Almost nothing has a higher impact on team culture, health, and effectiveness as much as who you recruit to the team. A good team member will be a joy to the team and the leader, and be a strong contributor to the ministry. An unhealthy, underprepared, or poorly fit team member can cause conflict, distraction, and even result in a team fracturing or leaving the field.

But how do you determine who you should invite to the team?

Our first post on recruiting was about broadly networking and casting vision to invite a pool of potential recruits to the process of evaluation. The second post was about the filtering process of gathering information and discerning the team fit of potential teammates. In that process, we recommend that you host them on a vision trip to allow them to hear from the Lord on location as well as you and the team getting to know them in person.

After you’ve done all the work of networking, casting vision, evaluating, and hosting them on a vision trip, you need to discern whether to give them an invitation to join the team or not. In our experience of recruiting and evaluating 30+ units for our teams in Thailand, we’ve had very few obvious green-light people to invite, and only some very clear red-light rejections. Most potential recruits fall into some kind of a yellow-light area. 

In this post, we’ll provide a recruiting evaluation grid that helps you measure a potential new recruit’s health and role fit versus the impact on your team and your degree of investment as a leader.

Difficult Decisions

Before we launched to Thailand, we went through our first season of recruiting teammates (including the ones from the soup terrine story). At the time, I was leading a missional community with other people that had a similar vision of wanting to serve overseas. We also took a vision trip to Thailand together a couple years before we launched.

I always highly valued loyalty, and just assumed that those in our group that had the vision to go overseas would eventually serve on the same team together. We did life together, prayed together, did ministry together, dreamed about the future together.

About a year out from our projected launch date, it was time to quit our jobs and go through the formal process of applying to an organization, going through evaluations, and officially forming the team. I knew each person would have development areas, but it didn’t even cross my mind that someone would not be considered qualified to go.

As I debriefed the evaluation process for my teammates with my supervisor, he mentioned that there were some red flags that came up with one teammate. He recommended that we at least give them a yellow-light and have them go through a 6-12 month season of development before having them re-apply.

I was surprised and distressed. This news would be devastating for this person.

Sure, there were some instances of difficulty that we had encountered. And yes, I wasn’t totally sure if that person would be willing to follow my leadership. And yes, we kind of knew they had some family of origin challenges that were unresolved. But telling them not to join the team? They had oriented everything in their lives towards this. What would the team think? What would happen to our relationship with this person?

But thankfully, my supervisor in his wisdom projected out how those things would play out on the field. If those things were a 3 out of 10 in concern and intensity in the States, they would quickly become 9 out of 10s and have the potential to fracture our team.

After prayer, discussion, and discernment, we made the decision to give this person a yellow light. Someone suggested that one of the evaluators from the organization give the bad news. But my mentor, also in his wisdom, said that I needed to be the one to take the responsibility for this decision and deliver the news, out of respect to this person and for my own development.

In a very difficult 2+ hour conversation, we told this person that there were some concerns and that they would need to go through a 6-12 month development process before re-applying.

It did not go well.

Eventually, this person broke off all contact with our team and levied accusations against me to other mutual friends.

We tried to pursue some conflict resolution through a counselor but that still didn’t go well. Ultimately, their response confirmed that this was the right decision, even though it was one of the most challenging team and leadership situations I had gone through to that point.

Our first year on the field was filled with conflicts, culture-shock, and challenges to the max with the team we did lead overseas, and I’m not sure we would’ve survived if we had added this person and their challenges. Even though it was painful and burdensome at the time, I’m thankful for wise mentors that helped a new team leader make a hard decision that I otherwise would not have had the courage to make.

Over the next decade on the field of evaluating and inviting several units to our teams, we’ve learned some of the key lessons in deciding who to invite and who to say “no” or “not yet” to. The stakes for teams and ministry among the unreached are incredibly high, and team leaders need to be thorough, wise, discerning, and prayerful in their evaluation and selection of potential teammates.

Recruiting Evaluation Grid

Hopefully your sending organization or church is assisting with recruiting, assessing, and developing potential new candidates for your team. There is a minimum baseline in the first category of the recruit’s character, health, and spiritual maturity that most agencies will be able to assess and either move them to the next step, put them on a development plan to later re-apply, or tell the applicant they’re not ready. Those baselines will vary for each agency, but some standards include freedom from addictions, health in singleness or marriage, consistent pattern of growing relationship with Jesus, and basic levels of physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual health. 

What they aren’t taking into account, and you as a team leader must measure, is you and your team’s own readiness to receive that specific person in this season of your ministry and team. The final decision needs to be made by the team leader, not the sending entity, as the TL will be the one taking responsibility for that teammate. 

Keep in mind that you won’t know everything perfectly unless you’ve had significant life-on-life experience with them, so a lot of this is doing your best to assess well and solicit feedback from people that do know these candidates. Also, you’re evaluating the readiness of this teammate to join your team at this point in time. For example, a more challenging candidate might not be good to add to a newly forming team, but in 6-12 months, with more team stability and more personal development, they might be a great fit! 

Remember, your goal is to recruit teammates that will eventually thrive and be able to contribute well to your team and ministry. Every new person transitioning to the field will likely have their cross-cultural stressors and struggles, but if the teammate’s foundations and the team’s environment are solid, they will be able to overcome those difficulties and become strong team members.

We would assess the potential recruit in these 5 areas – character/health/maturity, calling to missions, gifting and role in ministry, impact on team, and leader investment in development. Evaluate the potential candidate on this scale from 1 to 10 to help you have more of an objective grid for whether or not you should approve this teammate at this time.

1. Character, Health, and Spiritual Maturity
   Main question: Is this teammate healthy and spiritually mature enough to thrive on the field?
   (1 – unhealthy and immature; 10 – strong health and maturity)
   1. Freedom from addictions
   2. Strong and growing personal walk with Lord
   3. Self starter and flexible
   4. Good interpersonal skills and communication 
   5. Emotional awareness and health
   6. Health in singleness / marriage / family
      
2. Calling to Missions
   Main question: Is this potential teammate’s calling rooted in solid foundations that can persevere through challenges?
   (1 – weak foundation of calling; 10 – strong foundation of calling)
   1. Scriptural basis
   2. Prayer
   3. Pattern of affirmation
   4. Community 
   5. Personal experiences 
      
3. Gifting and Role in Ministry
   Main question: Are this potential teammate’s gifts, skills, and experience able to contribute to the ministry?
   (1 – gifts and skills are underdeveloped OR don’t align with the primary ministry work; 10 – demonstrated competency in gifts and skills that would contribute well to the ministry)
   1. Awareness, development, and practice of spiritual gifts
   2. Skills and competencies
   3. Ability to do main ministry activities 
   4. General ministry experience
   5. Strong learner and self developer 
   6. Leadership experience and potential to be a leader
      
