[Ferret7446]

At least historically, Google prioritized not hiring bad candidates over hiring good candidates. So it was neither a priority for interviews to be consistent (for good candidates) or for employees to be able to consistently pass interviews.

[HarHarVeryFunny]

That certainly makes sense as a goal, given the cost of hiring someone bad and then not being able to get rid of them.

The problem is that companies like Google that have evaluated their own hiring process, by comparing candidates "hiring score" with subsequent on-the-job performance, have found that there is little correlation. So, while the goal (be more concerned about false positives than false negatives) makes sense, their process of trying to achieve this is broken.