You can take a quantum leap in understanding your cross-cultural ministry partner by understanding the five basic culture scales. Today’s focus: Task/Relationship
Peterson’s Five Basic Culture Scales
According to Brooks Peterson in Cultural Intelligence: A Guide to Working with People from Other Cultures, there are five basic culture scales. They are: 1) Equality/Hierarchy, 2) Direct/Indirect, 3) Individual/Group, 4) Task/Relationship, and 5) Risk/Caution. Previous posts focused on the culture scale of Equality/Hierarchy … and Direct/Indirect … and Individual/Group. In this post, we are looking at Task/Relationship, which refers to the degree to which people focus first—on getting work accomplished (Task)—versus building trust between people (Relationship).
move straight to business—relationships come later,
keep most relationships with coworkers impersonal,
sacrifice leisure time and time with family in favor of work,
get to know co-workers and colleagues quickly but usually superficially,
use largely impersonal selection criteria in hiring (such as resumés or test scores), and
allow work to overlap with personal time.
A relationship style means people prefer to
define people based on who they are,
establish comfortable relationships and a sense of mutual trust before getting down to business,
have personal relationships with co-workers,
sacrifice work in favor of leisure time and time with family,
get to know co-workers and colleagues slowly and in depth,
use largely personal selection criteria (such as family connections) when hiring, and
not allow work to impinge on personal life.
An example from Scripture: Jesus praises Mary for sitting at Jesus’ feet
The classic text for comparing a task-oriented person to a relationship-oriented person is the story of Martha and Mary in Luke’s gospel. Martha is doing the expected work of a woman in her culture; Mary, however, is sitting at the feet of Jesus and learning from him.
Jesus visits Martha and Mary, by Otto van Veen, 1597 (public domain)
38 Now as they went on their way, Jesus entered a village. And a woman named Martha welcomed him into her house. 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to his teaching. 40 But Martha was distracted with much serving. And she went up to him and said, Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me. 41 But the Lord answered her, Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things, 42 but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.
(Luke 10:38–42 ESV)
There are several things we can observe from this passage using the lens of honor and shame. Jesus Christ was honored by Mary; Martha was not. Several things are plain:
Mary sat at the Lord’s feet. Her humility is evidenced by her posture. She physically expressed her recognition of the honor of Jesus. In the economy of honor and shame, feet have a particular meaning. Feet are among the least honorable parts of the human body—in contrast, for example, to the right hand. This honor/shame contrast is contained in Psalm 110:1—“The LORD says to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” The meaning in Mary’s action of sitting at Christ’s feet was profound and plain in their honor-shame culture—and surely was clear to Martha.
Mary was listening. Mary gave honor to Jesus by doing nothing except listening in humility to the Savior. The sacredness of her attention fittingly corresponded to the sacredness of the One in the room.
“Martha was distracted with much serving.” Martha was serving, getting stuff done. In defense of Martha, one could say that it was Mary who was the one distracted; it was Mary who should have been serving and getting work done. But Jesus praised Mary, and critiqued Martha.
Martha was preoccupied with herself. Note what she said: “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Tell her then to help me.” Could it be that Martha’s service was a smokescreen for her preoccupation with herself? No wonder Jesus said, “Mary has chosen the good portion.”
In the end, Mary was the one willing to give honor to Christ by her humility, and as a result, was praised by Jesus. This overturns one of the classic features of the honor and shame culture, namely, that honor and shame is a “limited good” … or “zero-sum game.” What does this mean, that honor is a zero-sum game? Simply this: It is the belief that “everything in the social, economic, natural universe, everything desired in life: land, wealth, respect and status, power and influence exist in finite quantity and are in short supply.”[2] In other words, If you gain, I lose … And if I gain, you lose. It is the belief that we cannot both increase in honor at the same time, because it is ‘a limited good,’ there’s only so much land … there’s only so much wealth … there’s only so much honor. Here in the story of Mary and Martha, it is Mary who willingly ‘loses’ self-honor by giving honor to Jesus—and yet, in the end, instead of losing, she gains a compliment from Jesus: Mary gains honor from the Lord.