4. Impact on Team
   Main Question: would receiving this potential teammate generally strengthen or disrupt / burden the team overall
   (1 – would be disruptive/burdening to receive, significant adjustment to help transition; 10 – gifts and personality are strong benefits to team and has strong chemistry with team)
   1. Has gifts that can serve the team (hospitality, shepherding, worship/prayer, etc.)
   2. Generally easy to get along with v. draining/challenging personality
   3. Demographics that match what the team needs (ex: single girl needing another single gal to co-labor with)
   4. Good relational chemistry / team player
   5. Stage of Team Development (forming, storming, norming, performing) – consider how much storming there currently is and if that’s the right time to introduce a teammate 
      
5. Leader Investment in Their Development
   Main Question: What level of personal investment and development by the leader would it take to get them to a point of thriving and contribution to the team and ministry? 
   (1 – high investment of time and energy by leader; difficult to lead; 10 – lower investment by leader, generally easy / joyful to lead)
   1. Submission to your leadership
   2. Fit with your leadership style and giftings
   3. Amount of time and energy investment by leader to help them thrive and become a solid contributor based off your capacity
   4. if teammates can help carry the burden of investment vs. solely on the leaders

If you don’t know the answer to some of these categories, try to get feedback from the candidate, the agency, or those that know them well. Ask for them to be as brutally honest and direct as possible. Many times, references will want to give the best version of feedback since they want to help those they’re connected with. But it’s important for a TL to draw out the realities of a potential teammate since there is such a significant impact on them and on the team.

Making a Decision

After you’ve assigned a 1-10 score to each major category, figure out what the average score is across all 5 categories.

If you have an average of 8+, you should have a pretty solid candidate and situation to invite them to the team.

If you have an average of 4 or below, there likely needs to be some significant development for the candidate or on your own team before you can reconsider, likely after at least 6 months.

If any individual category is at a 2 or below, they are probably not at the standard to pass for that category and you shouldn’t invite them to the team.

The challenging situations are when you have someone in the 5-7 range. Discuss with other team stakeholders (teammates, mentors, supervisors), and weigh the pros/cons of inviting this person to the team. Understand that if you invite someone in the 5-7 range, it will likely take significant investment to help them thrive and begin to contribute to the ministry.

Regardless of how they grade out, it’s essential to bring the decision to the Lord in prayer. It’s always a step of faith to invite someone to your team, and you as a team leader are making a substantial commitment by inviting someone to your team, to love, serve, and shepherd them through the challenges on the field.

Some Cautions and Guidelines

This evaluation grid is trying to help quantify some important categories so that team leaders can make wise decision about inviting team members. But you can be very thorough in the evaluation process and still be surprised how someone reacts to the field. Some great candidates that we invited really struggled on the field when things didn’t go their way. Some riskier candidates ended up thriving and doing really well in field environments. But by doing the work of evaluating and praying, you can have eyes open for each teammate’s potential pitfalls and weaknesses.

A caution for newer team leaders: team leaders at the beginning of launching a team are at the highest urgency to add teammates. If you find yourself convincing yourself that they should be on the team, but you know in your heart that they aren’t a good fit, don’t invite them. The team is at its newest and most fragile at the beginning, and recruiting even one person that is unprepared and challenging can be very costly to the leader and the team.

Take risks for potential leaders. Younger, more immature leaders may rock the boat and be somewhat difficult to lead at the beginning. But if you’re able to win trust and develop them well, they can multiply your impact and be worth the investment.

Understand your own giftings and tendencies as a leader: If you are shepherd-gifted, you may have a higher tolerance / capacity to take the time of investing in someone to get them to the point of thriving and contributing. If you are more of an apostolic/evangelist-type leader, know that when you invite someone to the team you are committing to shepherding them. Also know that you might get impatient or frustrated if someone takes too much of your time and focus because your tendency will be to focus on the external ministry.

Knit to the Soul

We’ve gone through some of the biggest ups and downs of our adult lives with our teammates. We were together making awkward noises in language school, joyful team Christmases away from home, celebrating new churches planted, and experiencing the first new babies born on the field. They’ve been with us through crises, cancer, and burnout.

It’s hard to imagine facing the realities of the field with anyone else.

It’s the generous gift of the Lord to bring significant people around us for the calling and work He has prepared for us. They are simultaneously brothers and sisters, friends, co-workers, confidantes, and caretakers. It’s worth giving time and focus to find people who are the right fit.

And, the Lord already knows who He has chosen to be on our teams. We can have faith that if we are prayerful and discerning, He will bring the right people.

As soon as he had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.

1 Samuel 18:1

In this episode, Jenn shares practical lessons learned from years of facilitating discovery bible groups among both believers and nonbelievers in Thailand. She gives an explanation of the tool, including how DBG can be used as a pathway toward planting house churches, responds to common concerns, and shares practical tips and tricks.

Life and leadership on the mission field can be incredibly lonely. For singles on the field who long for a partner, the loneliness is acute. For leaders, the responsibilities and weightiness of leadership can be isolating. It is hard to find others who can empathize with our experiences.

If anyone can speak on loneliness, it is Elisabeth Elliot. In this book, she shares the lessons God taught her through being widowed twice, and lays out a path and example for us to follow. Though this path seems painful and weighty, it hinges on the absolute goodness of God and his good desires for us. In surrender, we receive his gifts for us in seasons of loneliness.

For me, this is required reading for anyone joining our team in their first term, and a great resource for those experiencing seasons of loneliness.

God has promised to supply our needs. What we don’t have now we don’t need now.

Our loneliness cannot always be fixed, but it can always be accepted as the very will of God for now, and that turns into something beautiful. Perhaps it is like the field wherein lies the valuable treasure. We must buy the field. It is no sun drenched meadow embroidered with wildflowers. It is a bleak and empty place, but once we know it contains a jewel the whole picture changes.

In my case, “selling everything” meant giving up the self-pity and the bitter questions. I do not mean we are to go out looking for chances to be as lonely as possible. I am talking about acceptance of the inevitable. And when, through a willed act we receive this thing we did not want, then Loneliness, the name of the field nobody wants, is transformed into a place of hidden treasure.

Can we give up all for the love of God? When the surrender of ourselves seems too much to ask, it is first of all because our thoughts about God Himself are paltry…We ask …how much He will demand from us, how high is the price we must pay before He is placated.

If we had the least notion of His loving-kindness and tender mercy, His fatherly care for His poor children, His generosity, His beautiful plans for us; if we knew how patiently He waits for our turning to Him, how gently He means to lead us to green pastures and still waters…if we had any inkling of all this, could we be reluctant to let go of…whatever we clutch so fiercely in our sweaty little hands?

If with courage and joy we pour ourselves out for Him and for others for His sake, it is not possible to lose, in any final sense, anything worth keeping. We will lose ourselves and our selfishness. We will gain everything worth having.

In this post, we’ll talk about reasons why ethnocentrism can be extremely damaging to your vision to multiply, and practical ways to address ethnocentrism.

Do I Have to be the Main Character?

As we mentioned in the first post, many past and even current missionaries can possess an ethnocentric or paternalistic view when they go to the field, perhaps without realizing it. Paternalism is the assumption that missionaries have superior knowledge, experience, and skills than local Christians and exert control over the local church and ministries. This can lead to a variety of issues that keep the ministry from bearing fruit that we’ll explore further in this post.

