This study is exploratory and looks for meaningful ways of differentiating coaching approaches used by UK practitioners as a way of establishing a more solid foundation for comparative and evaluative research. The paper briefly explores how coaching is defined, arguing that current definitions provide an inadequate foundation for theoretical and evaluative research, compared with multi-dimensional models. A methodology for developing multi-dimensional models is sought within and outside the coaching literature. With little existing methodology to follow, a pragmatic approach is developed using a range of techniques from different traditions: data collection and analysis through interview (from Grounded Theory); synthesis through repertory grid (originally from Personal Construct Theory, but used in other contexts); and simplification of the resulting dimensions through qualitative clustering techniques. Interviews with 5 UK-based practitioners produced a five-dimensional typology reflecting attitudinal and conceptual differences. Potential applications of the typology are discussed.