Why You’re Ghosted (and How to Fix It) | From Dorms to Desks Podcast | ep51

On this week’s episode of the From Dorms to Desks Podcast, our cohosts dive deep into one of the most frustrating experiences in the job market. As our hosts put it, “You clicked apply and waited. And waited. And… nothing. Ghosted again.” They acknowledge it’s not always personal, but your résumé might indeed be scaring them off, prompting a look into small changes that can help your application get noticed and acted upon.

Candidate ghosting is a widespread and deeply frustrating issue in recruiting, characterized by recruiters and hiring managers ceasing all communication with job applicants without explanation. This is especially infuriating when recruiters initially reach out with great enthusiasm, only to disappear after candidates have invested significant time, sometimes enduring multiple interview rounds and completing projects. This lack of communication leaves job seekers in limbo, creating a profound sense of disrespect and hindering their ability to move forward, leading many to view recruiters as “useless,” “time wasters,” “liars,” and even “scumbags” who only prioritize their next fee.

Recruiters offer a variety of explanations for this behavior. Often, they claim to be “too busy” due to managing thousands of applicants for hundreds of roles, finding it difficult to keep track or respond to every unsuccessful candidate. They may believe it’s simply “not a good use of their time” compared to more “important” tasks. A substantial portion of the blame is often directed at hiring managers, who can be indecisive, unorganized, or poor communicators, leaving recruiters themselves without updates to share with candidates. Some recruiters also admit to avoiding delivering bad news due to concerns about candidates becoming hostile or even threatening, finding it easier to simply move them to a stage in their applicant tracking system that triggers a no-reply email. Additionally, recruiters might ghost candidates to keep “decent” applicants “on the back burner” in case their first choice doesn’t work out, avoiding the awkwardness of re-approaching previously rejected individuals. Antiquated or poorly implemented applicant tracking systems are also cited as a hurdle, making it difficult to manage the vast number of candidates or send automated rejections. In some cases, recruiters are explicitly instructed by their superiors or hiring managers not to communicate rejection, suggesting an organizational culture that condones ghosting. Furthermore, in many agency settings, time spent on candidates who are not in the running is seen as “not profitable,” so sending rejections is rarely prioritized. Candidly, some recruiters even admit to simply being lazy or indifferent, assuming that no response is a clear enough sign that a candidate didn’t get the job.

This pervasive practice has significant broader impacts. It leads to a negative brand perception for companies, making them appear uncaring about the candidate experience. This widespread frustration has even spurred a counter-movement of reciprocal ghosting by candidates themselves, including instances of “Gen Z Employees – Quitting via Ghosting,” signaling a breakdown of professional norms. The prevalence of ghosting also fosters a general mistrust of recruiters and contributes to the belief that many job postings are “ghost jobs” – positions that may not genuinely exist or are primarily used for data collection rather than actual hiring.

Despite these complex explanations, there’s a strong consensus that ghosting is unprofessional and largely avoidable. Proposed solutions often include implementing simple, automated “boilerplate” rejection emails that could provide closure with minimal effort, or improving applicant tracking systems to create better candidate portals where individuals can log in to check their application statuses. Many also believe recruiters should be held more accountable for professional communication, emphasizing the need to “remember the human” and treat candidates with the respect they would expect if they were job seeking. There is also the argument that ghosting may violate GDPR regulations, which require informing candidates about the processing and storage of their personal data throughout the application process. While challenging due to existing power dynamics, some suggest that recruiters should push back on hiring managers to establish clearer processes and timelines. Ironically, some hope that recruiters experiencing ghosting themselves when seeking new roles might cultivate greater empathy.

For candidates navigating this challenging landscape, this episode aims to explore what small changes can make your résumé or application more likely to be seen and acted upon. While the detailed strategies are saved for the episode, general advice includes always following up with the recruiter if you haven’t heard back, but also being prepared to move on if there’s no response after multiple attempts. Some candidates find it helpful to proactively communicate their desire for updates directly during the interview process. Ultimately, a pragmatic strategy often involves not dwelling on being ghosted and continuing to apply for opportunities until a definitive offer is received.