An historical review of police goals from the original 1829 Metropolitan Police instructions through contemporary theorists concludes that the control of crime, traffic, and public order are statutory imposed goals. However, the proactive social intervention goal has developed from social activities undertaken by the early police to gain acceptance by society, such as aiding the homeless and looking for missing children. In comparison with other organizational hierarchies, the police constable enjoys considerable discretion in exercising responsibility, although he or she is subject to a discipline code which acts as an unstated deterrent against corruption and criminal acts. The paper discusses factors governing this exercise of discretion in both proactive and reactive types of police work. It states that the techniques of management adopted by the police officer are largely determined by the physical and social characteristics of the beat. On the other hand, young officers must learn to incorporate a sense of morality into operational goals so they reflect the societal goals of the police service. Needs of individuals must be weighed against the needs of the law, and the law itself is often ambiguous. The intangible nature of organizational goals coupled with this system of operative goals results in recruits adopting operative goals under the influence of a dominant constable peer group. This situation can produce conflicts between official, societal, and operative output goals, although such problems can be minimized by senior officials who have come up from the ranks and know the constables' operative codes and possible malpractices. The quality and ability of the senior officer and the example set for subordinates will exert the most influence on street officers and maintain congruity between official and operative police goals. Finally, the legal system is an independent and powerful constraint on the officer's law enforcement goals. Over 30 references are included.