In this article it is argued that with regard to characteristic features of the recent local government reform targeted at local leadership two country groups can be distinguished. On the one hand, the reforms in England and Sweden have critically focused on the traditional government by committee and its collective/collegial decision-making form. This was reformed into a 'de-collectivised', if not 'individualised' commission form, with England going furthest in concentrating the decision-making and 'executive' powers within the cabinet, while essentially restricting the elected council to a 'scrutinising' function. By contrast, Sweden, while also moving towards 'de-collectivising' and 'parliamentarising' local leadership, has basically held on to the traditional government by committee form.

On the other hand, in Continental European, Germany's local government reform has further accentuated the traditionally 'monocratic' local leadership through the direct election of the ('executive') mayor, thus moving towards a local 'presidential' leadership; yet, at the same time, it has provided for a 'tripolar' local power balance particularly by expanding direct democratic citizen rights (i.e. the recall of the mayor, a binding local referendum). France, however, has essentially retained the traditionally predominant 'monocratic' leadership position of the formally council-elected 'executive' mayor, with the council playing a largely mayor-dependent role.