Menu

HRPlaybook

The Hidden Why: Spilling the Beans on Ghost Jobs

by

The Hidden Why: Spilling the Beans on Ghost Jobs

Surveys reveal 40% of hiring managers post “ghost jobs,” roles not actively being filled, frustrating job seekers and eroding trust. 

This HR Spotlight article gathers insights from business leaders and HR professionals on uncommon reasons behind this practice. 

From contingency hiring and market calibration to signaling growth for investors or preserving headcount, these experts uncover strategic, often overlooked motives. 

They also address the ethical concerns and trust costs, offering practical solutions like transparent labeling and clear timelines to mitigate candidate frustration, providing a roadmap for organizations to balance internal needs with external perceptions while maintaining a strong employer brand.

Read on!

Arsen Misakyan
CEO & Founder, Angel City Limo

As a founder who’s run hiring through contract cycles, I’ve seen “ghost jobs” happen for less-obvious reasons.

The most common at Angel City Limo: contingency hiring tied to uncertain revenue—e.g., an airport RFP or studio shuttle contract. You build a bench in case the deal lands, but you can’t issue offers until procurement signs. The role looks active from the outside, yet it’s paused by one signature you don’t control.

Other under-the-radar drivers: preserving approved headcount (finance will cut dormant reqs unless they’re “live”), maintaining job-board pricing tiers that require a minimum number of postings, and meeting optics in partner audits (some enterprise clients expect to see “active recruiting” in quarterly reviews).

I’ve also seen teams post to calibrate market comp or test ATS workflows before a broader hiring wave—useful internally, confusing externally.

We’ve changed our approach: if a role is pipeline-only, we label it that way and state the trigger (“pending contract award; ETA late October”). We add an auto-expire date and a one-line SLA on next steps to avoid inbox limbo.

For candidates, a simple sanity check helps: ask for timeline, budget owner, and success metrics for the first 90 days. If those answers are fuzzy, you’re likely looking at a contingency req.

Contingency Hiring Creates Unavoidable Ghost Job Scenarios

John Mac
Founder, Openbatt

One of the less talked-about reasons hiring managers post “ghost jobs” is internal benchmarking.

It’s not about collecting resumes for the sake of ego or creating a false sense of growth—it’s about market calibration.

I’ve seen cases where teams post open roles not to hire immediately, but to gather current data on candidate expectations: salary benchmarks, skill gaps, evolving tech stacks.

It becomes an informal research tool, especially in fast-moving sectors where comp and capabilities shift every few months.

Another reason—one that rarely gets called out—is internal optics.

Sometimes a job post is less about the external market and more about internal signalling. A department lead might list a role to protect future headcount, even if budget approval hasn’t landed yet. Or they want to show higher-ups that they’re “planning for growth,” even if hiring isn’t on the immediate roadmap.

It’s a form of strategic theatre that isn’t inherently malicious, but it creates noise for candidates who assume every listing equals urgency.

There’s also the issue of succession hedging.

I’ve worked with orgs where a job goes live not because someone is leaving—but because leadership wants to be ready if they do. They’ve spotted burnout, misalignment, or upcoming life changes, and they quietly begin building a shortlist just in case. From their lens, it’s being proactive. But to candidates on the outside, it looks like a black hole.

The real challenge is that ghost postings erode trust. In a market where transparency is currency, using job boards as a test bed or placeholder weakens the employer brand—even if the intent isn’t harmful.

My advice to hiring managers: if you’re going to post, make it purposeful. If you’re not ready to hire, run research or forecasting internally without wasting a candidate’s time. Long-term, your hiring reputation matters more than the data you scraped from a few CVs.

Ghost Jobs Serve Hidden Internal Corporate Agendas

Aziz Bekishov
CEO, DC Mobile Notary

Not being a woman myself, I may not be able to speak directly from such an experiential standpoint, yet I have strongly, and deeply, felt the severe repercussions of high stress reactivity through my own entry into entrepreneurship and the constant pressure placed on me.

If this can serve as a parallel or complement to your piece, I would be truly honored to share it.

Living life on edge is not living at all:

There was a period about the time two years back when the days would start in full-body tension, before breakfast, for that matter, rehearsing with terrible plans.

Nowadays, I would find something minor, for example: a contractor would be late or did not send me any reply to an email, and that would put me on an emotional roller coaster.

From calm, I would be in confrontation mode within seconds, and being able to concentrate became an afterthought.

This slowly developed during the months of running DC Mobile Notary and simultaneously scaling DuoNotary until the point when I felt that I was no longer enjoying my own success.

What pulled me into the ripple was low-stakes activities which I could control.

So, every morning, I walk without headphones, just for my thoughts to slow down.
I write a lot of check-ins, usually noting down what felt out of sync that day and what I could do about it next, not later.

Most importantly, I gave myself intermission from never being on.

The shift didn’t save the day, but it was enough to halt the spiral so I could finally breathe again.

I would be glad to expand on that should you have further questions or if that fits your angle.

Low-Stakes Rituals Halt High-Stress Reactivity

Jeremy Yamaguchi
CEO, Cabana

One of the main reasons why businesses post “ghost jobs” is to create the illusion of growth.

When a business has job openings, that means they are growing and needing to add more members to their team, right? Well, not always. Sometimes these “ghost jobs” are literally just there to create the illusion of growth.

