Coaching has become very popular in sports and business and as a tool in the leadership toolbox for personal and professional growth. A recent 2023 research, a meta-analysis of 37 coaching studies, concludes that coaching works and is effective in organizations and life. This blog article will discuss the origin and definitions of coaching, and explore what is required for coaching to work effectively.
The origin of coaching.
The story and etymology behind the words “coach” and “coaching” are actually quite fascinating.
The word “coach” originates from the village of Kochs in the northwestern part of Hungary in the 15th century, which was famous for building spacious and lightweight horse-drawn carriages that transported goods between Vienna and Budapest. An unknown carriage maker built a new, larger, and much more comfortable carriage, called a Kocsi, ‘from the town of Kocs’, which became so successful that it was copied around Europe[1].
That became “coach” in English, “kutsche” in German, “coche” in French and “kusk” in Danish[1].
The term “coach” was figuratively used as someone who comfortably carries another person from their current state to where they would like to be, from A to B.
However, coaching is not that transactional one-sided, but much more so an equal and safe thinking partnership, a dialogue partnership.
The modern use of the word “coach” stems from education, where it was first used in Oxford University in 18th century England as slang for tutors who helped students to achieve their goals[1]. Coaching was later applied in sports from 1860 and onwards, focused on helping athletes excel and perform in their field[1].
More modern-day coaching origins from Timothy Gallwey, who was a Tennis coach more than four centuries ago[2]. His book The inner Game of Tennis from 1974 was the first to focus on ways to unlock athletes’ potential and performance by reducing inner obstacles[2]. This was the origins of performance coaching in sports also characterized by this equation[2]:
Performance = Potential - Interference (P = p - i)
Coaching was improving performance (P) by growing potential (p) and by decreasing interference (i)[2].
In these early days of coaching, goals and goal-achievement became fundamental[3]. Coaching primarily concerned itself with specific outcomes (classic SMART goals) and this approach became known as performance coaching[3].
With Sir John Whitmore’s renowned book Coaching for Performance from 1992, the world was more formally introduced to performance coaching with the coaching model called GROW with its structure of Goal, Reality, Options and Will or Way Forward[3].

Bolton (2023) describes that it wasn’t long before coaching evolved from the goal-centered performance coaching to become more nuanced when developmental coaching and transformative coaching emerged, drawing from different areas and focus for the coaching[3].
Coaching has developed into these three general levels[3]:
- Performance Coaching: focuses on goal achievement
- Developmental Coaching: focuses on learning and competence
- Transformative Coaching: focuses on critical self-reflection that leads to wider personal change
Coaching has today evolved from solely focusing on goals and goal-achievement to something broader and more nuanced.
With that overall break-down of the story behind the words, what does coaching then actually mean in today’s modern world. Let’s find out.
How coaching is defined.
Coaching is today a very popular management tool[4] and has now been firmly established in the sports and business worlds as a great pathway for personal and professional growth[5]. Furthermore, coaching also enjoys a growing popularity in the teaching and medical professions[5].
And therefore, over the last two decades, accompanying the popularity of coaching world-wide, research on coaching in organizations has increased significantly[5]. The research has shown a wide and varied evidence base for the effectiveness of coaching[5].
As we learned in the previous section, coaching has emerged from solely focusing on goals and goal-achievement to something else and more. I also recognize from coaching endurance athletes to working in the corporate world, how integrated goals and goal-achievement are within sports and business. And rightly so as clearly measurable goals and goal-setting are still important.
Bolton (2023), the founder of Animas Centre for Coaching, distinguishes clearly between goals vs outcomes in coaching in his brilliant blog — The Fallacy of the Primacy of Goal-Setting in Coaching.
And that relates to how coaching has evolved to having a broader and more nuanced focus.
According to Bolton (2023) goals and outcomes differ in their focus[3]:
- Goals: are typically specific and measurable and time-bound (SMART)
- Outcomes: may be looser, more subjective and able to adapt to the emerging experience of change as it unfolds
Bolton (2023) argues that most people don’t come to coaching with a clear goal[3]. They are unsure of what they want, fearful of the journey or uncertain whether they can really do what’s needed[3]. So, their outcomes may emerge through exploration, reflection and thinking. This is also my experience for most of the coaching that I have engaged in for example in transition coaching, where an outcome may emerge through exploration rather than starting from a clear goal.
