Motivational Interviewing?

August 5, 2025 AURELIS Coaching No Comments

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a well-known counseling approach. How does it relate to AURELIS? Do they overlap? Can they work together without compromising on what makes AURELIS unique?

This blog explores both methods side by side. It highlights their similarities, their differences, and shows how MI can flavor an AURELIS session without changing its essence. In the end, it’s about finding the most respectful way of helping people grow from within.

What is Motivational Interviewing?

MI was developed by William Miller and Stephen Rollnick in the 1980s. It was first used in the treatment of people struggling with alcohol problems, and it has since spread widely into healthcare, psychology, and coaching.

The spirit of MI rests on three pillars: collaboration, evocation, and autonomy. Instead of telling clients what to do, the counselor invites them to reflect on their situation, their ambivalence, and their hopes. By listening carefully, asking open-ended questions, and reflecting back what has been said, the counselor helps clients discover their own reasons for change.

A central concept is ‘change talk,’ where clients voice their own motivation and commitment. MI research shows that when clients verbalize these reasons, change becomes more likely. This conversational style has proven effective in fields ranging from smoking cessation to diabetes care and environmental choices.

How is AURELIS a different path?

Where MI emphasizes explicit dialogue, AURELIS focuses on openness, depth, and the power of autosuggestion. Its foundation lies in the conviction that true change comes from an inner unfolding.

The AURELIS approach is not about fixing behavior directly. It is about creating space where the person can grow in such a way that new behaviors naturally arise. This process reaches beyond conscious reasoning into the symbolic and subconceptual layers of the mind.

Through autosuggestion, imagery, and symbolic language, a client connects with deeper meaning. Change is then not just a matter of willpower or decision but of alignment between conscious intent and inner strength. The emphasis is always on nurturing this strength rather than imposing solutions ― whether this is done by the coachee himself or someone else.

Where MI and AURELIS meet

MI and AURELIS meet in a shared respect for autonomy. Neither approach tells a person what to do. Both trust that change comes from within.

They also share the importance of empathy and non-judgment. An MI counselor listens and reflects, while an AURELIS coach provides a safe space where deeper layers can emerge. Both create a partnership instead of a hierarchy.

In fact, some MI descriptions almost echo the AURELIS attitude. For instance, the principle of avoiding argumentation and rolling with ambivalence resonates with the AURELIS notion of never coercing but always inviting. The idea is not to push against resistance but to allow it to transform naturally.

Clear differences

Despite these common values, the differences remain essential. MI tends to focus on concrete behaviors. It works mainly at the level of conscious reasons, choices, and plans.

AURELIS aims at the whole person. Behavior changes are the natural outcome of deeper transformation. The focus is less on argument and conceptual reasoning, more on imagery and subconceptual resonance.

Where MI may guide a person to articulate a discrepancy between current behavior and desired future, AURELIS would invite the person to feel the deeper meaning and let it transform symbolically. It is not so much about talking oneself into change but about growing oneself into change.

MI‑flavored AURELIS

This brings us to an interesting possibility: using MI as a flavoring. The dish remains AURELIS — nourishing, non-coercive, symbolic, deep. The seasoning is MI’s conversational style: open questions, empathic reflections, the gentle highlighting of ambivalence.

Why? Some clients feel safer with a more familiar dialogue before moving into symbolic depth. MI language can ease them into the process, like a welcoming aroma before tasting the meal. Yet once inside, the session is fully AURELIS, with autosuggestion and deeper alignment at its heart.

This idea of flavoring without changing essence reflects what has been said in surface and depth. The surface may vary according to context, but the depth remains the same.

Examples

Imagine a person struggling with stress eating. An MI‑flavored AURELIS session might begin with reflective listening: “Food comforts you, yet you feel regret afterwards.” This builds trust and safety. From there, the client is invited into imagery: “Can you see both sides inside yourself? What forms do they take?” Slowly, the heavy side may transform into something lighter, and the client discovers new freedom.