Part of this paternalistic/ethnocentric view that we as Western missionaries carry is the belief that we should be the “main character” in the ministry. Westerners have a higher cultural value of individualism, which emphasizes their own goals, rights, and decisions. It’s a deeply personal thing to feel called to the mission field, and most missionaries are very aware of the lack of access to the gospel in the fields where they serve. So naturally, we feel and envision that we are the ones responsible for bringing the gospel to these needy people and lands of darkness. We buy into the myth of the “Western savior” that is the hope and light for the unreached.

It’s an awesome privilege to be called to serve among the unreached. We know missionaries sacrifice much to respond to this calling out of many good motivations.

But Jesus is the Savior of the world, not us.

We get to be his ambassadors and get to join with him in the great work of seeing all peoples worship Jesus. God is moving and working in the countries where we are sent, likely through local or near-culture believers in that country or in the region.

We believe the most effective role for the majority of cross-cultural missionaries is to play a Barnabas role – empowering, coaching, and supporting local believers to multiply. In our view, this applies even beyond CPM ministry but to many other types of ministries, whether orphan care, theological education, or justice ministries. Western paternalism in missions has almost always led to negative consequences or at least non-lasting ministries, and we believe it grieves the Lord to see these same mistakes repeated over and over again.

Being the “main character” or having a Western savior perspective is one of the main barriers that keeps missionaries from having their most effective role as a Barnabas, therefore sabotaging their opportunity to be a part of what God is doing.

Baptism Through Binoculars

When we were first learning about movements, we kept hearing about this outsider role of being a Barnabas. It was a difficult mental shift to go from, “I’m going to be the one sharing, leading, and baptizing,” to “I am going to support local believers from the background.”

It’s not that movement practitioners don’t share and disciple – we absolutely do. We must be in the harvest, both out of obedience and to have the credibility to train others.

But we have to understand that our main effectiveness will be in serving and coaching local believers. As we investigated movements, we looked at about 50 case studies of how they started across the world. In nearly all of them, the outsider was partnering with a local or near-culture believer to catalyze multiplication. It was hard to argue with the pattern: if we wanted to see multiplication, this was the role we needed to play.

One story we heard from a movement practitioner really drove home the simultaneous sacrifice and joy of being a Barnabas. This practitioner served in a Muslim context with high persecution. If local Muslims that were interested in learning about Jesus were seen meeting with this white, American, Christian missionary, it would draw the attention of local Muslims and result in significant persecution.

So the outsider practitioner met with a few local, near-culture believers in a more neutral context and cast vision for multiplication, trained them in Biblical principles and practical tools, and encouraged them to go into these local Muslim villages where they would draw much less attention than he did, while coaching them from afar.

As these local believers began sharing and starting groups, he heard the reports and rejoiced but never got to meet the new believers face to face that he had indirectly invested in, prayed for, and loved deeply.

When it came time to baptize many of the new believers in the ocean, his local partner shared with him the time and place but told him, “Please don’t come to the baptism or it will attract unnecessary attention.” Instead, he got a boat about a mile down from the location of the baptism, and through binoculars, wept as he witnessed the celebration of new life among an unreached people group that he would not meet personally until heaven.

Are we willing to make this sacrifice? To take a background role in order that more people would hear and receive the gospel? 

To not be the main character?

How Ethnocentrism Will Sabotage Your Vision To Multiply

We believe that ethnocentrism can directly undermine your vision to multiply. We specifically chose the word “sabotage” because ethnocentrism is often a blind spot for workers, unlike more obvious challenges like team conflict or lack of funding.

These are some ways that ethnocentrism and paternalism can be a major barrier in your ministry:

Judgmental and Bitter Hearts: If our understanding of right and wrong, better and worse is based on our cultural perspective, many things in our host country will feel difficult. Over time, this can result in bitterness and a critical, judgmental spirit. We start to see all the ways that things can’t work in our country, that the people cannot be trusted. Those that don’t address ethnocentrism and bitterness in their hearts will often leave the field early, or start to withdraw into a cloistered missionary community where they do not interact with local people at all. For those that manage to grit it out, they will fail to thrive and eventually run out of motivation to serve.

Lack of Contextualization → Lack of Efficacy: If we believe that our cultural interpretations and expressions of obeying the Word and making disciples are the correct ones, we won’t look for contextualized expressions that might be more effective where we serve. This can apply to every aspect of ministry, from interpreting the Word, sharing the gospel, and ways that we worship. Using non-contextualized tools may attract people who are interested in our culture, but it will be difficult for them to apply tools from our context and multiply with them. We repeatedly see outsider trainers try to use a Western-created, non-contextualized training who are then bewildered when nothing works in a new context because they haven’t consulted a single local believer.

We met with the leaders of a globally well-known ministry in Thailand and asked them about their evangelism method. They told us that they shared using their organization’s tool (developed in the West) over 10,000 times in a year! But at the end of the year, it resulted in 10-15 consistent disciples joining their church. Just 0.1% of those they shared with stuck! We commended their amazing faithfulness and boldness but lamented the lack of willingness to try a more contextualized tool that might be more effective. 

Not Releasing Authority to Local Leaders: Many people understand using contextualized tools for greater effectiveness in ministry, but they still apply their ethnocentric values in evaluating local leaders. Without releasing authority to local leaders, the ministry can never fully indigenize and multiply further.

For example, in the West we might prioritize cultural values of leadership like being well-spoken, direct, and assertive. In Asia, leadership might be expressed by being more reserved, slow to speak, and having the final word. Neither of these cultural lenses are wrong, and they make sense within their own culture.

The problem is when outside missionaries, with a paternalistic approach that exerts control over local churches and ministries, fail to release authority and leadership to local leaders because of their own cultural biases. Emerging leaders may not look the same as leaders in the West, and we assume that we know best and that local leaders cannot yet be trusted. Out of a desire to make sure things are done “correctly,” we miss the opportunity to trust the Holy Spirit, empower local believers to take ownership, and encourage them to apply biblical principles in their own culture.

Overdependence on Outside Leaders and Money: Through a paternalistic perspective, we can assume that Western theology, curriculum, and resources are needed to help the struggling church among the unreached. We inadvertently create dependencies on outside leaders and resources that limit the local church and leaders from indigenizing and multiplying. 

When Helping Hurts is a well-known example of how a good desire of helping the poor by giving financial resources is actually damaging to the local people by creating over-dependency on Western resources. This type of “helping” happens across many types of ministries all over the world.

In consulting with experienced movement coaches, overreliance on outside money is a major barrier in catalyzing the multiplication of churches and disciples. Money brings different motivations and commitments, and we’ve heard of repeated instances of local partners who are driven by a salary and not a calling to make disciples. This can result in misreporting ministry results, an unwillingness to confront bad decisions from outsiders, and sometimes even direct deception in order to receive money.

