally.
5.1
Limitations
and
Threats
to
Validity
It
should
be
noted
that
our
review,
while
comprehensive,
does
not
cover
all
existing
literature.
It
is
possible
that
there
are
isolated
academic
studies
that
do
not
find
a
significant
correlation
between
communication
and
success
(perhaps
due
to
study
design)
or
niche
blogs
that
question
the
emphasis
on
soft
skills.
However,
we
believe
these
would
be
outliers.
The
strong
convergence
observed
here
indicates
a
dominant
trend.
Furthermore,
our
own
interpretation
might
be
influenced
by
confirmation
bias,
given
that
we
started
with
a
preconception
that
communication is important, and thus we may have paid less attention to counter-
examples.
We
sought
to
mitigate
this
by
actively
looking
for
alternative
views,
but we found virtually none explicitly in the sources.
Also, the qualitative nature
of
the
comparison
leaves
room
for
nuance:
we
emphasize
that
divergences
are
in
tone and focus, but another researcher might classify them differently.
We sought
to
base
each
statement
on
cited
evidence
from
the
sources,
for
transparency.
6
Conclusion
This paper investigated how communication skills in Software Engineering are dis-
cussed
and
valued
across
two
(complementary)
spheres
of
knowledge—academic
literature and gray literature—and analyzed the convergences and divergences be-
tween them.
In response to RQ1, we found that, overall, communication skills are
consistently
portrayed
as
essential
in
Software
Engineering.
Academic
literature
presents
evidence
of
its
importance,
showing
communication
as
one
of
the
most
demanded
soft
skills
by
employers
and
associated
with
better
project
outcomes.
Gray literature
reinforces
this view
with
practical examples and
emphatic
advice,
considering
communication
a
differentiator
for
individual,
collective,
and
project
success,
whether
in
internal
team
collaboration
or
in
dealing
with
clients.
Both
sources
highlight
multiple
aspects:
clarity
in
expressing
ideas,
active
listening,
constructive
feedback,
comprehensible
documentation,
among
others,
all
forming
the
communicative
repertoire
necessary
for
software
professionals.
In
relation
to
RQ2,
we
conclude
that
there
is
a
predominance
of
convergences
between
the
academic
and
practical
perspectives,
with
some
divergences
of
nuance.
Both
domains
agree
on
the
central
premise:
effective
communication
is
valued
as
a
pillar
in
software
development
environments
and
must
be
developed
11
just
as
much
as
technical
skills.
Convergences
include
the
identification
of
the
same
critical
sub-skills
(oral,
written,
collaboration,
etc.)
and
the
recognition
that
communication
enhances
productivity,
which
consequently
impacts
project
quality.
The
divergences
primarily
reside
in
the
tone
and
approach.
Academia
addresses
the
topic
systematically
and
evidentially,
while
the
industry
does
so
experientially
and
motivationally—and
in
some
contextual
emphases,
such
as
the
issue
of
language/culture,
which
is
more
explicitly
treated
in
formal
sources.
Nevertheless,
these
differences
do
not
represent
contradictions
about
what
is
important,
but
rather
how
the
subject
is
articulated.
Availability
of
Artifacts
All
supplementary
materials
necessary
for
the
replicability
of
this
research
are
available
in
the
repository:
https://figshare.com/s/13ffc6100bb9539d22e1
Acknowledgments
This
study
was
partially
funded
by
CAPES
-
Finance
Code
001,
INES.IA
(National
Institute
of
Science
and
Technology
for
Software
Engineering
Based
on
and
for
Artificial
Intelligence,
www.ines.org.br
),
and
CNPq
(408817/2024-0,
314680/2026-8
and
308623/2022-3).
References
[1]
Ian
Sommerville.
Software
engineering
9th
edition.
ISBN-10
,
137035152:18,
2011.
[2]
Giovana
Giardini
Borges
and
Rogéria
Cristiane
Gratão
de
Souza.
Skills
development
for
software
engineers:
Systematic
literature
review,
2024.
[3]
Ken
Schwaber
and
Jeff
Sutherland.
The
scrum
guide.
Scrum
Alliance
,
21(1):1–38,
2011.
[4]
Tawfig
Khidir
Ibnouf
Adham.
Conflict
resolution
in
team:
Analyzing
the
of
conflicts
and
best
skills
for
resolution.
