Ontological Coaching: The Art of Being and Personal Transformation

Lena: Have you ever felt like you were doing all the right things—reading the productivity books, hitting your targets, maybe even following a strict new habit—but somehow, deep down, nothing really changed? You find yourself slipping back into the same old frustrations or reactions the moment the pressure turns up. It’s like you’re trying to upgrade the software on a computer that has a glitchy operating system.

Eli: That is such a perfect way to frame it. Most of us spend our lives focused on the "what"—the actions we take and the results we get. But what if the real bottleneck isn't what you’re doing, but who you are being while you do it? That is the heart of ontological coaching . It’s a bit of a heavy word, "ontology," but it just comes from the Greek ontos, meaning "being," and ology, the "study of" . So, we’re essentially talking about the study of being.

Lena: It sounds almost philosophical, like something you’d discuss in a dark library with old leather books. But as I was looking into this, I realized it’s actually incredibly practical. It’s about why we see the world the way we do. There’s this fascinating analogy about a dark room where we’re all walking around with flashlights strapped to our heads . We think we’re seeing the whole room—the "objective" truth—but we’re really only seeing where our specific beam of light is hitting.

Eli: And we get so certain that our little circle of light is the only reality! We want to be right so badly. Ontological coaching is unique because, instead of just pointing the flashlight at a new corner of the room, the coach shines their light back at you—the one holding the flashlight . They help you see your own assumptions, your own blind spots, and the very structure of your "Way of Being" .

Lena: That’s a powerful shift. It’s not about just getting more "content" or tips; it’s about illuminating the "context" of your life . If you can change the person holding the light, the whole room starts to look different. Today, we’re going to dig into how this actually works—how your language, your emotions, and even your physical posture are all working together to create the reality you live in every day.

Eli: I’m so excited to dive into this. It’s a journey that started back in the late 70s with thinkers like Fernando Flores, who really pioneered this as a discipline . It’s not just about "fixing" problems; it’s about a radical kind of observation that can change your entire relationship with the world. So, let’s start by peeling back the layers on what exactly makes up this "Way of Being."

Lena: So, if we’re talking about this "Way of Being," it isn’t just a vague vibe or a personality trait. It’s actually described as a very specific, integrated system. I keep seeing these three specific domains pop up: language, emotions, and the body . It’s like a tripod—if you move one leg, the whole thing shifts.

Eli: That’s the core model, often called the BEL model—Body, Emotion, Language . Most traditional coaching or even just general self-improvement tends to live almost entirely in the "language" domain. We talk about our goals, we tell stories about our problems, we try to "think" our way into a new perspective. It’s very much based on that old Cartesian idea of "I think, therefore I am" .

Lena: Right, but ontological coaching says that’s not enough. You can’t just think your way into a permanent change if your body and your emotions are still stuck in the old pattern. It’s like trying to tell yourself to be confident while your chest is tight and you’re breathing shallowly. Your body is literally telling a different story than your words .

Eli: Exactly. Our "Way of Being" is the dynamic interplay between these three. Think about it—if you’re in a mood of resentment, how do you see a simple request from a colleague? It probably feels like an imposition or a slight . But if you’re in a mood of curiosity or gratitude, that same request might feel like an opportunity to collaborate. The "content" of the room didn’t change, but your emotional state changed the "lens" through which you observed it.

Lena: And it’s not just about fleeting feelings. The sources distinguish between emotions—which are reactions to specific events—and "moods," which are more like the background weather of our lives . Some of us have been living in a "mood" of anxiety or "resignation" for so long that we don’t even notice it anymore. It’s just the air we breathe.

Eli: And that mood is physically embodied. Our posture—the way we hold our shoulders, the tension in our jaw—is a learned configuration that we’ve developed over a lifetime . These physical patterns can actually trap us in certain moods. You might have the "language" of wanting to be a better leader, but if your physiology is stuck in a pattern of "defensiveness," your team is going to feel that long before they hear your words .

Lena: It’s such a holistic view. It suggests that if we want real transformation, we have to look at the "Who" before the "What" . Instead of asking "Why am I struggling with this task?", we might need to ask "Who am I being that makes this task feel so impossible?" It’s moving from the symptom to the operating system.

Eli: And that’s where the magic happens. When you start to see that your language, emotions, and body are all reflecting and reinforcing each other, you gain a new kind of leverage. You realize you can enter the system through any of those doors. If you can’t change your thoughts, maybe you start by changing your posture or noticing your breath .

Lena: One concept that really stuck with me is the idea of the "Concerned Observer" . It’s the idea that none of us see the world "as it is"—we see it as we are. And specifically, we see it through the lens of our "concerns."

