ABSTRACT
Big-P pragmatism solves the problem more thoroughly and in the long term. It often involves policy innovation exercising both/and thinking and looking at win–win solutions (duality). Strategic pragmatism exists when one has a rigorously devised grand strategy (potentially guided by principles/ideology) that is realistic in its analysis and policy options, and flexibly implemented to adapt to the situation, including tactical adjustments and strategic reversals, to achieve the desired vision and goals. While the idea of “pragmatism of means” and “pragmatism of ends” is a familiar one, it is strangely lacking in everyday utility, mainly due to the universal human tendency towards emotive conjugation, as described earlier. Grand strategy has to demonstrate foresight (scenario planning) and insight (systems thinking) in analysis, and long-term planning to achieve long-lasting goals. This is the differentiating factor between strategic pragmatism and pragmatism. At the opposite end of the scale, non-pragmatism is directed by ideology: driven by wish-based analysis and with principle predominating over being realistic.
