Pragmatic is a research paradigm based on the notion that real-world questions are best investigated by employing the most appropriate methods (Feilzer 2010; Morgan 2014a). The research philosophy of pragmatism thus encourages flexibility in the investigative approach, and it can be applied to both qualitative and quantitative studies. This is in contrast to more prescriptive approaches, such as positivist and interpretivist research methodologies, which tend to dictate a particular methodological framework.
A pragmatist is someone who takes the most useful or practical actions in a given situation. A pragmatist is realistic in the sense that he or she realizes there are some things that cannot be changed, but tries to manufacture positive outcomes despite these limitations. For example, a pragmatic person might be willing to settle a lawsuit because it will cost less than taking the case to court. This is also the attitude of an entrepreneur who seeks out profit opportunities that will yield good returns, rather than being stuck on his or her vision of how the world should be.
The scientific field of pragmatics is concerned with the interplay between language and communication. It attempts to disambiguate meaning, and understand how people consciously or unconsciously choose how they communicate. Pragmatics involves the study of how a speaker intends to be understood, and how that intention is conveyed through a system of linguistic rules. It also considers the effects of various interpretations on the meaning of an utterance.
In practice, a pragmatic approach is one that is well-suited for research on organizational processes. The pragmatist stance is particularly valuable for NGO research, where implementing staff can be influenced by normative beliefs surrounding the nature of evidence. Furthermore, the pragmatist view of the research process allows researchers to examine how individual experience, knowledge and action are linked in a respondent organisation, and to surface complex themes that may be hidden within formal documentation or rhetoric.
This can be accomplished by combining interviews with focused ethnographic fieldwork, for example using the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships (PMF) methodology in Project examples 1 and 2. This can lead to more holistic understandings of complex, dynamic organizational processes which can be explored through multiple forms of data collection.
In addition, the pragmatic philosophy of inquiry is a robust epistemological approach that steers clear of metaphysical debates about truth and reality and instead focuses on ‘practical understandings’ of real-world issues. For this reason, the pragmatic perspective is especially suited to research that seeks to bridge the gap between theory and practice. In the context of research on NGO processes, pragmatism is an effective epistemological perspective that can help to ensure that research findings are translated into meaningful action in the real world. This is important for achieving the goals of NGO programmes, as well as for the wider academic community. NGO programme managers and their external evaluators can use pragmatic insights into the complexity of organizational processes to improve the design, implementation and evaluation of their interventions.