Not entirely sure I agree but talking to your point:
Doesn't this support the idea that Google needs to improve their people-interaction? And one way to do that is to hire for people who are better at it?
Not necessarily -- there's an argument to focus on their comparative advantage and not bother wasting energy improving their people-interaction (something they are comparatively bad at).
Doesn't this support the idea that Google needs to improve their people-interaction? And one way to do that is to hire for people who are better at it?