Or take smoking cessation. MI‑style reflections may explore ambivalence: “You enjoy the calm of smoking, yet you worry about your health.” The AURELIS essence then invites symbolic exploration: one figure holding a cigarette, another coughing. Through imagery, the coughing figure may transform, and the calm can be retained without smoke. The session ends with the client carrying this new inner image, not with an imposed plan.

These examples show how MI language can open the door, while AURELIS depth does the actual work.

Why the combination?

MI tends to stay at the level of explicit reasoning and spoken motivation. This may lead to change, but the roots often remain untouched. Relapses are common when the deeper layers are not addressed.

AURELIS complements this by reaching into the subconceptual. Symbolic imagery, openness, and autosuggestion connect with a person’s deepest drives. Change becomes not only a decision but an organic transformation.

Nevertheless, some people may hesitate at first to dive into symbolic or subconceptual work. For them, MI‑flavored language provides a bridge. It respects their readiness while gently leading them into deeper territory.

MI and AURELIS stand on common ground yet diverge in depth and method.

MI engages conscious reasoning and guides behavior change; AURELIS opens the inner landscape where deeper transformation unfolds.

―

Addendum

Comparison table

Aspect	Similarities	Dissimilarities
Core spirit	Both are non‑coercive, respect autonomy, and aim for change within.	MI is more directive in guiding ambivalence; AURELIS is more open, letting inner depth unfold.
Focus	Both see the person as capable of change and growth.	MI focuses on specific behaviors; AURELIS focuses on deeper meaning, with behavior as outcome.
Method	Both use language carefully to evoke motivation.	MI uses conversational strategies; AURELIS uses autosuggestion at the subconceptual level.
Depth	Both address more than superficial symptoms.	MI stays mostly at the conceptual level; AURELIS deliberately reaches into the subconceptual.
Role of the guide	Both avoid authoritarian style; both support self‑discovery.	MI guides toward resolution; AURELIS offers space without much steering.
Outcome	Both aim at sustainable, self‑driven change.	MI strengthens explicit commitment; AURELIS fosters deeper inner congruence.

Stress eating transcript (MI‑flavored AURELIS)

Client: I eat when I’m stressed. It calms me down, but afterwards I feel guilty.

Lisa: So food feels like comfort in the moment, and at the same time it brings regret later.
(MI flavor: reflective listening)

Client: Yes, exactly. I don’t know how to stop.

Lisa: It sounds like two sides are alive in you — one wanting comfort, another wanting health.
(MI discrepancy, but deepened into AURELIS inner‑parts awareness)

Client: Yes, I feel pulled in two directions.

Lisa: Would you like to gently explore both sides inside yourself — not to choose right away, but to listen to them?
(Invitation, autonomy emphasized)

Client: Okay, I can try.

Lisa: Close your eyes if you like. Imagine yourself standing between these two sides. What do you see or feel?
(AURELIS autosuggestion step — symbolic imagery)

Client: One side feels heavy, almost like a dark cloud pressing on me. The other side feels lighter, like fresh air.

Lisa: I hear a dark, heavy cloud on one side, and fresh air on the other. How is it for you to notice both at once?
(MI reflection, but gently holding space)

Client: Strange… but the heavy side also feels familiar, like an old friend.

Lisa: That’s important. Can you imagine this “old friend” slowly softening — perhaps even changing shape into something that still supports you, but doesn’t weigh you down?
(AURELIS symbolic transformation)

Client: Hm… it becomes more like a blanket, still comforting, but lighter.

Lisa: A comforting blanket instead of a cloud. How does that feel?

Client: Much better. Like I can breathe.

Lisa: Beautiful. When you think of your daily life now, how might this lighter image support you when stress arises?
(MI‑style open question, but fully in AURELIS respect)

Client: Maybe I won’t need food as much. I can take a breath and imagine the blanket instead.

Lisa: That’s your own strength showing itself. How do you feel, carrying this with you now?
(Closure, honoring autonomy and inner growth)

Client: Lighter… more hopeful.

