An Introduction to Carl Rogers' Person-Centred Approach

"The theory behind person-centred psychotherapy is fundamentally organismic and holistic, placing the individual’s unique self-concept at its centre – “the sum of biochemical, physiological, perceptual, cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal behavioural subsystems that constitute the personality” (Pelletier & Rocchi, 2023; Wapner & Kaplan, 2024).

The holistic perspective views the person as an integrated whole (Wapner & Kaplan, 2024) – not as separate parts, but as a complete entity. The organismic theory complements this vision by emphasizing that the personality is a dynamic whole, composed of interconnected biological, cognitive, emotional, and social processes (Rogers, 1957). In other words, the person-centred approach sees the individual not as a collection of isolated elements, but as an integrated and unique whole.

Beyond being organismic and holistic, the theory also incorporates the philosophies of existentialism and phenomenology (Sartre, 2022; Wilkins, 2023). Existentialism emphasizes human existence and personal responsibility, while phenomenology seeks to explore the nature of conscious experience, describing phenomena as they appear to the subject while avoiding external assumptions (Wilkins, 2021).

In translation, person-centred psychotherapy perceives the personality as both existing and experiencing – striving to understand the person based on their own lived experience and narrative rather than imposing external interpretations.

In summary: In Rogerian thinking, a person is viewed as a whole composed of all their experiences, not as a collection of separate parts. The approach also includes a perspective on the existence of the personality, seeking to understand the individual based on their own experience, without imposing external assumptions. The theory is organismic, holistic, existential, and phenomenological." 
- The Person Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (available on Amazon.com)

Before we talk about the PCA, it’s important to place it in its historical and philosophical context – that means particularly its relationship with HUMANISM.
This can be a bit tricky because the two are deeply connected. In fact, you may often hear the person-centred approach described as a humanistic therapy – even though, interestingly, it actually emerged before humanistic psychology as a formal movement.
So, Carl Rogers began developing and sharing his ideas in the 1940s; while humanistic psychology, most commonly associated with Abraham Maslow – yes, the Maslow of the Hierarchy of Needs – began to take shape in the 1950s. Around 10 years later.
Here, you may ask: Why are they linked?
The answer is because: first, Humanism sees human beings as whole, unique, and self-directing. It emphasises free will, personal meaning, and growth potential. If that already sounds familiar, that’s because it mirrors the foundations of the person-centred approach almost perfectly.

And the second reason why they are linked is that both emerged as a response to the dominant theories of the mid-20th century: Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic theory and B. F. Skinner’s behavioural theory (Joseph, 2025). So, in the mid-20th century, psychology was dominated by 2 major schools – to repeat, psychoanalytic and behavioristic – and despite their differences, both tended to view the human being in deterministic and reductionist ways. I will explain what that means: they understood people through diagnoses, traits, symptoms, or observable behaviour. The individual, their experience and inner world did not matter that much.
Rogers and Maslow challenged this directly, and proposed something quite different - They suggested that people are not problems to be fixed, but persons to be understood.

From a person-centred and humanistic perspective, each individual is incredibly unique – not a category, not a label, not a diagnosis. Classifying people primarily by pathology or behaviour risks reducing them to explanations like: “You are this way because of X.”
Humanism and the PCA reject this kind of typological thinking. Instead, they insist that a person is always more than their symptoms, past experiences, diagnosis or behaviours.
The focus shifts from what is wrong with you to who are you and how do you experience the world.
Because of this clear departure from both psychoanalysis and behaviourism, the humanistic movement became known as “the third force” in psychology. Carl Rogers is recognised as one of its key founders, and the person-centred approach is among its earliest and most influential expressions.

So, if we follow the connection, Rogers developed the person-centred approach as an open expression of dissent. Later, Maslow developed humanistic psychology, also as a critique of the dominant paradigms of the time, sharing similar philosophies and values. But PCT is considered part of the humanistic school because it fits organically within the framework of the movement. That is to say, it is a niche within a movement, or a niche that embodies humanistic values in practice.

Today, the person-centred approach is recognised as the most famous humanistic psychotherapeutic approach, and its philosophical stance – that deep respect for the person – is what continues to set it apart.

1. Right, so, as the name suggests this is an OVERVIEW of the elements of the person-centred approach. We will explore them in detail separately throughout the course, but just now it can be helpful to step back and look at its core ideas as a whole, rather than as separate concepts. What makes this approach distinctive is not just what it believes about people, but how it understands them and relates to them.

