Would You Allow Candidates a Job Mulligan [poll]
Typically, we hear the term “mulligan” in golf. When a player tries to hit the golf ball and woosh! Completely misses. Often the other players will give that person a mulligan (i.e. a second chance, do over).
During the Great Recession, The Wall Street Journal said Bank of America wanted a “mortgage mulligan” for their role in the housing crisis. Basically, they were asking for another chance. I’m not sure this was the intended use of the term.
Now, the word is being used in recruiting and job search. The “job mulligan” defines those times when a person takes a job then immediately realizes they made a huge mistake. Instead of hanging out for months or years so the resume looks good when applying for another job, a candidate can take a “mulligan”.
On the plus side, it’s refreshing to see that candidates can admit the mistake and move on. They aren’t staying with companies for the sole purpose of building time on their resume. Companies don’t have to worry about a disengaged employee sticking around, just waiting for the clock to run down.
The other side, the job mulligan takes some responsibility out of the recruiting process. Candidates should be interviewing the company as much as the company is interviewing them. If the company can’t take a mulligan, should employees be able to? And how many mulligans are acceptable before it creates a new red flag?
I’m curious. What do you think of the “job mulligan”? Let’s take one of our quasi-famous one question polls:
Image courtesy of HR Bartender
0