Over time, coaches develop their own coaching style informed by professional experience and reflective practice. One key but often subconscious element of that style is how directive the coach is. Do they guide the coachee toward their own solutions, or do they offer suggestions and advice?
The concept of directive versus non-directive coaching is often described as a push–pull continuum. In coaching, a directive (push) style involves the coach providing feedback, advice, and possible solutions. This can be particularly effective when working with less experienced coachees or those lacking self-awareness. However, Hui and Chan (2009) caution that over-reliance on directive approaches can inhibit the coachee’s learning by reducing opportunities for self-discovery and reflective problem solving.
A non-directive (pull) style, by contrast, involves the coach facilitating awareness through active listening, open questioning, and reflection. This approach fosters autonomy, ownership, and deeper insight (Ives, 2008; Rogers, 2012). Non-directive coaching has been shown to enhance self-efficacy and long-term behaviour change, especially when coachees are more experienced or motivated (Grant, 2014).
These two styles align with transactional and transformational paradigms respectively. Whitmore (2009) emphasises that coaching is fundamentally about raising awareness and responsibility, which are best fostered through non-directive dialogue.
Importantly, most coaches do not rigidly adopt one style. Rather, they operate on a continuum of directiveness, shifting fluidly based on the context and coachee needs. Passmore (2010) and Ives (2008) argue that effective coaching involves responsiveness to the dynamic nature of the conversation. In fact, empirical research shows that coaches often integrate both approaches within a single session, adjusting based on coachee development, confidence, and the topic under discussion (de Haan et al., 2016).
Coaching typologies support this view. Skills coaching, for example, is typically more directive, focusing on instruction and immediate performance. Developmental coaching is more non-directive, centred on insight and long-term growth. Performance coaching lies in the middle—balancing structure with reflection (Passmore, 2010).
Understanding and managing this continuum helps coaches deliver more impactful sessions, strengthen coachee engagement, and foster both learning and behavioural change.
Action Point
Consider logging some of your interactions with peers or subordinates where you have utilised either a directive or non-directive approach. Complete the checklist table and think about how you could alter these interactions in the future.