I strongly agree. A good engineer can compensate for bad product management and occasionally bad leadership, but can't do much about all the other things you listed.
There's no way to guarantee a successful engineering hire, but organizations try to because their culture is so blameful or fearful of conflict that all the incentives are misaligned.
I believe most organizations copy the Google, Facebook, etc. hiring processes with the goal of adopting an "industry standard process" because they don't know how to conduct an interview process that's tailored to their own organization, and they don't want to think too deeply about it.
Having a coherent interview process means dealing with your organizational baggage: understanding it and either resolving it or crafting the interview process to select for people who can integrate well with it. Usually it's the latter, since most of the issues start at the top.
Google, Facebook, etc. have spent a lot of time and money crafting a good interview process for their organizations: specifically what they value and don't value (even if the individual interviewers aren't always fully aware of what the organization is selecting for). They can also support a lot of false negatives.
But the copycats don't have those same needs or candidate pool, so it always comes across as a bit disconnected to me.