This article considers distributed leadership in the context of the extensive literature on post-bureaucratic organisations. It suggests that both distributed leadership and bureaucracy are ideal types. It outlines the development of bureaucracy as an organisational form, challenges the often-stereotypical criticisms that have damned the theory and questions the withdrawal of the field of educational leadership from constructive engagement. It explores the notion that bureaucracy is conceived as a means of shaping and containing power in a way that is sophisticated and has developed considerably since Weber's original idea. The article also outlines the development of distributed leadership and critiques the assertion that it offers a means of redistributing power, arguing that there is little evidence that this happens in any reliable way. It suggests that such reliance is often based on a limited zero-sum concept of power and a sanitised view of staff and organisations. It concludes that bureaucracy offers a more realistic and deeper engagement with issues of power, and that its rejection, except as a butt of criticism, deliberately ignores an enduring and important aspect of leading organisations. It concludes that educational leaders need to engage positively with bureaucracy if they are to transform education.