Why the Coach – Client Relationship Is the Strongest Predictor of Coaching Effectiveness

Across the coaching literature and in practice, one principle remains remarkably consistent: the quality of the coach – client relationship is one of the most powerful drivers of coaching outcomes. It is not simply a helpful factor – it is often described as the primary tool a coach has to foster meaningful, sustainable change.

While coaching tools, models, and frameworks have grown increasingly sophisticated, the relational dimension remains central. But what exactly makes this relationship effective? And how can coaches intentionally cultivate it?

The coach – client relationship is best understood as a dynamic collaboration. Its quality can significantly influence clients’ engagement, goal attainment, and developmental growth. In many ways it is the container in which the coaching process unfolds – and the container matters.

At the heart of this relationship lies what many scholars and practitioners refer to as the Working Alliance, which includes three core components:

• Bond: This refers to the mutual respect, trust, and sense of connection between the coach and client. Clients need to feel that their coach genuinely cares about their well-being.
• Agreement: Both parties must share a clear understanding of the goals being pursued in the coaching process, and the methods through which those goals will be approached.
• Tasks: These are the agreed-upon actions and responsibilities that each party undertakes to help the client progress toward their goals.

A fourth but equally crucial factor is:

• Perceived Expertise: Clients are more likely to engage meaningfully in coaching when they perceive their coach as competent, experienced, and confident. This perception builds credibility and reinforces the client’s trust in the process.

The working alliance is foundational, but other relational elements have also been found to contribute significantly to coaching effectiveness:

• Trust: While related to the bond, trust encompasses the client’s perception of the coach’s integrity, competence, and goodwill.
• Perceived Empathy: A client’s sense that their coach understands their experiences and emotions is a strong predictor of engagement.
• Closeness: A general sense of liking and interpersonal connection can promote cooperative behavior and deepen commitment to the process.
• Perceived Need Support: When clients perceive that their psychological needs (for autonomy, competence, and relatedness) are supported, they show higher intrinsic motivation and more consistent progress.
• Interpersonal Dynamics (Dominance and Affiliation): A coach’s interpersonal style – confident (dominant) yet friendly (affiliative) – can shape the relationship and influence client outcomes.
• Infrastructure (Contracting): Clear agreements about roles, responsibilities, and expectations act as a kind of hygiene factor – preventing breakdowns but not sufficient alone to drive excellence.
• Psychological Safety: Clients value environments that are non-judgmental and emotionally safe, where they feel free to express themselves honestly – a component currently absent from chatbbots.

Importantly, clients’ perceptions of the relationship are more predictive of coaching success than coaches’ own perceptions. This highlights the need for coaches to regularly check in with clients about how the relationship feels from their side.

Coaching happens within a human relationship.

EUANTHIA KOURTOUBUYANNI

Building a high-quality relationship is not accidental – it requires deliberate attention and skill. Coaches can focus on the following strategies:

• Contracting: Establish clear agreements regarding the scope, structure, and goals of the coaching engagement. This sets expectations, reduces ambiguity, and enhances trust.
• Discuss Goals and Responsibilities: Clarify what both the coach and client will contribute to the process. Be explicit about time, focus, and commitment.
• Emphasize Goal and Task Alignment: Goal agreement and shared task orientation have been shown to be stronger predictors of coaching outcomes than the bond alone. Focusing on “what needs to be done” can also help compensate for a client’s lower self-efficacy early in the relationship.

When entering an unknown territory, you feel safer with a map. That’s what contracting is to the client.

euanthia kourtbouyanni

• Demonstrate Confidence and Competence: Clear structure, confident delivery, and goal-directed behaviour signal expertise. These behaviours help build clients’ trust and willingness to be guided into the sessions.
• Show Empathy and Support: Engage with the client’s experience deeply and non-judgmentally. Use tools like motivational interviewing to create space for clients’ inner motivations and needs.
• Foster Closeness and Connection: Consistent warmth, availability, and a sense of care enhance the perception of relational closeness, which in turn supports collaboration.
• Model Appropriate Behaviours: Coaches should embody the values and behaviours they promote, from integrity to discipline. This consistency creates relational safety and alignment.

