[alexandercrohde]

Most people hate them when they get rejected, consider them fair when they pass. Like anything, they are mostly subjective and very gameable (compare it to getting accepted at a college)

It's not remotely scientifically-objective, but most things in life aren't. I'd liken it more to dating. Both parties are evaluating each other on innumerable criteria through their own subjective lenses, and trying to reduce it a scientifically-quantifiable measure is dubious.

[CyberDildonics]

There are real results based on how successful someone is on a job. Being dismissive that there is a problem because you think people only complain when they don't get a job is simplistic and incredibly naive.

If an interview process is completely detached from what it takes to succeed at a job, what good is it?

[sidibe]

What makes you say it's completely detached from what it takes to do the job? The only evidence that I see cited often is some study by Google that says success in the interviews didn't predict performance, but Google continues to use the same model for interviewing. I would think an organization that big would have people devoted to improving their interviews and would change it if they thought it had bad outcomes.