‘Cryptic species’ are commonplace in systematics. With the application of barcoding approaches, increasing numbers of species are shown to be supposedly cryptic. However, the use of the term is inconsistent in the literature. Moreover, processes associated with the formation of cryptic species are generally ignored: (I) recent divergence, (II) parallel or (III) convergent phenotypic evolution, or (IV) phenotypic stasis. This causes confusion and imprecision in discussing the origins, evolutionary trajectories and ecological importance of cryptic species. We summarise these four processes based on a conceptual framework for the definition of cryptic species. The four processes identified above differ from each other in their temporal scale, phylogenetic context, and underlying selection.In focusing on the phenomenon of stasis, the absence of change over long geological periods, we identify overlaps between stasis in the paleontological record and as observed in cryptic species, and we discuss the challenge of integrating stasis into current evolutionary thinking. These include microevolutionary research that indicates abundant variation in genetic markers, quantitative traits and development. Hence, there are contradictions between micro- and macroevolutionary scales. Cryptic species bridge the gap between micro- and macroevolutionary research and so valuable research organisms.