I interviewed in September 2024 for a position at Allianz Partners in Bangkok, Thailand, with both HR and the Assistant Manager of the Travel Claims Department. The interview process was generally smooth and professional; HR was particularly courteous and efficient throughout. However, I encountered a moment of concern when I was advised not to express to the manager my potential interest in pursuing a future career in physiotherapy overseas. Although this was only a hypothetical situation given my background, I was advised that being transparent about it might not be viewed favorably and could impact my chances of being considered for the position. During the interview, I made it clear that my physiotherapy and healthcare background could provide added value in this role. While it may not be an essential requirement, I believe my skills and experience in this field would offer significant benefits. However, the overall guidance I received about being selective with my responses regarding my career aspirations left me feeling conflicted about how candid I could be. Despite HR informing me via email that the interview would be conducted in both English and Thai, the majority of the interview was conducted in Thai. This approach was presented as a means to assess my proficiency in the language, which I found to be inappropriate and unprofessional. Additionally, I questioned the manager’s command of English, as he asked his final question in Thai but expected me to respond in English. His subsequent response in English was largely incomprehensible, with only a few discernible phrases, such as “to other candidates,” indicating a lack of clarity in his communication. This made me doubt his proficiency in English and raised concerns about how effectively he could communicate in a role that requires bilingual skills. Furthermore, the manager’s perspective on my educational background was concerning. Despite holding a degree from the UK and being proficient in both Thai and English, he questioned my ability to work effectively in Thai. As a Thai national educated in Thai schools until elementary and continuing to use the language proficiently, I found this line of questioning unnecessary. Moreover, the job description only mentioned proficiency in Thai and English without specifying that the majority of clients would be Thai. The way this was communicated reflected a narrow mindset, which was unexpected from an international company that I believed upheld inclusive values and global perspectives. Additionally, the manager’s dismissive attitude toward my healthcare background was troubling. He did not seem to appreciate how my experience could be an asset in the role of a Claims Examiner, especially considering the nature of travel insurance claims, which often involve emergencies or accidents. His condescending tone in addressing my qualifications made it clear that my background was not valued, raising further concerns about the culture and leadership within the team. Overall, this experience left me questioning whether this role and company would be a good fit, as I expect professionalism and open-mindedness from those I work with. If the values exhibited during this interview reflect the company’s broader culture, I believe it was the right decision not to move forward.