A recruiter contacts a promising candidate about a role. The candidate researches the organisation, prepares for the interview and rearranges their working day to attend. The conversation goes well, and the recruiter promises to provide an update by the end of the week.
And then … silence.
The promised update never arrives, follow-up emails go unanswered, and the candidate is left to work out what happened.
Alternatively, a candidate stops returning calls, fails to attend confirmed interviews or even accepts a job offer and then disappears before their first day of work.
This is ghosting, and it’s on the rise. We explore why, how it’s hurting businesses as well as candidates, and how you can break the cycle and restore some trust to your organisation’s recruitment process.
What is ghosting?
Not every unanswered application necessarily amounts to ghosting. Job ads often make it clear that only shortlisted candidates will be contacted, so failing to contact everyone of the many applicants for a position isn’t really ghosting. It’s just acting in the way you said you would.
An automated rejection isn’t necessarily ghosting either. It may feel impersonal, especially when it arrives almost immediately, but it at least gives the candidate an answer.
Instead, ghosting occurs when one party suddenly stops communicating without explanation, despite creating a reasonable expectation that the conversation will continue.
In each of these cases, the problem isn’t so much the rejection or a change of mind – those are just natural and largely unavoidable parts of the recruitment process. Nor is the problem necessarily a delay: hiring decisions frequently take longer than expected and candidates’ circumstances can change quickly.
Ghosting happens when reasonable expectations meet unexplained silence: it’s when someone leaves another person to guess what’s gone on after giving them reason to expect an answer.
How common is ghosting in recruitment?
Research suggests ghosting is now common on both sides of the recruitment process.
A 2024 survey by hiring platform Greenhouse found that almost 45% of UK candidates had been ghosted by a recruiter after an initial conversation. And, significantly, respondents from historically underrepresented backgrounds were more likely to report being ghosted than white candidates. More recent Greenhouse data puts the figure even higher, with 61% of job seekers now reporting they’ve been ghosted after an interview.
Recruiters and employers are experiencing similar behaviour. In fact, Forbes Magazine reported that Gen Z candidates ghost employers or recruiters about 54% of the time – after already accepting a formal job offer.
The studies involve different groups and measure different behaviour, but together they reveal how easily the behaviour can become self-reinforcing. Candidates who’ve repeatedly been left without an answer conclude that recruiters don’t value their time. Meanwhile, recruiters who’ve been repeatedly ignored or stood up decide there’s little point investing in candidates until they have demonstrated a serious commitment.
Both responses may be understandable, but they lead to a low-trust system in which each party tries to minimise its investment and keep its alternatives open… until ghosting stops looking like a breach of professional courtesy and starts becoming accepted as simply how recruitment works.
Why has ghosting become so common?
There’s no single explanation for the rise of ghosting. But changes in how organisations recruit (and how candidates apply) have made the process increasingly impersonal.
Technology allows job seekers to find and apply for more positions, while generative AI can help them produce tailored applications in a fraction of the time.
This means employers must then process a greater volume of CVs and cover letters. And that, in turn, encourages heavier reliance on applicant tracking systems, automated screening questions and AI-assisted assessments.
But what happens inside these isn’t always transparent. Candidates often don’t know whether a recruiter considered their application, whether a knockout question excluded them or whether an automated tool ranked their experience poorly. A capable candidate may have relevant or transferable skills but describe them differently from the language the system has been configured to identify.
Over time, this opacity can change how people behave. Candidates who suspect nobody is meaningfully reading their applications become less inclined to invest in each one. This perpetuates their inclination to apply for several positions, use AI to reproduce the language in job advertisements and keep several options open simultaneously.
Employers then receive more formulaic applications from candidates who may have only limited interest in the position. That creates still more pressure to automate screening and reserve personal communication for a small number of applicants.
But technology isn’t the only cause. Hiring priorities change, positions are placed on hold, and recruiters can be left waiting for decisions from hiring managers. Sometimes responsibility for updating candidates is unclear. At other times, people simply avoid the discomfort of delivering a rejection or admitting that a decision has been delayed.
Candidates can be equally reluctant to have an awkward conversation. They might receive a better offer, lose interest in the position or become concerned about something they encountered during the recruitment process. Saying nothing can feel easier than formally withdrawing.
The result is a self-reinforcing cycle: the less human recruitment feels, the less personally responsible people feel for bringing a conversation to a proper end.
The damage ghosting does
Ghosting may avoid one uncomfortable conversation, but it usually creates larger problems for everyone involved.
When candidates disappear, recruiters may need to revive an old shortlist or restart the search entirely. Interviews have to be rescheduled, hiring decisions are delayed, and important positions remain vacant for longer. If someone disappears after accepting an offer, it can get worse still – especially if the employer or recruiter has already informed other candidates they were unsuccessful.
