True or False: Connecting What You Want and What Works in Counseling

Scroll down to content

True or False?

Therapy really does work. 


Research consistently finds you’ll be better off than 80% of men who don’t see a therapist. 

Any exceptions? 

Yes.  Studies show 1 in every 10 clients who are seeing a therapist aren’t getting any better.

The point is? 

Most of the time, most therapists produce powerfully effective results for their clients. 

So what’s the issue?

Almost half of those clients abruptly stop seeing their therapist. Often, those therapists don’t recognize their client is not making progress. 

Self-blame, shallowness, negativity and a lack of desire are usually the major reasons men don’t get help.


Doubting the outcome is the main reason men don’t see a therapist. 

Of all the factors influencing a client’s results, the kind of therapy used is the biggest determining factor in a client’s success.


The method of therapy used by the clinician carries the smallest impact on the client. 

What does matter? 

Alliance between client and therapist produces 60% of the outcome. 

Your therapist’s dedication carries another 30% of your success. 

The therapeutic technique your therapist uses produces 8% of your results.    

Presently, most therapists are convinced their skill in using a therapeutic approach produces their client’s successful outcomes. 

Most therapists are guided by the medical model, collection of techniques all doctors learn in school.  This approach is based on treatments supported by scientific research.

Another term for this is evidenced-based practice, which focuses on grouping people into groups sharing symptomatic characteristics. 

Studies reveal a few therapeutic models are better than others. 


Every therapeutic model is sometimes equally effective with some clients part of the time.  Each therapeutic approach produces similar results no matter how much time is spent applying each one. 

Doing more of the same therapy does not produce a better result. 

Different therapeutic treatments are not much better than the other.  This equality cannot be blamed on faulty research design, length of study, or when the research took place.

Any variances between the therapeutic approaches can be explained by chance.  This chance factor contributes about 1% of any differences among the therapeutic models. 

Your opinion of the therapeutic alliance between you and your therapist provides greater potential for your results and your remaining in therapy. 


The bond you have with your therapist determines, to a great extent, how much you benefit from meeting with your therapist.  Your therapist’s opinions of the relationship don’t matter as much as your opinion.

Your interpretation of the bond between you and your therapist guides the eventual results from your sessions.  It predicts if and how you engage in therapy, how you respond to your therapist and how long the results will last. 

Working to create and maintain that bond should be your therapist’s main concern.

The main part of progress in effective treatment happens prior as opposed to later. 


In the event a specific treatment, provided in a specific context, by a particular therapist will work, there ought to be quantifiable change in the initial month and a half of care.

The ideal approach is to safeguard productive, beneficial, ethical and responsible best practices, for counselors/therapists to accept and follow scientifically-supported treatments, external regulation, ongoing training requirements, therapist licensing, lawful regulation of counseling and it’s methods.


There are to potential ways to resolve this:  A medical or contextual approach.

The medical approach is evidence-based.  That means a counselor uses treatment supported by research outcomes. 

It requires a diagnosis and is considered a “sickness model”.  It uses treatments supported for whatever “illness” the client presents with.   

The goal is to heal the disease. 

The contextual approach uses practice-based evidence.  It applies what is learned in session on an ongoing basis. 

The client guides the process by providing an evaluation of each session, leaving nothing to chance.  It uses results to inform practice and stresses resolutions over deficiencies.

Evidence of effective practice emerges from customized, individualized application in session.

The evidence is collected at the beginning and end of each session using a session rating assessment provided to you by the therapist.   

Feedback is immediate and addressed during the session.

You’ll know you’ve found an effective therapist when they consistently use a formalized process to gain and use the feedback you give them about your experience in session.

They will evaluate and re-align your therapeutic relationship to assure the greatest benefit. 

Effective Therapeutic Practice, Successful Approach and Pitfalls

Combining regular, client-sourced, evaluations into each session produces effective therapy.

The information obtained is applicable, dependable and actionable since it comes from the client receiving the therapy.

Situations where therapist’s chose not to evaluate the client’s experience after each session resulted in a 50% client drop out rate.  Or, client’s were twice as likely to stop going to therapy. 

These clients were also more susceptible to staying the same or actually getting worse.   

Using client-sourced session evaluations benefits you by providing you with customized care that meets your needs in the most powerful and competent way possible. 

It also empowers you to make an informed choice when choosing your therapist and supplies you with progressive possibilities in therapy. 

Use this information to increase the value of your investment in therapy.

I’m Here To Help





3800 North Lamar Blvd., Suite 200

Austin, TX  78656


111 Congress, Suite 400

Austin, TX  78701


1 Chisolm Trail, Suite 450

Round Rock, TX  78681

Skip to toolbar