Picking The Perfect Coach: A Guide To The Many Definitions of Coaching
Coaching is a $10B industry, but what is “coaching”?
No one knows for sure.
When I enrolled in a coach certification program, I never expected I would spend weeks trying to find and understand the definition of coaching. But I did, and here’s what I found:
There isn’t one definition. There are many.
That means there is substantial variation in how coaches practice, and without some specific knowledge, you might find yourself buying an expensive “pig-in-a-poke” when it comes to coaching.
However, with that knowledge you can ask the right questions and pick the best coach for you.
This article will help. It will:
Explore the origins of “coaching”
Examine surprising differences in how coaching is defined
Take a short look at how executive coaching is different
Compare coaching with counseling, consulting and therapy
Discuss how different coaching methodologies shape these definitions
Origins of "Coaching"
When you think of the word coach, what picture comes to mind?
Is it this?
Or is it this?
The word “coach” actually has roots in transportation. In 15th-century Hungary, the village of Kocs developed a popular horse-drawn carriage known as a kocsi, which gave rise to the English word “coach” for a carriage.
Over time, the term “coach” took on a metaphorical meaning. By the 18th century, English students slangily called their tutors “coach,” meaning someone who carried a student through exams.
This metaphor stuck: a coach became someone who transports you from where you are to where you want to be. Later, the term was adopted in sports (19th-century “coachers,” later just coaches) and eventually in business and personal development contexts.
So, at its heart, coaching is about movement toward a goal – like a carriage ride toward a destination.
While Coaching originally meant using a vehicle for transport (like Ubering), it came to mean a tutor who carries a student to success, and now describes a professional relationship focused on moving a person from their current state to a desired future state.
Most agree that Coaching is helping people move from point A to point B.
Beyond that, it gets complicated.
The Varied Definitions of Coaching And Their Surprising Differences
“...there may be as many definitions of coaching as there are coaches,” - What Is Coaching?
Here are a few examples that highlight how definitions vary:
Partnering for Potential: The International Coaching Federation (ICF) defines coaching as “partnering with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their personal and professional potential.”
Highlights coaching as a partnership and a process centered on the client’s potential - coaching is non-directive (the coach and client are partners in exploration).
Solution-Focused and Results-Oriented: The Association for Coaching (AC) describes coaching as “a collaborative, solution-focused, results-orientated and systematic process in which the coach facilitates the enhancement of performance, self-directed learning and personal growth.”
Emphasizes a structured, solution-focused approach – coaching is about finding solutions and improving performance through a systematic process.
Developmental and Non-Directive: The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) notes that “coaching is a non-directive form of development” aimed at improving performance and usually focused on short-term, specific skills or goals.
Coaching is a form of development distinct from instruction. The coach’s role is to facilitate without giving direct advice or training.
Notably, CIPD also points out that typical coaching engagements are short-term, except in executive coaching, which often extends over a longer timeframe – a hint that executive coaching can differ in practice.
Unlocking Potential vs. Achieving Objectives: Coaching pioneers Timothy Gallwey and John Whitmore define coaching as “unlocking a person’s potential to maximize their own performance. It is helping them to learn rather than teaching them.”
Coaching is fundamentally about empowering the individual’s learning and growth, less focused on concrete objectives.
Reaching Organizational Goals and Exceeding Expectations: John Mattone, an executive coaching expert, defines coaching as assisting leaders to “reach organizational goals and exceed expectations”
Highlights tangible results and performance outcomes for both the individual and the organization.
Inclusion of Organizational Context: A surprising variation exists between executive coaching and coaching in general. Some professional bodies explicitly weave the organizational or leadership context into their definitions. For instance, the Center for Creative Leadership describes executive coaching as a learning-oriented endeavor that “creates self-awareness, helps drive transformational change, and provides critical challenge and support” for leaders. Likewise, another definition of executive coaching is “assisting top executives, managers, and other leaders to perform, learn, stay healthy and balanced, and effectively guide their teams to successfully reach desired goals and exceed… expectations.”
Contrasts with life coaching or personal coaching definitions which focus more on personal fulfillment or life balance without the business performance component. In executive coaching, the coach often considers both the individual’s development and the organization’s objectives.