When people think a business is growing, they assume it’s really excelling and thus might be more interested in getting involved with it in some way. Though there may not be any legal issues here, I definitely think this practice is ethically questionable at best.

So, it’s not something we do. I don’t think it’s fair to job hunters and their time.

Ghost Jobs Create the Illusion of Growth

Karen Southall Watts
Author, The Solo Workday

If you take just a few moments to survey discussions on LinkedIn, you’ll find the prevailing sentiment is “ghost jobs should be illegal.”

When I tell job seekers that almost half the listings they find online are probably bogus, they are understandably angry.

There are some business case reasons for ghost postings, like trying to indicate company health or growth, doing informal surveys of available talent, or hoping to boost the morale of overworked staff. However, I think there is one very human reason these posts linger, and it speaks to neither stellar work ethic nor healthy company culture. Never-got-around-to-it.

Job boards screening listings for accuracy: never-got-around-to-it

HR departments pulling job ads when jobs are filled or funding fails: never-got-around-to-it

Managers closing positions that have been phased out: never-got-around-to-it

From the outside, job seekers can’t tell if this behavior is the result of short staffing or callous attitudes.

Either way, ghost jobs are frustrating, unethical, and should be stamped out. If someone could just find the time to get around to it.

Not Strategic, Just Inaction

Edward Hones
Employment Lawyer & Founder, Hones Law PLLC

Legal Cushioning and Passive Compliance
From my perspective as an employment lawyer, one uncommon but very real reason companies post ghost jobs is to maintain the appearance of compliance with internal policies or legal obligations.

For example, some organizations, particularly federal contractors or those subject to affirmative action requirements, may post jobs to demonstrate they’re actively recruiting, even when they have no immediate intention to hire. It creates a paper trail that, in the event of an audit or lawsuit, can be used to show “good faith” hiring efforts, even if the positions were never truly open. While this isn’t necessarily illegal, it rides a thin ethical line and can mislead job seekers.

Strategic Talent Mapping (with Questionable Transparency)
Another lesser-known motive is strategic pipeline building for future contracts or business expansion.

Companies might anticipate new work, but until it’s confirmed, they hedge by posting roles to see who’s out there. If the deal doesn’t land, the job vanishes. In this context, it’s less about deception and more about risk management, but it creates real trust issues with candidates.

I advise clients to be transparent in these cases: label the job “pipeline” or “future opportunity” so applicants aren’t misled.

Honest branding of speculative roles goes a long way in protecting both the employer’s reputation and legal standing.

Offers Legal and Strategic Hedges

Peter Murphy
CEO, Track Spikes

I’ve hired across retail, delivery, and digital—and yes, ghost jobs are real, but not always for the obvious reasons.

Some post openings to test market interest before greenlighting a new job. Others use it to gather future candidates during off-season cycles, especially in businesses with seasonal surges.

I’ve seen leaders use ads to calm internal teams, like saying, “We’re growing,” even if they’re not ready to hire yet. It’s not ideal, but it often occurs when hiring decisions are influenced by mood or funding considerations.

Ghost Jobs: A Strategic Market Test

Jonathan Hill
Chairman & CEO, The Energists

“Ghost job” postings are an unfortunately common practice though I wish they weren’t.

Their potential harm goes beyond annoying job seekers. They can erode candidates’ trust in the hiring process and cause lasting damage to a company’s employer brand, which ultimately makes them counterproductive for the purpose many companies use them for.

There are two reasons for ghost postings that I’ve witnessed most often:

They forgot to take the post down after the job was filled or the search was cancelled.

They’re using the fake job to collect resumes and build a pipeline.

There are also some less common reasons I’ve seen for these postings:

Internal budget constraints – The company intends to fill the job when they post it but are faced with a pause in hiring after doing so, or may still be waiting for the budget approval before moving forward.

Contractual or client requirements – In sectors like EPC or consulting, firms may need to demonstrate staffing capacity as part of a bid, but don’t plan to fill the role unless they win the deal.

PR and market signaling – Hiring often reads as growth, which can mean a company with open jobs can look more attractive to investors or stakeholders.

Internal promotion – They plan to fill the job internally but are required to conduct a public search to satisfy compliance or policies, and so post the job with no intention of hiring an outside candidate.


Performance pressure – if someone in the company (often an executive or other critical role) is under-performing, they may post a role to both motivate that individual and to test the market if they do need to be replaced.

As an overarching comment, I’d say if a ghost posting isn’t for pipeline building or the result of carelessness, it’s most often going to be motivated by internal factors that may or may not have anything to do with the company’s talent strategy.

Motivated By Internal Factors

Magda Klimkiewicz
Senior HR Business Partner, Live Career

In a competitive industry, appearing active and fast-growing can be just as valuable as actual expansion. By posting job openings, even without the intent to hire, companies create the illusion of scaling up. This can make them seem more attractive to venture capitalists and potential backers.

For example, a startup in Series A funding might advertise multiple engineering roles, not because they are ready to onboard, but to signal momentum. These job posts are often left open indefinitely, fitting into the narrative that the business is gearing up for a big leap.

This tactic is not deceptive in the eyes of some hiring managers. They view it as a proactive branding strategy rather than a dishonest practice.

Sometimes, job postings are less about hiring and more about crafting a narrative for shareholders, competitors, or even employees.

