The Dark Side of Web3 Hiring: Free Work, False Promises, and Ghosting

My work at Web3 Insights: Talent is built on six years in Web3 recruitment, supporting companies from early-stage start-ups to global players. Every week I hear directly from candidates about their experiences in the market, and lately, a worrying trend keeps coming up.

Over the past year, I have seen the same scenario play out time and time again. Talented candidates in Web3 put themselves through several rounds of interviews, often at multiple companies, and get as far as the final stage. This occurs most when applying directly, as a good recruitment agency should vet the client and role they are working to avoid these issues, but its not always the case unfortunately. They invest weeks of energy, sometimes even completing demanding assignments such as growth strategies or full marketing audits, only to be left in silence. No feedback, no explanation, just an abrupt end to a process they thought was moving toward an offer.

I speak to candidates almost daily who tell me how demoralising this is. For them, it feels like wasted time and effort. For the industry, it creates a deeper problem. Web3 is built on networks and reputation. When candidates are treated poorly, that news spreads quickly through communities and group chats. A company that consistently ghosts candidates at late stages might not feel the damage right away, but over time their reputation as an employer suffers.

So why is this happening so often? From my perspective, it usually comes down to one of a few things. Sometimes the role was never truly signed off in the first place. The leadership team may have wanted to start conversations but were still waiting for a funding round or a grant approval before making a real commitment. In other cases, the hiring manager knows they need support but the company is not aligned on what kind of role would solve the problem. The interviews go ahead, but behind the scenes there is no agreement about the position. Other times, it is a case of “testing the market” to see what kind of talent is out there, even if there is no immediate intention to hire. And unfortunately, there are also situations where candidates are asked to deliver complex tasks, only for their work to be quietly absorbed and used internally while the process is dropped.

Whatever the reason, it’s important for candidates to understand the signals that a role may not be as real or as urgent as it first appears. When a company has a genuine need, there are usually some clear indicators. The budget has already been approved. The process has a defined structure, with set stages and a clear timeline. Senior decision makers such as founders or executives are directly involved, not just mid-level managers. There is consistency in the people you meet and the story you hear about the role. On the other hand, when job descriptions keep changing, when the interview steps are improvised rather than organised, or when weeks go by without clarity, those are warning signs. If you never meet someone with authority to actually sign off on the hire, that should tell you the role may not be a priority.

Candidates often feel they have no choice but to follow whatever process is laid out in front of them, but in reality there is room to take back some control. Asking the right questions can save you from wasting time on roles that are not truly ready. At the start of a process, a simple question such as “What is driving the need for this hire right now?” often reveals whether the company has a real urgency or whether they are just exploring. Asking whether the budget is signed off is a straightforward way to test whether the role is genuinely live. It can also help to ask what the ideal start date would be. If the answer is vague or depends on conditions outside the company’s control, that is useful information for you to have.

As you move through the process, you can continue to test for clarity. Asking who the key decision makers are and whether you will meet them before an offer is made tells you if the role has sponsorship at the top. Requesting a clear outline of next steps and timelines not only shows professionalism but also gives you a reference point to hold the company accountable. If they say you will hear back in a week and you don’t, you know the urgency isn’t there.

Assignments are another area where candidates can protect themselves. If you’re asked to produce something that could take many hours or even days, it is reasonable to ask how the task relates to the actual role, how the output will be used internally, and whether compensation is offered. Please, please, please ask these, your time and knowledge is valuable! Some of the most serious companies I work with go out of their way to pay candidates for substantial work at late stages. It’s not about the money itself but about what it signals. A company that compensates you for your time is showing that they value your expertise, that they respect the process, and that they are serious about hiring. That’s a very different experience to being asked to deliver free consulting with nothing in return.

The reality is however, is that no candidate can completely prevent ghosting. Companies will sometimes pull back from a process for reasons that have nothing to do with you. What you can do is reduce the chances of being caught off guard. Spotting weak signals early, asking sharper questions, and running more than one process at the same time gives you a stronger position. It also shifts the mindset. The company is evaluating you, yes, but you are also evaluating them. Remember that. You have every right to ask questions, to expect clarity, and to protect your time.

For candidates, approaching interviews this way is not just about avoiding frustration. It’s about ensuring that you’re investing your energy into opportunities that are real, aligned, and worthwhile. For companies, there is an equally important lesson. The way you treat candidates says a lot about who you are as an employer. In an industry as interconnected as Web3, professionalism and transparency are not optional. They are what will set you apart as an organisation people want to work with, both now and in the future.

At Web3 Insights: Talent, I see both sides of this equation. I work with candidates who are looking for meaningful opportunities and with companies who are serious about building strong teams. When the process is handled with respect and clarity, everybody benefits. Candidates feel valued and motivated, and companies build a reputation as an employer of choice. And that is exactly the kind of ecosystem we should be building in Web3.

---

For candidates who want more than just advice from an article, I offer a dedicated Web3 Career Advisory service where I act as your personal agent throughout hiring processes. From process guidance and spotting red flags to negotiating offers, it means you always have someone on your side who understands how Web3 hiring really works. 

If you would like to learn more, reach me directly at aaron.hayhurst@web3-insights.com