What would success in 2012 look like for the nation?
There's been a bit of a theme in the diary this week. I've had a lot of meetings that are NOT about Sport and have been much more to do with the wider legacy of the London 2012 Olympics for the United Kingdom.
I know the 'L' word - legacy - is a tricky one, but it's unavoidable in my job.
We're bombarded with ideas and documents about the economic legacy, the sport legacy, the social legacy and countless others - and you can read some of the government's documentation here.
But here's the best definition I've heard so far - from a bright chap at a brainstorming session we attended a couple of months back about what legacy really means.
He said we should maybe think about Andrew Marr's History Of Modern Britain - the Festival of Britain, the Coronation of the Queen and the rise of television in the 1950s, the dramatic social change and musical revolution of the 1960s and so on until the present day.
The Queen waves to the crowd from Buckingham Palace after her coronation in 1953
His question then is: imagine Andrew Marr making a programme in 2020 about the decade that had just ended and assessing the impact of the 2012 Olympics.
What would we like the next series of the Modern History of Britain to say the benefits had been?
Everyone here wants great sporting moments for the world, of course, and more golds for Team GB. But China and Australia as two of the recent Olympic hosts have got much more from the Games than that - and the debate is about how ambitious the UK can be.
It's not just about culture or volunteering or sports participation programmes or education: it's about all of those and more, and the cumulative effect if everything is brought together.
From the vantage point of 2009, some of the plans still feel a bit abstract; and it's not clear how or whether they'll work.
But a couple of meetings this week have also reminded me of the human dimension of the Olympics and Paralympics.
The Millennium Dome was not the initial success it was hoped to be
I caught up with some leaders from ethnic minority communities who were envisaging London 2012 as an opportunity for multi-racial Britain to talk in terms of success and achievement - rather than "problems" and division.
Then today I had a chat with some people involved in disability sport, and they have big hopes for how the Paralympic Games being in London might achieve lasting change in attitudes to disabled people in the UK.
None of this is about pie-in-the-sky social engineering: change will only happen if enough citizens of this country want it to.
But it will become a significant item on the national agenda: is 2012 only about sport, or do we want more than that. And if we do, how would we like our legacy (that word again) to be seen by future generations?