Tom was kind enough to respond, and confirmed that the emphasis on “coding” in his essay was based, in turn, on Igor’s:
…the only reason I focused on code was the original W+K focus on that, likely because that’s the technology they’re interested in.
Furthermore, if you re-read Igor’s article (which you probably should), it doesn’t take much mental work to replace “coding” with whatever skill happens to be most relevant in your field. The point is, if you’re going to make a living as a creative technologist (or similar), you need proven skill and experience in building something real.
Once you’ve dealt with the headaches, scaling issues, arguments, and mid-project misgivings, and have powered through to ship something real, you’re much less likely to Dunning-Kruger yourself and your colleagues into a smoking crater.
Of course you should only hire people who meet that requirement. As Tom says, “Why on Earth would you do otherwise?”