Most of your clients’ challenges will have a relational component – a fact that can make your relational competence itself an object of reflection and learning during your sessions.

euanthia kourtbouyanni

• Be an “Authentic Chameleon”: Adapt your interpersonal style to the client’s preferences and relational norms. Research shows that interpersonal similarity – especially in dimensions of dominance and affiliation – leads to better rapport and stronger outcomes.
• Coach Education on Relational Skills: Developing relational intelligence should be a core component of coach training. Empathy can be enhanced through modeling, practice, and feedback. Skills such as reading nonverbal cues and adjusting one’s interpersonal tone are essential.
• Attend to Client Perceptions: Since the client’s experience is the more accurate predictor of success, invite their feedback about the relationship and act on it. Open-ended inquiries can help surface unseen tensions or unmet needs.
• Building an Effective Relationship is a Goal: Treating it as such is a coach’s most reliable approach on the road to success.

Adapt – and you will evolve.

euanthia kourtbouyanni

The coaching relationship is not a backdrop to the real work – it is the real work. It is both the bridge and the vehicle for change. While goals, tasks, and models provide structure, it is within a relational space of trust, safety, and collaboration that clients dare to explore, grow, and act.

In a coaching marketplace that increasingly celebrates tools, metrics, and ROI, it is worth remembering: what moves people is people.

• Bolter, N. D., & Kipp, L. E. (2018). Sportspersonship coaching behaviours, relatedness need satisfaction, and early adolescent athletes’ prosocial and antisocial behaviour. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/1612197X.2016.1142461
• Correia, M. C., dos Santos, N. R., & Passmore, J. (2016). Understanding the Coach-Coachee-Client relationship: A conceptual framework for executive coaching. International Coaching Psychology Review, 11(1), 6–23. https://doi.org /10.53841/bpsicpr.2016.11.1.6
• De Haan, E., Duckworth, A., Birch, D., & Jones, C. (2013). Executive coaching outcome research: The contribution of common factors such as relationship, personality match, and self-efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 65(1), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031635
• De Haan, E., Grant, A. M., Burger, Y., & Eriksson, P.-O. (2016). A large-scale study of executive and workplace coaching: The relative contributions of relationship, personality match, and self efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 68(3), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000058
• De Haan, E., Molyn, J., & Nilsson, V. O. (2020). New findings on the effectiveness of the coaching relationship: Time to think differently about active ingredients? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 72(3), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000175
• Diller, S. J., Brantl, M., & Jonas, E. (2022). More Than Working Alliance: Exploring the Relationship in Entrepreneurial Coaching. Coaching | Theorie & Praxis, 8(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1365/s40896-022-00066-8
• Gehreke, L., Hirschberger ,Stephanie, & and Kauffeld, S. (2023). Building bonds, achieving goals: Surface and deep-level characteristics similarity in higher education group-coaching. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 0(0), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2025.2467628
• Gettman, H. J., Edinger, S. K., & Wouters, K. (2019). Assessing contracting and thecoaching relationship: Necessary infrastructure? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 17(1), 46–62. https://doi.org/10.24384/0nfx-0779
• Ianiro, P. M., Schermuly, C. C., & Kauffeld, S. (2013). Why interpersonal dominance and affiliation matter: An interaction analysis of the coach-client relationship. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 6(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2012.740489
• Kim, M., Kim, Y., & Won, D. (2018). From commanding to serving athletes: Nurturing the coach–athlete relationship. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 13(6), 891–901. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954118790810
• Lopez, M. L. (2017). Do we need alliance factor definitions unique to coaching? Clients’ operational definitions of research-based definitions. 15(1).
• O’Broin, A., & Palmer, S. (2006). The coach-client relationship and contributions made by the coach in improving coaching outcome. The Coaching Psychologist, 2(2), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpstcp.2006.2.2.16
• Terblanche, N. H. D., Van Heerden, M., & Hunt, R. (2024). The influence of an artificial intelligence chatbot coach assistant on the human coach-client working alliance. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 17(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2024.2304792