Every hiring decision involves unspoken rules, strategic moves, and hidden dynamics that both candidates and hiring managers navigate, but rarely discuss openly. Our latest research, surveying over 1,000 hiring managers and over 1,000 job seekers across the United States, pulls back the curtain on this intricate game between employers and candidates.

The data shows how employers and job seekers have adapted to market uncertainties and shifting expectations: companies post exploratory job listings to gauge talent availability and build pipelines, while job seekers cast wider nets by applying for stretch roles and leveraging AI tools to compete in crowded markets.

Where job seekers and hiring mangers actually agree

Despite all the confusion and miscommunication in hiring, our research reveals surprising areas where both sides are aligned on expectations and strategies.

The three-day rule: perfect timing alignment

Amid all the gamesmanship in hiring, job seekers and hiring managers have quietly settled on the same timeline:

• 52% of job seekers say three days is reasonable to decide on a job offer
• 54% of hiring managers expect a response within the same timeframe

Three days has become the standard window—long enough to review details, discuss with family, or weigh other options, but quick enough to show genuine interest. It gives both sides what they need: candidates get time to make an informed decision, and employers get a reasonably prompt response that keeps their hiring process moving. 

The AI strategy: a new consensus emerges

AI has entered the hiring process, and both sides have reached an unexpected agreement:

• 63% of job seekers say it's ethical to use AI to enhance their applications
• 67% of hiring managers agree with this approach
• 66% of hiring managers use AI-detection software to screen applications

Job seekers polish their resumes with AI tools, then hiring managers run those same resumes through AI detectors. But rather than creating an arms race, most people seem to view AI as just another tool—like spell check or grammar software—that helps put your best foot forward.

Stretch applications: a mutual understanding

Job seekers and hiring managers have reached the same conclusion about job requirements:

• 96% of job seekers apply for positions where they don't meet all required qualifications
• 75% of hiring managers say it's acceptable for candidates to apply for jobs they're only partially qualified for

Everyone agrees that job requirements are wish lists, not deal-breakers.

Why do job seekers take these chances? 36% of those who apply for stretch roles believe they can quickly learn the necessary skills once hired. They've realized that potential beats perfection on paper, and hiring managers often agree. They'd rather hire someone who can grow into the role than wait for a unicorn candidate who checks every box.

Crossing the line from strategy to dishonesty

While some aspects of hiring involve mutual understanding, our research exposes tactics that cross the line from strategy into dishonesty, damaging trust between job seekers and employers.

The phantom job problem: what's really happening

A "phantom job" is a posted position that a company isn't actually planning to fill, at least not right away. Most job seekers suspect this is happening: 84% believe companies routinely post these fake openings. The data shows they're right to be suspicious. 

Here's what hiring managers admit to doing:

• 78% have interviewed candidates for roles that weren't immediately available
• 81% have posted job openings, conducted full interview processes, and decided not to fill the position
• 30% say they frequently use this tactic

The reasons vary: testing the job market, building talent pipelines, satisfying internal posting requirements, or making the company look like it's growing. But this practice is breaking down trust in the hiring process. When job seekers encounter fake postings, they start questioning whether any opportunity is real.

The salary transparency shell game

Most job seekers want to know what a job pays before they apply, but most employers aren't telling them:

• 68% of job seekers want salary information disclosed upfront in job descriptions
• Only 48% of hiring managers typically provide it at that stage
• 37% of men fully trust employer-provided pay ranges vs. 27% of women
• Gen Z leads at 40% trust levels vs. 33% of millennials and 30% of Gen X

That 20-point gap between what job seekers want and what they get isn't an accident—many employers prefer to get candidates interested first, then talk about money later.  The generational differences suggest younger workers may be less jaded or more optimistic about transparency efforts.

The remote work bait-and-switch

Remote work has become a major source of confusion and mixed messages in hiring:

• 54% of hiring managers admit to misrepresenting remote work availability to secure hires
• 48% believe candidates will accept less ideal conditions once hired
• 47% want to present the company favorably
• 43% are trying to attract top talent
• 67% frequently find themselves correcting candidates' remote work expectations

Job seekers are noticing the disconnect:

• 58% of job seekers believe companies are transparent about remote work policies
• 76% of job seekers have experienced discrepancies in remote work expectations

This mismatch shows up in various ways: advertising "remote-friendly" positions that require frequent office presence, describing "hybrid" arrangements that heavily favor in-office work, or suggesting flexibility that disappears after hiring.

The benefits and career advancement gaps

Benefits and career growth information often get left out of hiring conversations:

• Only 33% of job seekers feel employers provide transparent benefit details during hiring
• Only 33% of hiring managers say their companies disclose comprehensive information upfront

Career advancement conversations show a similar pattern:

• 77% of job seekers say companies provide advancement information during interviews
• Only 46% of hiring managers discuss growth opportunities in every interview
• 62% of men report hiring managers initiating these conversations vs. 50% of women

These gaps mean some candidates don't get the full picture of what a job offers beyond salary, and companies may miss out on attracting people who care about benefits or career growth.

Changing the rules: how to win by playing fair

Our research points toward approaches that work better for everyone involved:

For hiring managers:

• Only post jobs you're actually planning to fill
• Include salary ranges in job descriptions from the start
• Be upfront about remote work policies from the first conversation
• Recognize that skills can be developed and give stretch candidates a chance

For job seekers:

• Keep applying for stretch opportunities since 75% of hiring managers are open to this approach
• Use AI tools openly to enhance your presentation—employers won’t hold it against you
• Ask direct questions about benefits, remote work, and advancement opportunities
• Trust your gut when something doesn't add up

For organizations:

• Reward hiring managers for clear communication rather than just filled positions
• Train hiring teams on how to have straightforward conversations with candidates
• Hold people accountable for accurately representing roles and company culture
• Remember that misleading candidates during hiring often backfires later

Kelly: your partner in hiring

At Kelly, we've spent decades working with both job seekers and employers, and we've seen what works—and what doesn't—in the hiring process. The best results happen when everyone involved can have straightforward conversations about what they're looking for and what they can offer.

We help organizations connect with talent through clear communication and realistic expectations. When companies are upfront about roles, compensation, and work arrangements, they attract candidates who are genuinely interested and well-suited for the position.

Our research with over 2,000 job seekers and hiring managers shows that both sides actually want the same thing: a hiring process based on honest information and real opportunities. Most people—whether they're looking for work or looking to hire—prefer straightforward conversations over guessing games.

Hiring will always involve some strategy and positioning. But the companies that do it best are the ones that build their approach on clear communication and realistic expectations rather than gimmicks or misleading information.