Not that simple. Time is usually a quarter not an hour. The amount of work is intermingled with value, perceived or actual.
Nobody is asking an interviewee to have a full product prototype ready for demo inside an hour. What they do is present some problem to you and ask you to reason through it.
Being able to work out pitfalls in a design early, rather than several weeks in, saves a lot of time and money.
So in short, yes. It is that simple.
And a sandpile is made up of a bunch of grains of sand. [0] It's identically disingenuous to suggest that such a difference in quantity does not manifest a difference in quality.
I don't think your point is necessarily a bad one, but you're leaving a lot of opportunity for people to dismis it.
> It's identically disingenuous to suggest that such a difference in quantity does not manifest a difference in quality.
Huh? I specifically addressed that when I stated that "Nobody is asking an interviewee to have a full product prototype ready for demo inside an hour."
Are we assuming that the interviewer is an idiot who has no concept of time? That the interviewee only has some small amount of time to work through the problem they have posed, or answer questions?
If your interview process is an hour, then you're comparing a bunch of candidates who all had an hour. It's demonstrative of what knowledge you are bringing to the table and how you can work through problems. It's all extrapolation.
No, it isn't perfect. But if you find me a system that is, I've got a billion dollars for you in my pocket.
> you're leaving a lot of opportunity for people to dismis it.
Frankly, I don't care if people dismiss it. The people who dismiss are not here to engage in thoughtful conversation and aren't my target audience, anyway.