Very interesting methodology, but it would be very nice to correlate this data with long-term job performance. Interview decisions (of which of course you get more than long-term results, and they are clearer to quantify) are hopefully, but not necessarily an indicator of whether an employee works out for your company. Otherwise you run the risk of optimizing the quiz/screening process around metrics that influence your interview (i.e. test for how you personally weigh performance indicators, not for how these performance indicators actually affect performance)
It's all well and good that certain things (quiz) correlate more to performing well in a long-form remote coding task.
But part of the problem of hiring is that these test-style code questions are themselves not necessarily good indicators of future job performance.
The only way to truly analyze whether a given technique is working or not is to follow the candidates through into their jobs and see which ones actually become good long term employees.