One of the most immediate shifts you’ll notice is in language. In the person-centred approach, we speak about the client, not the patient. This is not a cosmetic change. The word patient implies passivity – someone something is being done to. Client, on the other hand, reflects agency, choice, and collaboration. It signals that the person seeking therapy is not broken or ill by default, but an active participant in their own process of growth and understanding. And interestingly, Carl Rogers was the first practitioner to introduce and popularise the term “client” instead of “patient,” based on the idea that therapists are equal collaborators rather than elevated experts (Guenther, 2022). Later in his career, he chose the term “person,” considering it an even better alternative.

Closely connected to this is the person-centred focus on the present moment. While past experiences are respected and can emerge naturally, the emphasis is on how those experiences are being lived and felt now. The therapist is interested in the client’s current perceptions, emotions, and meanings, rather than in interpreting their past or analysing it through predetermined theoretical lenses. What matters most is the person’s lived experience as it unfolds in the room.

Then, at the heart of the person-centred approach lies the concept of the actualising tendency. Rogers proposed that all organisms have an innate drive toward growth, development, and fulfilment. This tendency is not something the therapist creates or installs. It already exists within the person. Psychological distress, from this perspective, is not a sign of pathology, but often the result of conditions that have blocked, distorted, or constrained this natural movement toward growth. Therapy, then, is not about fixing the person, but about creating the conditions in which this inherent tendency can re-emerge and flow more freely.

This leads us to the idea of the fully functioning person – towards whom the self-actualising tendency is naturally directed. Rather than an ideal or a final state, this is a way of describing a person who is open to their experience, able to live more fluidly in the present, and increasingly guided by their own internal sense of meaning rather than by external expectations or conditions of worth. A fully functioning person is not someone always happy or free from struggle, but rather someone who is more psychologically flexible, self-trusting, and engaged with life as it is.

All of this rests on what is arguably the most essential element of the person-centred approach, which is the therapeutic relationship. Rogers argued that meaningful psychological change does not come from techniques, interpretations, or advice, but from the quality of the relationship itself. When the therapist offers genuineness, empathic understanding, and unconditional positive regard, a relational climate is created in which the client feels sufficiently safe to explore, question, and reorganise their inner world. It is within this relationship, not outside of it, that growth occurs.

Taken together, these ideas form a coherent and deeply respectful view of the person. The person-centred approach sees individuals not as problems to be solved, but as human beings with an inherent capacity for growth, meaning, and self-direction, given the right relational conditions. Once again, we will explore them in greater detail separately, but it is also useful to have them all together here at the beginning.”

· In the mid-1920s, early in his career, Rogers was strongly influenced by Otto Rank, who had already broken away from Freud. Rank challenged psychoanalysis by shifting attention away from distant childhood events and unconscious speculation, and toward present experience and conscious choice. This resonated deeply with Rogers and contributed to his growing dissatisfaction with the deterministic nature of psychoanalysis.

· A major turning point came in 1939, when Rogers joined Ohio State University. There, he began developing what he initially called non-directive therapy. This was the earliest and most experimental phase of what later became the person-centred approach. Rogers proposed that it was neither helpful nor ethical for therapists to give advice, impose interpretations, or direct the client’s process. Instead, the client was viewed as the expert on their own experience.

· In 1945, Rogers established the Counseling Center at the University of Chicago. This marked the consolidation of his work and brought him national recognition as a founder of psychology’s “third force” – humanistic psychology. Working with people affected by the aftermath of World War II, Rogers was able to refine his ideas through extensive clinical practice. Importantly, Rogers also applied his philosophy internally. At the Chicago center, he decentralised authority and experimented with shared leadership, reflecting his belief in trust, collaboration, and personal responsibility, principles that would later influence education, leadership, and organizational psychology.

· In 1951, Rogers formally renamed his approach client-centred therapy. He moved away from the term “non-directive” because it implied a lack of direction. Rogers argued that therapy always has direction, but that it should emerge from the client, not the therapist. The new name also reflected his growing emphasis on the client’s inner world and on the therapist’s relational attitude rather than technique.

· That same year, in one of his books, Client-Centered Therapy: Its Current Practice, Implications, and Theory, Rogers introduced the first major pillar of his theory: The Nineteen Propositions, which describe personality development and psychological functioning.