Using Peterson’s words, above, might we say that Mary was someone who prefers to “define people by who they are,” while Martha was someone who prefers to “define people by what they do?” Can we say that Mary did not try to impress Jesus by her service, and Mary gave immense honor to Jesus by sitting at his feet, listening and learning attentively, affectionately?
What are some applications to cross-cultural partnership?
Understanding that most of the peoples of the non-western world hold to the values of relationship as opposed to task, it is likely that western and majority-world partners will confront situations where this collision of values will cause confusion and sometimes conflict. Here are some suggestions for task-oriented Christian leaders in order to avoid these conflicts:
We are very familiar with the relational style of networking. In networking, people often consider first what they can gain from the other person. For some, this is their primary relational style. Ultimately, this is a task-oriented, rather than a person-oriented relational style. At its worst, networking tends to “objectify” people into categories of what they can do, rather than to simply honor who they are. Christians can get sucked into this kind of superficial relational style. Unfortunately, partnership with national missionaries can have this dehumanizing edge, because sometimes westerners think of the cost-effectiveness factor above all else. Principles to consider:
Networking has its place in the Christian community. But when spending time with your cross-cultural partners, leave your networking style behind.
Be intentional to focus on the person who is your ministry partner—his or her life, family, story, struggles. Share your story, too. Focus on honoring the one you are with in the present moment by listening with your heart. Ask open-ended questions and learn. Listen … Listen … Listen! (Check this blog for other posts on empathic listening.)
Give honor; avoid flattery. Flattery is giving pseudo-honor in order to get something. Can you imagine sitting at the feet of your cross-cultural partner—perhaps not physically—but spiritually? Are you willing to wash the feet of your cross-cultural ministry partner? There is simply no substitute for the spirit of Christlike servanthood.
When visiting your cross-cultural partner, plan for informal time together. If you are on a seven-day mission, consider spending one day together, leader-to-leader, family-to-family. Just talking and praying and laughing as friends. This must be intentional. Consider … just being together as friends … accomplishing nothing … simply honoring one anothers’ personhood in Christ. The honor you will give to your cross-cultural partner will be immensely appreciated. The trust you build will pay huge dividends later on.
Obviously, there are tasks to accomplish. Jesus Christ has commissioned us with the magnificent, enormous task of discipling the nations. But let us remember, Jesus taught us that this “task” is first and foremost a relational journey: “… And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20 ESV).
What do you think? What do you find to be helpful in bridging the gap between cultures relative to task and relationship? Your comments are most welcomed.
I am currently reading through Dr. Roger Parrott’s book, The Longview: Lasting Strategies for Rising Leaders. Chapter 8 is titled, “Planning Will Drain the Life from Your Ministry.” For me, that chapter title alone is like a drink of cool water on a hot day. Here’s how Roger ends the chapter:
Occasionally we see operational planning in the Bible: Nehemiah rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem, Jesus sending the disciples to prepare the Last Supper. But most of the big ideas God gave to his people in dreams. Jacob, Joseph, Abraham, the Magi, John on Patmos.
Christian leaders need to spend more time dreaming, praying, and listening to what God wants for us, rather than huddled around conference tables attempting to plan God’s best for us.
It has long been quoted, “He how fails to plan, plans to fail,” but don’t be so sure that’s true. Yes, operational, localized planning is vital to a well-managed ministry. But putting too much energy into planning an unknown future will drain the life from your ministry. Instead, longview leaders must look to the future as the wellspring of opportunity and be poised to take advantage of it.
Roger Parrott, PhD is the President of Belhaven College in Jackson, Mississippi. He also serves on the Board of Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization.
What does this have to do with cross-cultural partnership? Here’s one idea: What if you took time to build and deepen your relationship with your cross-cultural ministry partner by dreaming, praying, and listening to God together. What an investment in your friendship this would be! What a great faith-builder it would be to explore together God’s best for your partnership! Could it be that dreaming, praying, and listening to God together—as partners in God’s global mission to bless all peoples—is one of the most catalytic things you could do to advance the partnership and build God’s kingdom?
Jesus as the Good Shepherd from the early Christian catacomb of Domitilla/Domatilla (Crypt of Lucina, 200 AD). How does the idea of “one flock, one shepherd” impact your partnership?
