Coaching can be hard to sell, hard to explain, and at times hard to trust, especially when the honest answer to “What exactly will happen in our sessions?” is, “It depends.” That is exactly why pre-designed coaching programmes are so appealing. They offer structure, certainty, and a sense that there is a clear path from problem to outcome. But coaching is also relational, emergent, and deeply human. Real conversations rarely unfold neatly.
This tension sits at the heart of a question many coaches wrestle with: should coaching be packaged into a set journey, or does that risk pulling attention away from the conversation that actually matters? There is no simplistic answer here. Done well, structure can create safety, momentum, and an accessible entry point into coaching. Done rigidly, it can become a distraction. This article explores the benefits, pitfalls, and nuanced middle ground.
Table of Contents
- Why set coaching programmes are so appealing
- Why many coaches resist pre-designed coaching
- Where structured coaching can genuinely work
- When a programme becomes a distraction, and when it opens the right door
- The real skill: holding the programme lightly
- Is the structure for the client, or for the coach?
- Key reflections for coaching practice
- Conclusion
- Attribution
- A Note from the “Author”
Before We Dive In – A Word of Caution
Before you read on, please note that this article is an AI-generated summary of the above podcast episode. While prompted carefully, it’s possible that some views may be misrepresented and/or information incorrect. If you find any errors please report them to us by emailing report (a) existentialcoaching.net . If you find something that seems odd, untrue, or difficult to believe, my encouragement is for you to go to the source and listen to the episode to get the full context. If it turns out to be false or misrepresented, kindly let us know! Due to the volume of information and limited team resources, we can’t check all AI-generated articles for accuracy, but decided that these are good enough, and hence valuable resources.
Why set coaching programmes are so appealing
There is a very practical reason set coaching programmes keep coming up in the coaching world: they make coaching easier to understand.
If a coach offers a six-session programme, a three-month journey, or a package built around exercises, assessments, and follow-up, prospective clients usually feel more grounded. They know what they are buying. They can imagine the process. They may even feel reassured by the implied promise that this path has worked before.
From a marketing perspective, that is powerful. Coaching often involves uncertainty. A coach who works in a more facilitative, emergent way may struggle to answer the question, “So what exactly do we do?” with the kind of specificity that inspires immediate confidence. The honest response is often something like this: the conversation will depend on what they bring, what unfolds between coach and client, and what ultimately matters most.
That honesty is good coaching. It is just not always easy to sell.
Structured coaching programmes meet a real need for certainty. They can offer:
- Clarity about process and timeframe
- Predictability for clients who feel overwhelmed
- Tangible value through exercises and reflection tools
- A sense of progress through milestones or stages
- Confidence for coaches who are still finding their footing
Nikki points to something important here. People are already overloaded and uncertain and in that sense a structured coaching process can be deeply comforting. It can function as an anchor. Not every client arrives ready to sit in ambiguity, and not every season of life allows for that kind of openness.
Why many coaches resist pre-designed coaching?
For coaches who see coaching as a relational and emergent process, pre-designed programmes can feel fundamentally off.
Yannick speaks to this resistance clearly. For a long time, set programmes did not seem to reflect the human journey. People do not unfold in a neat sequence. A client may arrive with one goal, begin an exercise that supposedly belongs to session two, and suddenly reveal the issue that has been shaping everything all along. If the coach is too committed to the programme, that moment can be missed.
This is where the concern sharpens. Coaching is not only about delivering content. It is about meeting a person where they are. And that means the work cannot always be pre-planned.
A rigid programme can create several problems:
- It can pull the conversation away from what is alive in the room
- It can confuse activity with depth
- It can encourage compliance rather than genuine engagement
- It can make the coach less responsive to what is actually needed
- It can imply that all clients with a similar label need the same journey
That last point matters. A coach might be able to create a very useful programme for a tightly defined niche. If the audience is very specific, perhaps career changers in a certain stage of life, or a particular client group with a shared challenge, common themes may emerge and structured coaching can deliver real value. But the broader the audience, the more likely it is that the programme will only partially fit.
Where structured coaching can genuinely work?
None of this means set coaching programmes are a bad idea. Quite the opposite. Both Yannick and Nikki acknowledge that they can be very useful in the right context.
Nikki gives a simple and grounded example from her own work in Portugal, where she has offered one-off coaching sessions at a surf camp. In that setting, she created two clearly defined options.
