> Giant tech companies have data going back decades now on the performance of this method vs. alternatives. The position that they blindly incur this expense fo

> Giant tech companies have data going back decades now on the performance of this method vs. alternatives. The position that they blindly incur this expense for no benefits is hard to believe. I am not so sure about this. People change, HR fads come and go, leadership always has their own ideas. A company is always ascendant, in plateau, or declining. There's a lot of factors in hiring. It's intrinsically and necessarily subjective. I think the FAANG's benefit far more from having an appeal to candidates (people really want to work there) than by using some kind of home-grown data-driven algorithm for candidate evaluation. Ultimately, if these companies can afford to offer compensation in multiples of what others do in other domains and other parts of the world, they really will attract competitive candidates. Does an elaborate selection process help? Sure, but it's only part of the picture and I think it's a relatively small part.