Jesus said:
“And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd” (John 10:16 ESV).
Consider the words, “… one flock, one shepherd.” Imagine how this rang in the ears of the first disciples, who knew that likely thousands of shepherds were taking care of likely hundreds of thousands of sheep! How could just one shepherd lead and take care of all the sheep? It surely must have sounded like a radical idea.
What does Jesus mean by “one flock, one shepherd?” Later in John’s gospel, Jesus gives us insights into what he means concerning oneness among his followers.
John 17:20–23
20 I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.
For the sake of the subject of this blog—cross-cultural partnership—and in light of the fact that life on our planet has become dominated by globalization, consider this:
On the one hand, the benefits of globalization represented by the Internet and inexpensive air travel can be a great help in aiding the church in its unity and practice of cross-cultural partnership; it is simply so much easier to communicate today than just ten years ago. On the other hand, there is a risk that modern methods become an end in themselves … that Christian leaders rely too heavily on such things as management systems and marketing communications. This, in turn, undermines dependence on God and ultimately, the goal of Christian unity. It can be summed up by the words, “Amplified opportunity, amplified threat.”[1]
Amplified opportunity: Church history has never had the enormous advantages of the powerful global communications tools which globalization and the Internet afford us today. This blog is one of a billion examples. Could it be that globalization has given us communication tools to facilitate this “one flock, one shepherd” ideal of Jesus Christ—so that Christ’s plan for unity amidst diversity can be more fully realized than ever before in human history?
Therefore, in the light of God’s global purpose to bless all peoples
through the gospel of Christ, could it be that to ignore cross-cultural partnership
as a key method for world evangelization is to fail in stewarding
one of the greatest advantages the church has ever known?
Amplified threat: The features of globalization consist of such things as extremely powerful global communications … inexpensive air travel … market-based economic systems … and international cooperation by individuals (not just nations and corporations). You may ask, How is globalization a threat? Simply, this: I believe many Christians, myself included, are often seduced into thinking that these powerful tools are a substitute for relying on the leadership and provision of our Shepherd. But the Bible says there is a relational depth—a beauty, wisdom and effectiveness—that is available solely from following our Shepherd, the Lord Jesus Christ.
Could it be that those of us engaged in cross-cultural ministry partnerships
have to be extra intentional in listening to our Shepherd and to each other—
in order to guard against the default culture and inherent spiritual biases of self-reliance,
modern systems, and such practices as results-based management?
Consider the words of Mark 6:34: “When he went ashore he saw a great crowd, and he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. And he began to teach them many things.” Could it be that when Jesus sees us relying primarily on our modern technologies, global communications tools, management systems and fund-raising strategies—he sees us being technologically rich but spiritually poor? Could it be he sees us as “sheep without a shepherd?”
=======================
1. The words “amplified opportunity, amplified threat” and related concepts are from an article by Os Guinness: “Mission modernity: Seven checkpoints on mission in the modern world” in Sampson, Samuel, and Sugden, Eds., Faith and Modernity (Oxford: Regnum Books, 1994).
A model for cross-cultural partnership inside of God’s grace
THE CROSS-CULTURAL PARTNERSHIP
A, B, and C are partners in a partnership—and represent any organization or ministry entity; for example, a western mission agency, an indigenous majority-world ministry, and a local church.
God’s grace—each ministry partner operates inside of the sphere of God’s grace (the large light green circle)—secured through the finished work of Jesus Christ.
The vision—is central to the partnership; it’s what has brought the partners together, and is far greater than what any partner can do alone. Each partner brings unique resources to work together toward the vision.
The Cross—represents the finished work of Jesus Christ, and God’s passion to gather worshipers from among all peoples; this is what ultimately holds the partnership together.
The advocate—is an individual from one of the partner organizations who serves as a “champion” or ambassador for the partnership, and applies cultural intelligence as he/she serves the partnership toward the vision.
THE PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS
Character: Each partner has leaders with godly character (represented by the yellow circle) who live as followers of Jesus Christ. The principal thing is humility.
