The paper groups the basic skills into two categories in terms of "Technical Skills" and "People Skills", where the former refers to the analysis and design skills that the HP technologist should personally have and the latter refers to the interaction skills such as management and communication that takes effect when the HP technologists are working and talking with people.
For the technical skill part, when the technologist deals with a case, it is like he has to cut the complicated, twisted situation into small, simple pieces of factors, (The sub-factors may be parallel or hierarchical), then analyze each of these, and explain the comined relations between the sub-factors as well.
One interesting thing I found here is that the paper talked about "HP technologists should be able to explain a variety of implementation alternatives, each potentially differeing in cost, speed of implementation and overal performance improvement impact. All alternatives, however, should be powerful enough to solve the performance deficiency." I didn't realize that they have to find a few alternatives to solve the problem before I read this. I had thought that they only need to find an optimal way, whatever it is maximum likelihood, parsimoney or something else, only one best fit model to settle the problem. My understanding here is: Is it that the HP technologist proposes several feasible solutions, weigh the strength and weakness of each, and pick up the most suitable one according to some particular rule, standard or their previous experience? It seems to me that it is more pratical that they focus on only one solutio, keep on adjusting this one by adding some parameters, changing some variables, etc., rather than developing a couple of alternatives and compare different alternatives to get the best one. If the first one doesn't fit, then they can turn to another one. I guess I also doubt that in the real world, the possibility and feasibility to work out a lot of alternatives, all have the attributes of "cost-saving, effective, speed-up the implementation".
Furthermore, for the "People Skills" part, I learn that a good personal character is very important for a HP technologist. Like it says in the paper, "the HP technologist must become a person with whom others want to do business". Even though what the paper mean by people skill are mainly on management and communication interpersonal skills, it seems to me that these skills are more of an art than a science. Given two HP technologists with pretty similar analyzing and designing skills, usually it is the truth that the clients would prefer a nice looking, polite, humorous technologist who are good at communication and experts in management. Those "soft" skills help the technologists to build trust with the clients, know better what the clients think and want, convey their design ideas more clearly and effectively to the customers and identify the problem more efficiently.
For the future skills for HP technologists, I think one important qualification is the ability to locate the useful resources that they need to solve the problem. This is an information century. Tons of informations are available on line. If they can effectively grab the information they want out of less useful resources with this powerful "library", they would benefit a lot, saving time and energy, using other HP technologists' work for references, etc. I was also thinking that maybe in future, the position of HP technologists will become more interdisciplinary because they need to have a large knowledge base to solve a wide range of performance problems and also because the Human Performance technology doesn't primarily focus on creating new theories and consequently they will borrow more from other theories and disciplines.