There can be integrous and truly helpful ways to support disciple-making efforts among the unreached, but outsider practitioners should be very careful, thoughtful, and prayerful about anything involving outside money.

Ethnocentrism on Multicultural Teams: Increasingly, missions teams have team members from multiple different cultures and countries. They will bring in different values, communication styles, and preferences as individuals and from their cultural background.

If team leaders and team members aren’t aware of the cultural differences and have an ethnocentric view, this can lead to major conflicts that distracts you from your vision and can lead to teams fracturing. One resource for this specific situation of multi-cultural teams is Teamwork Cross-Culturally.

Barnabas Role without a Barnabas Heart: Lastly, simply playing the role of a Barnabas to train and coach local believers as an outsider does not necessarily mean that practitioners understand their own ethnocentrism. They may be trainers and coaches, but still inherently mistrust or condescend to local believers. We believe a Barnabas heart is critical to playing an effective Barnabas role. Local believers can easily tell when we are looking down on them or just see them as a means to an end. Lack of true relationship with your local partners leads to a lack of buy-in and ownership in the vision.

How to Address Ethnocentrism

Addressing ethnocentrism doesn’t require perfect understanding of varying cultures. Our job is not to decide what in the culture is right and wrong. But what is necessary is to posture ourselves in ways that directly offset ethnocentric thinking – namely as a learner with a humble heart of love.

Have a Heart of Humility and Love 

The primary way to combat ethnocentrism is modeled for us by Jesus himself! Jesus left the culture of heaven to live among and serve sinful humanity. Here is what Philippians 2 says about his heart posture: 

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves,  not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

Who, being in very nature God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

rather, he made himself nothing
    by taking the very nature of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.

And being found in appearance as a man,
    he humbled himself
    by becoming obedient to death—
    even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
    and gave him the name that is above every name…

Philippians 2:3-9

Many times, we experience feelings of offense, fear, or superiority when confronted with other cultures. These reactions are mitigated when we try to embody Christ’s heart of love and humility that considers others higher than ourselves. We are one in Christ and equal in the Kingdom with our brothers and sisters across the world. And the same Holy Spirit that works in us is also working in them! 

When we remember these things and seek to serve out of Christ’s love and humility, it becomes easier to both love the lost and to trust local believers. From there, a Barnabas partnership becomes a natural outflow of our ministry rather than feeling like a sacrifice.

Understanding our Ethnic Boundaries

Learning about our own ethnocentrism can be an overwhelming experience, as our ethnic identity is also closely tied to our personal identity, and it can be difficult to know the difference.

Alvin Sanders describes ethnic borders as “cultural traits that define our ethnic identity for ourselves and others.” He points out that people who come from the majority culture in their home country often haven’t had to think much about these borders because they naturally fit within them.

Most missionaries understand they’ll need to learn a new culture when they arrive in another country. But often that learning stays at the surface level – food, customs, language, and etiquette. What many missionaries haven’t yet wrestled with is how deeply their own cultural values and ethnic borders shape the way they see right and wrong. Without realizing it, they continue interpreting the world through their own cultural framework instead of learning to understand the perspective of their host culture.

There’s grace for us even if we are at the beginning of our journey of learning our own ethnic borders and those of our host country! Our encouragement is to take things one step at a time, with a heart of openness and humility.

One culture is not better or worse than another. Every people group is created ultimately in God’s image. And there are aspects of every culture that are marred by sin. We need the Word and the Holy Spirit to help us in this process of learning to live and serve across cultures.Alvin Sanders’ book, Bridging the Diversity Gap gives an outline of addressing your own heart to align with the Bible, learning about cultural dynamics, and then applying practical changes.

Discovering Cultural Values

One way to learn is from studying cultural values across different countries and cultures, including our own. There are several different frameworks for this, many of which had their origins in Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory. A resource specific for missions leaders would be from Livermore’s Leading with Cultural Intelligence, where Chapter 5 lists out 10 different cultural value dimensions like individualism vs. collectivism, power distance, low and high context. Although it’s a broad estimation, this book also shows how different regions of the world align with different cultural values.

One of the most difficult cultural values to navigate for Westerners can be low and high context, or direct and indirect communication. We had encouraged our teammates in our first term to be willing to learn and be flexible in interacting with local believers, but hadn’t given them much training on direct and indirect communication. I asked one teammate how their weekend was, and they said, “Yeah it was good but crazy. I got invited to one thing after church, and I just kept saying yes, and 12 hours later I was in someone’s home in another province!” As he described what happened, I realized that my teammate did a great job in being flexible and willing to learn, but hadn’t recognized that many of the invitations were simply being polite and indirectly they were not actually inviting him to go! 

Learning about your own and the host culture’s values can be a good, basic introduction to the differences between what you are used to and what the norms are in your host country. It can also be illuminating that people around the world have very different perspectives than our own – a key step in unraveling our ethnocentrism!

Be a Learner

When our team first landed in Thailand, we spent time brainstorming questions that we wanted to ask local Thai people, Thai believers, and Thai pastors. We set goals to ask these questions regularly in our day-to-day conversations and we wrote down our learnings into weekly reports. Through these informal surveys, we were able to generally learn about Thai motivations, values, concerns, and stressors, and even things like types of humor! Almost every answer revealed to us a vastly different perspective from our Western cultural lens. (The more formal version of these would be ethnographic interviews, if you’d like to dive deeper.)

When asking questions, try to stay open-minded with zero assumptions about what someone might say. In the moment of conversation, do your best to downplay any immediate judgment or emotional responses that might stem from your own cultural biases; these responses may actually be indicators to press in and learn more. Strive to listen well and not just wait for your next turn to speak, and continually be curious. Instead of jumping to conclusions, build the habit of asking “why.” And write down what you learn!
Even with a basic understanding of ethnocentrism, we still struggled many times figuring out a different culture and not being judgmental! Many of our ethnocentric values are so deeply ingrained that sometimes we cannot help our reactions and judgments. Something we learned from our pre-field cross-cultural training was the phrase, “It’s not wrong, it’s just different.” That phrase has been invaluable, especially when it feels like we are at a cultural impasse that can never be crossed. God is the one who judges what’s right or wrong. But we can embrace that differences exist and seek to understand them.

We’d also encourage you to be a learner in many different ways. Try to take in content from authors, writers, creators from a different background. Read books, watch movies, take in art made by people from different cultures. Ask your friends if they can bring you to different cultural traditions and festivals like holiday celebrations, weddings, funerals, etc. Go to museums and learn about history, traditions, and art. 

One of the biggest cultural experiences is in food! We learned from an Asian pastor how critical it is to be willing to “eat what is set before you.” He told us, “Most cultures share food around the table. If you can’t enter the table because of unwillingness to try different and sometimes strange foods, you can’t enter into the culture. If you can’t enter into the culture, you can’t enter into relationships.” Try every food offered to you at least once!

Lastly, learn the language. Too many missionaries today are overly focused on quick results and bypass learning language to work through translators. Taking the time to learn the language forces you to humble yourself and greatly improves your understanding of the culture. Learn language!

