The question of how to use your forces to successfully defeat your enemy is as old as warfare itself. Today maneuver warfare is the leading theory in the west, but it can´t explain the human experience of combat and how it effects the outcome of battle. The purpose of this essay is to analyze the human perspective of combat to see if it can explain the outcome of battle on the tactical level, where a smaller force successfully defeats a larger one.  This essay will apply Jim Storr´s theory of tactical success to the successful assault on Fort Eben Emael by German forces in the spring of 1940 in the form of a case study, to test whether it can explain this problem. Surprise was a vital success factor for the Germans, facing larger, well-fortified Belgian defenders. Storr highlights the human perspective of combat, and that surprise and shock can lead to collapse of the organization and the will to fight at the tactical level. The results indicate that Storr´s theory can explain the outcome of a battle thru the human perspective where surprise and shock lead to organizational collapse.

The concept of surprise is as old as warfare itself. All battlefield commanders want to defeat their foe with the smallest number of lost lives and expenditure of resources. This study will analyse what factors are necessary to achieve surprise and what the effect of that surprise can be. This study will apply Jim Storr’s theory of surprise against two different cases where surprise can be found. The first case is when the German forces stormed the fortress of Eben Emael during the Second World War where a small force of 86 paratroopers successfully managed to defeat a garrison of about 1000 men. The second case is the second battle of El Alamein where the British 8th army beat Rommel and his Das Afrika Korps. The aim of the study is to see how surprise was achieved and what the effect of the surprise was in the two cases according to Jim Storrs theory of surprise. The result of the study indicates that there are some explanatory powers to these cases with Jim Storr’s theory of surprise. In the case of Eben Emael it is quite significant and in the case of El Alamein it is somewhat limited.