· In 1957, Rogers published one of the most influential articles in psychotherapy, outlining the Six Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Therapeutic Change, the second pillar of his theory. He proposed that psychological change occurs when a specific relational climate is present, not when techniques are applied.

· By 1959, he clarified the three core therapist attitudes within these conditions: Congruence, Unconditional Positive Regard, and Empathy. Rogers argued that when these attitudes are genuinely communicated and perceived by the client, meaningful change can occur. This was a radical claim at the time, placing the relationship, not interpretation, at the centre of therapy.

· In On Becoming a Person (1961), Rogers articulated his core hypothesis: that if a therapist can provide a certain type of relationship, the client will discover within themselves the capacity for growth and change. In the same work, he introduced the third pillar of his theory: The Seven Stages of Process, describing how clients change within the therapeutic relationship.

Another crucial aspect of Rogers’ work was his commitment to empirical research. The person-centred approach is widely recognised as the first psychotherapeutic orientation developed entirely through systematic research. Rogers pioneered the use of audio recordings of full therapy sessions, allowing researchers to study real therapeutic processes rather than hypothetical ones.

· Over more than two decades, Rogers and his colleagues conducted extensive outcome and process research, developed measurement tools for empathy, congruence, and acceptance, and validated client change empirically. In recognition of this work, Rogers received the American Psychological Association’s Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions in 1956.

· During the 1960s, Rogers’ work became closely associated with the Human Potential Movement. He introduced the concept of the Fully Functioning Person and expanded his understanding of the actualizing tendency — the innate drive toward growth and fulfilment.

· In 1963, Rogers left academia and moved to California, where he broadened the application of the approach beyond psychotherapy into education, leadership, group work, organizations, creativity, and conflict resolution. His work demonstrated that the same relational conditions that foster change in therapy could also promote learning, collaboration, and healing in groups and communities.

· By the late 1960s and 1970s, Rogers increasingly focused on group processes and encounter groups, showing that empathic, non-hierarchical leadership fostered energy, creativity, and authenticity. These ideas had a profound influence on modern organizational and leadership practices.

· Over time, as the approach expanded beyond therapy, the term person-centred approach came into use. This shift emphasised shared humanity rather than roles such as therapist and client. Today, the terms person-centred therapy, client-centred therapy, and Rogerian psychotherapy are often used interchangeably.

· In his later years, Rogers became increasingly attentive to power, authority, and social structures. In Carl Rogers on Personal Power (1977), he explored how person-centred principles challenge hierarchy and promote more egalitarian relationships.

· He also applied the approach to intergroup and international conflicts, facilitating dialogue between divided communities in Northern Ireland, South Africa, and beyond. Through large-scale person-centred encounters, Rogers demonstrated that empathy, acceptance, and authenticity could reduce hostility and foster mutual understanding, even between opposing groups.

· These contributions led to his posthumous nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1987.

· Today, the person-centred approach stands out not only as a theory of psychotherapy, but as a profoundly humane way of understanding people, relationships, and social change. As Richard Farson described him, Carl Rogers was “the quiet revolutionary.” The effects of that revolution continue to shape psychotherapy and human relationships worldwide.

Excerpt taken from The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026) by Aleksandra Tsenkova; available on Amazon.com

• PHENOMENAL FIELD – (or I) is our subjective reality. This refers to everything a person is aware of – the field of our experience. It includes people, objects, our feelings, behaviours, thoughts, images, and ideas such as justice, equality, and so on. Essentially, it encompasses everything that is currently, or potentially, accessible to a person’s consciousness or personal world, covering all kinds of experiences. This set of sensations, knowledge, emotions, and memories is either currently conscious or could easily become conscious (Williams, 2021).

• Rogers was not the original creator of this term; in fact, it was first proposed by Donald Snygg, Arthur Combs, and Aaron Gurwitsch. The phenomenal field also appears as a concept in other psychological approaches beyond the person-centred, such as Gestalt psychology.

• SELF-CONCEPT/ (Perceived Self) – In its simplest terms, the Self-Concept is the way a person sees themselves, intertwined with how others perceive them. It encompasses how one views their own identity, relates to others, and makes sense of the world around them. The self-concept reflects the way we define ourselves, incorporating our perceptions, values, and aspirations. According to Carl Rogers, it represents a dynamic yet coherent pattern of self-perceptions in relation to our environment. Within the person-centred approach, the Self-Concept is fundamental, shaping not only the therapeutic process but also an individual’s broader psychological growth. (Jannah et al., 2024).

