Moving Past GROW: Why Generic Coaching Models Don’t Work

The GROW model has played an important role in the development of coaching. Its four stages – Goal, Reality, Options and Will – give new coaches a clear way to think about a conversation. It can help you remember to clarify an outcome, explore the current situation, consider possibilities and agree on action.

However, applying a universal framework to every client, no matter their culture, context, or situation, can be problematic. GROW is only one example. Coaching also includes other generic models such as OSKAR and CLEAR, and these can be useful starting points as well. The issue is not that established models are bad. The issue is what happens when any generic model is treated as if it should fit every client in the same way.

The Difference Between a Model, a Process, and a Structure

People often use these terms interchangeably, but they refer to different parts of coaching practice. Separating them makes the rest of the discussion much clearer.

Term	What it means	What it does
Philosophy	Your beliefs about people, change, learning, and the purpose of coaching	Shapes how you understand coaching at the deepest level
Coaching model	A tangible expression of your philosophy, strengths, beliefs, experience, clients, and context	Gives coherence to your coaching approach
Structure	The overall design of a coaching session or engagement	Holds the conversation together
Process	The flow of what happens in the session from opening to close	Helps you move through a conversation with intention
Framework or theory	An informing body of thought, such as positive psychology or systems thinking	Influences your thinking without dictating the minute-to-minute flow

Coaching model

A coaching model is a tangible expression of your philosophy on coaching and the particular style you have. It is shaped by who you are, your strengths, your beliefs, the clients you coach and the context they are in. It gives coherence to your work. It helps you notice what to listen for, what kind of change you are supporting and how you understand the coaching relationship.

Structure and process

A coaching process or session structure describes the flow of a professional coaching conversation — how it begins, unfolds and concludes. You still need that regardless of your model. Think of it as a coat hanger for your coaching work, sturdy enough to hold the session together but flexible enough to fit every client differently.

Frameworks and theories

Coaching frameworks or theories such as positive psychology or systems thinking inform your thinking, but they do not dictate the minute-to-minute flow of your sessions. Your coaching model grows out of your philosophy, and from the frameworks and theories you are aligned to. That is part of what gives the model its shape and makes it your own.

The ICF has added “describes one’s coaching philosophy” to competency 3.01 within the “Establishes and Maintains Agreements” competency. The competency now reads: “Describes one’s coaching philosophy and clearly defines what coaching is and is not for potential clients and stakeholders.” This means the ICF now asks coaches to describe their own coaching philosophy and define clearly what coaching is and is not for prospective clients and stakeholders, which fits closely with what we teach in our coaching program.

This distinction is important because arguing against generic models is not the same as rejecting structure altogether. Clients benefit from a session design. They benefit when the coach knows how to open the conversation, establish focus, explore meaning, support learning and close with clear accountability. The issue is not structure. The issue is one-size-fits-all models being treated as if they should run every conversation in the same way.

As the reading guide in our coaching course explains, “Every coaching session follows a process, a flow from opening to close. As a new coach, simply becoming aware of what you’re doing moment to moment is valuable. As you gain experience, you can design your process with full intention.”

A coaching conversation is not a checklist. People bring different histories, cultures, identities, motivations, relationships and constraints to the coaching space. What helps one client move forward may feel irrelevant, rushed or even limiting to another.

This is why moving past generic coaching models is important. It does not mean rejecting structure. It means learning to use structure with judgment, context and responsiveness.

Why You Need Your Own Coaching Model

Moving past a generic model, or choosing not to rely on one, does not mean that you need to invent a completely new acronym or a complicated framework. Your coaching model is a way of making your thinking visible.

As we teach in our coaching program, your individual coaching model is a representation of who you are as a coach. It reflects your values, core practices, personal strengths, philosophies, and beliefs. It integrates your past experience and is tailored to meet the needs of the clients you will coach.

A coach with a background in organizational psychology may develop a model that considers systems, roles, and workplace relationships. A coach experienced in health and well-being may focus more closely on awareness, sustainable behavior, and the connection between mind and body. A coach supporting people through relocation may develop a model around identity, belonging, and reinvention.

None of these approaches is automatically right for every client. Their value comes from being thoughtfully designed, clearly explained, and adapted responsibly.

1. Coaching is contextual, not one-size-fits-all

Context includes more than the topic a client brings. It includes the whole environment in which change needs to happen.

Ask yourself:

• What does this client believe about themselves?
• What pressures or expectations are shaping their decisions?
• Which relationships or systems influence the situation?
• What cultural or professional context should I understand?
• Is the client looking for action, clarity, confidence, meaning or permission to pause?
• What does this person need from the conversation today?

A goal-focused model may be appropriate for one session and unhelpful in another. Even with the same client, the most useful approach may change as the coaching relationship develops.