Interestingly, these strategic, though arguably misleading practices show that ghost jobs are not always about laziness or disorganization. They are, in most cases, about perception, influence, and control.

A Strategic Branding Tool

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Write to us at connect@HRSpotlight.com, and our team will help you share your insights.

Recent Posts

Discover the latest HR Tips and trends with our weekly newsletters!

Ghost Jobs Decoded: Unexpected Drivers in Today’s Hiring Game

by

Ghost Jobs Decoded: Unexpected Drivers in Today’s Hiring Game

Job searching is already challenging, but “ghost jobs”—listings posted without real hiring intent—add a layer of deceit. 

Far beyond building talent pipelines, these postings serve complex, sometimes questionable purposes, like salary benchmarking or internal employee pressure tactics. 

Drawing from frank perspectives of HR experts and business leaders, this HR Spotlight article reveals the hidden motives behind ghost jobs and explores the serious risks they pose to a company’s reputation and the trust of job seekers.

Read on!

Friddy Hoegener
Co-Founder & Head of Recruiting, SCOPE Recruiting

Hidden Motives Behind Corporate Ghost Job Practices

As an HR business lead, beyond the commonly discussed reasons like maintaining candidate pipelines or satisfying internal posting requirements, I’ve observed some less obvious motivations behind ghost job practices in the recruiting industry.

Companies frequently post positions to gauge salary expectations in competitive markets.

When organizations are considering expanding into new geographic areas or skill sets, fake job postings help them understand what compensation levels they’d need to offer without committing to actual hires.

Another uncommon driver involves competitive intelligence gathering. Some companies post attractive roles to see which competitors’ employees respond, providing insights into rival organizations’ retention challenges and workforce stability. This information becomes valuable for strategic planning and market positioning.

I’ve also noticed ghost jobs being used to test internal promotion readiness. Organizations post external roles to see if current employees apply, revealing who might be considering departure and helping identify internal candidates for future advancement opportunities.

Some companies use ghost postings to justify budget requests for hiring. When executives see hundreds of applications for non-existent roles, it supports arguments for increased headcount or higher salary ranges in subsequent budget discussions.

The practice reflects deeper organizational planning processes rather than deliberate candidate deception. However, it wastes candidates’ time and damages employer brand reputation when people discover the truth.

Transparent communication about hiring timelines and actual needs serves everyone better than these indirect intelligence-gathering methods.

Arvind Rongala
CEO, Edstellar

Reveals Internal Skill Benchmarking Strategy

While it’s often assumed ghost jobs are posted to build a talent pipeline, an uncommon but increasingly relevant reason is internal benchmarking.

Some companies post roles publicly to gauge the market value of skills they already have in-house, helping HR teams justify salary adjustments or training investments.

For example, if job postings attract candidates with higher-level skills or certifications, it can prompt leadership to upskill existing teams rather than hire externally.

In this context, corporate training becomes a strategic alternative to recruitment, aligning workforce capabilities with evolving business needs.

Blake Beesley
Operations & Technology Manager, Pacific Plumbing Systems

Serves Multiple Strategic Business Purposes

One uncommon reason we’ve seen is pipeline protection companies post ghost jobs to have backup candidates ready in case someone quits or underperforms, especially in hard to fill roles.

Another is internal leverage: some managers use fake openings to pressure current staff to take promotions or work harder, creating a false sense of competition.

In a few cases, jobs are posted to gather market salary data or gauge interest in a potential expansion that hasn’t been approved yet. While not always malicious, it wastes candidates’ time and erodes trust.
If a role isn’t real, don’t post it transparency matters.

Guillermo Triana
Founder & CEO, PEO-Marketplace.com

Pressures Employees, Stall Hiring

Here is something people do not talk about: some companies post fake openings to pressure current employees.

It is like a soft threat, e.g., “your role could be filled.” It sounds shady, but it happens, especially during budget cuts or performance dips. Nobody says it outright, but when three people on a team spot their job posted publicly, morale tanks. It is a passive-aggressive tactic used to spark urgency without having the guts to confront issues head-on.

Then you have the internal chaos side. Some roles are posted without real intent to hire because teams are waiting on budget approval, but recruiting gets told to move anyway. It is a stall tactic. Post first, decide later.

Sometimes it is just a placeholder to keep a role “active” in the system. Basically, no plan, just bureaucracy in motion. Meanwhile, candidates waste time applying to something that does not exist.

Lacey Kaelani
CEO, Metaintro

Ghost Jobs: Hidden Motives Beyond Hiring

Beyond the obvious “keeping options open for good talent,” we’re tracking more subtle motivations.

Because a lot of the major job boards don’t source check, we see companies every day taking advantage of free traffic.

For instance, a few weeks ago, we saw a company post over 600K jobs on a major job board that drew traffic to their site – and who knows if those jobs were real.

In addition to this, we can assume employers post ghost jobs for AI training data collection., competitive intelligence gathering and even, perhaps, employee retention psychology.

Leah Miller
Marketing Strategist, Versys Media

Signals Growth, Benchmark Talent

One less obvious reason some companies post ghost jobs is purely strategic. I’ve seen organizations use them as a way to signal projected growth to investors or stakeholders.

Posting open roles they don’t intend to fill quickly can give the impression of scaling up, even when resources aren’t quite there yet.

