When faced with adversary, he cannot be fearful of losing face or seeming disloyal but instead must ask 'what actions are necessary to take for the greater good?' Even when a military leader disciplines a subordinate for disobedience, these actions are because of the requirements of safety and the need for adherence to institutional rules, not because of personal anger. Military officers must hold fast to an "objective professional ethic" of responsibilities owed to themselves, to the institution, to their leaders, and to the American public.[footnoteRef:3] When personal and individual obligations conflict with those of the collective ethos, the need to preserve institutional authority must be upheld. For example, "where it would be improper for a manager at IBM to invade the privacy of her employees, the officer is morally obligated to do so" rather than place others in the service at risk.[footnoteRef:4] [2: Margaret Hermann, "Assessing leadership constraints: A...
[ View Full Essay]