Culture: Each partner devotes resources to acquiring cultural intelligence (represented by the smaller green circle) in order to develop cultural awareness of self and others along with the ability to adjust behavior and attitudes. The principal thing is deep understanding.
Competence: Each partner has developed organizational competence (represented by the blue circle) with appropriate systems and accountability. The principal thing is wise practice.
If you are interested in developing godly character, cultural intelligence, and organizational competence for your cross-cultural partnership, consider joining The Beauty of Partnershiplearning journey. Or contact me, Werner Mischke at werner@mission1.org.
Are you avoiding risk, underestimating risk, or wisely navigating risk in your cross-cultural partnership?
The first post in this series looked at avoiding risk; the second looked at underestimating risk. This blog post considers a third option—navigating risk—as an act of wise obedience to our Lord’s Great Commission.
3) Navigating risk:Wise entrepreneurial leaders are skilled at assessing risk. They have a knack for ‘knowing that they don’t know,’ and then investing in the knowledge, skills and attitudes to overcome the gaps in their knowledge and experience. Wise leaders know that Jesus Christ commands us to assess the risk and count the cost in following him:
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it? –Luke 14:26–28 ESV
Likewise, when western leaders who are following Christ realize their journey is leading them into partnership with an indigenous ministry in the majority world, wise leaders know that they don’t know. The wise leader knows there are risks involved and says,
Let’s slow down and assess both the opportunity and the risk.
Let’s listen to God, and seek the wisdom of his Word for these matters.
Let’s go on an exploratory search do discover what we don’t know about cross-cultural partnership.
Let’s listen to other leaders who have been down this road before and have been successful.
Let’s navigate the risk, knowing that the opportunity for reward is tremendous, while recognizing that the risk for disappointment is just as real.
The wise leader invests in developing the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are necessary for a healthy cross-cultural partnership. He or she knows that developing these KSAs is not just a matter of information; it is rather, the result of a journey that will take time. The wise leader knows that there are many varying cultures in the world—and navigating the vast differences between cultures, worldviews, and social values may be as difficult as navigating across an ocean.
The wise leader invests in the journey to gain wisdom in the practice of healthy cross-cultural partnerships—and once having done so, he or she can truly begin to think big and responsiblypursue significant risk-laden dreams for the kingdom of God. The wise leader is thrilled to be a part of God’s Story, and knows that the impact of their decisions and actions in serving a cross-cultural partnership could ripple across the globe and throughout eternity to the glory of Christ.
To see a video about risk and cross-cultural partnership, go to this page—Week 3: Risk.
If you are interested in developing the knowledge, skills and attitudes
to wisely navigate a cross-cultural partnership,
then you may be ready for The Beauty of Partnership learning journey. Click here to learn more, or simply write to me,
Werner Mischke, at werner@mission1.org.
2) Underestimating risk: One of the common blessings of going on a mission trip or serving cross-culturallyis to discover that the person who I’m getting to know is so different from me, and yet, because we have a common faith in Jesus Christ, we are part of the same family and have a built-in sense of deep spiritual connection. We discover just how true the Bible really is: “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:4–6).
How wonderful! With this knowledge, many Christians believe it is easy to begin a cross-cultural partnership, confident that whatever obstacles there may be, their common faith in Jesus will enable them to overcome any problems.
A year goes by; so far so good … Another year, and questions emerge … Over time, mistrust develops, and sure enough, obstacles arise along with misunderstandings. From one side are accusations of mismanagement; from the other side, accusations of colonialism or arrogance. It is discovered that expectations for the partnership are radically different, and what seemed at first to be an exciting “can’t-lose enterprise for the kingdom” becomes mired in disappointment and cross-cultural conflict.
What happened? They underestimated the risks. They underestimated the need for developing new knowledge, skills and attitudes (KSAs); they did not know that you must develop godly character, cultural intelligence, and organizational competence for healthy cross-cultural partnership.
Are you avoiding risk, underestimating risk, or wisely navigating risk relative to cross-cultural partnership?