Eli: That’s a key distinction. Every individual relates to the world in a unique way based on what they care about—their "concerns" . For one person, a "change in the workplace" might be seen through the concern of "security," so they observe it as a threat. For someone else, the concern might be "innovation," so they observe that same change as a exciting new frontier.

Lena: It really challenges the idea of being "objective," doesn’t it? We like to think we’re just reporting the facts, but we’re actually interpreting them every second. This brings us to the OAR model—Observer, Action, Results . Most of the time, when we don’t like our results, we just try to change our "actions." We work harder, we try a different tactic.

Eli: But if the "Observer" stays the same, we’re likely to just keep repeating variations of the same actions. It’s like the "double-loop learning" model from Chris Argyris . Single-loop learning is just changing the action to get a better result. Double-loop learning is stepping back and challenging the way we’re thinking and perceiving in the first place.

Lena: So, an ontological coach isn’t just looking at your to-do list. They’re listening for the "blind spots" in your speech . They’re looking for where you’ve decided something is an "objective truth" when it’s actually just an "assessment" you’ve made. I love that distinction—between facts and the stories we wrap around them.

Eli: That is a huge one in this field. We often collapse the two. We say "my boss is unsupportive" as if it’s a fact like "the sky is blue." But "unsupportive" is an assessment . When we start to see our assessments as just that—interpretations—we suddenly have the power to change them. We aren't stuck in a world of "fixed truths" anymore; we’re in a world of possibilities.

Lena: It reminds me of the history here. Fernando Flores, who really founded this discipline around 1979, was actually a political prisoner in Chile for three years . He spent that time reading philosophy—Heidegger, phenomenology—and he realized that even in a prison cell, he had a choice in how he "observed" his reality. He took these deep philosophical concepts and turned them into a practical methodology for business and life .

Eli: It’s such a resilient foundation. He saw language not just as a way to describe the world, but as a "technology" to create it . When we make a request, or a promise, or an assessment, we are literally shaping the future. If we can become more aware of how we use those "linguistic acts," we become much more effective at navigating the world .

Lena: We’ve talked a lot about speaking and taking action, but the sources place a huge emphasis on listening. And not just the "active listening" we usually hear about—like nodding and paraphrasing—but a much deeper, almost "ontological" listening .

Eli: Right, because listening is where we actually "generate" the meaning of what’s being said. As one practitioner, Victor Seet, shared—he realized he had spent years thinking he was a "bad listener" and tried all the skills, but it didn't stick until he addressed his "Way of Being" as a listener . He had to learn to listen through his body and his emotions, not just his ears.

Lena: That’s such a vulnerable realization. He mentioned that under stress, he’d always revert to dominating conversations because his "Way of Being" was still stuck in a pattern of needing to convince others . The skills weren't enough because the "operating system" hadn't changed.

Eli: This is why an ontological coach listens for what's not being said. They’re listening for the "narratives" that are running in the background—the silent stories that define what the client thinks is possible . These stories often reflect the "deep culture" of an organization or a family, and they can be huge barriers to change because they’re invisible to the person living in them .

Lena: It’s like the coach acts as an external mirror. Because we are so familiar with our own worldview, it becomes "just the way things are" . We can’t see the flashlight beam that’s attached to our own head. The coach shines their light on our context, making the invisible visible .

Eli: And they do this by creating "distinctions." This is a big word in this practice. A distinction is just being able to see a difference where you couldn't see one before . For example, distinguishing between a "request" and a "demand." If you don't have that distinction, you might feel resentful every time someone asks you for something because you hear it as an order you can't say no to.

Lena: Or the distinction Victor Seet mentioned—the difference between "being a listener" and "listening as an action" . When he shifted his being to that of a listener, he became comfortable with silence. He didn't have to "do" anything; he just was different. And that shift changed his relationships with his kids and his wife completely .

Eli: It’s about building "conversational proficiency" . When you realize that everything we do in a business or a relationship happens through conversation, then the quality of those conversations becomes your most important asset. Ontological coaching helps you recognize the type of conversation you're in—is it a descriptive conversation about the past, or an "action conversation" about the future?

Lena: I want to go back to the body for a second, because this feels like the part most people overlook in "professional" settings. We tend to treat our bodies like they’re just vehicles for our heads—like we’re just "brains on sticks." But ontological coaching says our way of being is "embodied" .

Eli: It really is! Our posture, our muscle tension, even our breathing—these aren't just physical facts; they are part of how we observe the world. Think about "defensiveness." You can usually see it in someone’s body before they even speak—the crossed arms, the tight jaw, the shallow breath . If you stay in that physical posture, it’s almost impossible to truly "listen" or be "open" to a new idea.

Lena: That’s a fascinating point. The body can actually "trap" us in certain moods . You might have a great coaching session where you "intellectually" realize you need to be more collaborative, but if your nervous system is still wired for "protection" and your body is stuck in that defensive posture, you’ll revert to your old behavior the second you feel stressed .

