How can coaches choose their approach and their interventions based on the evidence we now have?

The purpose of this contribution was the translation of recent research evidence regarding factors contributing to effectiveness in the helping professions in general, and in coaching outcome studies in particular, to the practice of workplace and executive coaching. It is shown that rigorous statistical results from effectiveness studies can be translated to benefit training, coach development, and supervision of coaches and help professional coaches to bring out and hone competencies and skills that are demonstrably informed by the evidence base in coaching. For this purpose, the main outcome studies and meta-analyses in the helping professions are first summarized in general terms, including the evidence for general effectiveness, the evidence for the importance of common factors in producing that effectiveness, and some clear indications that factors stemming from technique and approach do not reach statistical significance, that is, that all professional approaches work.Moreover, we review good indications in outcome research for the differential use of particular approaches for dedicated purposes, as well as some evidence for a demonstrable added value of the participation of the coachee in the choice and application of interventions. Plausible conclusions are drawn from these findings, such as the importance for coaches to be aware of (a) their own preferences within models and approaches, (b) strengthening of common factors in their own effectiveness, and (c) allowing the coaching contract to determine the nature of the interventions offered. A new model of coaching contracts is offered, based on the presenting anxieties of the coachee.