I believe there are three basic ways to think about risk relative to cross-cultural partnerships—or partnership with indigenous ministries. They are: Avoiding risk, underestimating risk, and navigating risk. This blog post considers the first option:
1) Avoiding risk: People who avoid risk relative to partnership with indigenous ministries do so for various reasons—perhaps because they have heard someone say, “You can’t trust the nationals”—or they tried a cross-cultural partnership and had a bad experience. So they simply conclude, “No way” or “Never again.”
They resist learning lessons of how to adjust their approach; they don’t know about the need to learn new skills. Maybe they are unaware that there is a specific skill set necessary for someone to be a partnership ambassador. So they never consider developing the Christlike servanthood, the listening skills, the cultural intelligence, the organizational systems that are necessary to succeed. They give up, thinking that partnership ought to be easy, or that partnership just doesn’t work. They may still have a nagging sense that the body of Christ really is supposed to work together around the world (the Bible surely seems to say that it’s possible), but they see no way to get there.
Sadly, their default response to the possibility of cross-cultural partnership is to avoid the risk, and thus, to forgo the enormous potential for greater blessing for the peoples of the world. They also forgo the privilege of a deep cross-cultural friendship, not to mention the opportunity to better know the Lord Jesus Christ through the journey of working with Christian leaders from other cultures.
“I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.
So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything,
but only God who gives the growth.” (1 Corinthians 3:6–7 ESV)
The Bible teaches that when it comes to spiritual fruit, “God gives the growth.” But with our modern management orientation in Christian ministry, we often think we can control outcomes. This is understandable because of the secular environment in which we live in the west; but is it biblical?
Last week I attended a small gathering of mission leaders for a “Sailboat Retreat” during which we compared the powerboat mindset with the sailboat mindset—and what it could mean for Christian mission ministry. (Note: If you want to understand the difference between the powerboat and sailboat mindsets, click here.) One of the things we discussed is that money is very often a controlling force in ministry. As a result, fundraising is what often shapes ministry. This can be quite unhealthy, an example of “the tail wagging the dog.”
In keeping with the sailboat theme of “catching the wind of God”—one of the things we considered in our sailboat retreat is this idea: Instead of having money as the single greatest catalyst for ministry, what if that catalyst was simply listening—listening to God and listening to people?
To make this contrast clear, take a look at two “formulas” for ministry. With the “powerboat” formula for Christian mission, the catalyst is money:
Money drives ministry for results
Money drives the process; no funding = no ministry = no results.
Money comes first; listening is almost optional and comes last.
Primary emphasis on fundraising and methods to raise money.
Western nations have more funds, therefore wealthy nations tend to control ministry.
Implies reliance on expensive structures, technology, “missions machinery.”
Money makes “mission” go fast.
Tremendous pressure on people for results—measurement of outcomes—in order to maintain funding. This shapes ministry strategy and reporting protocol.
With the “sailboat” formula for Christian mission, things are very different. The variables are the same, but the priorities are different. The catalyst is listening—to God and people.
Listening shapes ministry for faithfulness
Listening replaces money as the catalyst for global missions.
Listening comes first; money is almost optional and comes last.
Primary emphasis on—listening to God—catching the wind of the Holy Spirit.
Implies a quantum leap by Christian mission leaders in the west relative to listening to Christian mission leaders in the global south—while at the same time adopting more of a servant role rather than a leadership role in missions.
Ministry can go forward without excessive reliance on funding.
Sometimes fast, sometimes slow; it depends on the wind of God.
Results are up to God, and can greatly exceed the plans of people, or not. Either one is okay, because God is in control. What is required is that God’s people be found faithful.
Obviously, there are generalizations involved in making formulas and it would be easy to critique specific pieces of the formulas above. Nevertheless, the point of this is to imagine: What would be different in your cross-cultural partnership, if you put listening ahead of funding? What if listening to God and to people was by far the most important, the most catalytic practice, in your cross-cultural partnership ministry—or any ministry, for that matter?
I received this email note today from Marilyn Nasman, a fellow-learner in The Beauty of Partnership. Marilyn has been involved in a cross-cultural partnership in Kenya for several years. Her email was a real blessing to me. God is faithful and God is good!
