If employers are looking for a radical utopian reform, I'd rather see them do away with the interview. Interviews slant hiring toward personal charm, and toward the cultural uniformity of the workplace, at the expense of competence.
Which is both the objective and a net positive for the workplace.
I get that everyone who's bad at interviews want to do away with them. But you could likely find charming individuals who want to do away with technical requirements because they feel their great personality is more important than what their gradepoint average was. Neither of those groups are right to discard the "other side" of the equation.
You need both, and hiring blindly based strictly for technical competence will have you feeling like you're managing a daycare center. Trust me, the interview is not a problem.
Interviews are valuable. Being able to communicate effectively about your work, especially to a stranger, is competence. Going off of pure resume and cover letter fluff, lots of candidates can clearly do the job, but only in the interview do you see if a candidate can confidently leverage their experiences to solve new problems.
If you want an interview to favor a higher level of competence, do away with the hiring managers. Have candidates interviewed by their equally titled peers, or members of the group the candidate would be working most closely with. People who not only have a technical background, but an understanding of how the specific job actually works day to day.