Eli: This is why ontological coaches might ask you to notice your "somatic patterns" . They might ask, "What happens to your body when you think about meeting with your boss?" Do your shoulders hunch? Does your heart rate spike? By bringing awareness to these physical responses, you can start to make small shifts.

Lena: I saw a suggestion that even tiny shifts in posture can generate a more positive outlook . It’s not about doing a full workout; it’s about "using the body to get into more constructive moods" . It’s acknowledging that we are biological beings, and our nervous system is what’s actually responsible for our perception .

Eli: And there’s a biological law mentioned in the sources—that all change revolves around what is to be "conserved" or maintained . People are often resistant to change because they’re afraid of losing something vital. An ontological coach respects this. They help the client see that they can change their "Way of Being" while still keeping the things that truly matter to them safe .

Lena: It’s such a respectful, gentle approach. It’s not about "fixing" a broken person; it’s about a "relational context" where the client can self-generate change . The coach isn't the expert on your life; they're just a partner in the exploration of your "being" .

Eli: And that partnership is key. The coach has to do their own "self-work" too. They can’t just be a "content provider." They have to be a "powerful observer" of their own emotions and biases so they can show up fully for the client . It’s a continuous process for both people.

Lena: This feels especially relevant for leadership. We often think of leadership as a set of skills—like "how to give feedback" or "how to run a meeting." But ontological coaching suggests that you can only "do" leadership from your "Way of Being" .

Eli: Exactly. If a leader doesn't do that internal "self-work," the quality of their influence is always going to be compromised . You can use all the "right" words, but if your underlying "Way of Being" is one of "distrust" or "control," that’s what your team is going to respond to. They’ll feel the "incoherence" between your words and your "body language and moods" .

Lena: It’s about "constructive emotional leadership" . A leader’s mood is contagious. If a manager is stuck in a mood of "resignation," it permeates the whole team and limits what they see as possible. But if they can shift their own "Way of Being" to one of "possibility" or "ambition," it opens up a whole new "conversational space" for everyone .

Eli: And it’s not just about the leader as an individual. The ontological approach can be used for "Organizational Development" too . Organizations run through conversations. If you look at the interactions between people—the "conversations of trust," the "conversations for accountability"—you can see where the system is breaking down .

Lena: I love the idea that "ineffective conversations" are a waste of time and energy and they stifle innovation . If a team is afraid to make "requests" or "say no" to unrealistic demands, they’re going to burn out. Ontological coaching gives them the tools to "self-monitor" and adjust the quality of their interactions .

Eli: It’s also incredibly helpful for "intracultural" or "cross-cultural" relationships . In our globalized world, we’re constantly bumping into different "cultural narratives" and "norms" . We might misinterpret someone’s body language or their way of speaking because it doesn't fit our own "Way of Being." Ontological coaching helps us become "deep listeners" across those barriers .

Lena: It really is a versatile methodology. It’s a personal development tool, a leadership tool, and a business improvement tool all rolled into one . It’s been featured in places like the Wall Street Journal and Harvard Business Review because it gets to that "heart of human interaction" that determines whether a business actually succeeds .

Eli: And it’s particularly suited for the "disruptive and ambiguous" times we’re living in . When the world is changing so fast, we can’t rely on old scripts. We need to be "powerful observers" who can adapt and learn on the fly. We need a "stronger operating system," as Victor Seet put it .

Lena: Now, for anyone listening who’s thinking, "Wait, this sounds a bit like therapy," or "How is this different from a regular mentor?", the sources are very clear on those distinctions. It’s helpful to understand where ontological coaching fits in the "support ecosystem" .

Eli: That’s a really important point. Therapy is primarily focused on "healing" and "mental health"—addressing past trauma, clinical issues like depression or anxiety, and helping people develop coping mechanisms . Ontological coaching, on the other hand, is "future-focused" . It’s not looking for a "diagnosis" or a "treatment."

Lena: Right. It’s looking at your "Way of Being" in the present to create "new possibilities for the future" . It doesn't delve into past traumas. Instead, it asks: "Who are you being right now, and how is that helping or hindering the life you want to build?" It can actually "complement" therapy—someone might go to therapy to heal emotional pain and then use ontological coaching to align their actions with a new vision for their life .

Eli: And then you have "mentoring" and "consulting." A mentor is usually an expert who shares their "knowledge and experience" to give you advice . A consultant is hired to "solve a specific problem" and provide strategic solutions .

Lena: But an ontological coach isn't there to give you the answers or tell you what to do . They aren't the "expert" on your specific field. Their expertise is in the "process of being" . They won't dictate your actions; they’ll "empower you to discover your own solutions" by shifting your perspective .

