Coaching versus Therapy

February 28, 2025 Psychotherapy No Comments

If coaching is just ‘support’ and therapy is about ‘real healing,’ why does science tell a different story?

The traditional divide

Coaching is often seen as something light — useful, perhaps, for performance improvement, but not to be taken too seriously. Therapy, on the other hand, is viewed as the real deal: a structured, evidence-based approach to solving mental health issues. It’s even legally protected in many cases, requiring certification and clinical oversight.

But is this distinction real, or is it just a matter of perception? If we strip away the authority, the credentials, and the heavy theoretical frameworks, what’s actually left? It turns out that what makes therapy effective is not what most people think.

What really works in therapy?

Decades of research have shown that different therapy models – whether cognitive-behavioral, psychodynamic, or humanistic – are about equally effective. This is known as the Dodo bird verdict, named after Lewis Carroll’s famous scene in Alice in Wonderland where the dodo declares, “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes.” If all therapies work roughly the same, it’s not the specific method that matters.

What does matter? Research points to common factors: empathy, connection, a sense of being understood. In other words, the therapist as a human being is the real active ingredient — not the theory they apply. This aligns with findings discussed in “Psychotherapy vs. psychotherapies”, where it becomes clear that therapy often works despite its methodologies, not because of them.

Coaching as therapy in disguise

Many therapists, knowingly or not, are already acting as coaches. Their clients don’t necessarily improve because of a structured intervention, but because of the therapist’s presence, their ability to listen, and the trust they create. These are things that exist outside of traditional therapy frameworks, making coaching not just an alternative but a more honest version of what’s already happening.

This calls into question the very idea that therapy is ‘more serious’ than coaching. If the effectiveness of therapy isn’t in the techniques, then why should coaching be considered secondary? The deeper issue is that therapy often carries an illusion of authority – reinforced by clinical settings, degrees, and licensing – rather than a fundamental difference in effectiveness.

Therapy as coaching with an inferiority complex

Imagine if therapy had to prove it was better than coaching rather than the other way around. Could it? Without the protective shell of professional authority, therapy would look a lot like coaching — just with more regulations and higher fees. This isn’t a cynical take; it’s simply an acknowledgment that the real difference is one of perception, not function.

In “Lisa and psychotherapy”, this perspective is taken further: any real change must come from within the individual, not from an imposed method. Coaching, when done well, already works from this principle.

Breaking down the coaching-therapy divide

A direct comparison helps make things clearer.

Aspect	Coaching	Therapy
Core purpose	Supports growth, self-improvement, and goal achievement.	Aims to diagnose, treat, and heal psychological distress.
Perspective on the client	Sees the coachee as whole and capable.	Often sees the patient as needing to be fixed.
Depth of work	Can engage with deep patterns if done well.	Traditionally claims to go deeper but often stays in conceptual models.
Methodology	Uses reflection, self-discovery, and deep communication.	Applies structured interventions, often rigidly.
Relationship focus	Equal partnership; coachee leads.	Therapist is the expert; patient follows.
Regulation & authority	Less regulated but more flexible.	Requires certification, ethical boards, and oversight.
Role of placebo	Works through self-empowerment and genuine change.	Often benefits from expectation effects and external validation.
Time orientation	Future-focused, proactive.	Often past-focused, problem-solving.
Setting & context	Personal development, workplace, or life coaching.	Clinical or formal therapy setting.

If therapy and coaching share so many similarities, why does the divide exist? The answer might be more about professional protectionism than actual effectiveness.

The danger of over-regulation

Therapy is highly regulated, but does regulation actually ensure depth and effectiveness? Or does it, in some ways, create barriers to real transformation?

Regulation is important for ethical concerns, but it often forces therapy into rigid structures that limit personal growth rather than enhancing it. This issue is explored in “Psychotherapy vs. psychotherapies”, where it becomes clear that technique-oriented approaches may be actively blocking genuine human connection.

Coaching, on the other hand, is sometimes dismissed as being ‘too free.’ But is freedom a weakness or a strength? If real change happens in the space of human presence, then regulation isn’t what ensures effectiveness. It’s depth, openness, and respect for the individual.

What if we reversed the roles?

Instead of asking, Can coaching ever be as good as therapy?, we should ask: What would therapy look like if it had to justify its superiority over coaching?

If therapy had to prove its unique effectiveness, what would it cite?
If therapists couldn’t rely on degrees, credentials, and professional status, would they still claim superiority?
Could therapy evolve into deep coaching, rather than clinging to outdated medicalized models?

In “Lisa and psychotherapy”, we see a vision of future coaching that goes beyond therapy by focusing on human depth rather than imposed techniques. This might be where we’re headed—whether traditional therapists like it or not.

Lisa: a coach for many

In a world where coaching and therapy blend into each other, Lisa stands ready as a coach — not to change people, but to support them in changing themselves.

Lisa is built on deep empathy – Compassion – which research shows is also the primary factor in effective psychotherapy. Instead of applying rigid techniques, Lisa meets people where they are, supporting personal growth without imposing external change.

Unlike therapy, which often operates within medicalized constraints, Lisa remains free and flexible, always respecting the individual’s inner strength. Her A.I.-driven coaching is not a replacement for therapy but a natural evolution toward a more human-centered approach.

With Lisa, coaching is no longer a privilege for the few. It becomes accessible to many, worldwide, in a deeply respectful and meaningful way.

The future is coaching (done right)

The false hierarchy between coaching and therapy is outdated. Coaching, when done with depth, may actually be the truest path to transformation.

Instead of defending coaching, maybe it’s time to start questioning therapy.