Code is the output; gathering requirements, taking direction, reacting to bug reports, and various other interactions with co-workers are the inputs. If you onl

Code is the output; gathering requirements, taking direction, reacting to bug reports, and various other interactions with co-workers are the inputs. If you only look at the outputs, you're not seeing the whole process. How many employers want to hire someone who writes beautifully elegant jewel-like code that doesn't meet their needs, because the developer is incompetent at the input side of the development process? Talking to people they've worked with can tell you "this candidate is incredibly abrasive and drives away their teammates (but can hide the abrasiveness for a day or so of interviews)" or "this candidate is incredibly helpful, teaching and mentoring junior members of the team, and providing insight to non-technical managers". If the two candidates code equally well, which would you want to hire?