So, here’s a grand-prize question for an offbeat gameshow: who was a more successful performer in their respective field: John Paciorek, or Paul the Apostle? You must to click through to find the surprising answer…
You already know that I’m setting you up to invest the next five minutes into a meaningful take-away. Between Paciorek and Paul, the Apostle was the runner-up. But; was he?
We’ve just put the bats and balls away until next-year’s Spring Training brings the pros back to the diamond. Sixty-two years ago, John Paciorek had just finished his season with a flourish.
Houston’s Astros were a major league expansion team in 1963, and their final game of a miserable season (66-96) was against the New York Mets, whose 51-111 record was worse.
Paciorek was in Houston’s minor league system, but he was “called up” to play in that final game. He played right field and was in the seventh spot in the line-up. Three at-bats produced three hits. That was his only major league appearance, ever: there were 3000 people in the stands to watch his historic act.
John Paciorek: the only player in Major League history to have a career batting average of 1.000, with three hits (others have pulled off that feat with one or two). That’s the stuff of legends…
The Apostle Paul didn’t bat 1.000. Luke’s insider account of Paul’s performance in the Major League of Christian Missions told the story of his back-to-back seasons, on the road in the Roman Empire carrying the story of Jesus and the home-run message of the Gospel to audiences everywhere.
The 1st Missionary Journey (check the maps in the back of your Bible) had Paul on the bus with Barnabas. They performed in a variety of towns; in some, they failed to score. In others, they caused quite a ruckus. In the notable spots, their appeal caught attention and produced new followers of Jesus and left newly-formed churches in their wake. Then, back on the bus to the next venue.
The 2nd Missionary Journey on your map has the same basic framework, but the starting-lineup has now changed: Barnabas has taken John Mark and launched a comparative effort, while Paul elevated Silas to full-partner status and got back on the road. Their plan: retrace the steps from Journey #1, and check-in with the churches that Paul and Barnabas had planted to see how they were doing.
They were well into their travel plan when the unexpected hit: circumstances turned hostile, and doors began to close. The Bible lingo summarizes it:
“…the Holy Spirit prevented them from preaching the word in the province of Asia at that time…” And, “…they headed north, but again the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them to go there.”
They had a plan; the plan wasn’t working.
“That night Paul had a vision: A man from Macedonia was standing there, pleading with him, ‘Come over to Macedonia and help us!’ So we decided to leave for Macedonia at once, having concluded that God was calling us to preach the Good News there” (Acts 16).
A recent article in Forbes could have been valuable to Paul and Silas as they reassessed their situation. Under the headline, “The More you Plan, the Less you Adapt,” Benjamin Laker offers some solid counsel to great leaders who often have their strategies locked-and-loaded.
To quote Laker,
“Overly detailed planning creates a false sense of security, leading organizations to defend outdated strategies and hindering their ability to adapt to changing conditions. Effective strategy treats plans as flexible hypotheses, prioritizing continuous adjustment and learning over rigid adherence to initial predictions. Leaders should foster structured adaptability by implementing modular planning, regular review points and focusing on learning to pivot effectively as reality shifts.”
Paul’s plan was both effective and flexible; ultimately, God used the Man of Macedonia – in Paul’s dream – to divert Paul’s commitment away from a return trip to Asia and toward the beachhead that would open Europe to the expansion of the Christian faith.
Are you hitting some roadblocks in the advance of your plans today? Is it possible that an unexpected opportunity is popping into your dreams as you deal with the pushbacks to your plans?
Bob Shank
___
Discover the locations of our new cohort launches! CLICK HERE
A famous general said, “No plan survives contact with the enemy.” Planning is good, and good planning produces good plans, but as you say, be flexible and able to adapt.
Good stuff. I needed to hear this: “Effective strategy treats plans as flexible hypotheses, prioritizing continuous adjustment and learning over rigid adherence to initial predictions.” Thank you.