Community policing (CP) is regarded as a promising alternative to law enforcement oriented policing. Field research in the London Metropolitan Police and Surrey police forces was conducted to identify obstacles to CP. CP requires organizational flexibility, with rules adapted to fit situations, since service delivery varies by community priorities. Officers’ responsibilities are less closely informed by the rank structure and more by externally perceived effectiveness. New criteria for the exercise of discretion are required, as well as changes to training and appraisal. Supervisors must assess the quality of interventions and whether they solve problems the public prioritized. Because CP involves both reactive and proactive service delivery, call screening and call analysis become greater obligations, with better matching of units to demand. The reactive posture of CP makes police prioritize short-term information with a direct return and inhibits crime pattern analysis. Impaired crime pattern analysis affects deployment. The demand for the public involvement required by CP runs against ingrained police and public assumptions. Some of the conditions under which successful CP can be achieved involve changes in the organizational environment and in prevailing conceptions of the nature and role of community policing. Community policing needs to move away from approaches based on community building and outreach. A construction of community policing based on its role in crime control is needed. 18 references