>> After two or three years, your ability to perform at Google is completely unrelated to how you performed when you were in school, because the skills you required in college are very different. You’re also fundamentally a different person. You learn and grow, you think about things differently.

While the analysis is correcting some beliefs about interviewing techniques, do I sense them draw a conclusion again not supported by data? How did they conclude the lack of correlation is "because" the skills required are different and people think differently a few years out from college.