A LinkedIn post by a founder has drawn attention after a candidate turned down a ₹20 LPA offer following a three-week interview process. The post points to a gap in communication during the hiring stages, which led to a mismatch in expectations between both sides.
The incident has raised questions around how salary discussions are handled during recruitment and whether companies should be more upfront about compensation in job descriptions.
How a simple mismatch turned into a hiring failure
The post was shared on LinkedIn by founder Abhishek Agarwal. In the caption, he wrote, “A candidate rejected our 20 LPA offer. It was entirely my fault. I forgot to mention the salary in the job description. Four rounds of interviews. Three weeks. All wasted.”
(Also Read: 'Getting fired isn’t the real risk': Man breaks down Germany unemployment benefits system)
He further explained that HR described the role as offering a “competitive salary”, but no specific figure was shared at the beginning. He also pointed out how the same job title can have very different pay scales across companies, comparing roles like a sales executive at Samsung and Apple.
According to him, the candidate expected ₹28 LPA, while the company’s budget was ₹20 LPA. By the time both sides reached the offer stage, the gap in expectations had already become too wide to bridge.
{{/usCountry}}According to him, the candidate expected ₹28 LPA, while the company’s budget was ₹20 LPA. By the time both sides reached the offer stage, the gap in expectations had already become too wide to bridge.
{{/usCountry}}Debate on salary transparency in hiring
The post also raised a larger question about hiring practices. The author argued that job descriptions often focus on titles and responsibilities, while budgets remain undisclosed, leading to mismatched expectations and wasted effort.
He suggested that companies should clearly mention salary ranges at the start of the process to avoid long interview cycles ending in rejection. According to him, this would reduce unnecessary applications and save time for both recruiters and candidates.
Internet users were quick to respond, with many agreeing that early salary transparency is essential. One user wrote, “Transparency saves everyone time, four rounds for a mismatch is painful.” Another commented, “One line in the job description could have saved three weeks of effort for everyone involved.”
Some users also shared recruitment experience, noting that even a short compensation discussion early in the process can prevent misunderstandings later. Others added that salary clarity helps candidates make informed decisions and ensures companies only interview those aligned with their budget.