Another reason is internal benchmarking; a company may want to see what kind of talent or salary expectations are out there without having to commit to hiring.

We once worked with a tech platform that listed roles just to test how its employer brand was landing compared to competitors. It wasn’t done maliciously, but from the candidate’s perspective, it still erodes trust.

Wendy Sellers
HR, The HR Lady

Ghost Jobs Hurt Brand, Morale, Productivity

That 40% figure is troubling. Beyond the usual “pipeline building,” some managers post phantom roles to signal growth to investors or customers, to satisfy headcount optics before budgets are set, to test pay ranges or locations without committing, to hedge for pending contracts, or to appease leaders who equate open reqs with influence. It’s a bad practice.

Candidates notice and your brand takes the hit; current employees see the listings and assume they’re being replaced, which drags morale, productivity and retention.

It’s also a waste of money and time—recruiting and ads are expensive, and every hour spent screening for a non-job is an hour stolen from real workforce planning.

Do better: be transparent about hiring status, build talent communities, and only post when funding and approvals are real.

Gregory Shein
CEO, Nomadic Soft

A Bet On Uncertainty

Posting “ghost jobs” may seem deceptive, but some less-discussed motivations come from operational uncertainty rather than ill intent.

In fast-moving sectors like tech and FinTech, companies sometimes post roles preemptively anticipating funding rounds, contract wins, or internal restructures that haven’t been finalized.

It’s a way to gauge market talent and keep a candidate pipeline warm.

Another overlooked reason is employer branding. Active listings can falsely signal growth or stability to investors, clients, or even competitors. While I understand the strategic logic, it’s a practice that erodes trust in the long term.

Transparency should always take precedence over short-term optics.

Calin Oancea
Founder, Nature and Sustainability

Ghost Jobs Benchmark Salaries and Talent

Having hired over 30 people and freelancers in my company and projects and having consulted with multiple HR teams during hiring booms, I’ve seen how these so-called “ghost jobs” serve hidden strategic purposes.

I regularly collaborate with companies that are refining their growth projections. One less-discussed driver is the desire to measure labor market trends or competitors’ salary expectations; some managers post roles purely to benchmark talent pools and adjust internal plans.

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Write to us at connect@HRSpotlight.com, and our team will help you share your insights.

Recent Posts

Influence with Integrity: Revelations from HR’s Ethical Playbook

by

Influence with Integrity: Revelations from HR’s Ethical Playbook

The way leaders and HR teams influence behavior in the modern workplace has evolved dramatically, thanks to tools like gamification and motivational psychology.

Yet, with this new power comes a critical dilemma: when does constructive encouragement cross over into unethical manipulation?

The boundary is a fine one, and it’s easily breached when an initiative lacks clear intent or transparency, posing a direct threat to employee trust and morale.

To navigate this delicate balance, a new framework for ethical engagement is required.

How can leaders ensure their strategies are both effective and genuinely aligned with company values, protecting the well-being of their people?

This HR Spotlight article brings together invaluable insights from industry leaders, who reveal their best practices for building an ethical culture where every influencing technique is grounded in transparency, fairness, and a sincere commitment to employee health and happiness.

Read on!

Ben Schwencke
Business Psychologist, Test Partnership

No Victims Means Ethical HR Interventions

In organizational psychology, we have a simple heuristic that determines whether interventions are ethical or not, and it couldn’t be simpler.

Ask yourself, “Who is the victim here?”

As a result of this intervention, who will be worse off having implemented it?

If you can’t identify a victim, if the impact of the manipulation has no net-negative effects on people, then you typically remain within ethical territory.

By the way, the term “manipulation,” from a researcher’s perspective, simply means to control variables. The goal of the HR team is to control variables and, hopefully, improve performance, retention, satisfaction, engagement, team dynamics, and so on.

It’s not the HR team’s fault that these variables are related to people. The finance team wouldn’t hesitate to implement interventions to cut costs, and the sales team wouldn’t hesitate to implement interventions to boost sales.

So why should HR feel guilty about doing the same thing within their purview?

Ultimately, as long as no one is victimized, and as long as the outcomes are expected to be neutral or positive for all involved, you should be ethically clear.

Niclas Schlopsna
Managing Consultant & CEO, Spectup

Feedback Loops Prevent Manipulative HR Practices

One thing I’ve seen work well—especially when companies start veering into that grey zone of influence—is establishing a transparent feedback loop.

At Spectup, when we started supporting a fast-scaling fintech client in building their hiring strategy, their HR lead was big on using subtle nudges to steer behavior: gamified KPIs, reward badges, social recognition.

It worked at first, but morale quietly began to dip. Turns out, people felt manipulated rather than genuinely motivated.

What we advised—and what I still stand by—is creating a structure where employees can openly question or opt out of certain “influence” programs without repercussions.

That means including neutral, anonymous feedback channels and being explicit about the intent behind any behavioural incentive.

If the goal is performance, say it. If it’s culture-building, say that. The moment HR hides intent behind feel-good language, people lose trust, and manipulation turns sour.

So it’s less about avoiding tactics altogether and more about ensuring employees remain active participants, not passive subjects.

John Mac
Founder, Openbatt

Open Communication Safeguards Ethical HR Tactics

One way an HR team can ensure they don’t cross into unethical territory when using positive manipulation tactics is by maintaining transparency and fostering open communication.