Coaching vs. Mentoring Distinctions: Some organizations blur coaching with adjacent concepts. The European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC), for example, doesn’t sharply differentiate “coaching” and “mentoring” in its core definition – it speaks of a “professionally guided process” that inspires clients to maximize potential, and notes that in this partnership the client is the expert on content while the coach/mentor is the expert on the process.
Other bodies (like ICF) draw a clear line between coaching (non-directive, not advising) and mentoring (often advisory, drawing from the mentor’s experience).
EMCC’s approach suggests an overlap, acknowledging that both coaching and mentoring seek to develop the client in a similar partnering way. Meanwhile, other definitions (like Whitmore’s above) insist that coaching is distinctly not teaching or advising – highlighting how purists separate coaching from mentorship or consulting.
Most schools of thought agree on a few core ideas:
Coaching is a partnership. Trust is the primary determinant of success.
The power of coaching is in increasing the self-awareness and agency of the client.
Coaching occurs in conversations and is moved forward by powerful questions from the coach.
The differences in definitions seem to vary with respect to 5 primary aspects.
Targeted outcomes range from the more subjective (personal transformation), to more objective/measurable (performance and results).
Focus ranges from individual success to include organizational success.
How Directive should be in finding solutions ranges from passive (strictly non-directive facilitation) to active (giving direct feedback or guidance).
Duration of coaching ranges from short-term (skills-focused) to long-term (developmental engagements).
Advice expected from the coach ranges from career and context specific advice as a mentor to a generic facilitator.
…And this doesn’t even begin to account for the many coaches that work outside of any professional organization and have their own unique definitions. Some of them are amazing.
What does all this mean?
It means that not every “coach” operates the same way. They all exist somewhere within the ranges of the variable aspects described above. So, to find the perfect coach for you, you need to:
Know what you want in those aspects, and
Ask the right questions to understand how a coach defines their approach.
Caveat emptor!
Executive Coaching
Executive coaching is a subset of coaching that focuses on professionals in leadership or high-level roles (executives, managers, entrepreneurs, etc.). While it adheres to the core idea of facilitating a client’s growth and goal attainment, executive coaching often comes with additional layers:
Business and Leadership Focus: Executive coaching typically aims at improving effectiveness as a leader. Definitions of executive coaching frequently mention business results, leadership skills, and organizational change. For example, executive coaching is described as “a professional development partnership” in which a coach works with leaders to enhance their capabilities in alignment with organizational needs. Improving team leadership performance or driving strategic change are common goals in executive coaching engagements.
Longer-Term and High Stakes: Compared to life coaching (often driven by the individual’s personal goals) or skills coaching (which might be short-term training), executive coaching relationships can last many months or even years. The issues addressed (e.g. developing a more effective leadership style, managing organizational transformation, handling executive stress and “staying balanced” are complex and evolving. Because executives have a broad influence, coaching them can create a “ripple effect” across teams and the entire company, so the coaching is often seen as strategically important to the organization.
Stakeholders and Sponsorship: Executive coaching often involves a triangular relationship – the coach, the executive (coachee), and the sponsoring organization. There may be agreements about goals and confidentiality among these parties. This is a practical distinction: while a life coach only answers to the client, an executive coach might also coordinate with an HR department or the executive’s manager about the coaching objectives. The best executive coaches manage this carefully, maintaining the trust of the individual while also aligning with the organization’s interests.
Content vs. Process Expertise: Executive coaches are sometimes chosen for their familiarity with business or leadership challenges, but they still typically refrain from consulting. Instead of directly telling a CEO how to restructure a division, for instance, a coach will ask the right questions to help the leader arrive at their own insights. However, executives may expect a coach who understands business context. Executive coaches may incorporate tools like 360-degree feedback, personality assessments, or leadership frameworks more often than in general life coaching. In essence, the process (facilitating reflection, building new habits, etc.) remains central, but it’s informed by context-specific knowledge of leadership dynamics.
Bottom line: Executive coaching is still coaching – it’s largely client-driven and focused on unlocking the person’s potential – but it zeroes in on the client’s role as a leader in an organizational setting. Thus, definitions of executive coaching often blend personal development with performance outcomes in a business context.
