Unless of course the hiring process has a systemic flaw and there's an entire class of people that are being rejected that could be game changing.

(I actually don't have an axe to grind here - it's certainly not related to any obvious grouping - I just wonder if interview and selection might be so deeply flawed that a the occasional random lottery injection might improve the overall result.)

There are effectively random lottery injections via acquisition/acquihires. Source: I was/am one.

I thought they made people re-interview?

They do but it’s at least a lighter schedule.

I also think the criteria are different. i.e. I believe when evaluating the results it’s more strongly biased to avoid false negatives unlike the regular process which is more about avoiding false positives.

Or maybe I just have impostor syndrome, who can say...