Candidates may find that ghosting cuts out their options for future roles. A recruiter or hiring manager who has been ignored, stood up or left without an employee on the agreed starting date is unlikely to consider that candidate favourably when another opportunity arises.
Finally, for employers, the damage extends beyond the immediate vacancy. Recruitment is often a candidate’s first direct experience of how an organisation operates. Repeated delays, broken promises and unexplained silence can suggest that the organisation is disorganised, indecisive or indifferent to people’s time.
That impression doesn’t necessarily disappear easily: an unsuccessful candidate might later apply for another position, refer someone else, become a customer or influence how others view the organisation.
Viewed this way, candidate experience isn’t separate from employer brand – it’s part of a wider pattern of recruitment friction that can repel top talent.
Who should break the cycle?
Recruiters, employers and job seekers all share responsibility for communicating professionally, but they don’t have equal control over the recruitment process.
Employers decide how positions are advertised, which technology screens applications, how many interviews candidates must complete and how long decisions take. And that also gives them the greatest ability, and therefore the greatest responsibility, to set a better standard.
Not that this absolves job seekers of their own responsibility to withdraw honestly rather than disappear. But because employers and recruiters hold the most control over the process, breaking the cycle has to start with them.
How you can help break the ghosting cycle in your business
People will always change their minds, accept other opportunities and occasionally behave badly. But a well-designed recruitment process can make disappearing less likely and make professional communication easier for everyone.
1. Set expectations from the beginning
Candidates should know what the recruitment process involves, how long it’s likely to take and who will keep them informed.
Recruiters should also ask how candidates prefer to be contacted and encourage them to disclose if they are considering other opportunities or working to another deadline. Candidates, in turn, should be clear about their level of interest and availability.
Neither party should have to guess what happens next.
2. Give people an actual update date
“We’ll be in touch” creates no meaningful expectation. “We will update you by Friday” does.
Sometimes Friday will arrive before the employer has made a decision. That shouldn’t prevent the recruiter from contacting the candidate with a short message explaining that the process has been delayed.
3. Match the communication to the investment
Not every candidate requires the same level of personal attention.
An automated acknowledgement or rejection might be appropriate for someone who has only submitted an initial application. But once a recruiter has spoken to a candidate, communication should become more personal.
Anyone who takes the time to prepare for and attend an interview deserves a clear outcome. Someone who completes several interviews, assessments or reference checks – the kind of multi-stage process a thorough hiring approach involves – deserves a direct conversation and, where possible, useful feedback.
The greater the investment you ask of the candidate, the greater your obligation to bring the process to a proper conclusion.
4. Automate administration, not relationships
Technology can improve the candidate experience when it’s used to acknowledge applications, arrange interviews, issue reminders and prevent people from being forgotten.
Problems arise when automation replaces communication or makes important decisions unnecessarily opaque.
Make sure you understand how your screening systems work and regularly check what kinds of candidates they exclude. A rigid system can overlook valuable transferable experience simply because it is described differently from the language used in the advertisement.
Once a meaningful human exchange has begun, technology should support the relationship rather than providing an excuse to withdraw from it.
5. Make honest withdrawal easy
Candidates sometimes disappear because formally declining an opportunity feels awkward. You can reduce this by providing a simple and stigma-free way to withdraw.
A short email, text message or link in your recruitment platform may be enough. Recruiters should also make clear that circumstances change and that an honest withdrawal will be treated more favourably than silence.
6. Make communication part of the process
Communication shouldn’t depend entirely on individual memory or goodwill.
You can assign responsibility for updates at every stage, establish expected response times and track candidates who’ve not received an outcome – see our guide to streamlining your hiring process in 8 weeks for a practical framework.
Also, if you find a pattern of ghosting occurring at the same point of your recruitment process, that may be a sign of excessive delays, unclear information, unnecessary assessments or a gap between the advertised position and the role candidates encounter.
Instead of treating every disappearance as evidence that candidates are unreliable, employers should ask whether the recruitment process is contributing to the behaviour.
Restoring the lost art of replying
Recruitment will always involve rejection, changed circumstances and difficult conversations. Ghosting avoids none of these things. It simply transfers the uncertainty and discomfort to someone else.
Recruiters and job seekers won’t always have the answer the other person wants but, in most cases, any honest answer is better than silence.
In short, by treating communication as part of the process rather than an afterthought, employers can begin rebuilding trust and hold candidates to the same standard.
The lost art of replying isn’t especially complicated: it begins with recognising that there is still a person waiting at the other end.
Want more?
If your organisation needs help creating a more effective recruitment process or finding the right people, contact Catalina Consultants.