While it’s important to motivate and influence employees positively, it’s equally critical that these efforts are aligned with the company’s values and ethics.

For example, if HR is using incentives or rewards to encourage productivity, these incentives should be clearly communicated to all employees, with a focus on fairness and voluntary participation.

This transparency ensures that employees understand the reasoning behind these strategies and are not being coerced into conforming to expectations that may not align with their personal values.

Another key element is ensuring that any tactics used to influence behavior are done so in a way that respects employee autonomy.

Positive manipulation can be viewed as ethical if it involves motivating employees to make decisions that benefit both them and the company, but it should never feel manipulative or deceitful.

HR teams must avoid pressuring employees into decisions they aren’t comfortable with, especially if these decisions may compromise their personal well-being or professional growth.

Additionally, HR should continuously seek employee feedback to ensure that any tactics or strategies being implemented are working as intended.

Regular check-ins, surveys, or focus groups allow HR teams to gauge whether employees feel supported or if they feel the tactics are overstepping boundaries.

This feedback loop helps HR stay in tune with employee sentiment and adjust their approach to ensure it remains ethical and respectful.

By keeping the lines of communication open, being transparent about goals and tactics, and ensuring that employees have the autonomy to make their own choices, HR teams can effectively motivate employees without crossing ethical boundaries.

Jonathan Palley
CEO, QR Codes Unlimited

Honesty in Hiring Builds Trustful Reputation

It’s essential to set clear boundaries for yourself before using tactics like this.

One boundary that I’ve established is that I’m never going to lie to candidates, including by omission. I’m always going to give straight answers to any questions, and I’m never going to tell outright lies.

This is about protecting my own morals as well as our company’s reputation.

Matt Taschner
CEO, Sota Home Buyers

Authentic Leadership Shapes Ethical Workplace Culture

After a decent portion of my career time in the trenches of workplace dynamics, I have learned that leadership dictates the tone of all things, particularly in the area of ethics.

When it comes to motivating versus manipulating, the difference can be as simple as authenticity and integrity when it comes to HR considering using what is commonly referred to as positive manipulation (let us be honest, it is just influence in a fancy suit).

This is the one thing I always go back to “ Lead how you would want to be led”. You can not preach positivity, motivation, or culture and at the same time condone a double standard or turn a blind eye when bad things occur.

I have seen amazing leaders who have created low-turnover, loyal teams–not by offering perks or gimmicks, but by showing genuine respect. A thank you, a sincere compliment, a word of encouragement, these were not strategies; they were demonstrations of what they were.

Therefore, the surest means by which HR can avoid entering into the unethical waters in the attempt to steer culture is as follows: ensure that any attempt to influence behavior is based on the same behavior being modeled at the top.

When your leadership talks the talk but walks the walk, you are not influencing, you are manipulating and people know it. Culture is not a memo, it is a mirror.

Wynter Johnson
Founder & CEO, Caily

Fair Jobs Enable Ethical Candidate Encouragement

This starts with the quality of the job you’re offering.

If the position is a good fit for the candidate and the compensation package is fair, a little pressure is simply encouraging someone to make the right decision for them.

Carl Rodriguez
Founder & Marketing Head, NX Auto Transport

Transparency Builds Trust for Employee Growth

The only thing that differentiates deception from ethical persuasion is transparency.

If you as a leader are clear to your employees on why you are implementing the policies you are, you don’t have a reason to be guilty.

Conversely, if you are hoping they do not notice exactly why you’re calling the shots you are, you might want to turn inward at this point.

Employees want to feel involved, respected, and cared for. That’s what established trust. And it is this trust that is crucial for growth and innovation. Otherwise, they’ll stop at a very low ceiling since there won’t be any real incentive moving on.

This trust is built by communication, openness, and transparency which shows there are no skeletons in the closet.

R. Karl Hebenstreit
Organization Development Consultant, Perform & Function

Tailored Transparency Fosters Ethical Stakeholder Trust

My take on it is relationship-based.  

If we take the time to truly understand our stakeholders, their needs, concerns, pain points, challenges, values, and preferences, we can tailor our communications to meet them where they are and for what they are ready.  

This will prevent them from immediately putting up their defenses, and make them more open to hearing what we have to say or ask them.  

Manipulation implies trickery, however tailoring our communication style and message to the recipient will avoid any hints of being unethical.  

As long as we are completely transparent with our messaging, the tailored “how’ of our delivery will be well-received and not seen as manipulation or trickery.

Don M Walters
Insurance Sales, The Ephraim Group

Transparent Recognition Drives Ethical Motivation

In 20+ years of insurance sales, I’ve learned that transparency beats manipulation every time.

When our team at The Ephraim Group wants to motivate employees, we focus on genuine recognition rather than psychological tricks.

The key boundary is simple: would you feel comfortable if your tactic was printed on the company website?

We implemented peer nomination systems where team members recognize each other’s achievements publicly. This creates positive momentum without the manipulation aspect that can backfire.

I’ve seen HR teams get burned trying to “gamify” performance with hidden psychological triggers. Instead, we share real client success stories during team meetings – like when we helped a small business owner save $3,000 annually on their commercial policy. These authentic wins naturally motivate people because they see the direct impact of their work.

The insurance industry taught me that trust, once broken, is nearly impossible to rebuild. Keep your motivational tactics transparent and tied to genuine business outcomes rather than psychological manipulation.

