I'm 100% behind heavily weighting work sample tests. However, your system seems to minimize the value of non-coding skills. If the interview loop doesn't real

I'm 100% behind heavily weighting work sample tests. However, your system seems to minimize the value of non-coding skills. If the interview loop doesn't really matter, how do you answer questions like: - Can this person communicate a technical concept to another engineer? - Can this person communicate a technical concept to a non-engineer? - Can they explain how the code they wrote works? - How do they respond to technical feedback? I'd argue that a good half of what makes up a good senior engineer is their non-technical skills. I won't claim that onsite "interview loops" do an amazing job of evaluating this, but it doesn't seem like work sample tests evaluate it at all. If your onsite loop doesn't really matter, how do you test for this?