For example, the Center for Executive Coaching calls coaching “an efficient, high-impact process of dialogue that helps high performing people improve results in ways that are sustained over time.”
That mix of self-awareness + challenge/support toward change nicely captures how an executive coach might push a client to grow in ways that benefit both the individual and their organization.
Coaching vs. Consulting vs. Therapy: Key Differences
Coaching shares some similarities with consulting and therapy – all involve one-on-one conversations and problem solving – but they are fundamentally different disciplines. Here’s how they compare:
Coaching: Coaching is a facilitative, goal-oriented partnership. The coach’s role is to draw out the client’s insights and help them generate their own solutions. The focus is on the present and future – where the client is now and where they want to go – and unlocking their potential to get there. Importantly, a coach does not diagnose problems or prescribe answers; instead, they use probing questions, active listening, and feedback to raise the client’s self-awareness and forward momentum. The assumption is that the client is capable and resourceful and is not in need of mental health treatment. Coaching clients are typically functional, “well” individuals looking to improve performance or achieve specific outcomes.
Consulting: In a consulting relationship, the balance of expertise is different. A consultant is hired as an expert who provides advice or solutions in a particular domain. Instead of asking you introspective questions, a consultant will more likely analyze your situation and tell you what to do (or even do it for you). For example, if a company hires a consultant to improve their supply chain, the consultant might assess the operations and recommend a detailed plan. If the same company hired a coach for their supply chain manager, the coach would help that manager develop their own strategies and leadership skills to address supply chain challenges. The consultant is the expert on the content, whereas the coach is an expert on the process of learning and change. In practice, this means consulting often yields direct answers and action plans, while coaching yields deeper personal growth that enables the client to find answers themselves. It’s “Teach a man to FISH” approach.
(That said, some executive coaches with consulting backgrounds do blend in advice at times, so it’s important to know what style you’re getting.)
Therapy: Therapy is a licensed professional service aimed at improving mental health and emotional well-being. A rough rule of thumb is that therapy often focuses on understanding and healing the past and present emotional difficulties, while coaching focuses on envisioning and creating a desired future. The International Coaching Federation contrasts the two by explaining that therapy is meant to “help people with a broad variety of mental illnesses and emotional difficulties,” whereas coaching is “partnering with clients in a… creative process” to maximize their potential. There is some overlap – both coaches and therapists are adept at listening, empathy, and asking questions – but their qualifications and intentions differ greatly. (Notably, therapists must be licensed and undergo years of supervised clinical training, whereas coaching as an industry is self-regulated and does not require a license.)
Counseling: Counseling sits somewhere between coaching and therapy on the helping spectrum. Like therapy, counseling is a mental health profession requiring specific education and licensure. However, counseling tends to be more focused on specific life challenges or transitions rather than deeper psychological issues. Counselors typically help clients work through immediate problems or decisions (career changes, relationship issues, stress management) using a combination of guidance and skill-building. While coaches focus primarily on future goals and actions, and therapists often deal with past trauma or mental health conditions, counselors help people cope with present challenges and decisions. They may provide more direct advice than coaches but less clinical intervention than therapists. The relationship is usually shorter-term than therapy but may be more structured than coaching.
If you imagine a spectrum of helping professions: consultants are on the “tell/give advice” end, therapists are on the “heal and support mental health” end, and coaches are in the middle focusing on development and self-directed change. All can be valuable – sometimes an executive might need a therapist or counselor to handle personal stress, a consultant for a technical business fix, and a coach to develop their leadership skills.
It’s crucial to engage each for what they do best.
Influence of Coaching Methodologies on Definition and Practice
As we demonstrated earlier, coaching isn’t a monolithic technique; there are various methodologies and models that coaches employ, and these approaches influence how coaching is defined and practiced. Here are a few ways different methodologies shape coaching:
Directive vs. Non-Directive Approaches: One of the fundamental distinctions in coaching style is how “directive” a coach is. A fully non-directive coach acts as a facilitator – they primarily listen, ask open-ended questions, and reflect, allowing the client to arrive at their own solutions. A more directive coach might interject with suggestions, offer exercises or tools, or give feedback and guidance based on their expertise.