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Write to us at connect@HRSpotlight.com, and our team will help you share your insights.

Recent Posts

Why Post Fake Jobs? Ghost Job Motives That Will Surprise You

by

Why Post Fake Jobs? Ghost Job Motives That Will Surprise You

Job hunting has always had its frustrations, but a new, more deceptive trend is making the process even harder: the “ghost job.”

These are listings that look perfectly real but are posted without any genuine intent to hire.

While many assume companies are just building a talent pipeline, the real story is far more complex and, at times, ethically questionable.

The motivations for posting ghost jobs run deep, from strategic maneuvers like benchmarking salaries to internal tactics aimed at pressuring employees.

This HR Spotlight article gathers candid insights from a panel of business leaders and HR professionals.

It pulls back the curtain on the unspoken reasons organizations use this practice and examines the significant risks these tactics pose to a company’s brand reputation and the crucial trust of potential candidates.

Read on!

Philip Ruffini
Co-Founder, Hire Overseas

A Strategic Market Research Tool

Beyond the usual reasons like building a talent pipeline or keeping up appearances, there are some less-discussed drivers behind “ghost jobs.”

In some cases, companies post roles to benchmark salaries and skills in the market, using applicant data to inform future hiring decisions without the immediate intent to hire.

Others do it to appease internal stakeholders—for example, showing a department they’re “addressing” workload concerns, even if there’s no budget approval yet.

Another uncommon reason is testing employer brand visibility—using postings to see how attractive their job descriptions are, how many applications they draw, and which channels perform best.

While these reasons can be strategic, they risk damaging trust with candidates if transparency isn’t maintained, making it a short-term tactic with long-term reputation costs.

Ahmad Faiz
Owner, Achilles Roofing & Exteriors

Testing the Current Talent Pool

In my experience running Achilles Roofing and Exterior, one uncommon but real reason some hiring managers post “ghost jobs” is to test the current talent pool without actually being ready to hire.

I’ve seen it especially in construction and trades. Sometimes you’re on the fence—you’ve got a couple of big jobs possibly closing, and you’re not sure if you’re going to need more guys on the crew next month. So, what do you do? You put out a job post just to see what kind of skills are floating around out there.

Another reason—and it might ruffle some feathers—is to send a message internally.

Sometimes the team’s performance is slipping, morale is low, or one guy thinks he’s untouchable. Management drops a job post not because they want to replace anyone yet, but to let folks know, “Hey, you’re not irreplaceable.” It’s a pressure tactic. Not the cleanest move, but I’ve seen it done in construction circles.

And let’s be honest—some posts are to make it look like the business is booming. It keeps up the appearance of growth. For some, especially those trying to get funding or close a big client deal, the image of “we’re expanding” matters more than the actual hire.

At Achilles Roofing, I don’t play that game. If I post a job, it’s because I’ve got real work lined up and I need real people to get it done. Wasting someone’s time when they’re out there trying to feed their family? That’s not how we do business.

Oliver Morrisey
Founder, Empower Wills & Estate Lawyers

Strategic, Legal Purposes

I have often seen postings that are utilized to create a defense in future employment disputes. The Australian unfair dismissal law applied that a business purporting to provide genuine redundancy would have to show genuine efforts to redeploy. The story can then be supported with a 90-day stream of ads, which can save more than 15 thousand dollars in settlement and legal costs on a single claim.

Moreover, I also see advertisements that are put out to meet the labor market testing requirements on visas even though an internal hire is known. Some groups will release during due diligence as a growth signal to shift valuation by 5 to 10 percent. Others will use them to map competitors’ talent pipelines and find two or three target salaries of approximately $120,000 without blowing the game.

Mircea Dima
CEO, CTO, Founder & Software Engineer, AlgoCademy

Stress Testing and Systems Checks

One thing I have witnessed is that ghost jobs are to stress test internal pipelines, particularly in tech.
Others will utilize them to monitor the volume flow through their ATS or how their hiring groups can screen in stressful circumstances.

It is not only to discover talent, but a systems check in the guise of opportunity.

Our learners will frequently apply to positions that do not lead to anything and only realize that the position was on hold or not available anymore even though it is still live on the site.

Such testing may assist the firms to optimize their processes, but it silently undermines the trust of candidates who are in fact trying to enter the industry.

Misty Knight
Human Resource Consultant, Red Clover HR

They Harm Trust, Miss Talent

In my experience, companies will post a job without an actual position for the purpose of creating a pipeline of candidates for future roles.

There may also be circumstances where a job will be posted publicly for compliance purposes, but the plan was always to fill the role with an internal candidate.

Personally I disagree with this approach, it is inconsiderate to the candidate pool which could impact the employer brand. Additionally this strategy could lead a company to overlook an ideal candidate.

Jeffrey A. Hensel
Broker Associate, North Coast Financial

Risking Trust for Strategy

The act of posting ghost jobs is not merely based on the notion of the creation of a talent pipeline or producing an enhanced corporate image. Some of the rather rare drivers are:

Internally satisfying compliance or policy requirements–in some cases there is a need to post jobs publicly even when jobs have been promised to internal applicants.

Measuring the current market in terms of salary demands or candidate quality without any real intention to hire, which assists companies to align in terms of competitive compensation.

