Sometimes winning is not losing .....

Money, that is.

Just like you, I'm sure, I sometimes find myself winning more in a tourney by virtue of outlasting other players.

Sometimes they're smaller stacks, and sometimes they're much bigger.

Depending on how bad they play or unlucky they get, you can often find yourself significantly increasing your winnings, even with a modest stack, simply by not getting into risky situations at the wrong time.

We're always in it to win (the tourney itself), but if I'm honest I'll admit that the thing that is most important to me is that my BR gets bigger. That might mean, for example, that I tighten up and don't play a decent hand against a big stack when there may be one or two places I could move up by letting smaller stacks knock themselves out.

Is this thinking wrong, or is there something to consider?

Books, articles or discussions, do you have any advice as to where I can read up on strategy considerations relative to this?

I think the same as you do. But the players who win more tourneys will take those risks -- sometimes. Some of the top players have ITM percentages similar to mine -- but they make it a lot further in tourneys, make a lot more final tables. And have a much higher ROI. Make much more money overall.

At a final table, though, it makes a lot of sense to let the small stacks go bust before you. The difference between final table places is so great...

It's a choice.

If simply cashing is your goal, so that you make a little profit a lot of the time, then there's nothing wrong with this. The above poster made a good analysis of the differences between playing it safe, and not.

Tournaments are structured in such a way that 1st and 2nd place finishes greatly skew your overall ROI. This is why top players all play a style which will attempt to win the whole thing.

Playing to win is in fact quite different from playing to cash.

This is my concern, that this kind of play is not an effective (money making) strategy in the long run.

Example: Three players left last night, with one on the shortstack (less than 1/2 my stack) folding from the CO. I didn't play KJ in the SB, against the monster stack in the BB.

Not remotely a monster, but it was certainly a playable hand in that situation, and it was most likely the best hand.

I felt wrong about not playing it afterwards.

While your KJ may have been the best hand preflop, as you know best hands don't always win especially 3 handed. Monster stack has control of the board and can basically play ATC (any two cards) with impunity. In situations like this I like to sit back and let the monster do my work for me, as in eliminate the short stack. I think you made a good fold.