Can Pragmatists and Ideologists Work Together?

Mar 23, 2010 by Kevin

In nearly every organization, including most churches, you’ll find people who tend to be ideologists and others who tend to be pragmatists.

Ideologists tend to make decisions based on a central guiding philosophy—a core ideology, which comes from a deep understanding of the group’s core values and core purpose. New proposals are judged mostly by how closely they fit with the group’s core ideology. They tend to trust and focus more on the process, believing that the process will produce the desired results.

Pragmatists, on the other hand, tend to make decisions based on what they believe will most quickly produce the outcomes they desire. While they generally care about and respect the group’s core ideology, they are much more interested in attaining more, bigger, and better results. When they encounter an idea that has been tried elsewhere and seemed to produce results, they are eager to try it with their own group.

Ideologists and pragmatists have a notoriously difficult time working together within an organization. Ideologists tire of constantly saying no to ideas pragmatists suggest that do not fit with the group’s core ideology. Pragmatists tire of hearing their ideas, which seem to work so well for other organizations, shot down by the ideologists. So is it possible for ideologists and pragmatists to work together and even thrive within the same organization?

I believe they can, but it requires hard work, plus trust and understanding on the part of both ideologists and pragmatists.

For their part, ideologists need to:
1. value the desire of pragmatists to produce results as a good thing, and affirm that their desire to get things done is admirable;
2. speak the pragmatist’s language, as much as possible, explaining why a proposed course of action will or will not produce the results desired;
3. avoid accusations or insinuations that the pragmatist is somehow less faithful to the group’s mission; and
4. appreciate that, while there are differences in approach, the pragmatist is very motivated to accomplish the group’s mission.

At the same time, pragmatists need to:
1. value the ideologists’ commitment to the group’s guiding philosophy as a good thing, and avoid trying to convince them to temporarily set it aside;
2. speak the ideologist’s language, as much as possible, explaining why a proposed course of action is or is not consistent with the group’s core ideology;
3. avoid accusations or insinuations that the ideologists’ focus on the process means they are somehow less interested in results or in getting things done; and
4. appreciate that, while there are differences in approach, the ideologist is very motivated to accomplish the group’s mission.

When it comes time to make a decision, the group cannot afford to ignore either perspective. An effective decision will be in line with the group’s core ideology and it will have a high likelihood of producing results. If there is a serious question about whether a proposed course of action deviates from the group’s core ideology, it should be tabled or rejected. At the same, if there is a serious question about whether a proposed course of action will produce genuine and timely results, then the proposal should be tabled or rejected.

Since every group has limited time and energy, they should only seek to implement the proposals that are both consistent with their core philosophy and likely to produce the desired results. If you have an effective core ideology, you will have no problem finding courses of action that meet both of these criteria.