"job success" is something that happens in the future relative to a "job interview". To be able to truly predict whether or not someone will be successful mean

"job success" is something that happens in the future relative to a "job interview". To be able to truly predict whether or not someone will be successful means that the interviewer would have to able to foresee how that person will interact with others in their workgroup , rise to challenges that don't yet exist, and be motivated to remain for a "long-enough" engagement with the company (whatever that means). Predicting the future is just damn hard, and it's even harder when nebulous desired outcomes such as "job success" are used. To make matters even more difficult, this problem also has "another half" to it which people tend to ignore: the employer doing the interviewing. These types of questions seem to take the point of view that an employer is presented with a bowl of fruit (candidates) and all they have to do is be able to select the best fruits. But it doesn't work that way. You may not get the fruit which you want, that fruit may want to go elsewhere or others might have already grabbed the fruit you would have wanted. The fruit which looks good now may end up rotten a short time later. Some fruit that looks undesirable today, may be awesome later. You may grow tired of apples and desire pears, but you've already filled your pantry with apples. What would happen if some organization was able to "figure this out" and truly maximally optimize their candidate selection using interview techniques? I am not so sure it would be easily distinguishable from what other similar competitive employers are doing. Predicting the future can only go so far.