This broader spectrum of focus in coaching allows for varied perspectives and focus.
Now, when we consider how coaching has evolved, the research in coaching in organizations has increased significantly as we learned before. Despite that, coaching doesn’t have one universal definition and the term “coach” is not a protected title.
However, two of the largest and most recognized organizational bodies for coaching, the International Coaching Federation (ICF) and the European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) work to ensure the highest quality, ethics and best practices of coaching and the coaching profession.
That is a quality stamp of the coaching profession and craft that coaching and professional dialogues are.
As a disclaimer to keep full transparency, I am personally associated with EMCC as a member of the Board at EMCC Denmark. That means that I work together with great colleagues to develop, encourage and set expectations for “best practice” in mentoring, coaching and supervision.
Now, as mentioned earlier several definitions of coaching exist. These two are the main professional definitions:
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[6].”
The European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) defines coaching and mentoring as “a professionally guided process that inspires clients to maximise their personal and professional potential. It is a structured, purposeful and transformational process, helping clients to see and test alternative ways for improvement of competence, decision making and enhancement of quality of life. Coach and Mentor and client work together in a partnering relationship on strictly confidential terms. In this relationship, clients are experts on the content and decision making level; the coach and mentor is an expert in professionally guiding the process[7].”
Coaching can therefore be defined as a dialogic exploration process to help a client or dialogue partner to unleash their personal and professional potential in life.
Bolton (2023) describes coaching simply as an approach to non-directive, self-initiated, dialogic exploration and change[3]. He further characterizes the emerging transformative coaching as a purposeful exploration of an individual’s worldview, sense-making, paradigms, personal constructs, values, hopes, fears etc. in order to help them navigate complex choices[3].
A few weeks ago, I participated in an exciting HR event by NOCA here in Denmark called The future of coaching. It featured Reinhard Stelter, Professor of Coaching and Sports Psychology at the University of Copenhagen. In a poll, we were asked to define coaching.
One definition of coaching was standing out to me. It was coaching defined as “assisted reflection”, i.e. assisted reflection to create self-awareness, self-knowledge. It is a good label, but only part of it.
In coaching, we as coaches also support, question and challenge perspectives (non-directive). It is an integral part of coaching.
Haan and Nilsson (2023) further widens the definition of coaching as “a customized personal development journey that promotes the client’s decision-making and performance through conversations, making use of shared inquiry, reflection, support, and challenge[4].”
So, a development journey through conversations that involves questions, assisted reflection and both support and caring challenge.

A while back, I read the excellent book Simplifying Coaching by Claire Pedrick, which I can highly recommend. In her book, Claire Pedrick (2021: p. 8) defines coaching in a further clear way as “a future-focused conversation between two people working in partnership in service of the thinking of one of them[8].”
Coaching is here thought of as more of an equal thinking partnership and space for thinking and exploration to bring about new perspectives and reflection.
I really like that notion of the coach as being a thinking or dialogue partner. That is what it is really all about an equal partnership to help curiously exploring thinking.
The effectiveness and benefits of coaching in organizations and life.
Back in 2014, the researchers Theeboom, Beersma and van Vianen already in their study explored if coaching could affect performance, well-being and skills. They did extensive research of literature and brought many nuances and caveats from it and their conclusions were (Rogers, 2016: p. 283)[8]:
“The results show that coaching has significant positive effects on performance and skills, well-being, coping, work attitudes, and goal-directed self-regulation. In general, our meta-analytic findings indicate that coaching is an effective tool for improving the functioning of individuals in organisations.”
Among coaches, those findings are well-known. Yet, for coaching in organizations, more research to establish effects beyond doubt are needed[5].
A few weeks ago, Jacob, my colleague from EMCC Denmark, shared a brand-new and exciting research article about the very benefits and effectiveness of coaching in organizations and in life.
The new 2023 research article, published in Academy of Management Learning & Education, is called What Can We Know About the Effectiveness of Coaching? A Meta-Analysis Based Only on Randomized Controlled Trials.
