Dual identity as coach and therapist, what do members say?

With practitioners increasingly working across both coaching and counselling/psychotherapy, some questions have emerged: would a shared title within Â鶹ԭ´´ be beneficial for dual-practising coaches and therapists and, if so, what would that title be?

Â鶹ԭ´´ Coaching Division Executive has been discussing these questions and the value of having a shared title to use within Â鶹ԭ´´ to represent this community. It has been made clear that any title would not affect how an individual chooses to self-identify to clients and peers. The purpose is to provide a clear identity for dual practising coaches and therapists within Â鶹ԭ´´.

The ways in which dual-practitioners practice can differ greatly (see Â鶹ԭ´´â€™s evidence-based Coaching competence framework), and members also work in a variety of settings. With such diversity, opposing views on the idea of a shared title are to be expected, making any decision about a suitably representative title a tricky task. The voice of members needed to be heard to contribute to the discussion. Therefore, an initial survey went out to Coaching division members from December 2025 to January 2026, as a starting point to understand members’ views on naming conventions for dual-practising practitioners. The survey received 229 responses (22.9% response rate), demonstrating strong engagement and highlighting the survey’s significance to members.

No single way of working

As expected, the survey respondents varied in terms of how they practised. Most survey respondents indicated that, depending on the needs of their clients, they either integrate or separate the approaches. Other members stated that they integrate the two disciplines, whereas a minority separate their coaching and therapy practices.

Dual practitioner’s sense of belonging within Â鶹ԭ´´

Survey respondents were divided on this. Several members felt a sense of belonging within Â鶹ԭ´´ with a similar number feeling unsure of their place. A minority did not feel a sense of belonging as a dual practitioner.  

Would a title reflecting shared identity within Â鶹ԭ´´ help?

Most of the members who responded felt that a title reflecting their competence to practise both coaching and therapy would be beneficial. A small portion of respondents disagreed with this, whilst almost 30% of respondents were unsure how a title like this would be beneficial to them.

Mixed views on having a shared organisational title

The positives expressed of such a title ranged from increased professional recognition, legitimacy and awareness of the work of dual-practising coaches and therapists, and greater clarity and understanding for clients about what these practitioners can offer. Alternatively, concerns were raised by a small number of respondents. These practitioners believed a title risked categorisation and being tied to a title that was inaccurate for an individual’s practice.

Which title did survey respondents prefer?

Three titles were proposed by the Coaching Executive, so survey respondents were asked to vote on the following options and given the opportunity to provide further comment on their preference.

1. Coach-Therapist
2. Integrated Coach
3. Therapeutic Coach
4. None of the above

‘Integrated Coach’ was the least preferred option. The most preferred was ‘Therapeutic Coach’ which received just over 37% of the votes, with ‘Coach-Therapist’ as a close second (30.4%). However, almost 30% voted ‘None of the above’. Practitioners also proposed alternative titles in their comments with 42 different titles suggested. These results show the diversity of opinion among the respondents and clearly indicate a lack of consensus about which title is best to represent this community.

An ongoing conversation

It’s clear that the survey respondents have a wide range of perspectives, all of which offer food for thought and things to consider moving forward. Over 63% of dual-practising coaches and therapists surveyed believed a title within Â鶹ԭ´´ would be beneficial, so further discussion and consultation with the wider membership is required before any decisions can be made on practice-descriptor titles, to develop this idea and meet the needs of the membership.

Keep an eye out for more detailed findings of this survey in the July 2026 issue of Coaching Today.