This post is the forth in a six-part series exploring the invisible barriers that keep people from seeking coaching. From cultural resistance and self-doubt to confusion and cost, we’ll explore what stops people from getting support and how that can shift.

“So,... what do I do about this?” or “How do I go about…?” These questions come up more often than you might expect, usually in the very first session. For clients raised in cultures or workplaces where hierarchy rules and the boss always have the answers, the expectation is clear: the coach is here to give solutions. When I don’t immediately step into that role, the mismatch is obvious. It can be disorienting for the clients and sometimes, it’s downright disappointing.

I call it the first impression mismatch. Before we even get started, clients often size me up. They think different industry, too senior, not senior enough, different gender or different culture. The conclusion is the same: “He won’t get me.” Ironically, it’s often that very difference that makes coaching effective. A coach who isn’t your mirror is better placed to notice patterns you’ve stopped seeing yourself. But at the beginning, those assumptions can feel like deal-breakers. It usually takes a little real dialogue for the penny to drop: it isn’t about whether I’ve walked in your shoes, but how I can help you walk more consciously in your own.

Then there are projections. My hair started greying drastically in my thirties, and with it came an odd shift: people around me began expecting wisdom. Professionally, they wanted me to play the sage, dispensing advice from on high, but coaching doesn’t work like that. If I play into that role, the client gets momentary reassurance but loses the chance to build their own insight. The tension is real, I can see the pull in their eyes “Tell me what you think I should do” and often it takes discipline to stay with questions rather than pronouncements.

Sometimes the resistance is not about me but about what coaching is supposed to be. I once had someone in a discovery session ask me, very reasonably, about my coaching model or methodology. Instead of giving a straight answer, I quipped, “Would it be comforting for you to know if I had a particular method?” They didn’t appreciate the humour. They were suspicious: “So you don’t have a model?” The truth is, I do. I deal mostly in cognitive-based coaching, with a dash of NLP, but I don’t see myself tied to any single model or methodology. My work is also guided by the principles of positive psychology, which emphasise strengths, growth, and wellbeing rather than deficits. I view coaching models as tools, and I like to think of myself as multi-modal practitioner, different clients and different issues call for different approaches. For some, structure is reassuring, for others, flexibility is freeing; what matters is not the label but how the process serves the client.

And then there are the moments where clients over-read the coaching process. A metaphor slips into the conversation, and suddenly it’s treated as profound symbolism. “You mentioned a bridge does that mean I’m crossing into a new stage of life?” Sometimes a metaphor is just a metaphor. Critical thinking is essential, but it can tip into over-analysis, turning every word from the coach into hidden meaning. That can be flattering, but it’s also a trap. Coaching is about helping clients find their own significance, not about decoding what they imagine mine to be.

Research also shows that these cultural expectations aren’t static. While traditional Asian collectivist norms may be loosening, that doesn’t mean people are becoming more individualistic in return. In Japan, for example, studies found signs of rising individualism such as unique baby names and smaller households, yet filial piety and obligations to family remain strong. A broader review in Advances in Psychological Science found that while individualism has increased in many countries, collectivist values often persist in parallel. The result is a cultural grey zone. In coaching, this shows up as clients who no longer feel bound to follow the group, but who aren’t yet confident in standing fully on their own. The tension lands in the room as an unspoken question: “Should I be looking to you for the answer, or should I be brave enough to find my own?”

All of the mismatched expectations, the projections, the model assumptions, the over-interpretations create discomfort. And that discomfort is the point. Coaching isn’t built to confirm assumptions. It’s designed to stretch them, when a client moves past the stage of waiting for my answers and begins listening for their own, that’s when the work starts to land. That’s when we see leaders grow more confident, decision-making becomes clearer, and relationships shift in ways that ripple outward.

There’s plenty of research that supports what happens at this point. While training alone has been shown to increase productivity by 22%, one landmark study found that combining training with coaching boosted that increase to 88%. In other words, coaching didn't just add a little value—it nearly quadrupled the effectiveness of the training.

The International Coaching Federation reports that coaching delivers a median return on investment of 700 percent. This figure comes from studies where organisations calculated the financial benefits tied to coaching outcomes such as higher performance, retention, and innovation then compared those benefits to the cost of coaching. Researchers used a formula that factored in a confidence rating (how certain they were the results were due to coaching) to keep the numbers grounded.

These aren’t just abstract numbers. They show what happens when people stop outsourcing answers and start taking ownership: teams become more engaged, talent is retained, performance improves. And the benefits aren’t confined to individuals they ripple outward into culture. One organisation I worked with saw this firsthand. A senior leader who had been micromanaging his team shifted into a coaching approach. Within six months, engagement scores rose, and voluntary turnover halved. The ROI wasn’t just in numbers it showed up in morale, trust, and a healthier culture.

But here’s a wrinkle worth naming. Sometimes what you feel in coaching is valuable feedback. A gut reaction can be as meaningful as formal evidence. If you feel resistance in your body, that’s data. Yet this is also where “coaching traps” appear. In my own work, I’ve seen how traps play out: coaches who miss clear signs of mental health issues, or those who lean only on their personal story without proper training. Some make vague promises of total transformation. Others never set clear contracts or boundaries. And the biggest trap of all is the one-size-fits-all model the idea that one method works for everyone. Coaching should be personalised, not prescriptive. Gut feel can be a clue, but the real test is whether the process is ethical, professional, and tailored to the client in front of you. Not every gut feeling signals growth. Sometimes it’s just habit putting up a fight.

Forgive me, but I have a penchant for idioms. Since I started this series with a Chinese saying, I’ll continue that trend here. 山窮水盡疑無路，柳暗花明又一村 when the mountains and rivers seem to block every path, suddenly another village appears, hidden among willows and blossoms. That’s what this stage of coaching often feels like. At first, the path looks blocked. This isn’t what you expected. But if you stay with it, new possibilities open up, ones you couldn’t see from the start.

So, if coaching doesn’t feel like what you imagined, maybe that’s the best sign of all. Growth often begins in the mismatch, the discomfort, the stretch. That uneasy moment when you stop waiting for my answer and begin hearing your own is where coaching starts to do its real work. The question isn’t whether the path feels strange, but whether you’re willing to stay long enough to see the new village ahead.

References

1. Huang, Z., Jing, Y., Yu, F., Gu, R., Zhou, X., Zhang, J., & Cai, H. (2018). Increasing individualism and decreasing collectivism? Cultural and psychological change around the globe. Advances in Psychological Science, 26(11), 2068–2080. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.02068

2. International Coach Federation. (2009). ICF global coaching client study [Executive summary]. PricewaterhouseCoopers. https://coachingfederation.org/research/global-coaching-client-study

3. Kim, S.-Y. (2024). Examining 35 years of individualism–collectivism research in Asia: Meta-analytic trends and cultural implications. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 99, Article 101988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.101988

4. Laker, B. (2022, October 4). Every leader can benefit from coaching—Here’s why. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminlaker/2022/10/04/every-leader-can-benefit-from-coaching-heres-why/

5. Ogihara, Y. (2017). Temporal changes in individualism and their ramifications in Japan: Rising individualism and conflicts with persistent collectivism. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 695. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00695