Being a curious, respectful learner will take you 80% of the way there. It requires the humility to say, “My cultural experience is not the only way and is not always the right way.”

Every Tribe, Tongue, and Nation

Deconstructing our ethnocentrism and learning another culture’s values can feel like an insurmountable challenge. Our desire in these two blog posts is not to make missionaries feel guilty or helpless, but to bring to the surface a potentially crippling obstacle that many are not even aware of.

We can’t change overnight. But if we take small steps in humbling ourselves and trying to be a learner, those things will compound and help you pursue the vision that God has given you in a Christ-like, culturally intelligent way. Local friends will notice your willingness and heart to learn and will give you a lot of grace even when you do make cultural missteps.

I think about the practitioner that witnessed baptisms through binoculars often. It is a sacrifice to be sure. But imagine the joy, when we reach the throne of God with all the nations in Revelation 7, clothed in white robes, when we meet those that we have prayed for, that we have indirectly invested in, that we have wept for. To see the fruition of the small sacrifice we made to lay down our ethnocentrism, to not be the main character in order that many would receive new life. 

That joy will last for eternity.

After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

Revelation 7:9

“You can’t work with the Thai church.”

“They’re lazy, they don’t show up on time, and they lie to you by saying they’ll do something and then not do it.”

This was the repeated sentiment we heard from experienced missionaries during our early years in Thailand. We had learned that most CPMs are started by in/near culture believers, so we wanted to find Thai believers with a vision for multiplying disciples.

We sought out long-time workers in Thailand to learn how to approach this. But over and over, we heard: don’t even try. It won’t work. It’s too hard. Just do it yourself.

At the same time, we began visiting local Thai churches that seemed to carry a vision for disciple-making and church planting. We met vibrant, growing, Thai-led churches with goals like planting 100 churches or starting groups in every province in their region. And to our surprise, they warmly welcomed us to learn from them and partner together.

Over the last 12 years on the field, we’ve continued to hear that working with the local church is too difficult for cross-cultural missionaries — not just in Thailand, but in many places around the world. Yet by God’s grace, our experience has been marked by deep partnership and friendship with our Thai brothers and sisters. We also know many CPM practitioners who feel the same way, some even brought to tears when speaking about their local partners and friends.

So why is there such a massive gap between these experiences? Why do some cross-cultural workers grow skeptical or even bitter toward local believers, while others develop rich, life-giving relationships?

We believe one big reason lies with ethnocentrism. It’s one of the most sinister and destructive barriers for cross-cultural workers that sabotages their desire to have an impact among the fields they’re called to.

It affects not only their relationship with local believers, but their relationship with the local culture, their thriving on the field, and ultimately their long-term perseverance in their calling. 

In this post, we’ll look at what ethnocentrism is, how the Bible addresses it, and ways we can reflect on our own ethnocentrism. In our next post, we’ll discuss how ethnocentrism affects your vision and practical ways you can combat it.

What is Ethnocentrism?

Ethnocentrism is defined as “the tendency to evaluate other cultures based on the standards and values of one’s own culture, often leading to perceptions of superiority.”

When a goer moves overseas, it’s an extremely jarring experience. The language, climate, foods, traditions, expectations, and social dynamics can be completely different from the place you grew up. For many goers, there can be an initial honeymoon phase where they’re excited to learn and experience many new things. But after a few months, the ongoing feelings of confusion, of homesickness, of not fitting in can start to impact you. You get tired of being stared at on the street, being laughed at when you try to speak the local language, and you just want a dang burger instead of this funky tasting mystery meat.

Thoughts of judgment and criticism start creeping in:

“Why can’t they just do it the way we do it at home? It’s so much better that way.” 

“Why are people here so dishonest? Why can’t they just tell it to me straight?”

“Why is this thing so weird? Why can’t it just be normal?”

All missionaries have had thoughts like these, including myself and those on our team. Naturally, in an attempt to assuage the confusion we experience, we begin to measure things in our host culture against our home culture. The criticisms that we heard from experienced missionaries in Thailand assumed that certain cultural values in the West, like being hard-working, punctual, and communicating directly, are the cultural standards in Thailand. They aren’t! But that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

Without an understanding of ethnocentrism, cross-cultural workers can become frustrated, bitter, and judgmental against the very culture and people they came to serve. And unfortunately, it’s not just an early season culture shock thing for many people. We’ve met several decade-plus missionaries who still say things like, “I honestly hate everything about this country but I guess we’re supposed to be here.”

Dr. Craig Ott in Teaching and Learning Across Cultures writes that “ethnocentrism not only can blind one to the beauty of other cultures but can also lead to condescending attitudes that block meaningful relationships with others and the ability to learn from them. In the worst case, it can foster racism and prejudice.”

The Lawnmower

In a pre-field cultural training that Jenn and I attended, the facilitator explained that the different places we were going to would have different cultural values and to be wary of ethnocentrism. To illustrate this, he told a story of his time in Indonesia where a neighbor asked to borrow a lawnmower. But after the neighbor used it, he kept the lawnmower in his own garage. After a couple of weeks, the facilitator, somewhat annoyed, finally asked the neighbor for his lawnmower back.

The neighbor said, “Of course!” When the facilitator asked the neighbor why he had not returned his lawnmower several weeks after using it, the neighbor explained, “In our culture, since we are part of the same neighborhood, it means we are part of the same community. What’s mine is yours and what’s yours is mine! I was just keeping the lawnmower in my garage until you needed it back, but you could have asked for it anytime!”

The facilitator posed a question to the group of future missionaries: did my neighbor steal my lawnmower? Jenn and I looked at each other and both thought – “of course not, the neighbor was just explaining communal culture. The facilitator even just explicitly said so.”

But the entire class answered in an uproar: “Yes! He stole it! He should’ve given it back immediately because it’s your personal property!” Some even aggressively contended that the facilitator should have called the police on the neighbor for theft.

We were shocked. Not only that the explicitly explained difference in cultural values went over everyone’s head, but also at the anger and disbelief that was in the response.

As we’ve reflected on this interaction, we’ve realized that the angry energy in the class’ response was because they had made a cultural misunderstanding into a moral issue. It was morally wrong that the neighbor did not return the lawnmower because of Americans’ high value of individuality and personal ownership. But the neighbor did not see it that way at all because of his own more collectivist cultural lens.

The lawnmower is a somewhat trivial example, but still such a small issue resulted in such a strong response from the group. We have seen missionaries, including ourselves, make this ethnocentric mistake in much higher stakes situations. We do this in how we train and model expressions of church, how we discuss theology, how we choose leaders, how we evaluate moral and discipleship issues. We measure local believers against our cultural interpretation of Scripture, instead of looking at how Scripture speaks into the local context.

Ethnocentrism and Paternalism in Missions History

There are countless examples of ethnocentrism, paternalism, and even cultural imperialism throughout missions history. Entire books, courses, and degree programs have been devoted to these topics, so we won’t try to cover them in depth here.