Implication of help coming or of their jobs being dispensable may be ways to keep employees alert and motivated, although no hiring is in the offing.

Trial hiring on various job descriptions or outreach text to identify what works best to get the best applicant pools and then dedicating resources to actual hiring.

These can be strategically sound tactics, but can also serve to undermine trust with candidates and employer reputation, a factor I warn clients regarding as a financial advisor. Openness tends to be more effective in the long-term than these less apparent, occasionally ethically dubious, strategies.

Duman Zhumagulov
Owner, Box Star Movers

An Unspoken Strategy Behind the Listings

Companies may make job listings in a very visible marketplace during a supposedly weak hiring climate to appear as if they are growing in technology, attracting fund-raising or M&A interest, or building a competitive advantage by reputation.

Others use ghost listings to stress-test internal teams, comparing how outsiders value the same role for purposes like raises or restructuring.

I’ve seen hiring managers keep posts active simply because they’re unsure about budgets or future departmental needs, and don’t want to lose time once the decision to hire is finalized. Although this may seem misleading, from another angle, ghost posts can be seen as defensive maneuvers in fast-changing industries dealing with uncertainty.

Oryna Shestakova
Head of Communications & Lead of the Research Group, Papers Owl

Masking Strategic, Deceptive Motives

While many ghost job postings stem from pipeline-building or internal policy, there are lesser-known motivations behind this practice.

In some cases, companies post roles to appear as though they’re growing — an effort to attract investors or boost internal morale. Others may use these listings to test the market, gauging interest or salary expectations without committing to hiring.

In rare cases, a ghost job may be posted to frighten current employees into working harder as if to say “Everyone is replaceable.”

I’ve also seen firms leave jobs up to create the illusion of competitiveness, especially during economic slowdowns.

Brett Bennett
Director of Operations, PURCOR Pest Solutions

A Waste of Job Seekers’ Time

I tend to dislike when companies post “ghost jobs,” which is why we don’t. 

I’ve personally talked to a handful of new hires in the past few years who have expressed dealing with these, and I’ve even talked to colleagues at other companies who have expressed that they do in fact post these fake job openings. 

It’s one of those practices that may not be illegal necessarily, but that doesn’t mean it’s not wrong. The job market is so hard for job seekers already – all this does is just waste their time.

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Write to us at connect@HRSpotlight.com, and our team will help you share your insights.

Recent Posts

Keeping It Ethical: Tricks to Master Positive Workplace Influence

by

Keeping It Ethical: Tricks to Master Positive Workplace Influence

In the complex landscape of modern organizational behavior, leaders and HR professionals often employ techniques to positively influence employee actions—from gamification and wellness challenges to motivational framing.

However, the line between constructive encouragement and unethical manipulation is a thin one, easily crossed when the intent or transparency behind a tactic is compromised.

This pivotal challenge demands a new framework for ethical engagement.

How can HR teams and business leaders ensure their strategies are both effective and genuinely aligned with organizational values, without risking employee trust or morale?

This HR Spotlight article compiles invaluable insights from industry leaders, revealing their go-to strategies for navigating this delicate balance, ensuring that every influencing technique is rooted in transparency, fairness, and a deep commitment to employee well-being.

Read on!

Eugene Mischenko
President, E-Commerce & Digital Marketing Association

Transparency Keeps Workplace Influence Ethical

Positive manipulation in the workplace can easily slip into unethical territory if the intent or transparency behind those tactics is compromised.

In my work consulting global e-commerce companies and advising HR leaders through the E-Commerce & Digital Marketing Association, I have seen that the key to staying ethical is to ensure that every influencing technique is both transparent and rooted in genuine alignment with organizational values.

One practical approach is to make intent explicit: whenever HR introduces a program or incentive designed to shape behavior, it is critical that employees understand both the purpose and the expected outcome. For example, if an HR team is using gamification to boost engagement or productivity, the rules, rewards, and reasoning should be communicated clearly.

Employees should never feel that recognition or feedback is being used to steer them in a direction that is hidden or manipulative. When I helped a multinational retailer launch a recognition program, we made it clear how achievements would be measured and why certain behaviors were being highlighted. This transparency removed any suspicion of hidden agendas and fostered trust across teams.

Another safeguard is to regularly test these tactics against the organization’s core values and code of conduct. HR should ask: if every employee saw the inner workings of this tactic, would it still feel fair and respectful? In my experience, the moment a tactic relies on withholding information, exaggerating benefits, or creating artificial competition, it risks undermining morale and long-term engagement.

Finally, ongoing feedback from employees is essential. At ECDMA, when we advise firms on cultural transformation, we recommend structured, anonymous feedback loops so that leadership can hear directly if people start to feel manipulated rather than supported. Adjustments can then be made quickly before trust erodes.

Ethical boundaries in positive manipulation are best upheld by ensuring transparency, genuine intent, and consistent feedback. HR teams that practice open communication and align their tactics with authentic values will not just avoid ethical missteps – they will build stronger, more resilient organizations.

Julie Collins
Marketing Director, The FruitGuys

Clear Intent Makes HR Tactics Ethical

One simple but effective way is transparency with intent.

If HR is using strategies like gamification, nudges, or framing incentives in a certain way, they should make sure the purpose behind it is clear and fair.

