First, I think the study is limited in that it only analyzes one type of short term missionary, the “house builder.” My instinct tells me there are more effective types of short-term missionary.

I think the most important principle for short-term missionaries is that you want to be involved in a partnership with a long-term missionary you know and trust, and realize that you are a part of their strategy. It’s not reasonable to expect a lasting, positive impact without time commitment. In the world of short-term missions this means sending a team every year to the same long-term missionary until you complete a part of their strategy.

In contrast, some people I know feel like mega-churches make terrible partners because they want to spend a Summer in Mexico, then in India, then Siberia…they want to feel like they’re impacting the world, not just a single city or people group.

In my city, short term teams are a vital part of our strategy. They usually come in the Summer, Fall, and around Christmas and their primary job is to evangelize. As people come to believe, they are passed on to the long-term missionaries who are equipped to disciple them and to help them become a church.

That’s what happened this summer as one of our short-term teams just saw ten people come to the Father in four days! These ten people will be followed up on and it is likely that a church will form as a result of this short term team.