Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of the “Selfless Leader” and to pose the question as to whether this is an impossible ideal. It locates the importance of values within the context of public leadership and puts forward a new perspective on principle-based leadership that incorporates selflessness as its foundation.Design/methodology/approach– It primarily involves a literature review in relation to the importance of virtues and values based on an historical review, and the wider language of leadership. It draws briefly upon primary research based on realistic evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997) across a range of public service organisations in various differing contexts but is, primarily, a conceptual paper aimed at encouraging further debate and research.Findings– Given the fact that we are innately selfish, the requirement to lead in the public interest provides a real challenge for all leaders particularly as leaders are encouraged more towards achievement of competitive advantage, rather than collaborative advantage. The paper will suggest that values-based leadership is highly relevant to the challenges facing public leaders, and will present a principle-based framework for the practice and processes of public leadership.Research limitations/implications– The paper seeks to generate a debate in relation to principle-based leadership that incorporates selflessness as its foundation, primarily through a literature review but supported by selected findings from a range of research projects in the area of public leadership.Practical implications– The approach to realistic evaluation is helpful, not only as a research methodology, but also in relation to the development and assessment of leadership practice.Social implications– This is considered to represent a unique approach to the study of leading in the public interest by focusing on the concept of selflessness.Originality/value– This is considered to represent a unique approach to the study of leading in the public interest by focusing on the concept of selflessness.

The paper argues that the public sector context in the UK is characterized by a reform that focuses on ‘delivery’ with an unprecedented obsession with measurement. It examines whether the time is right to move from new public management (NPM) to new public leadership (NPL) and supports its argument by reference to literature and a content analysis of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) seminar series papers and the subsequent edited volume ( The New Public Leadership Challenge [NPLC]) that set a public leadership challenge. The paper endorses the view that the focus on NPM has resulted in a culture of ‘counting what can be counted rather than what counts’ (McKee, 2004) and proposes a frame of reference that has potential for supporting the development and evaluation of new public leadership.

There has been an increasing momentum in public sector reform in the UK since 1997 as part of the wider modernising government agenda (HMSO 1999). This chapter explores the impact of these reforms on public leaders and how the reforms embrace the traditional notion of new public management (NPM). One of the aims of the challenge is to identify what public leadership means, whether the term can be applied consistently across the public sector and whether public leadership can be evaluated.

This article draws on qualitative research that explores the concept of public value in the delivery of sport services by the organization Sport England. The research took place against a backdrop of shifting priorities following the award of the 2012 Olympic Games to London. It highlights the difficulties that exist in measuring the qualitative nature of the public value of sport and suggests there is a need to understand better the idea. Research with organizations involved alongside Sport England in the delivery of sport is described. This explores the potential to create a public value vision, how to measure it and how to focus public value on delivery beyond the aim of 'sport for sports sake' and more towards 'sport for the greater good'. The article argues that this represents a game of 'two halves' in which the first half focuses on 2012 with the second half concerned with its legacy.

This paper identifies some of the critical conditions that help or hinder the development of community policing. The findings are timely given the current political emphasis on neighbourhood policing. The research on which it is based took place in three police forces of varying sizes and was based on a systems approach. Following an extensive literature review that concluded there is “no one best way” of achieving community policing it also established that it may be possible to identify the conditions in which critical success factors can come together to develop what is described as a coactive (community-based) policing style within a process of change. The research sought to test this proposition and asks whether in this sense community policing has really come of age. It concludes that while the conditions are right for community policing, significant barriers still remain before it can be conceived of as the normal way of conducting policing business. Attention to the management of change is required and in particular, the cultural conditions.

Excellent leadership makes a difference to partnership performance and is arguably the most critical success factor for partnership working. Without it, partnerships would be ineffective. It is, however, perceived as a problematic issue for a number of reasons. First, traditional approaches to leadership have focused almost exclusively on individuals. Second, leadership is often seen as just one part of an organisational system rather than something that pervades the whole. Finally, it is said to be difficult to measure and therefore supposedly hard to tell the good leadership from the bad.

Leadership theories have focused on the innate qualities of an individual, the behaviours adopted, the situations in which leadership takes place and leadership that is specific to particular functions. These theories have their place but arguably they tend to ignore leadership increasingly important dynamics within partnership contexts. The paper examines the concept of public leadership and asks whether there is a better way of leading. It introduces the notion of a collective leadership style where leaders at all levels both share and distribute leadership responsibilities. In so doing the paper seeks to discover where the tipping point lies in turning shared leadership into distributed leadership. It asks how leaders at all levels of all public sector organisations can lead up, down and across in shaping the agenda and how all leaders can play a part in turning visionary strategies into meaningful action 'on the ground'.