For example, if you’re nudging employees to complete wellness challenges or take part in upskilling programs, don’t hide the business motive—like improving productivity or reducing healthcare costs. Be upfront about how it benefits both sides.

That balance—between employee value and company goals—is what keeps the tactic ethical. The second it feels one-sided or deceptive, it crosses the line.

Brittney Simpson
HR Consultant, Savvy HR Partner

Transparency Preserves Ethics in HR Strategies

One critical way HR teams can avoid crossing into unethical territory is to maintain complete transparency about their motivational strategies. If you’re implementing gamification, wellness challenges, or recognition programs to boost performance, tell employees exactly why you’re doing it.

Don’t disguise business objectives as purely employee benefits. For example, when introducing a peer recognition system, openly explain that it’s designed to increase engagement and retention while also making work more enjoyable. Employees can then choose to participate with full knowledge of both what they’ll gain and what the company expects to achieve.

The ethical line gets crossed when you manipulate people without their awareness, but transparency preserves their ability to make informed choices about participation.

Shakira M. Brown
CEO, Incumbent Worker Training

Authentic Storytelling Boosts HR Influence

Let’s be honest with ourselves, most teams across a myriad of industries are inherently dysfunctional. HR teams poorly executing positive manipulation tactics will, of course, add to existing team dysfunction. Being intentionally authentic and influential is the leading ethical way to move employees to action in a positive way.

Storytelling is a powerful tool in HR communication. Find ways to use storytelling to get points across quickly. Using narratives, HR professionals and managers can create authentic connections that employees will relate to because stories evoke emotions, making messages more relatable and memorable.

When trying to influence employees to accept a task or do something you need them to do, share relevant personal anecdotes to make employees more receptive to your recommendations. Such storytelling fosters a sense of community and belonging, reminding individuals that they are part of something larger than themselves while also motivating them to action.

Jake Castro
Owner, White Cacti

Ethical Influence Prioritizes Transparency, Fairness

When it comes to positive manipulation in the workplace, intent and transparency matter most.

HR teams should keep checks in place to make sure any influence strategy—whether it’s motivational framing or goal setting—is aligned with the employee’s best interest, not just the company’s.

One approach: set up internal review systems where tactics are pressure-tested by multiple perspectives (managers, employees, compliance). This helps eliminate bias and maintain ethical standards.

Bottom line: if you’re using psychology to nudge behavior, make sure it’s for everyone’s benefit—not just bottom lines.

Sayak Moulic
Founder, Abroad For Better Future

Ethical HR Prioritizes Transparency, Consent

One effective way HR teams can remain ethical is by prioritizing transparency and informed consent.

Positive manipulation, such as incentivizing behavior or guiding decisions, should never involve deceit or withholding critical information. For instance, companies like Google emphasize open communication and employee autonomy even when using motivational strategies, ensuring employees understand the intent behind certain initiatives.

By fostering an environment of trust and empowerment rather than control, HR can ethically harness positive influence. Regular ethics training and clear guidelines also help in maintaining these boundaries.

Diana Babaeva
Founder & CEO, Twistly

Ethical AI Nudges Boost Productivity

Nudges are effective until they become invisible.

We have developed AI nudges to remind users to finish certain tasks, celebrate small victories, or suggest improvements in real-time. One such popular feature is the progress bar for document completion, which surprisingly increased productivity during internal trials.

We draw a clear line at emotional nudging. No guilt-trips. Nothing about “others are doing better.” Every nudge must be opted in to, easily disabled, and clearly explained. The instant a nudge becomes invisible or feels as if it is watching without permission, it is no longer helpful but starts manipulating.

People really get their moral strength from support, rather than from silent pressure.

Guillermo Triana
Founder & CEO, PEO Marketplace

Transparent HR Persuasion Ensures Ethical Clarity

If HR wants to use persuasion without crossing the line, they need to pressure-test the tactic with a single question: Does this give the employee more clarity or more confusion?

Positive manipulation can be framed as encouragement or nudging, but the second it muddles someone’s understanding of their options or reality, it goes sideways. You are no longer helping; you are gaming the outcome. That line is thin. It is the difference between telling someone “this will help your career” and “this will look good to the execs.” One is honest incentive. The other is bait.

The fix is simple: add transparency to every tactic. Say what you are doing and why. If your influence method cannot survive daylight, it probably should not be used at all.

Every message should pass the “could this be said in a public Slack thread” test. If the answer is no, scrap it. You can steer behavior without hiding the wheel. The intent matters, but the clarity matters more.

Magda Klimkiewicz
Senior HR Business Partner, Live Career

Ethical HR Prioritizes Employee-Centric Benefits

One way an HR team can avoid crossing into unethical territory when using positive manipulation is by asking a simple question: Would this still benefit the employee even if the company gained nothing from it? This will help them stay focused on the well-being of their staff, not just company goals.

For example, HR might offer flexible working hours. If the real goal is to reduce stress and help employees balance work and life better, even if productivity doesn’t increase, then it is an ethical move. But if the flexibility is only there so they can be available longer or work outside normal hours, it becomes a selfish tactic disguised as support.

This mindset helps HR stay on the right side of ethics. When any strategy still adds real value to the employee, whether or not the company profits, it shows that the intent is honest. Positive influence becomes harmful only when it hides pressure behind kindness.

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Write to us at connect@HRSpotlight.com, and our team will help you share your insights.

Recent Posts