Scholars
Journal
of
Engineering
and
Technology
,
11(08):152–162,
2023.
[5]
Gerardo Matturro.
Soft skills in software engineering:
A study of its demand
by
software
companies
in
uruguay.
In
2013
6th
international
workshop
on
cooperative
and
human
aspects
of
software
engineering
(CHASE)
,
pages
133–136.
IEEE,
2013.
[6]
Dannilo
Rabelo,
Albert
Lopes,
Wendy
Mendes,
Cleidson
de
Souza,
Kiev
Gama,
Danilo
Monteiro,
and
Gustavo
Pinto.
The
role
of
non-technical
skills
in the software development market.
In
Proceedings
of
the
XXXVI
Brazilian
12
Symposium
on
Software
Engineering
,
SBES
’22,
page
31–40,
New
York,
NY,
USA,
2022.
Association
for
Computing
Machinery.
[7]
Matthias
Galster,
Antonija
Mitrovic,
Sanna
Malinen,
and
Jay
Holland.
What
soft
skills
does
the
software
industry
*really*
want?
an
exploratory
study
of
software
positions
in
new
zealand.
In
Proceedings
of
the
16th
ACM
/
IEEE
International
Symposium
on
Empirical
Software
Engineering
and
Measurement
,
ESEM
’22,
page
272–282,
New
York,
NY,
USA,
2022.
Association
for
Computing
Machinery.
[8]
Raluca
Florea
and
Viktoria
Stray.
Software
tester,
we
want
to
hire
you!
an
analysis
of
the
demand
for
soft
skills.
In
International
Conference
on
Agile
Software
Development
,
pages
54–67.
Springer,
2018.
[9]
Gerardo
Matturro,
Florencia
Raschetti,
and
Carina
Fontán.
A
systematic
mapping
study
on
soft
skills
in
software
engineering.
J.
Univers.
Comput.
Sci.
,
25(1):16–41,
2019.
[10]
Chang
Liu,
Karin
Sandell,
and
Lonnie
Welch.
Teaching
communication
skills
in
software
engineering
courses.
In
2005
Annual
Conference
,
pages
10–1196,
2005.
[11]
Christopher
Scaffidi.
A
survey
of
employers’
needs
for
technical
and
soft
skills
among
new
graduates.
International
Journal
of
Computer
Science,
Engineering
and
Information
Technology
,
8(5/6):11–21,
2018.
[12]
Radhika
Kapur.
The
types
of
communication.
MIJ
,
6,
2020.
[13]
Ayoub
Abidi.
The
role
of
communication
in
software
develop-
ment.
https://ayoub3bidi.medium.com/the-role-of-communication-in-
software-development-2dbeb6cbe38c,
2023.
visited
March
03,
2026.
[14]
Vahid
Garousi,
Austen
Rainer,
Michael
Felderer,
and
Mika
V
Mäntylä.
Introduction to the special issue on:
Grey literature and multivocal literature
reviews
(mlrs)
in
software
engineering,
2022.
[15]
Mark
Zarb,
Janet
Hughes,
and
John
Richards.
Evaluating
industry-inspired
pair
programming
communication
guidelines
with
undergraduate
students.
In
Proceedings
of
the
45th
ACM
technical
symposium
on
Computer
Science
Education
,
pages
361–366,
2014.
[16]
Kyungsub
Steve
Choi,
Fadi
P
Deek,
and
Il
Im.
Pair
dynamics
in
team
collaboration.
Computers
in
Human
Behavior
,
25(4):844–852,
2009.
[17]
Vahid
Garousi,
Michael
Felderer,
and
Mika
V.
Mäntylä.
Guidelines
for
including
grey
literature
and
conducting
multivocal
literature
reviews
in
software
engineering.
Information
and
Software
Technology
,
106:101–121,
2019.
13
[18]
Wagner Lancetti,
Andre Takeshi Endo,
Fabiano Cutigi Ferrari,
and Vinicius
Durelli.
Ticket to ride:
A journey through the most in-demand soft skills for
qa
professionals
in
brazil.
In
Proceedings
of
the
XXII
Brazilian
Symposium
on
Software
Quality
,
pages
128–137,
2023.
[19]
Vahid Garousi and Austen Rainer.
Gray literature versus academic literature
in
software
engineering:
A
call
for
epistemological
analysis.
IEEE
Software
,
38(5):65–72,
2020.
14