College and university presidents are viewed by their various constituencies as responsible for everything, good and ill. Upon assuming the role of president, one takes on a double existence--the symbol of the presidency overlays one's identity as a private individual. And the line between the two can at times become dangerously blurred. In this article, the author outlines the pressures of the college presidency and examines what boards and presidents can do to prepare themselves for future challenges. An important step in the right direction is suggested in a report from the Association of Governing Board's (AGB) task force on the state of the presidency in American higher education, "The Leadership Imperative." Recognizing that a synergistic partnership between the president and the board is critical for the good of an institution, AGB calls for a brand of leadership linking the two "in an environment of support, candor, and accountability." This new brand of "collaborative but decisive leadership" is termed "integral leadership." AGB makes 43 recommendations regarding how a board can produce it, including how the trustees should support the president, approach presidential compensation and evaluation, and be involved in presidential renewal and succession. The author discusses the areas of concern about presidents highlighted by AGB: (1) presidential being; (2) presidential doing; (3) presidential social integration; (4) presidential transition; and (5) presidential evaluation and support.