• ORGANISMIC SELF (Real Self) – The most genuine and authentic part of a person – the part that feels truly “you.” According to Rogers, the Organismic Self exists within the person from birth. He described it as innate, representing individuals’ fundamental physical connection to the world, seamlessly integrating sensory, bodily, and visceral functions (Zhu & Liu, 2022; Palletier & Rocchi, 2023). At its core, Rogers considered it trustworthy, for it experiences all inner feelings and deeply rooted desires. The Organismic Self also knows what a person needs – mentally, physically, from the surroundings, and from other people. It can be thought of as the “True Me,” but also as the “Experiencing Me”: the aspect of ourselves that embodies our connection to the world and continually strives for growth, maturity, and self-actualisation, seeking to unfold its full potential.

  
  

  The term Organismic Self has been adopted by numerous practitioners, including Jules Seeman, Dave Meerns, Brian Thorne, Robert Cunliffe, and others. Beyond the person-centred approach, the concept also appears in other modalities, such as Transactional Analysis, highlighting its broader relevance in understanding human experience.

• IDEAL SELF – It represents the person we strive to become, or the way we would like to be. Rogers explains that within our mind, heart, and body exists a version of ourselves that is ideal – a version encompassing the aspirations, goals, and traits we wish to embody. This Ideal Self is shaped by a combination of personal ambitions, societal expectations, and the potential we perceive within ourselves (Zhu & Liu, 2022).

• CONDITIONS OF WORTH – Rogers observed that external factors can influence the way we evaluate or measure our own worth, based on our ability to meet certain conditions we consider important. These conditions or standards are those we believe we must adhere to to earn love, acceptance, and respect. In other words, they represent the requirements we feel compelled to fulfil to be regarded by others as worthy of their affection and positive regard (Ismail & Tekke, 2015; Wilkins, 2023).

• LOCUS OF EVALUATION – The term locus, derived from the Latin word for “place,” describes the source from which a person makes their judgments. It serves as the reference point we turn to when evaluating ourselves, others, and the world around us. The locus of evaluation is central to how we perceive ourselves and our own worth. In contemporary psychology, as well as in the person-centred approach, two types are distinguished: the Internal and External Locus of Evaluation (Di Malta et al., 2024).

• INTERNAL LOCUS OF EVALUATION – When a person operates from an Internal Locus of Evaluation, they trust their own instincts and use their organism as a guide. They listen to themselves. Or they evaluate their worth according to their personal beliefs, values, and standards, making decisions guided by their inner compass. Individuals who act from an internal locus of evaluation tend to be more autonomous and self-directed. This independence is associated with higher self-esteem, better mental health, and greater resilience to external pressures. In essence, an internal locus of evaluation reflects how much we trust and value our own perception of ourselves.

• EXTERNAL LOCUS OF EVALUATION – When a person operates from an External Locus of Evaluation, they rely on introjected values received from others through conditions of worth. They listen to others. Or they orient themselves according to the opinions, expectations, and standards of those around them. Their self-esteem, self-respect, and sense of worth become dependent on external approval and fluctuating opinions. This dependence makes them more vulnerable to social pressure, conflict, and anxiety, and can contribute to issues with confidence. An external locus of evaluation reflects how much we trust and value the way others perceive us.

Broadly speaking, the nineteen propositions form Carl Rogers’ theory of personality and behaviour. Together, they describe how people experience themselves and the world, how behaviour emerges from personal meaning rather than external control, and why psychological change requires emotional safety. At their core, the propositions reflect a deeply optimistic view of human nature: that people are always in process, always developing, and always moving toward greater wholeness when the right conditions are present...

At the centre of personality lies the Organismic Self. This is the most authentic and fundamental aspect of who we are. It is grounded in immediate, lived experience – bodily sensations, emotions, instincts, and inner knowing. The Organismic Self reflects what we genuinely feel and need in the present moment, before those experiences are filtered through expectations or judgments.

Alongside this sits the Self-Concept, which represents how we see ourselves. This includes our beliefs about who we are, our strengths and weaknesses, and our sense of identity — shaped not only by our own perceptions but also by how we believe others see us. Because it develops in a social context, the Self-Concept is particularly influenced by feedback, relationships, and conditions of worth.