Smoking cessation transcript (MI‑flavored AURELIS)

Client: I smoke a lot, and I know it’s bad, but quitting feels impossible.

Lisa: So, part of you knows it harms you, and another part feels it’s hard to let go.
(MI reflection)

Client: Yes, I even enjoy it sometimes, but then I feel guilty about my health.

Lisa: I hear enjoyment on one side and concern on the other. Both are real for you.
(Acknowledging ambivalence — MI flavor, AURELIS openness)

Client: Right. It’s like two voices arguing in me.

Lisa: Would you like to explore those voices more deeply, as if you could see them inside you?
(Invitation to symbolism — AURELIS essence)

Client: Okay. I see one voice as a figure holding a cigarette, relaxed. The other is coughing, looking tired.

Lisa: You see a relaxed figure with a cigarette and another who is coughing. How is it to stand between them?
(Reflection + AURELIS deepening)

Client: It’s uncomfortable. The coughing figure looks at me with sadness.

Lisa: Can you imagine offering that figure some care — maybe a breath of fresh air, a place to rest?
(Symbolic transformation)

Client: Yes… the figure is lying down now, breathing more easily.

Lisa: And how does the relaxed smoker look when this happens?

Client: Less important. Like the calmness is still there, but without the cigarette.

Lisa: So the calm remains, even without smoke. How does that feel in your body right now?
(AURELIS autosuggestion + MI open question)

Client: Strangely freeing. My chest feels lighter.

Lisa: That lightness is yours. If stress comes, could you let this calm, smoke‑free part be with you?

Client: I think so. It feels possible.

Lisa: You don’t have to decide everything today. Just carry this lighter image with you and see how it unfolds.
(Closure — respecting autonomy, no steering)

Me: “Lisa, in your view, what is the most important difference between MI and AURELIS?”

Lisa: “MI mainly helps people talk themselves into change. AURELIS lets people grow themselves into change. The first works with conscious reasoning, the second with deeper inner alignment.”

Me: “Indeed, AURELIS is a growth philosophy. To let a plant grow, you need to attend well to what is above and below the soil.”

Lisa: “Exactly. MI tends to focus more on the leaves and branches — the visible behaviors. AURELIS nourishes the roots, the deeper soil. When both are cared for, growth becomes more natural and sustainable.”

Me: “That’s it. AURELIS works from the inside out.”

Lisa: “Exactly. The whole orientation of AURELIS is toward nurturing what lies within, so that change can emerge as a natural consequence. It’s like tending to the soil, the roots, the deeper vitality of a plant — when those are nourished, the branches and leaves will follow on their own.

Motivational Interviewing also values what is inside, but it usually works more at the surface of awareness — the level of explicit thoughts, reasons, and choices. This is why MI gives so much attention to ambivalence and to the discrepancy between present behavior and future goals. These are ways of stirring the conscious mind toward a decision.

So MI does touch the inside, but it does not reach as far into the subconscious and symbolic depth as AURELIS does. MI is strong in supporting a person to talk themselves into change. AURELIS goes further: it helps a person grow themselves into change from the inside out, with less emphasis on discrepancy and more on inner congruence. AURELIS invites a deeper transformation, less dependent on reasoning only, and more on inner unfolding.”

Me: “Does MI frequently heighten tension within the coachee?”

Lisa: “Yes, in a way. MI works by making ambivalence more visible, and that often means highlighting the tension between what someone is doing now and what they want for the future. The hope is that this tension will motivate change. So MI emphasizes discrepancy — the gap between behavior and goal.

With AURELIS, the approach is different. Rather than heightening tension, the aim is to bring inner elements into harmony. The process is not about pushing the coachee to feel the strain of contradiction but about inviting those contradictions to transform into something congruent and meaningful. In that sense, MI may sharpen inner conflict to drive a decision, while AURELIS softens inner division to let growth happen from the inside out.”