A prime example of a professional is a medical doctor. While s/he is compensated, concern for the public (or pateint) takes precedence. A doctor has an ethical standard, which translates to trust and respect.
Irrelevant.
A patient isn't paid to be part of the doctor's team. The doctor doesn't earn the trust of the patient, the patient spends his or her money elsewhere. Further, a doctor who lacks trust cannot be relied upon to handle the health and welfare of the patient. The patient is the employer, the doctor the employee.
This has nothing at all to do with the captain/copilot relationship. Put it in context.
The doctor leads a surgical team in a heart operation. Now it's a crew environment. You think the doctor is going to cow down to a nurse when the nurse says "it's my patient, I'll decide what goes on in this operation?" Not hardly. Not even if it's a nurse-practitioner, an experienced OR nurse, or a Physician's Assistant. Not even an intern. The surgeon will remain in charge, period. It's his patient, his operation, and while others may assist, cut, medicate, anesthetize, treat, monitor, or help...it's the doctor's show. the first one to insist that no, it's their patient can certainly expect to be not only removed from the operation, but likely fired or not brought into the OR again.
Now it's in context. Service? Leadership? No. A job to do.
Look at it this way: if a FO and the cabin crew know that the Captain will do for them everything s/he can, won't that instill a high level of trust, respect, teamwork? In addition, it will in turn motivate the FO and FA's to do everything they can to support the CA and his goals which are: safe operation of the jet, earn a living and making the company money. Once a crew is highly motivated to do these things all of the little ego battles, turf battles, and "drama" go out the window.
Regardless of the captain's actions, it's NOT THE FIRST OFFICER'S AIRPLANE!!!
The actions and duties of the first officer are not predicated on how nice a guy the captain is. It's not a case of the first officer doing the minimum for a captain he doesn't like, or the maximum for one he does. He's being paid as a professional, he has a job description, and he needs to do it, period. He's not paid to like it, but paid to do it. He's not paid for his method, but his result. He's paid to assist the pilot in command in operating the flight.
The captain does not have need of bowing down to his subordinates; it's the subordinates who adapt to meet the needs of the captain.
I fully agree that leadership is best defined by serving those whom one leads. However, the cockpit isn't a popularity contest, nor a democracy. Whether or not the captain leads or is a fine leader, whether or not he posesses the qualities of a fine surgeon or a CEO, the duties and responsibilities, and limitations of the FO remain unchanged...and are not predicated on the leadership of the captain. The FO has a job to do. It does not include assuming authority beyond his own, and it certainly does not include failure to remain open to the instruction of the captain.