If you know me, or even if you’ve read some of my writing, you know that, in the past, I’ve been quite loudly opposed to the concept of pedigree as a useful

If you know me, or even if you’ve read some of my writing, you know that, in the past, I’ve been quite loudly opposed to the concept of pedigree as a useful hiring signal. With that in mind, I feel like I owe clearly acknowledge, up front, that we found this time runs counter to my stance. Did the interviewers have access to the applicant's resume? If so, to what extent do these results simply reflect the interviewers' bias for top schools and famous companies?