One was based on the Wheel of Life, helping people take stock of where they are and identify actions across different life areas. The other was based on a values exercise, supporting clients to clarify what matters and leave with practical next steps.
These were structured sessions, but they were not empty. They delivered value in and of themselves. They gave people a meaningful first experience of coaching. They also created the possibility of further work, should the client want to continue.
That example shows one of the strongest cases for structured coaching: as an entry point.
A guided session or programme can help clients:
- Get started when the prospect of open-ended coaching feels intimidating
- Experience coaching without committing to a vague or abstract process
- Build trust through a contained and purposeful first step
- Gain insights that naturally lead into deeper coaching later
Yannick shares a similar point through the example of corporate coaching. Coaches are often encouraged to train in assessments, such as 360 feedback tools, and use them as an entry into coaching. The assessment creates structure and gives the organisation something concrete. Then, as the feedback is explored, doors begin to open into richer coaching conversations.
Even if the formal session is short, something important happens. The client starts to see themselves differently. New questions emerge. The deeper work announces itself.
When a programme becomes a distraction, and when it opens the right door
This is really the heart of it.
Yannick uses the word distraction in a provocative but useful way. A set of exercises, assessments, or questions can become a way of avoiding the harder conversation. Sometimes the client reaches for structure because uncertainty feels uncomfortable. Sometimes the coach reaches for a tool because not knowing what comes next feels uncomfortable. In both cases, the programme can become a shield.
And yet that same exercise may also be exactly what opens the door.
A surface-level activity can unlock something deeper. Two exercises into a six-part programme, the real issue might emerge. The work then is not to force the client back onto the track. The work is to recognise that the programme has done its job by opening the door, and now the coach must follow what matters.
This distinction is subtle but crucial for coaching practice.
A programme is probably serving the coaching when it:
- Helps the client feel safe enough to begin
- Creates language for things that were previously vague
- Stimulates reflection that leads into meaningful dialogue
- Supports momentum without replacing relationship
A programme is probably hindering the coaching when it:
- Overrides what is clearly most important in the moment
- Keeps coach and client busy but not honest
- Becomes something to hide behind
- Turns into a script that cannot be challenged or adapted
Nikki adds a gentle refinement to the language. For her, “distraction” initially felt too harsh, because many structured tools function more like an icebreaker or a conversation starter. That is a useful distinction too. Not every piece of structure is avoidance. Sometimes it is simply the first manageable step for a client who is not yet ready for greater openness.
The real skill is in holding the programme lightly
If there is one practical principle that runs through this whole conversation, it is this: hold any pre-designed coaching journey lightly.
This may be the most balanced position available. A coach can design a programme. A coach can use exercises, assessments, reflection prompts, or thematic pathways. A coach can even market coaching through a clear framework. But if the coach is not willing to deviate, the programme becomes a problem.
Holding it lightly means:
- Using structure in service of the client, not the other way around
- Being willing to abandon the plan when a more important conversation emerges
- Seeing exercises as invitations rather than requirements
- Remembering that a framework is not the same as a human being
This matters especially in organisational settings. Yannick mentions coaches who work within agency or company methodologies. They are given clients, but they are also expected to use a specific model. That can create real tension. The coach may sense that another approach would be far more useful, perhaps a strengths-based approach, or something more creative and hands-on, but the system does not allow it.
That is one of the pitfalls of standardised coaching. It can become less about responding well and more about delivering what fits the institution.
Ethically, coaches need to stay alert to that. Structure is not neutral if it prevents the work that actually needs to happen.
Is the structure for the client, or for the coach?
This may be the most uncomfortable question in the whole conversation.
When coaches design a guided journey, how much of that is genuinely for the client, and how much of it is for their own comfort?
That is not a criticism. It is a useful supervision question.
Many coaches enjoy designing programmes. It is creative. It gives shape to experience. It can also soothe anxiety. If a coach knows what session one, session two, and session three are meant to contain, uncertainty becomes easier to tolerate. The coach feels more prepared, more professional, more in control.
But coaching often asks for something harder than control. It asks for presence in the absence of certainty.
Yannick invites coaches to check in with themselves:
- How much uncertainty is actually tolerable?
- What need is this programme serving?
- If the need is mostly the coach’s, what would it take to let go a little?
These are not small questions. They go to the heart of coaching identity.
A coach who cannot tolerate not knowing may over-structure the work. A coach who rejects all structure on principle may miss opportunities to support clients who genuinely need containment and clarity. Good coaching probably lies somewhere between those extremes.