But we do want to briefly acknowledge how the painful parts of missions history can compound the problems that come with ethnocentrism today. We’re also troubled by how many workers are unaware of the historical dynamics in the places they serve, and how often the same mistakes continue to be repeated.

Paternalism “occurs when missionaries and their sending churches and agencies consciously or unconsciously assume that they possess superior knowledge, experience, and skills and, consequently, exert control over local Christians and their leaders. This control is almost always exerted through financial arrangements and the implicit authority of money.”

Missions history is littered with examples of paternalism, racism, and cultural imperialism (the imposition by a dominant community of its own culture onto another community) that led to destructive consequences for the name of Jesus around the world. In the most extreme cases, some missionaries had a view that they were not only bringing the gospel, but Western civilization to the “savage” or “heathens” in other parts of the world. They viewed non-Western cultures and peoples as inferior, and thought that planting churches meant dismantling the local culture. Is it any wonder that in many unreached places in the world, Christianity has a negative reputation and is seen as a Western, foreign religion?

Missionaries today need to be aware of what previous generations of workers have done, both good and bad, and in some cases, explicitly acknowledge the negative impact that has come with paternalism and imperialism. It’s especially important for those of us from the West to guard against a “Western savior complex” – the assumption that we are coming to rescue people who are helpless without us. Jesus is the Savior, not us. We should be aware of where he is working and join in that, which often is through the existing local church!

How the Bible Addresses Ethnocentrism

One of my favorite Bible studies is comparing and contrasting Jesus’ interactions with Gentiles and with Jewish religious leaders. I might post a blog on this topic in the future but I’d encourage you to study this if you haven’t!

The story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 is the clearest example of how Jesus addresses ethnocentrism. When challenged by a lawyer about how to inherit eternal life, Jesus answers with the Great Commandment: love God and love your neighbor. And the lawyer, perhaps looking for a loophole to focus his “love” on those he prefers, replies, “who is my neighbor?”

And Jesus tells of a man beaten and left for dead, passed on by supposedly holy leaders, a priest and a Levite. But a Samaritan – avoided, judged, hated by the Jews – showed compassion to the man, cared for him, sacrificed his own resources, and showed mercy. The ultimate example of obedience to the Great Commandment was a person not just from a different culture, but a culture that the Jews hated.

Jesus’ example is love, humility, and compassion towards those from different cultures. He left heaven’s culture to walk on the earth as a Jewish man and make a way for all cultures to receive grace through the Cross. He condemns and rejects ethnocentrism by declaring God’s heart for all nations and explicitly showing his love towards non-Jewish people. The gospels are full of examples of this: the salvation for the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4), the grace for the Syrophoenician woman (Mark 7), the faith of the Roman centurion to name just a few.

Paul also embodies an anti-ethnocentric posture: “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings” (1 Cor. 9:22-23). He is willing to lay down his own values, preferences, and even rights to be a minister to the Gentiles.

Scripture culminates in Revelation 7, perhaps the most anti-ethnocentric passage in the Bible, where the multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language is worshipping around the throne of God. There is no higher or lower culture, no better or worse cultural values – there are only the people rescued by Jesus clothed in white robes. And yet, the peoples still preserve their cultural identity – representatives from every culture are in the new heaven and the new earth but redeemed perfectly.

Reflection: Have I Been Ethnocentric?

If we are honest with ourselves for a moment, whether from our upbringing, personal experiences, or plain ignorance, there are people from other cultures that we instinctively judge, feel superior to, dislike, or even hate. We know missionaries that will travel half the world away to serve another culture but speak disparagingly and condescendingly about people of another skin color in a different part of their own hometown.

I was brought up to ignorantly fear black people and hate Japanese people for what they did historically in China, and believe that ethnic Chinese people were somehow superior to all others. I’ve had bitterness in my heart from racist experiences with white people. It took years of seeing God’s heart in Scripture and repenting, befriending people from different cultures, learning different perspectives, and even living in another country to unlearn these prejudices from my upbringing and my sinful heart.

Reflecting on our own ethnocentrism can be challenging because our cultural values are deeply tied to our cultural identity and therefore our personal identity. It also requires us to be honest with our own motivations in serving overseas. It can be overwhelming to discover and admit pride, sin, or a sense of superiority towards other cultures, perhaps even the people God has called us to serve.

Our encouragement is this – honest reflection about our ethnocentrism is necessary and it is worth doing. At best, we have some blind spots that can be removed to help us be more loving and effective in our calling. At worst, there are some deeply rooted and sinful perspectives that we didn’t even know we had and they are directly sabotaging what we are trying to accomplish in serving across cultures.

The good news of the gospel is that Jesus knows our hearts and loves us, even if we aren’t aware of these sins or haven’t reconciled them yet.

As you reflect on the questions below, try to come before God with openness, honesty, and humility. Come in a posture of surrender and repentance. Ask the Holy Spirit to reveal hidden assumptions, pride, fear, or bitterness in your heart. Allow God to heal and change your heart! From that, we believe you will not only become a greater servant to the people you’re called to, but become more like Christ in his love for all peoples.

Reflection Questions

• What kinds of people or behaviors are you quickest to judge? What standards are you using to judge them?
• Are there ways you subtly view local believers as less capable, less mature, or less trustworthy than believers from your own culture? How do you react when local believers do something differently than you would?
• Have past wounds, stereotypes, or experiences shaped the way you see certain cultures or ethnicities?
• In what ways might pride, superiority, control, or a “savior mentality” be affecting your ministry?
• Where are you failing to have the Philippians 2 posture of considering others more significant than yourself?

There are so many transitions, unknowns, and moving parts when new teams launch to the field. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a document that most missions teams have to provide clarity in the midst of those unknowns. We would define an MOU as a non-binding agreement created between two or more parties explaining how they will work together and interact with each other.

As common as MOUs are on missions teams, there’s surprisingly few examples or short articles out there to help with how to write one. But, “can you help me with how to write our team MOU?” is one of the most common questions we get from team leaders. Vision of the Possible by Daniel Sinclair is a really good book about missions teams in pioneer church planting, and has a short appendix on MOUs/VSPs that we’d recommend.

One of the agreements in our MOU was no dating in the first year. The two single guys on our initial team took that to heart… and both asked out another teammate on a date at 1 year plus 1 day. I guess they technically followed the agreement. I’m happy to report they both ended up marrying those teammates.

Why are MOUs important?

I quickly wanted to address why this document even matters and why it’s worth the time for team leaders to work through this.

1. Clear Expectations. As I mentioned above, clarity is kindness. New teammates especially are being introduced to a new country, culture, community, career all at the same time. What am I supposed to do? How am I supposed to interact? What is success every day? These are questions that every new goer faces in their early season on the field. As much as is possible, an MOU can lay down some basic foundations of clarity and expectations for your team. 
   
   For a new TL, it can feel overwhelming and difficult to write down all of these expectations. Write down what you know, and put down a ‘TBD’ in the categories that you’re not sure about yet! But provide as much clarity as you can in this document for your teammates, and then you won’t have to answer it in person that many more times.
   
