One of the primary concerns I communicated at the very beginning of the process was my availability for travel. Being explicit, I mentioned that I was open to traveling, but only 1-2 times per year. To this, the recruiting team assured me that my preferences would not pose any issues for the role in question. With this reassurance, I committed my time and energy to the subsequent interview stages, investing effort in preparations, research, and the interviews themselves. The overall process spanned four weeks, encompassing several rounds of discussions. While the duration and rigor of an interview process can be indicative of a company's commitment to hiring the right candidate, it becomes a severe drawback when paired with poor communication and lack of transparency. After my final interview, I was met with complete silence. No feedback, no status update, nothing. After such an intensive and extended interaction, being ghosted felt unprofessional and disrespectful. I later came to learn, through indirect channels, that the primary reason I was not selected was my reluctance to travel more frequently, despite my clear communication about this from the outset. This revelation was disappointing, not because I was not chosen, but because I had been misled. If my travel preferences were an issue, this should have been flagged in the initial stages. Instead, I was led to believe that everything was in alignment, wasting my time and resources. In conclusion, while Kuehne+Nagel might be a reputable company in its industry operations, my experience with their hiring process has unfortunately painted them in a less flattering light. Prospective candidates should approach with caution and ensure that all requirements and expectations are crystal clear from the very start, to avoid similar disappointments.