Rick Love wrote an interesting article about the use of the term "Missions" in church. It is called Called to Conquer or Commissioned to Bless? Why I Dislike the Term “Missions”. In it he argues that we need to drop the militaristic perspective of missions. Prior to my coming to FIM, this was something they intentionally looked at. They changed some of their terminology. Headquarters became home office and furlough became home assignment. I believe other things changed as well, but I wasn't around for that chapter.
Should FIM someday decide to walk away from the term missions and replace it with blessing or something similar it would present huge difficulty. Not the least of which is that it's part of our name, Fellowship International Mission. Additionally, what would I be called? I'd no longer be a missionary, perhaps an agent of blessing or a blessor. Also, how would people find us? They know to look for mission agencies, but we'd be a blessing agency. Google wouldn't know to bring our website into the search results for "mission agencies" nor would the future missionaries know to look for a "blessing agency". Much effort would need to be done, huge amounts of communication (and associated expense) would have to be undertaken to inform just the people who already are involved and help them understand. Being the catalyst of cultural change does not come without a variety of costs.
I don't argue for whether it should or shouldn't be done. I think the psychological benefits for the Christian community may be clear, but the practical implementation becomes very tricky. I'm not sure how a change like that could happen in our culture, but I think it clearly would have to start with an organization with a lot of resources.