My first filter on recruiting now is: "Has this person built anything I can see?" A website, an app, a repo on Github. If the answer to that question is 'No' then my assumption is either a) this person isn't interested in the work, or b) they don't know how to code in the real world and I'll be paying them to learn. I'm constantly amazed at the number of people applying for dev positions who claim years of experience…
In the majority of cases the best candidates are those that "code for fun". This means that they build shit that they find useful, interesting or to showcase a particular skill or new technology. It would be trivial for them to make some of this work available for me to see.
Where this work isn't available we pay potential hires to work on something for a couple of days.
There is usually nothing on a CV that will convince me to hire a person over and above actually seeing some of their work. In cases where I've skipped the "show and tell" step as we call it, my chances of making a bad hire increase exponentially.