Break the Bias: the assumption inside a name

Read the campaign story

Titan Raga’s 2016 Break the Bias film opens in a workplace appraisal discussion. An employee named Kiran has been recommended by Rajat. As colleagues hear about their close working relationship, their expressions suggest a story beyond professional merit. The reveal comes when Kiran enters and is a man. The film uses a name that did not establish gender to expose what the people in the room supplied for themselves.

Contemporary accounts in Mint and Adgully describe the scene and credit Ogilvy & Mather. The communication asks viewers to reconsider assumptions about women’s professional success. It belongs to Titan Raga’s wider conversation about women’s choices, but it is a distinct boardroom execution from the earlier airport encounter already represented in the library. This entry does not count the umbrella positioning as a newly invented platform.

The editorial mechanism is delayed information. Viewers are allowed to form an interpretation before a missing fact changes it. That can make a bias more tangible than a direct instruction to avoid bias, because the audience has an opportunity to notice its own inference. The effectiveness depends on the setup remaining fair. If the film explicitly supplied false information, the twist would reveal deception by the storyteller rather than an assumption by the viewer.

A small team could adapt this structure to a fictional, non-evaluative training exercise about how evidence is interpreted. Present an anonymised work example without demographic cues, ask what further information is needed and then reveal only facts relevant to the task. Keep the exercise voluntary and avoid turning it into a test used to shame or rank employees. Real promotion decisions require consistent criteria and appropriate review, not an advertising-style surprise.

The film is not evidence that a brief exposure removes discrimination, nor does one fictional scene establish how every workplace behaves. Its useful contribution is a question for communication design: what did the audience actually observe, and what did it add? Measure whether participants can distinguish evidence from inference after the exercise. For the advertiser, also test whether the brand connection remains clear, because a powerful social reveal can be remembered even when the product and its role disappear from memory.

Keep the setup fair

Do not misstate facts merely to manufacture a twist.

Separate evidence from inference

Ask viewers what they observed versus what they assumed.

Do not shame participants

Use fictional exercises without employee ranking or public exposure.

A small test for another brief

Test a fictional evidence-versus-assumption exercise.

Ability to identify unsupported inferences.

Stop if the exercise becomes a judgement about individual employees.

• Write an anonymised scenario with no real employee details.
• Ask volunteers what is known and what remains uncertain.
• Reveal relevant facts and discuss the reasoning without scoring people.