Eli: It’s that "flashlight" analogy again . Mentors and consultants shine their flashlight onto parts previously unseen by the client but valued as useful by clients with similar objectives in the past. A coach shines the flashlight on you—the "context" . They help you "brighten and expand your own flashlight beam" so you can see the content differently .

Lena: That’s a great way to put it. You might have a mentor giving you great advice, but if your "Way of Being" is one of "self-doubt," you might never actually implement that advice . The ontological work helps you "break through those self-imposed limitations" so you can actually use the tools you already have .

Eli: It’s also not "psychologically based" in the traditional sense. It’s grounded in "philosophy and the biology of cognition" . It doesn't use a "mind-based" model; it uses a "being-based" model that explicitly includes the body and emotions as equal partners with language .

Lena: For some of our listeners, this might be sounding like a career path they want to explore. If you’re interested in becoming an ontological coach, there are some very specific training programs out there.

Eli: There are! And it’s worth noting that this is still an "unregulated industry," so while you don't need a certification to practice, it definitely adds "credibility" . There are two main paths often mentioned that are accredited by the "International Coach Federation" or ICF .

Lena: One is through the "Ontological Coaching Institute" . They have an 18-month program called the "Certified Ontological Coaching and Leadership Program" or COCLP. It’s quite comprehensive—it involves experiential workshops and three levels of learning, starting with the "Linguistic Basis," then "Emotional Learning," and finally "Professional Practice" .

Eli: Then there’s "The Coach Partnership," which offers programs like the "Newfield Coach Training program" . They have a nine-month track that includes "Foundations in Ontological Learning" and then "The Art and Practice of Ontological Mastery" . These programs are often designed for people who are already in leadership or business and want to bring this "transformational approach" into their work .

Lena: It’s a serious commitment. The COCLP has been running since 1999 and has graduates across five continents . It’s often described as the "gold standard" because of its "rigorous theoretical foundation" . It’s not just a weekend workshop; it’s a "life-changing experience" for the coach as much as the client .

Eli: And if you’re wondering about the "business side" of it, some estimates suggest that coach practitioners can make an average annual income of around 62,500 USD, with hourly rates averaging around 244 USD . But of course, that varies wildly based on your experience and your niche .

Lena: Because ontological coaching is more "niche" than general life coaching, it often allows for "higher end hourly rates" . But as we’ve discussed, a big part of the job is "self-coaching"—continuously reflecting on your own "Way of Being" so you can stay "powerful as an observer" for your clients .

Eli: It’s a path for someone who is a "continual learner" . You can’t just "teach" this; you have to "be" it. You’re helping people navigate "uncertain, unpredictable, and disruptive times," and that requires a level of "wisdom and humility" that only comes through your own ontological journey .

Lena: As we start to wrap this up, I’m thinking about the listener who isn't necessarily looking to become a professional coach, but just wants to apply some of this to their own life. Where do they start?

Eli: I think it starts with "noticing." Just becoming aware of the "nexus" of your Body, Emotions, and Language . You can start by asking yourself those four interrelated questions we talked about: What am I saying to myself? What am I saying to the world? What emotion am I feeling as I say those things? And how does my body feel right now?

Lena: That’s such a simple but deep practice. And maybe noticing when you’re collapsing "facts" and "assessments." When you catch yourself saying "This situation is a disaster," try pausing and asking, "Is that a fact, or is that an assessment I’m making from my current mood?" Just that one distinction can open up a tiny bit of "breathing room" in a stressful moment.

Eli: And don't forget the power of the body! If you find yourself stuck in a "negative mood," try making a "small shift in your posture" or your breathing . See if you can "use the body to get into a more constructive state" . It’s about realizing that you aren't a victim of your "Way of Being"—you are the one who can "observe and shift" it .

Lena: It’s a journey of "becoming a more powerful observer" so you can take "more effective action" . It’s about a life that is "mentally, emotionally, physically, and spiritually enriched" . It’s a big goal, but it starts with these very small, compassionate moments of self-awareness.

Eli: I love that. "Compassionate moments." Because this isn't about "fixing" yourself; it’s about "respecting" yourself as a "legitimate other" . It’s an "experience in wisdom," as one student put it . We’re all just learning how to hold our flashlights a little more steadily and see a little more of the room.

Lena: Well, this has been such a fascinating exploration. For everyone listening, I’d invite you to take a moment today to just check in with your "tripod." How are your words, your feelings, and your body interacting right now? Is there a small shift you could make that might open up a new possibility for you?

Eli: Thank you so much for joining us on this deep dive into the "Way of Being." It’s a powerful lens, and I hope it offers you some new insights into your own unique way of observing the world.

Lena: Take care of yourselves, and keep observing. Thank you for listening.