[vannevar]

The company would have to be fairly large (>100 employees) and long-lived (>10 years) to generate an amount of data with any hope of statistical significance. Employee "success" depends on many factors, and an employee who can seem to be a failure in the short-term may end up becoming very successful (or vice-versa), simply because of external circumstances---the nature of the projects, the clients, colleagues, etc.

[kqr]

Setting the bar at Fisherian statistical significance is letting perfect be the enemy of good.

This seems like one of those occasions where improving your reliability by just a few percent (even if far from statistical significance) can massively reduce costs in the long run. (Maybe Kahneman even used interviewing as a concrete example of this in his latest book?)