Coaching approaches

Neuro-linguistic programming–based coaching

Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) based coaching uses techniques for language, rapport and reframing that are associated with Richard Bandler and John Grinder. Its claims about how the mind works are not established. Of the sources this page checked, Witkowski's 2010 title poses the question 'State of the Art or Pseudoscientific Decoration?' and is not itself a verdict. A 2013 item by Murray is titled 'Limited evidence that neurolinguistic programming improves health-related outcomes'. This page reads these sources from their titles only, so the evidence is graded P: a practitioner tradition with limited outcome research.

What it is

NLP-based coaching draws on techniques for noticing language patterns, building rapport, changing how a problem is represented in the mind, and describing goals in concrete sensory detail. A coach may use these to help you change a habit, a reaction or the way you talk about a problem.

The approach makes strong claims about how the mind and language work, and those claims are where the scientific questions sit. The sources this page could check, at title level, include a question about whether the field is pseudoscientific and a title reporting limited evidence (see below). The page describes the method so that you can recognise it. It does not present the method's claims as established.

Where it comes from

Richard Bandler and John Grinder are credited with developing NLP. A 2010 paper, 'Thirty-Five Years of Research on Neuro-Linguistic Programming', carries the question 'State of the Art or Pseudoscientific Decoration?' in its title (Witkowski, 2010). This page does not treat that title as a verdict.

A 2012 systematic review by Sturt and colleagues examined NLP's effects on health outcomes (Sturt et al., 2012).

The principles underneath

Language shapes experience

The words a person uses are treated as a guide to how they represent a problem, and changing the words is treated as a way to change the representation.

Rapport makes change easier

The coach matches some of your pace, posture or wording to build trust, on the view that rapport makes it easier to work on a goal.

Reframing

A problem is looked at from another angle, so that a different response becomes available.

Goals in sensory terms

A goal is described in concrete detail, so that you can tell what achieving it would look, sound and feel like.

How a session runs

  1. Start with the goal or problem you want to work on, in your own words.
  2. The coach listens for the words you use, and may reflect some of them back, to notice how you describe the problem.
  3. You describe the goal in concrete sensory terms: what you would see, hear and feel if it were happening.
  4. The coach may offer a reframe, or a change of wording or pace, and you notice how it lands for you.
  5. You agree one practical step and a way to check whether it helped.

When it tends to fit

  • You keep describing a problem in the same fixed words and want to try others.
  • You want a short, structured conversation about a specific goal rather than an explanation of why the problem exists.
  • A habit or reaction feels automatic, and you want a practical way to notice it as it happens.

What the research shows

Evidence: Practitioner tradition — little or no outcome research

The sources checked for this page do not point the same way in their titles. Witkowski's 2010 paper in the Polish Psychological Bulletin has a title that poses the question 'State of the Art or Pseudoscientific Decoration?', and the title itself does not answer it. A systematic review of NLP's effects on health outcomes (Sturt et al., 2012) is cited here at title level. A 2013 item in Evidence Based Mental Health by Murray (2013) is titled 'Limited evidence that neurolinguistic programming improves health-related outcomes'. This page reads these sources from their titles and does not report their full findings.

Where the evidence is thin: This page describes the sources from their titles only; their full texts were not read for this page. Practitioner accounts of NLP-based coaching are not outcome research and are not treated as evidence here.

Sources

  1. Witkowski, T. (2010). Thirty-Five Years of Research on Neuro-Linguistic Programming. NLP Research Data Base. State of the Art or Pseudoscientific Decoration? Polish Psychological Bulletin.
  2. Sturt, J., Ali, S., Robertson, W., Metcalfe, D., et al. (2012). Neurolinguistic programming: a systematic review of the effects on health outcomes. British Journal of General Practice.
  3. Murray, L. L. (2013). Limited evidence that neurolinguistic programming improves health-related outcomes. Evidence Based Mental Health.

Where it stops

NLP-based coaching does not treat depression, anxiety, trauma or addiction. Those are better taken to a qualified professional, who can work with them safely.

Its claims about how the mind works are not established. A session should not be taken as an explanation of why you feel or act as you do.

If a practitioner promises a fixed result or a quick cure, treat that as a warning sign rather than a reason to go ahead.

Practices for this approach

Practice this with IX Coach

Try this practice