Assume That I Can

Read the campaign story

CoorDown launched Assume That I Can on 14 March 2024 ahead of World Down Syndrome Day. Created with SMALL and produced by Indiana Production, the film places a woman with Down syndrome at the centre of situations shaped by other people’s expectations. Partner NDSS describes the campaign as a request to stop allowing stereotypes to determine opportunities. The protagonist challenges the assumption before it becomes a restriction on what she is permitted to try.

The campaign’s structure moves from limiting expectations towards a different possibility. It is an argument for opportunity, not a clinical claim that people have interchangeable capabilities. The published material documents the communication and its partnerships. It does not establish that viewers subsequently changed hiring, teaching or support decisions. This case therefore separates the memorable rhetorical reversal from the longer work required to make inclusion practical.

Editorial interpretation: many awareness messages ask an audience to hold a better attitude. This one makes the consequence of an attitude visible. An assumption can determine whether someone receives an explanation, invitation or chance to practise. That is a more actionable point of intervention than a general instruction to be kind. The creative mechanism invites the viewer to notice a decision they may otherwise consider neutral or protective.

Editorial interpretation: the protagonist’s agency prevents the message becoming only a story of benevolent helpers. She states the alternative perspective. For another organisation, the useful question is who gets to describe the barrier and define a worthwhile opportunity. A campaign can celebrate individual confidence while still recognising that access, accommodation and continuing support matter. Replacing a negative stereotype with an expectation of exceptional performance would create a different burden rather than remove the original one.

Locate the decision behind the stereotype

Ask people affected by a barrier to identify the moment when someone else’s assumption changes their options. It may be an invitation not offered, an explanation withheld or a task assigned without consultation. Build the message around that decision, then specify an alternative action. This creates a testable communication objective. It also helps prevent a broad inclusion campaign from praising diversity while leaving the actual gatekeeping process untouched.

Keep opportunity separate from compulsory achievement

An invitation to try should allow someone to decline, request support or choose a different goal. Do not make inclusion conditional on a moving success story. In campaign research, include people with varied experiences and support requirements rather than selecting only unusually confident performers as representatives of everyone. The aim is to remove an unjustified assumption, not to replace it with a universal claim about what people should be able to do.

Evaluate decisions, not approving reactions

Use carefully designed fictional scenarios to test whether audiences offer an appropriate opportunity and ask about support needs. Compare those choices with responses to a generic awareness message. Avoid using real hiring or educational decisions as a casual marketing experiment. Where an organisation changes a process, evaluate it with appropriate expertise and safeguards. Social engagement can indicate interest, but evidence of inclusion requires attention to what people actually experience afterwards.

A small test for another brief

Co-design a short staff-learning scenario about an everyday access decision, with paid input from people who encounter that barrier.

Compare recognition of the barrier, quality of the proposed response and later use of the improved process. Report attitudes separately from observed actions.

Stop if the exercise stereotypes participants, demands disclosure of disability or treats one person’s experience as universal.

• Choose one reversible, low-stakes decision rather than simulate a consequential selection process.
• Write versions showing an assumption and a respectful question about preferences or support.
• Test comprehension anonymously and give participants a concrete process improvement to consider.