Model of identity leadership: Indonesia and Malaysia experiences

Abstract

A paradox between the concepts of globalization versus localization, nationalism versus ethnocentrism, idea of homogenous national identity - the 'imagined' oneness of a nation state 'community' versus the strength of local power in Indonesia are able to produce their own problem solving methods. It has achieved through indigenous knowledge which is support by identity spirit of local leadership. Those concepts are faced by many countries. The issue is presented in the area of public policy as well as stated in a formulation of government leadership and management. The phenomenon is manifested in a power distribution between central, local and rural government in Indonesia. A model of identity leadership strengthened a bargaining position of indigenous knowledge. For example, a dichotomy between the issue of 'putra daerah' and leadership of 'nagan' as a part of Minangkabau identity in West Sumatera province has blocked by a concept of Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia (NKRI). The concept of 'putra daerah' is viewed as a 'disease' which could affecte national unity as a whole. Meanwhile, Malaysian experience in inflaming the spirit of 'New Malay' became impeller of progress of Malaysia development. It is achieved through blocking a principle of oneness of a one-state 'community'. This paper is trying to analyze the issue by using comparative method between Malaysian and Indonesian experience. It is indicated that certain model of identity leadership strengthened the local and rural government level based on indigenous knowledge as opposed to central model of leadership.