2. Sets Team Culture and Values. An MOU is also one way you can write down and reinforce your team culture and values. What you talk about and what you do on your team will influence your team culture and values more than a document, but it still acts as a cornerstone for your team.
   
   How often will your team interact? What values do you want to have as a team? What’s your expectation on learning language? Many of these things can be expressed in an MOU.
   
3. Guidelines for Challenging Situations. Team conflict is a guarantee on missions teams, and some of it will certainly come out in the early season of a team forming. A team MOU is a good tool for outlining solutions to potentially challenging situations.
   
   In our experience, topics that result in conflict tend to be things in the ‘personal’ realm – vacations, parenting, travel, money, decision-making that infringes on what people think to be their own personal boundaries, etc. Teammates will mostly be willing to discuss things like team rhythms and ministry approaches with openness, but those ‘personal’ topics will get teams and team leaders in hot water. It’s important to write down some basic expectations and guidelines for how those things will be approached before you get into conflict.
   
4. Brief Summary for Outsiders. An MOU can be a good document to share with people in your team’s ecosystem that aren’t teammates. Church support teams, sending agencies, potential new recruits, etc. It will give them an idea of who you are, what you’re there to do, and how you want to interact.

How to Write an MOU

Some tips: don’t worry about perfecting the language. It’s not a legal document. This was a huge roadblock for me in trying to ‘wordsmith’ the MOU into being really professional or airtight. That’s not the purpose – write in common language that your team can understand easily and discuss.

Think of your first draft as just that – a draft. It’s not something the TL writes and then the team just agrees and signs. You want the first draft to be something your team can discuss and then incorporate their feedback into the MOU. It’s an agreement you enter into with each other, not a contract between you and your team members.

Here’s our step-by-step guide for how to write an MOU for your team.

1. Consider the requirements from your sending agency or church. If they already have staff handbooks, you don’t (and shouldn’t) need to rewrite everything that is already in there as all your staff have to adhere to that handbook anyway. If there’s additional aspects that aren’t outlined in the staff handbook, then go ahead and include that in your team MOU.

2. Consider what categories you want included in your MOU. This isn’t exhaustive, but below we’ve outlined some potential MOU categories into “core” which we’d recommend most MOUs have, and “optional” which could be added on a team-by-team basis.

Core Categories

• Purpose of this Document
• Vision and Mission Statements
• Strategy Summary / Ministry Distinctives – short summary that should refer to a Vision and Strategy Paper (VSP) or Strategy Plan
• Team and Leadership Structure – potentially including decisions that the leader reserves the right to have the final say
• Process and Requirements to Join the Team – if your staff handbook already has this, only add the parts that are unique to your team
• Preparation and Language Learning – pre-field requirements, commitment to language learning, hours and timeframe, approach
• Decision Making Process – general description of how decisions are made, potentially can cover decisions that will be by vote, consensus, consultation, and command
• Conflict Resolution
• Vacations, Home Assignments (HMA), and Travel
• Communication and Reporting
• Crises and Emergencies – basic overview that should refer to a Crisis and Contingency Plan document
• Restrictions and Recommendations – including security considerations
• How Future Changes to this MOU Can Be Made

Optional Categories

• Core Team Values
• Philosophy of Ministry
• Accountability Groups
• Expectations of the First 2 Years
• Job Descriptions and Team Roles
• Partnerships with Local Churches and Believers
• Contextualization
• Statement of Faith / Theological Distinctives
• Family / Children / Parenting – becomes very important if there are children on the team, but not necessarily beforehand
• Team Life and Lifestyle – general guidelines about team life and lifestyle
• Dating and Relationships
• Team Funds – running a team will include expenses; it’s easier to pull a regular amount from each unit and be support raised before launching to the field than to figure out finances for every gathering
• Visas / Identity

3. Read other example MOUs. Contact the other TLs that you know, or ask your sending agency for examples if they can provide them. Add categories that you might be missing.

4. Write down quick points of what you know in each category. Feel free to just copy and paste whole sections from other MOUs if it says what you want. If you’re not sure, write down ‘TBD’ or the questions you need answered in that section.

5. Let your draft sit for a while and have some informal conversations with your team or other advisors on the topics you have not yet filled in or need questions answered.

6. Take your last pass through filling out the MOU with coherent language and incorporating the feedback you’ve heard.

7. Bring your MOU draft to your teammates during a team meeting and read through it, asking for their feedback. Again it may be good to explain the purpose of the MOU is for mutual agreement, not to be ironclad against all situations or to be wielded against one another as a ‘gotcha.’

8. Incorporate your teammates’ feedback as best you can. Bring it back to them for final review. Have everyone sign and date their agreement with the MOU. Our recommendation is for new teams to set a 1-year evaluation period for the MOU because there are so many things you don’t know yet and may need to change. You could possibly edit the MOU earlier than that if needed. With future teammates, it will most likely be that they are joining an established team and simply need to read it, ask any clarifying questions, and sign it. But with your initial team (if you have one), it’s good to solicit feedback in the MOU’s creation.

9. Update the MOU as needed. Our recommendation is when there are significant team transitions – from language to ministry season, when teammates start having children, moving cities, changing platforms, changing ministry approaches – it’s a good idea to take a brief look at the MOU and see if everything still aligns or if anything needs to be added. 

Attached is an example of our original team’s MOU with some of the specifics removed, just so you can have a place to start. We have other team MOU’s that we can share as well. If you want some other example MOUs, want some guidance on how to write your MOU, or just someone to review your current MOU, please reach out at contact@missionsleaders.com. We’d be happy to help you!

Remember, as a team leader, your role is to serve your team members and help them to thrive and stay on task. Bringing clarity to some major categories through an MOU is one way you can serve them. The goal isn’t to be directive or controlling – a pushback you may receive – but to provide guardrails for your team members so they can move forward through all the unknowns.

…every time there has been a spiritual awakening, women are often called up into ministry and spiritual leadership. It’s one of the signs of a revival that isn’t talked about very often.

Dr. Jo Anne Lyon, 181

In Developing Female Leaders, church consultant Kadi Cole addresses how churches and leaders can better develop, empower, and elevate women leaders, with strategies on how to navigate common “minefields” and barriers that women leaders experience.

Cole draws from research from more than 30 executive and high-level female ministry leaders from a variety of settings, survey results from over 1,000 female leaders around the world, and interviews from male church leaders who are actively engaging in this issue. Each chapter outlines a “best practice” for church leaders to follow and ends with discussion questions to work through with a leadership team.

We have found this book incredibly relevant and practical. Kadi Cole’s best practices challenge many common assumptions held about women in ministry leadership, and reveal how those assumptions might actually be holding leaders back! But when women leaders are intentionally developed in a supportive environment, all that stunted potential can be unleashed for the expansion of the kingdom of God!

…there’s always room for one more at God’s table…there will always be more than enough people to love, more than enough people to serve, more than enough people with whom we can share the gospel, and more than enough people who need great leadership. In God’s kingdom, there is more than enough for all of us.

