<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p> The study assessed whether the six special operations principles (simplicity, security, repetition, speed, purpose, and surprise) proposed by Admiral William McRaven could predict the degree of success among Finnish long range patrols during WWII. Eighty-four missions that included deliberate contact with the enemy were considered. Bootstrapped estimates were obtained from a LISREL path model. The result offers partial support for McRaven’s model. Significant direct and indirect effects of security, purpose and surprise were demonstrated. Limitations imposed by available data, as well as the circumstance that other principles were rarely violated, may explain the absence of further significant effects. It is furthermore suggested that the principles can be divided into “decisive” (security, purpose, and surprise) where negligence has immediate detrimental consequences, and “contextual” (simplicity, repetition, and in part, speed) that are largely case-specific and may need further precision to be analytically viable. The cause for the absence of significant effects would according to this interpretation be that the principles, as they are generally defined, fail to identify contextual circumstances that are crucial for success.</p></abstract>

The study assessed whether the six special operations principles (simplicity, security, repetition, speed, purpose, and surprise) proposed by Admiral William McRaven could predict the degree of success among Finnish long range patrols during WWII. Eighty-four missions that included deliberate contact with the enemy were considered. Bootstrapped estimates were obtained from a LISREL path model. The result offers partial support for McRaven’s model. Significant direct and indirect effects of security, purpose and surprise were demonstrated. Limitations imposed by available data, as well as the circumstance that other principles were rarely violated, may explain the absence of further significant effects. It is furthermore suggested that the principles can be divided into “decisive” (security, purpose, and surprise) where negligence has immediate detrimental consequences, and “contextual” (simplicity, repetition, and in part, speed) that are largely case-specific and may need further precision to be analytically viable. The cause for the absence of significant effects would according to this interpretation be that the principles, as they are generally defined, fail to identify contextual circumstances that are crucial for success.

Special Operations Principles and Finnish Long Range Patrols during WWII

PhD in Political Science and a Senior Lecturer in the Sector of Social Services and Health Care at Novia,

Journal of Military Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

{"article-title":"Special Operations Principles and Finnish Long Range Patrols during WWII"}

The study assessed whether the six special operations principles (simplicity, security, repetition, speed, purpose, and surprise) proposed by Admiral William...

Special Operations Principles and Finnish Long Range Patrols during WWII

Published Online: Nov 23, 2016

Page range: 86 - 120

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jms-2016-0191

Keywords
special operations principles, Finnish long range patrols, World War II, McRaven, LISREL path model

© 2016

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Special Operations Principles and Finnish Long Range Patrols during WWII

Published Online: Nov 23, 2016

Page range: 86 - 120

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jms-2016-0191

Keywordsspecial operations principles, Finnish long range patrols, World War II, McRaven, LISREL path model

© 2016

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Keywords
special operations principles, Finnish long range patrols, World War II, McRaven, LISREL path model