The recent emergence of distributed leadership has been very marked. In England, it has received official endorsement. But the evidence-base which supports this endorsement is weak: there is little evidence of a direct causal relationship between distributed leadership and pupil attainment. What therefore might explain its rise to prominence? Here three possible explanations are considered: first, it accords with the contemporary reform of the public services; second, it is legitimated by an appeal to a culture wherein all categories and classifications are rendered increasingly permeable; and third, it is regarded as functional for the "new work order".