As always, here’s a story.

The year was 1915.

Location: Deep in the jungles of South America

Situation: Rising conflict between two rival companies

Conflict emerged when two American fruit companies discovered a no-man’s land located between Guatemala and Honduras.

Turns out this piece of land was a perfect location to cultivate a variety of fruits. More specifically: bananas.

The problem?

Two different locals claimed to own the land, and there was no way to officially tell who the rightful owner was.

Here lies a overly-complicated dilemma, and how each company faced the problem at hand was dictated by their own organization and ethos.

Company A was one of the most powerful corporations in the United States, United Fruit.

Company B, in comparisson, was a small upstart owned by businessman Samuel Zemurray.

Due to the nature of Company A, they immediately dispatched an entire team of high-powered and extremely expensive lawyers. Their goal was to search every corner of every document in existence as long as they were able to find the rightful owner.

As you might’ve guessed, money wasn’t a problem.

Company B had a different approach.

Since compared to Company A, their budget was probably the same as Company A’s budget for birthday parties, they aimed for a different course of action.

Zemurray knew if he played the same game as United Fruit, they’ll lose, so he chose not to.

Being more flexible and defiant, and eventually more efficient, Zemurray chose to meet both of the “owners” and bought the land from both of them.

Yes, I know, he actually paid double but! the benefits of such land massively outweighted the cost of acquiring it.

This is what Ryan Holiday calls:

Pragmatism embodied: Don’t worry about the “right” way, worry about the right way.

This is how we get things done.

In fact, story doesn’t end there.

After acquiring the land, Zemurray now had to transport the fruit out of the location for shipment, yet the goverment denied the construction of the necessary bridges claiming this were illegal. (Obviously goverment officials had been bribed by competitors to make this illegal in an attempt to claim the land for them)

Zemurray’s answer?

He built two long piers with a “temporal” pontoon in the middle.

When faced by local authorities, Zamuray answered:

“Why, that’s no bridge. It’s just a couple of little old wharfs.”

This is what pragmatism is all about.

It’s about making it work, regardless of the how.

The goal is to reach from point A to point B. Doesn’t matter how pretty the road is, as long as it gets you there.

As the adage usually goes:

If it looks stupid and it works, then it ain’t stupid.

Pragmatism is not as much realism as it is about flexibility.

You’ll always find yourself ion the middle of the way you wish things were and the way they actually are. How far are you willing to go?

Next time you face a challenge, start thiking like a radical pragmatist: ambitious, aggresive but also imminently practical.

Remember: actions dictate our future, not words, not dreams. Actions.