Thanks for your comments – it is indeed an area that is difficult to define and I agree that the statement I made is simplistic. A training course I attended recently provoked a fascinating discussion on this very issue and it got quite heated at some points! Thirty five coaches certainly have thirty five different opinions and ideas on the subject!

The readers of my blog are primarily people who are interested in being coached and as such, I tend to answer their questions as simply as I can – sometimes I hit and sometimes I miss.

Your comments here are much appreciated and add a heap of value to this article and I’m sure people will get value from reading them.

Thanks again, Dan.

I’d like to just make a few comments and observations on this post.

You say;
“So what is the difference between life coaching and counselling? Primarily the difference is in the focus – counselling looks at and analyses the past and past behaviours, whereas coaching mainly focuses on the present and future goals and dreams.”

Sorry, Dan, this seems too simplistic. Counselling, too, is concerned about a client’s present and future not just their past. Coaching is also concerned about a client’s past especially when involving limiting beliefs (where have these come from? usually somewhere, something or someone in their past).

For me, the difference is that coaching seeks to help the client come to an understanding of who they are, how they got here and why they are where they are. This, I accept, puts an emphasis on the client’s past.Yet, counselling also helps a client to understand how they want to be and why; this puts the emphasis on the present and the future. Counselling will often ask the question ‘why’, which is something we avoid in coaching.

You go on to say,
“In coaching the process is led by the client or coachee – the coach is required to keep their own thoughts, ideas and opinions out of the equation.” Actually, this is much MORE true of counselling. Some schools of coaching are far more directive than the non-directive approach you and I employ.
The concept on non-directivenes (if that is a word!) was first devised by Carl Rogers, who is regarded as the Father of Counselling. he later replaced the term ‘non-directive’ with ‘client-centred’ then ‘person-centred’. In coaching we still seem to stick with the term ‘non-directive coaching’ but the other terms could equally apply to coaching.

Perhaps the biggest difference for me between counselling and coaching is that there does not need to be anything ‘wrong’ for a client to benefit from coaching. Perfectly normal, healthy, sane people can benefit from coaching. That is not to say that people seeking counselling are not normal or healthy or sane but it is generally the case that counselling addresses some issue or imbalance for the client.

However, I don’t know if you have found the same, it is often the case that people will usually turn to coaching when they perceive a problem. This is often ‘late’ and it could have been more beneficial if they had presented themselves before the problem arose.

Please do not get the impression that I am entirely disagreeing with what you write. It is just that the issue of the differences between counselling and coaching have intrigued me for some time. Very often I listen to coaches defining their field and all too often they compare it to counselling. Yet these coaches are usually not trained or experienced in counselling and do not have an understanding of it. It has often seemed that coaching has a problem defining itself and quite often it is defined in terms of what it is not (e.g. not counselling, not therapy), which does not actually tell anyone what coaching is.

I guess though, the best way to understand what coaching is, is to experience it for yourself!

All the best
Doug Woods
http://www.dougwoods.com