Hiring the right people is competence when it comes to corporate leadership. That's pretty much the only lever they have. Sure they make a few strategic decisions, but for the most part they are just reviewing and signing off on things that get bubbled up.
I think this bothers a lot of engineers who pride themselves on being able to understand complex things, and see "soft skills" as something ancillary and lesser. It's also not helped by the fact that management skill has a low floor, since it's so hard to assess, thus everyone has had bad managers and they really make your life miserable. But at the upper end of management skill with large org sizes, the problem of debugging orgs and understanding the outputs of systems of people is way harder than software due to the human element. Even just getting accurate information and assessments is non-trivial given the underlying incentives and politics. In this type of environment, competence looks completely different from how a craftsperson thinks about it.
I think this bothers a lot of engineers who pride themselves on being able to understand complex things, and see "soft skills" as something ancillary and lesser. It's also not helped by the fact that management skill has a low floor, since it's so hard to assess, thus everyone has had bad managers and they really make your life miserable. But at the upper end of management skill with large org sizes, the problem of debugging orgs and understanding the outputs of systems of people is way harder than software due to the human element. Even just getting accurate information and assessments is non-trivial given the underlying incentives and politics. In this type of environment, competence looks completely different from how a craftsperson thinks about it.