Hiring employees can be frustrating. But according to entrepreneur and Shark Tank India judge Anupam Mittal, employers rarely get to share their side of the story.
In a LinkedIn post that has sparked a debate online, Mittal floated the idea of a “Ghostdoor,” a platform where companies could rate job candidates for things like keeping their word after accepting offers, serving notice periods properly, and ensuring smooth handovers before leaving a job.
Anupam Mittal shares hiring disappointment
Mittal began by pointing out that employers are often rated publicly on platforms like Glassdoor, sometimes receiving harsh reviews. “Employers get rated publicly & sometimes negatively. Many deserve it,” he wrote.
But he argued that there is another side to the story that people do not talk about enough. “Anyone who has hired in India knows the other side too,” Mittal said.
He described a common situation faced by recruiters and companies. Candidates accept job offers, continue looking for better opportunities, and then back out at the last minute if they receive a more attractive package elsewhere.
Referring to the practice, he wrote, “Candidates who accept offers, shop them for usual ‘30% more’ totka, and then ghost you a day before.”
Mittal revealed that he had recently experienced something similar himself. “Like I recently found out the hard way when a VP didn’t show up after making the company wait for 6 months. Usual family medical emergency,” he wrote, adding a laughing emoji.
The idea of a reverse reputation system
The experience led Mittal to wonder whether companies should have a way to review candidates, just as employees review employers. “Perhaps that’s why, a reverse reputation system sounds tempting,” he wrote.
He suggested a platform where candidates could be rated on factors such as offer integrity, notice-period behaviour and handover quality. “Rate people on offer integrity, notice-period behaviour & handover quality. Done!”
Mittal admitted that such a system could be very useful. “Useful? Very.” But he was quick enough to point out the dangers as well. “Dangerous? Also very.”
Why Mittal believes ‘Ghostdoor’ may not work in India
While the idea sounds attractive on paper, Mittal said it could easily be misused, especially in India. According to him, bad managers could unfairly target employees, while people leaving toxic workplaces could end up being punished. “Bad managers will misuse it.”
“Good employees punished for leaving toxic workplaces.” He warned that a candidate-rating platform could eventually turn into something similar to a credit score system driven by personal grudges. “And careers could become vendetta-based CIBIL scores.”
For that reason, Mittal concluded that a platform like Ghostdoor would probably not work in practice. “So, this won’t work.”
‘There has to be a solution’
Even though he dismissed the idea, Mittal said the problem still needs to be addressed. He questioned how companies can protect themselves from people who repeatedly accept offers and then disappear before joining. “But, koi toh solution hoga,” he wrote. (But there should be some solution)
He added that habitual offenders end up hurting the reputation of professionals who act responsibly. “To stop the habitual offenders from giving professionals a bad name.”
Mittal then turned to technology for answers and asked whether artificial intelligence could help solve the issue. “Maybe AI can help? Any ideas? Anybody building?”
Internet weighs in
The post triggered a flood of responses, with many professionals sharing their own experiences both as hiring managers and candidates. However, one of the most liked and shared comments came from a resume writer named Vik Gambhir, who argued that India’s long notice periods are a major reason candidates continue exploring multiple opportunities even after accepting the offers.
“The bigger problem is companies have 90-day notice periods, which makes this whole shopping for multiple offers and ghosting possible in the first place,” he wrote.
Soon after, multiple in comment section came in support of Gambhir, agreeing with the viewpoint.
One finance professional joked that if companies get a “ghostdor” for candidates, employees should get warnings about misleading job descriptions too. “If we get a ‘Ghostdoor’ for candidates, can we also get an automated alert for when a job description says ‘Dynamic work culture’ but actually means ‘We expect you to answer Slack messages at 11:30 PM on a Sunday’? Asking for a friend.”
Mittal’s “Ghostdoor” idea may not become a reality anytime soon, but it has reignited an important discussion about trust, transparency and accountability in the job market.