One of the traditional roles of a leader is to help the group discover and in effect own itself. We refer to this as a leaders role in establishing the group identity and this role of leadership, this task is one that is among the most basic functions of what leaders do. Leaders create communities by lifting up various aspects of shared meaning. By definition, leadership begins with a process through which groups form and identify who they are and what it is they want to accomplish for themselves. The individual members may have obvious things in common or they may be united only out of a shared interest, it doesn't matter. Leadership is a process through which this commonality is given form and often given a name. Think of Buddhists, followers of the Buddha or Danes who were originally subjects of King Dan and who now discuss in their own society the importance of the unique Danish character. Now, if you thought that all Danes descended from a single Great Dane, well, you're not entirely wrong although it might make you a little squeamish to consider it that way. But this is not just a historical nor is it an antiquated view of leaders and leadership. Every group, every institution and every society adopts an identity. It may be broad and it may be diffused but it is understood at some level and quite often it is the leader who comes to personify whatever shared meaning that is. This is not just a historical nor an antiquated view of leaders and leadership. Every group, every institution and society adopts an identity. It may be broad and it may be diffused but it is understood at some level and quite often it is the leader who comes to personify what ever shared meaning that is. You see it's from this connection between a leader and a group that we derive the term representation as the leader becomes the living presence of the group's shared identity, formally and symbolically. To do this, the leader has to collect any number of individual objects, people and bequeath them with a shared character. Still independent of one another, they identify with what they have in common and the leader names this and in a sense stands in for this. The legends and myths capture this idea, biblical stories are based on it, national identities and social movements all reflect this. You know this. This is one of the most fundamental ways in which leaders serve their groups and it results in a process of increased mutual empowerment. The group and its members have greater collective agency and a sense of purpose to which it can be directed. The leader in standing before the group stands on behalf of them too and is entrusted with some of the group's power to envision, to choose and to act. Without the exchange that comes from the leader's ability to assemble identity, the leader can stride but there will be no merge because there would be no mergers. You see, the leader reminds the group who we are, and with the group suggests, this is who we should be. Keep in mind there is no process of inclusion that does not involve a process of exclusion. Knowing who we are almost always requires that we know who is not one of us. It doesn't sound pleasant and often is not at all pleasant but it's part of the boundary setting process for which groups form and leaders, while they are actually expected to defend the spoken, the somewhat sacred identity of the collective as it's been formed. It's essential to the process of making this whole. Making it special. Making us great, greater than ever, greater than everybody and especially greater than anybody that just doesn't belong. Perhaps this sounds primitive to you, but let's take an opportunity to reflect on this role of leaders in leadership and place it back into the context of our own colleges and universities. Yeah. Even today, colleges only survive and they thrive to the degree that they can foster a sense of inclusion and strong affiliation with succeeding generations of students, alumni, faculty and staff. The strong identification with Alma Mater can span decades, even centuries and yet the campus itself is in many ways the setting for a great continuous parade. People passing by, pausing for two or three or four years perhaps but then carrying something with them that defines them distinguishes them, perhaps even elevates them. What is this about the college experience that makes many people feel a part of it so intensely? How is this accomplished? Think about it. What mechanisms are in place to assure it? And what role does the leader play in all of this? Let's drill even deeper. What are the different ways formal and informal the colleges and universities shape? Who will join them as students? How do colleges and universities orient them to what this means and builds among them a sense of common identity? What similar or different mechanisms exist to create a bond between faculty and what factors make this a different process than the one that's experienced by students? Here's the point. How is inclusion understood in these contexts? And again, what is the role of the leader and what are her or his institutional surrogates doing to advance this concept of identity and inclusion? You see when we speak of leadership and the special role of leaders, the ability to construct and represent the group identity, and to protect the boundaries of the group from being overrun by those who do not belong, creating this distinction, this is a pretty basic function. Whether it's a pope talking to the invading barbarians out of sacking Rome or provost ensuring that high standards are met in the promotion and tenure process of faculty. And how is it done? Leaders use their knowledge of the group, its history and its place in the world to build and maintain inclusion. They have tools they employ to protect and to project this identity and sometimes this is the hard part. They must show courage and inspire courage in others to defend what is most important to the group, the community or for that matter the nation and whether this is done directly or through some form of delegated influence, it's the leader that's behind it. And to an important degree, it's the leaders ultimate effectiveness in their role that depends on the ability to shape and reinforce a strong sense of internal identification and cohesion. The ability for a leader to coerce behavior, to inspire collective sacrifice and in anyway to bring the group to achieve great things requires the sense of personal and group commitment is secured. It seems so obvious, doesn't it? But as we shall see in our next segment, there is a tension here and it becomes evident when the leader takes up the challenge of recognizing and promoting greater diversity in the context of the parameters shaped by this identity.
