Vision... Focus... Change... Influence! These terms are commonly used in the language of leaders and leadership education. In the context of the "National Leadership Education Research Agenda" (NLERA) (Andenoro, et al., 2013) those terms reflect higher-level meanings and applications. First and foremost, the overarching "vision" of a "living" document to guide and direct future leadership education research has far-reaching implications for faculty, students, and ultimately the knowledge base of leadership education. Scholars of leadership education should be motivated and challenged by the NLERA to identify how their individual and collective contributions expand the knowledge base of our discipline. Having foresight and recognizing what leadership education aspires to be and become in the future was prerequisite to the development of the NLERA. The ability to envision a preferred future through a new and different lens is the very essence of a vision. Based upon that vision, there is now a framework and pathway to build upon the existing knowledge by adding new knowledge that, by consensus, is both important and significant (Warmbrod, 1986; 1987, 1993). Structurally, the NLERA is organized into seven Research Priority Areas, two under the category of Pedagogy and five under the category of Content-Based Considerations. Descriptions included under each priority include sections on Applied Outcomes, Background/Foundations, Challenges, and Opportunities. Figure 1 presents a brief overview of the seven research priority areas with important topics highlighted in each area. Summarizing the contents of the NLERA in such a way provides a clear focus to the research topics that have been identified as priorities for leadership education researchers over the next five years. Although five years is not a magic number, it provides another dimension of importance and focus, by establishing timeline parameters for the established priorities. Such a focus is important for the current time frame, but there is also a need to re-examine research priorities frequently. The scope of five years provides sufficient time to make progress on research agenda priorities, but also establishes an expectation that priorities will need to be reviewed on a regular basis.