Kadi Cole, 178

Feel free to also directly subscribe to the Dare to Multiply Podcast on whatever application you use for podcast listening!

In this episode, Jenn is introduced as a co-host for Dare to Multiply and gives practical advice around leading teams toward a multiplication vision.

“Effective leaders increasingly perceive their ministries in terms of a lifetime perspective.“

The Making of a Leader by J. Robert Clinton helps spiritual leaders understand God’s process of developing them over a course of a lifetime. Clinton draws principles from the lives of Biblical and ministry leaders in history, breaking each leaders’ journey into 5 phases – sovereign foundations, inner-life growth, ministry maturing, life maturing, and convergence. Each chapter provides reflection questions and tools to help you identify key points in your leadership development journey. We especially appreciate Clinton’s breakdown of spiritual giftings as they relate to ministry.

This book was instrumental in helping us identify different events that God has used in our own lives to develop our character, skills, and calling. Overall, we highly recommend this book for leaders who want to understand their development process and discern how they can continue growing in the ways that God has been moving in their lives.

“God is working primarily in the leader, not through them. Many emerging leaders don’t recognize this and become frustrated. They are constantly evaluating productivity and activities, while God is quietly evaluating their leadership potential. He wants to teach us that we minister out of who we are.”

Before we launched, Jenn and I were in pre-engagement counseling and we took a stress test as a way to gauge different stressors and how we responded to them. Our counselor came back and said, “Steven, you scored the lowest stress we’ve ever seen on this test. You have like no stress at all.”

I semi-pridefully, semi-jokingly responded, “I guess it’s just trusting in Jesus!”

My 23-year-old self had yet to be introduced to the pressure cooker of cross-cultural life, ministry, and leadership. Man, I want to go back and slap that 23-year-old version of myself.

When we’re in our home countries, we perhaps unconsciously and easily move towards the things that keep our stress low and keep our physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual health high. There’s an abundance of resources to help you thrive and the added bonus that they are all in your own language. Pastors, small groups, counseling centers, local churches, friend groups, classes, workout groups, sports teams, etc.

Moving overseas, most of these are wiped away overnight.

In the chaos of transition, language learning, pioneering ministry, and team conflict, we can take for granted that all the ways we are used to pursuing health and thriving in our lives are no longer there. Additionally, the stressors in our lives spike to levels we’ve never experienced before: change in culture, climate, job, community, proximity to family, access to hobbies and other supports.

The Holmes-Rahe stress inventory gives a score for different stressful events that might happen in your life, like changing your job, death of a family member, or changing residences. Score over 200, and you had a 50% chance to have a major health breakdown within 2 years. Over 300, and that percentage would shoot to 80%. Dr. Lois Dodds of Heartstream Resources did some analysis of first year missionaries’ stress levels according to the Holmes-Rahe stress inventory. They found that first term missionaries peaked at 900 and even veteran missionaries averaged about 600!

Yikes.

As we’ve repeatedly said before, much of what is posted on this blog are lessons from how NOT to do it. Jenn and I completely disregarded any thought of health and powered through new marriage, transitions, team leadership, language school, and pioneering ministry without a thought of how to manage our stress, much less be aware of how we were doing.

In month 6 on the field, we noted that I had been sick almost every month upon landing on the field when I barely got sick once a year in the States. At a team meeting in our second year, out of curiosity I asked the team to raise their hands if they had experienced the following “minor”  health issues: regular migraines/headaches, panic / anxiety attacks, eye twitching, vertigo, stomach issues (both directions), increase in colds/sickness, weight gain, difficulty sleeping, random muscle pains, and hives. As I went through the list, at least half to ⅔ of the team raised their hands. Except the stomach issues one. That one was 100%.

Even on our own team, we didn’t know that we were all experiencing these issues.

Before you launch to the field you hear of the extreme stories of missionaries thrown into jail or maybe even those that have seizures and find out they have brain cancer. But what’s often not mentioned is the ongoing, dangerously high levels of stress that we experience at a regular level.

There’s also an underlying, unmentioned belief among goers that the more you suffer, the holier you are. And it’s true that Romans 5 tells us that suffering produces perseverance, which produces character. But I think holiness and character are produced from how we respond to suffering, not just whether we have it. There’s nothing particularly holy about disregarding your own health or your family’s or team’s out of ignorance. How can goers persevere amidst all of this?

After 10 years of living on the field, our first answer is still abiding in Jesus through our union with Christ. Realizing when you’re anxious or stressed, surrendering control, and receiving what you need from the vine.

Secondly, setting rhythms and boundaries for health is critical for sustained thriving on the field.

At the end of 2022 as we were about to head back to Thailand after Jenn’s cancer treatment, our counselor asked us how we were going to pursue healthy rhythms after returning. I told her I wasn’t sure, and she asked, “When was a season in Thailand when you felt you were healthy?”

“I don’t think I’ve ever had a season in Thailand when I was healthy.”

She gave us the following tool to complete before returning: Red-Yellow-Green Health Markers.

Red-Yellow-Green Health Markers

Summary: With culture stress, ministry challenges, and life transitions, life on the field as a cross-cultural worker can quickly cause areas of physical, mental, emotional, relational, and spiritual health to suffer. This tool is meant to help workers self-evaluate what their markers of health are, and establish rhythms to help them maintain thriving.

Red: markers that indicate you are outside a window of tolerance, need to take a hard stop and make changes.

Yellow: markers that indicate you need to take caution, slow down, and go back to green. Warning signs to pay attention to.

Green: markers that indicate that you are healthy and thriving when these are in place.

Below is an example table of what indicators and rhythms you could add. These can span physical, mental, emotional, relational (e.g. marriage/singleness, team, ministry partners, friendships, spiritual community), and spiritual areas of life. You can take the template and fill in your own health markers. Feel free to add any categories that might have a significant impact on your health, including travel, schedule, personal development, or anything else that is helpful.

After each filling this out, Jenn and I have tried to adhere to these rhythms as best we can for the past 2 years. We had our counselor check in and help us honestly evaluate how we were doing for the first two quarters. For the most part, we’ve been in and out of the yellow-green areas, which has been way better than our first 8 years on the field. And when we have weeks where we dip into the red markers, we’re both much more aware of it and quick to enact some changes.

Our encouragement for those that are on the field is to take a day of prayer and evaluate your health indicators and rhythms. Share your markers with a supervisor, leader, or member care friend and ask them to check you on it monthly or quarterly.

We want to persevere until the vision that God has given is accomplished! Constantly redlining into burnout and unhealth is a sure way to leave the field or be forced out before that vision is realized. More than that, the promises of Jesus are for abundant life (John 10:10), for a light burden and easy yoke and rest for our souls (Matthew 11:28-30), for an overflowing cup and refreshment for our souls (Psalm 23). The lie of our flesh or pride is that goers must only suffer and not thrive. And while seasons of suffering are almost guaranteed for the goer, it is to release us into more thriving! May we be an example of overflowing, abiding fruitfulness that multiplies into those we lead and into new disciples among the nations.