In coaching literature, this is sometimes described as the difference between “pull” and “push.” The pull style (non-directive) has the coach drawing out the answers from the client, while the push style (directive) involves the coach imparting more of their own ideas.
Neither style is inherently “right” – effective coaching often requires a balance. With a very inexperienced client who can’t see any path forward, a coach might temporarily be more directive to help them gain momentum. However, too much directing can undermine one of coaching’s benefits: the client’s self-discovery and ownership of solutions. Therefore, many formal definitions (ICF, Whitmore, etc.) emphasize the non-directive nature of coaching.
If a coach primarily gives advice, some would argue they’ve stepped out of coaching and into consulting or mentoring.
Different coaching methodologies fall at different points on this spectrum.
Coaching Models and Philosophies: Specific coaching schools or methodologies have their own take on what coaching means. For instance:
The GROW Model (popularized by John Whitmore) provides a structured framework for coaching conversations (Goal, Reality, Options, Way Forward). Its popularity in executive coaching means many coaches define success in terms of clearly moving the client through those stages to reach concrete goals. Whitmore’s philosophy, as noted, is about maximizing performance by unlocking potential, which aligns with a performance and goal-focused definition of coaching.
Co-Active Coaching (pioneered by the Coaches Training Institute) puts heavy emphasis on the coaching relationship. Their definition: “Co-Active coaching is a relationship that is both supportive and challenging,” aimed at empowering the client’s own knowledge and creativity. This approach influences practice by ensuring the coach is not just an observer but fully engaged in an alliance with the client. A coach from the Co-Active school might define coaching in terms of holistic balance and the client’s whole life, and thus spend time on values and fulfillment, not just task accomplishment.
Solution-Focused Coaching (stemming from solution-focused therapy) influences definitions like the one from the Association for Coaching, which explicitly includes “solution-focused, results-oriented” in its definition. Coaches with this bent will steer conversations toward defining a desired future state and the steps to get there, often minimizing dwelling on past problems.
They might define coaching as the “process of closing the gap between a client’s current reality and their solution or goal state.”
Positive Psychology and Coaching Psychology: As coaching evolved, fields like positive psychology contributed ideas about well-being, strengths, and potential. Some practitioners define coaching in terms of helping clients flourish or leverage strengths.
They might say coaching is a way to help clients build on what’s right with them (strengths, values) to achieve meaningful goals, which subtly shifts the practice toward techniques like strengths assessments or visioning exercises.
Narrative Coaching, Cognitive-Behavioral Coaching, etc.: Each of these sub-approaches would describe the purpose of coaching a bit differently.
A narrative coach (inspired by narrative therapy) might define coaching as “helping people re-author their stories to create new results,” emphasizing personal narrative and meaning.
A cognitive-behavioral coach focuses on how thoughts influence actions, so they might describe coaching as “a process to challenge and change unhelpful thinking patterns to improve performance.”
These definitions guide whether a coach spends a lot of time on a client’s belief systems, language, and mindset (as a cognitive or narrative coach would), or more time on practical action plans.
Methodology in Practice: The methodology a coach uses will influence the tools and techniques they use in coaching sessions with you.
A coach trained in a somatic coaching methodology, for instance, might define coaching as involving the body and physical awareness in the growth process – and in practice they might incorporate breathing exercises or attention to posture in sessions.
Meanwhile, an executive coach using a stakeholder-centered methodology (like Marshall Goldsmith’s approach) might define coaching as “following up with stakeholders and measured behavior change,” and their practice will involve 360-feedback and periodic surveys of coworkers to track progress.
These aren’t contradictions so much as different facets of coaching, but they show why one coach’s explanation of “what coaching is” can sound quite unlike another’s.
And you need to understand what they mean to make an informed decision.
Bottom line, coaching is a diverse field. The core principle is consistent – facilitating someone’s development or progress – but the how can vary widely.
This is why understanding a coach’s training or methodology is important for you: a psychoanalytically-informed coach vs. an action-oriented business coach will each define what they do in different terms and will conduct sessions differently.
Neither is wrong, but one might suit you better than the other.
And you want to pick the perfect coach!
References:
