This week marked a shift from planning the project to refining how we intend to carry it out. At the start of the week, we attended a session on research methods and methodology, which helped clarify not only what methods we were proposing to use, but why they were appropriate for our research question. Distinguishing between methodology as the reasoning behind the research and methods as the practical tools for collecting evidence gave us a much clearer framework for developing our proposal.

A significant milestone this week was receiving detailed feedback on the stakeholder mapping exercise we had submitted previously. Although much of the feedback required us to rethink our original plan, it ultimately strengthened the project. We realised that our initial stakeholder map was too broad and attempted to engage with more organisations than was realistic within the timeframe. Returning to the drawing board allowed us to simplify our approach, identify the stakeholders most relevant to our research questions, and delegate responsibilities more effectively across the team. Rather than seeing this as a setback, it became an opportunity to focus the project on where our engagement could provide the greatest value.

Much of my own work this week centred on developing the project's methodology, refining our literature review on community partnerships, and preparing interview schedules for schools, charities and community organisations. This involved thinking carefully about the kinds of evidence we actually need to collect, rather than simply asking questions because they seemed interesting. We also began drafting professional emails to potential participants, recognising that building relationships with stakeholders is itself an important part of community-based research.

One discussion that particularly stayed with me came from a session on leadership. We were asked a seemingly simple question: what does leadership actually mean? I found myself questioning whether the word "leadership" was even appropriate in the context of our project. It is easy to describe ourselves as leading a research project, yet we are in no position to lead the community we are working alongside. Instead, I began to think about leadership as creating the conditions for others' expertise to be heard. Our role is not to arrive with solutions, but to ask better questions, listen carefully, and learn what solutions are actually feasible from the people who know the community best. In that sense, leadership feels much closer to facilitation than management.

This idea also changed how I viewed our upcoming interviews. Initially, I saw them primarily as a method of collecting data. Increasingly, I see them as opportunities to test assumptions developed through the literature and local data profile. Rather than asking stakeholders whether our ideas are "correct", we want to understand which recommendations are realistic, which barriers matter most, and what we may have overlooked entirely. Ultimately, the aim is not simply to produce an academic report, but to develop recommendations that Leys Cricket Club can genuinely use as it continues to grow.

Looking ahead to next week, our focus will be on finalising interview questions, contacting additional stakeholders, including schools, charities and Oxfordshire Cricket representatives, and beginning the interview process itself. We will also continue refining our literature review and methods section so that they remain closely aligned with the needs of our community partner. As the project develops, I am increasingly recognising that good community research depends less on having the right answers and more on asking the right people the right questions.