"Also, there were some candidates who managed to get 95% and above - but would then just be absolutely awful during the interview - we would later discover that

"Also, there were some candidates who managed to get 95% and above - but would then just be absolutely awful during the interview - we would later discover that they were paying someone to complete the technical test on their behalf." I wondered about this when I see test scores inconsistent with actual ability. The truth does come out. In general tests (or interviews) for new hires should be tougher than for existing employees. You want each new hire to bring something new to the table. The OP suggests that you can't beat interviews. I believe that even better is seeing someone in action (which they did) and getting references from someone you trust. This is why employee referral programs are so good. Once HR gets into the mix of "Fairness to the candidates" as opposed to "Fairness to the company" it gets a little strange.