For instance, a leader might initially want help managing conflict with a colleague. During the conversation, they may recognize that the difficulty connects to a long-standing fear of disappointing others. A purely behavioral model might move quickly to communication strategies. A more contextual approach creates room to explore the belief, understand its origins and consider how it affects the leader’s choices.

Models are useful as resources to draw on, not rules that dictate what happens in a session. They can help you create direction and focus, but they need to be applied with judgment, flexibility, and attention to the client in front of you.

2. Move from techniques to professional judgment

Learning a model is relatively straightforward. Developing judgment takes longer.

Professional judgment involves noticing what is happening in the conversation, considering what the client may need and choosing how to respond without imposing your own assumptions. It requires more than knowing a sequence of questions.

You need to learn, practice and reflect:

1. Learn different theories, philosophies and frameworks.
2. Practice applying them with real people in varied situations.
3. Reflect on what helped, what limited the conversation and what you might do differently.

This cycle is more demanding than memorizing a model. It is also more likely to support sustainable development.

Research into coaching has increasingly moved beyond the question of whether coaching works to examine how it works, for whom and under what conditions. The quality of the coaching relationship, client engagement, presence and contextual understanding all play a role. Specific tools and models are part of the picture, but they are not the whole picture.

You can read more about this development in How Coaching Research Evolved.

3. It’s More Sustainable

There is another layer to this as well. Many coaching schools teach a single house model and train students to work from that model. ICA takes a different view. You would not use someone else’s plans to build your own house, especially if you already know the kind of house you want to live in. The same applies to coaching. In your own practice, you do not want to rely only on someone else’s architectural plans for how your coaching should work.

How to Develop A Unique Coaching Model

At International Coach Academy, students explore a range of coaching theories and philosophies rather than being taught that one model is the answer for every client.

There is a deliberate reason for that. In a global, multicultural student body, coaches are better served by creating their own model. That means learning to understand the environment in which they work, their specific clientele, and the nuances of themselves and how that shapes the work they choose to do. For inspiration, many students look at already published coaching models.

The program connects theory with practical application through classes, Coach Development Labs, peer coaching, mentor feedback, supervision, and reflection. This creates a continuing cycle of learn, practice, reflect, and refine.

We teach models, and we also teach coaching session design, and those are two different things. We also teach frameworks and theories. Through all of that, students develop their own coaching philosophy and their own personal coaching model. If you want to see how ICA approaches session design, you can explore How to Structure a Coaching Session.

Students are supported to develop a coaching model that reflects their experience, philosophy, and intended clients. In practice, that usually involves identifying a niche or signature offer, researching other models, creating a metaphor or visual representation, and refining the model through feedback and peer coaching. The model is assessed for uniqueness and must be the student’s own words and work.

Types of models our students create

Here are some of the types of coaching models our students develop:

Process models

A process model is driven by the coach’s process and often uses an acronym. GROW, OSKAR, and similar models fit here. They can be useful because they give shape to a conversation, but their value depends on how thoughtfully they are applied.

Concept models

A concept model is built around an idea, image, or metaphor. Many coaches use these to express the philosophy behind their work in a way that is memorable, clear, and personal.

Blended models

A blended model combines coaching with another professional skill set, such as consultant, therapist, trainer, or subject-matter expertise, used with the same client.

Signature models

A signature model is based around the coach’s signature offer — the unique problem the coach helps a specific client with, and how their coaching is a solution to it. Many of our students build a signature offer around their model, whatever form that model takes — a process model, a concept model, or a blended model.

You can explore examples of the models our students create in the ICA graduate coaching model collection, which includes more than 3,000 published graduate coaching models.

Generic Models Still Have Purpose

Generic models, such as the GROW model, can work well when the client has a reasonably clear, practical objective.

For example, a client might want to prepare for an important presentation. You could explore:

• What do they want the presentation to achieve?
• What is happening now?
• What options have they considered?
• What will they do next, and by when?

In this context, GROW may provide a helpful sequence for a focused conversation.

But consider a different client. They have recently left a long-term career and say they want “more purpose”. They cannot yet define a goal. They are uncertain whether they want a new role, a different lifestyle or simply time to recover from an exhausting period.

If you move immediately to the “Goal” stage, you may ask the client to create clarity before they are ready. You may also overlook the emotions, values and identity questions underneath the presenting issue.

The model has not necessarily failed. The context has changed.

Generic models become limiting when coaches assume the same sequence should work for every person, every situation and every stage of development.

Developing your own coaching model is not a quick process, and you would not want it to be. The work is closely tied to your own personal development. You cannot separate your professional development from your personal development, and creating your own coaching model pushes you to reflect on a deeper set of questions about who you are as a coach.

The result is a more personal and contextual approach to coaching — one that can continue to develop as your experience grows.

Building your own model is not only a professional exercise. It is a reflective process that asks how you think, what you value, how you work, and who you want to be as a coach. That is what gives the model depth, durability, and long-term value.

If you are considering coach training, explore ICA’s methodology or book a consultation with an ICA advisor.