ABSTRACT
The perceived demands of military professionalism have always taken divergent directions. To some sources, professionalism has meant a politically neutral, socially isolated elite, highly skilled in the decisive use of force. Others have stressed the need for a politically sensitive, socially integrated, and responsive organization geared to the measured use of force. The concept of duty assumes a subordination of personal desires to service directed at some broader objective. The oath of military service defines that objective as the support and defense of the Constitution of the United States. As a member of a service, an individual accepts a series of narrowly defined duties to superiors and subordinates consistent with his responsibilities to uphold that oath. There is perhaps no way to structure a motivational system that does not draw upon individual ambition, and in many respects, ambition can be a healthy attribute in a profession that is ultimately centered on competition.