Dear Werner,
Thank you for your note. I am just finishing the “Listening” section. My, the richness of this material is just down right impressive. It couldn’t be more appropriate for me and the current project in Kenya. Kitty does not return until October 4th. Our team here in Friday Harbor meets each week to pray for her as a group and ask for God’s guidance as we go forward. Every week I am able to use some part of The Beauty of Partnership material as we tackle issues that come up or gain insights into the dynamics of what is occurring.
When I taught Aviation Ground School years ago one of the FAA manuals contained a phrase that said, “… there must be time and opportunity for perceptions to occur.” That is what I am finding with my slower progress, I need time and opportunity for perceptions to occur. I don’t think this material would be nearly as dynamic and powerful for me if I wasn’t knee deep in the practical application! It is just perfect timing and dead on target!
In re-reading Elmer’s book this morning he talks about tolerating ambiguity as one of the skills of Openness. I thought again of the sailboat caught in mixed currents with no clear cut wind or direction. We just go back, forth, and sideways for awhile. Eventually forces outside the boat take command and a course can be plotted but there are many times when confusion and ambiguity just exist. “Wait upon the Lord” comes to mind. This study is recalibrating my spiritual walk … and that is a very good thing.
Thank you again for the dedication, passion and experience that brought this material into reality.
Marilyn Nasman
Friday Harbor, Washington
Thanks, Marilyn, for your encouraging words! Praise God from whom all blessings flow! -Werner
Godly character, cultural intelligence, and organizational competence are the three inter-related categories of competence for people and ministries to have healthy cross-cultural partnerships. Growth in one arena usually impacts growth in the others. Likewise, deficits in one arena can also affect the others.
Here’s how we define these three categories or arenas:
1. GODLY CHARACTER means … following humbly our Lord Jesus Christ for the glory of God. At its core, godly character is—humility.
2. CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE (CQ) means … understanding deeply our diversity and unity for the glory of God. At its core, cultural intelligence is—deep understanding.
3. ORGANIZATIONAL COMPETENCE means … practicing wisely the art and science of partnership for the glory of God. At its core, organizational competence is—wise practice.
You can evaluate the health of a cross-cultural partnership by considering the three-legged stool. You need strength in all three “legs”—godly character, cultural intelligence, and organizational competence—for a healthy partnership. If the partnership is wobbly, at least one of the legs of the stool is weak or broken.
Evaluations are often made by asking questions; here are a few suggestions to help you get started:
GODLY CHARACTER: Does a lack of humility—a lack of Christlike servanthood—characterize the relationship or the key leaders on either side of the partnership? How much time are you devoting to slow, deliberate, empathic listening inside of the partnership? Note: Pride can be easy to recognize in others; it is harder to see in yourself.
CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE: Is there a lack of cultural intelligence—a deficit in awareness of the worldview or cultural values of the other party, or of the key leaders on either side of the partnership? Does this contribute to a lack of trust—or an unwillingness to make necessary adjustments in expectations or behavior? Note: Without training in cultural intelligence, this is very difficult to answer.
ORGANIZATIONAL COMPETENCE: Is there a vision for this partnership? Is there an alliance champion or ambassador with true collaboration skills? Is there a clear understanding of what is expected regarding reports, accountability, and protocol—from all sides of the partnership? Note: As with godly character and cultural intelligence, the wise practices that comprise organizational competence are, ideally, an ever-evolving process of growth on all sides of the partnership.
At Mission ONE, we have developed The Beauty of Partnership to equip Christian entrepreneurial leaders for a learning journey by which they not only gain much new knowledge, but also gain the skills and attitudes that are simply vital for healthy cross-cultural partnership. A weekend seminar will not give you the deep understanding and behavioral change necessary. That’s why it is a twelve-week missional learning journey.
At Mission ONE, we have a passion for equipping Christian entrepreneurial leaders for cross-cultural partnership. That is the main reason why this site exists. Would you like to join the journey? Write to me, Werner Mischke, at werner@mission1.org.
Godly character, cultural intelligence, and organizational competence are the three inter-related categories of competence for people and ministries to have healthy cross-cultural partnerships. Growth in one arena usually impacts growth in the others. Likewise, deficits in one arena can also affect the others.