This week felt like the point where our project started to move from preparation into genuine engagement. At the beginning of the week, we had a session on ethical and inclusive leadership with Nabella Kajee, which gave us a useful lens for thinking about the way we approached our research. A question that stayed with us was what inclusive leadership actually looks like in practice. The discussion encouraged us to think about leadership not as simply holding authority, but as using our position to create space for other people’s voices, perspectives and expertise. That idea felt especially relevant as we began speaking to people beyond our immediate team.

A major focus of the week was our interviews. We had spent a lot of time preparing questions, submitting the methods section of our project, and contacting schools, representatives and community organisations by email. Even though this process was time-consuming, it became one of the most important parts of the week. There was something very different about turning a set of ideas into real conversations with people who had much deeper knowledge of the subject than we did. At times, it felt slightly daunting to ask meaningful questions to people so well informed, but it also reminded us that the purpose of the interviews was not to prove what we already knew. Instead, it was to listen carefully and learn from perspectives we might not have considered ourselves.

What stood out most from these conversations was how much they widened our understanding of the project. We had already been thinking about ideas such as school partnerships, subsidised membership, volunteering, and access to facilities, but the interviews pushed us to think more practically about what those ideas would actually require. Questions about transport, coaching capacity, changing facilities, committee structure, and long-term sustainability showed us that a strong idea on paper does not necessarily translate easily into reality. These conversations were therefore not just a source of information, but a way of challenging our assumptions and refining what we thought was possible.

A lot of the week also involved persistent emailing and follow-up. We were reaching out to schools, community representatives and university contacts, and gradually turning those emails and interview notes into a shared document of key takeaways. Although the process sometimes felt repetitive, it was also a useful reminder that building relationships is part of the research itself. Each response, even when it was brief, contributed something to our understanding of the local context and helped us see how different people and organisations fit into the wider picture.

Looking back, one of the most valuable things about this week was the way it opened up new perspectives for us. The interviews and conversations did not simply confirm what we already thought; they revealed details, barriers and possibilities we would not have noticed on our own. That felt important not only for the project, but also for how we think about working with communities more broadly. As we move forward, we are becoming more aware that good research depends less on having the perfect answer and more on asking thoughtful questions, listening properly and being willing to adapt our thinking in response to what we hear.

Looking ahead to next week, we will continue refining our interview findings, following up on contacts, and drawing together the key themes from the conversations we have had so far. We will also keep developing the document of takeaways so that our work remains grounded in what stakeholders have actually told us. More than anything, this week reminded us that meaningful community research is as much about perspective as it is about data.