A meta-analysis is the statistical process of analyzing and combining results from several similar studies. In this case a comprehensive meta-analysis of 37 randomized controlled trial (RCT) coaching studies in English from 1994-2021 on the effectiveness of workplace, leadership, executive and life coaching[4]. The randomized controlled trials are a kind of scientific experiment used to control factors from the 37 studies that are not under direct experimental control.
The research was conducted by the two experienced researchers Erik de Haan and Viktor O. Nilsson. Let me just put a few more words on their background in the next.
Erik de Haan is Director of the Hult Ashridge Centre for Coaching and Professor of Organisation Development and Coaching at the VU University Amsterdam[5]. He has a MSc in Theoretical Physics, an MA in Psychodynamic Psychotherapy, and a PhD in Psychophysics, and specializes in team coaching and one-to-one coaching for executives[5]. He has published nearly 200 professional and research articles as well as 14 books[8].
Viktor O. Nilsson is an adjunct at Hult International Business School and a Research Data Manager for administrative data in the Centre for Experimental Research on Fairness, Inequality and Rationality at the Norwegian School of Economics[5]. He completed his MSc in quantitative research methods at University of Strathclyde, Glasgow[5].
Overall, Haan and Nilsson (2023) find significant and convincing support for the effectiveness of coaching as a tailored form of personal and organizational development for leaders and others in organizations[5].
These are some of the main findings of their extensive research[5]:
- The coaching relationship, trust, alliance and contracting are essential for the effect of coaching
- Coaching has positive effects for well-being, workplace skills, preparedness, and goal attainment
- Research shows significant impact on employees, students and lower overall effects on leaders and managers
- Coaching has a significant effect on personal and organizational development when tailored to the individual context
- The background, training level and organizational association of the coach matters when it comes to the effect of coaching
- Number of sessions is not paramount to the effect of coaching – 4-8 sessions seem to be a sweet spot with stable effect
According to Haan and Nilsson (2023), this intriguing new research comes with a strong message on the effectiveness of coaching in organizations and life and to practicing coaches and developers of coaches in their focus of coach training, development as well as supervision[5]. Great to see such thorough research supporting the effectiveness of coaching!
In conclusion, I believe that coaching has a fascinating origin and has evolved from not only being about goal-setting and goal-achievement, but also about more loose outcomes and exploring, reflecting, and thinking. To ensure that coaching works effectively, both the coach and the coachee must establish a trusting relationship, clear contracting and partnership.
Such a partnership can help unfold human potential.
Now, I am curious to hear about your personal experiences of the effectiveness of coaching – Please share in the comments.

References.
[1]Harper, D. (2023) Online Etymology Dictionary. Available at: Online Etymology Dictionary (etymonline.com). (Accessed 16 April 2023).
[2]Whitmore, S. J. (2017) Coaching for Performance, 5th ed., London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing: pp. 11-13.
[3]Bolton, N. (2023) The Fallacy of the Primacy of Goal-Setting in Coaching. Available at: Animas Centre for Coaching (animascoaching.com). (Accessed 22 February 2023).
[4]Theeboom, T. and Beersma, B. and van Vianen, A. E. M. (2014) Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context, Journal of Positive Psychology 9(1): pp. 1-18.
[5]Haan, E. D. and Nilsson, V. O. (2023) What Can We Know about the Effectiveness of Coaching? A Meta-Analysis Based Only on Randomized Controlled Trials, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 0(0): pp. 1–21.
[6]International Coaching Federation (2020) ICF Code of Ethics. Available at: ICF Code of Ethics (coachingfederation.org). (Accessed 16 April 2023).
[7]European Mentoring and Coaching Council (2018) EMCC Glossary. Available at: EMCC Glossary (emccglobal.org). (Accessed 16 April 2023).
[8]Rogers, J. (2016) Coaching Skills: The definitive guide to being a coach, 4th ed., Berkshire: Open University Press.
[9]Haan, D. E. (2023) Erik de Haan – Consulting for organisation development. Available at: Erik de Haan (erikdehaan.com). (Accessed 20 April 2023).