Key reflections for coaching practice
For coaches trying to decide whether to create or use a programme, a few reflections stand out.
1\. Match the structure to the client and context
Some clients are eager for open-ended exploration. Others need more certainty before they can engage. Some settings, such as one-off sessions, workplace programmes, or first-contact offers, may lend themselves naturally to structured coaching. The question is not whether structure is inherently good or bad, but whether it fits.
2\. Be realistic about what a programme can and cannot do
A programme can offer value. It can help clients reflect, gain insight, and take action. What it cannot do is guarantee that the most important issue will politely appear in the expected slot.
3\. Use tools to open dialogue, not replace it
Assessments, exercises, and frameworks are often most useful when they create language and momentum for a deeper conversation. They are less useful when they become the whole event.
4\. Notice who is asking for certainty
Sometimes the client wants a neat process. Sometimes the coach does. Effective coaching requires enough self-awareness to tell the difference.
5\. Stay willing to deviate
If something more alive, more important, or more truthful appears, follow it. The best coaching often happens at the point where the prepared plan stops being the point.
Conclusion
Pre-designed coaching programmes are neither friend nor foe by default. They can be a genuine gift when they provide safety, clarity, and a meaningful way into coaching. They can also become a trap when they are held too tightly, sold too confidently, or used to avoid the discomfort of not knowing.
The most useful distinction is not between structured coaching and organic coaching. It is between rigid structure and responsive structure.
Good coaching may begin with a programme, an assessment, a values exercise, a Wheel of Life session, or a clearly defined pathway. But good coaching does not stay loyal to the plan at the expense of the person. It notices when a door opens and is willing to walk through it.
For any coach reflecting on their own practice, a few questions may be worth sitting with:
- Where does structure support the coaching, and where does it limit it?
- What kinds of clients genuinely benefit from a guided journey?
- How easy is it to let go of the plan when the real conversation arrives?
- What role does certainty play in the coach’s own sense of safety?
These are rich questions for supervision, peer reflection, and honest conversations with coaching colleagues. If this stirred something, it may be worth sharing the episode with a fellow coach or continuing the conversation in the wider community for coaches. Coaching grows through dialogue, and so do coaches.
Those who want to keep up with future conversations can also join the mailing list or explore more episodes through the podcast archive.
Attribution
Talking about Coaching is a podcast by coaches for coaches. It does what it says on the tin: We talk about coaching. We, that is Yannick, Siawash and Nicki. We love coaching, collectively got a tonne of experience, knowledge and charm; and we all felt it was time to give something back to our wonderful coaching community. Whether you’re a life coach, work with organisations or practice any other form of coaching, you can ask us anything and we’ll discuss it for and with you so you can learn, grow and develop your practice and business skills!
Committed to helping leaders and coaches do their best work and live their best lives, Yannick Jacob, the founder of Talking about Coaching, is a Coach, Trainer & Supervisor with Masters degrees in Existential Coaching and Applied Positive Psychology. He is part of the teaching faculties at Cambridge University and the International Centre for Coaching Supervision, and he’s the Course Director of the School of Positive Transformation’s acclaimed Accredited Certificate in Integrative Coaching, for which he gathered many of the world’s most influential coaches and earliest pioneers. Formerly Programme Leader of the MSc Coaching Psychology at the University of East London, Yannick founded and hosts Yannick’s Coaching Lab which gives novice and seasoned coaches an opportunity to witness experienced coaches live in action. Yannick presents at conferences internationally, his book An Introduction to Existential Coaching was released by a leading academic publisher, and his self-study online course on the subject is now available for instant access. Across four seasons as host of Animas Centre for Coaching’s popular podcast Coaching Uncaged Yannick engaged the thought leaders of our industry in dialogue, and he passionately hosts his own podcasts Talking about Coaching and Talking about Coaching and Psychedelics.
A Note from the “Author”
I hope you enjoyed this article. If any of it resonates, make it swing! Start a conversation with someone about what came up for you, or let us know what you think*. We’d love to hear from you!* And please keep in mind that, while I’ve personally engineered the prompt for these articles and everything that’s written will be based on the above video, this content is AI-generated*, so the general guidance is to* go to the source and listen to the podcast.
It will also help us to reach more people if you support the podcast by sharing it, liking it, or leaving a comment on the platform where you listen to podcasts. Coaches can also send a question for a future conversation or support the wider mission on Patreon.
This article was created from the video Pre-designed coaching programmes – friend or foe? – Episode 94 with the help of AI.