The third aspect is the Ideal Self – the image of who we would like to be. This includes our aspirations, values, goals, and ideas about our potential, often shaped by cultural, social, and relational expectations. While the Ideal Self can be motivating and growth-oriented, it can also become a source of pressure if it drifts too far from lived experience.

This brings us to one of Rogers’ most radical contributions to psychotherapy: his redefinition of the therapist–client relationship. Rather than a hierarchical model in which the therapist is the expert and the client the passive recipient, the person-centred relationship becomes a collaborative, human encounter. The relationship itself becomes the healing agent.

Rogers. C. (1957) ‘The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change’, Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 21, pp 95–103

1. Two persons are in psychological contact.

2. The first, whom we shall term the client, is in a state of incongruence, being vulnerable or anxious.

3. The second person, whom we shall term the counsellor, is congruent or integrated in the relationship.

4. The counsellor experiences unconditional positive regard for the client.

5. The counsellor experiences an empathic understanding of the client’s internal frame of reference, and endeavours to communicate this experience to the client.

6. The communication to the client of the counsellor’s empathic understanding and unconditional positive regard is to a minimal extent achieved.

HERE-AND-NOW –> MY AWARENESS OF THE HERE-AND-NOW –> MY COMMUNICATION OF THE HERE-AND-NOW

This is one of the most misunderstood concepts in psychotherapy, so I want to begin by clearing something up straight away: unconditional positive regard is not the same as being nice, agreeable, or approving.

When Rogers spoke about unconditional positive regard, he was referring to a deep, non-possessive acceptance of the person as they are, without conditions attached to their worth.

In many of our lives, acceptance has been conditional. We learn in life that we are more loved, more welcome, or more valued when we behave in certain ways, feel certain emotions, or meet certain expectations. Over time, this teaches us that parts of ourselves are acceptable, and others are not.

Unconditional positive regard offers a radically different experience...

When empathy is present alongside congruence and unconditional positive regard, something remarkable happens: the client no longer needs to defend their experience. They can explore it openly, revise it, and relate to it with greater compassion and clarity.

Empathy, then, is not about fixing or changing the client. It is about creating the relational conditions in which change becomes possible...

In this section, we’re moving a little deeper into the person-centred approach. Up to now, we’ve explored the theory of personality and behaviour and the conditions that facilitate change –congruence, unconditional positive regard, and empathy.
Now the question becomes: what does change actually look like when it happens?

• People functioning primarily at this stage are unlikely to seek therapy voluntarily.

• Responsibility is entirely located outside the self.

• The person is extremely remote from their inner experience.

• Any attempt to invite reflection or inward awareness is often met with defensiveness or resistance.

• At this point, therapy as a process of change cannot truly occur.

• People at this stage are far more likely to appear in the therapy room; not always – some individuals linger here for years without taking action – but the key difference is this: something has begun to loosen...

• The individual begins to think about the possibility of responsibility, without yet being able to take it.

• A hallmark of this stage is a strong focus on the past.

• When difficulties arise, responsibility is still largely externalised.

• People at Stage Two are still not fully in touch with their feelings.

• Most clients enter therapy at Stage Three.

• Anger is a catalyst.

• People become more willing to talk about themselves and their emotional world; however, this openness is still fragile.

• The client still tends to focus on the past rather than the present.

• They now recognise that the pain exists – and that it belongs to them.

• People may also begin to describe present-moment feelings, but often with harsh self-judgment.

• The real loosening of the Self-Concept begins.

• One of the first things you’ll notice in Stage Four is a change in language; clients begin to use “I” statements more consistently; this signals a growing sense of personal responsibility.

• Emotions become stronger, clearer, and more detailed. They are still mostly located in the past, rather than experienced fully in the present.

• A dual movement marks Stage Four: greater ownership of experience and continued emotional distance as a form of protection.

• Rogers captured this beautifully with the phrase “not now.” Clients allow painful feelings into the therapy room, but keep them at arm’s length.

• A strong wish at this stage for the pain to simply go away – as if it should never have existed at all

• Use of humour as a defence.

• Trust is fragile.

• Clients begin to recognise that they can make choices and influence their lives, but they are unsure of how to do so.

• The emergence of “bubbling-up feelings”.

• Feelings are experienced and expressed in the present moment.

• Clients are not only aware of what they are feeling, they are naming it, validating it, and sharing it openly within the therapeutic relationship; this signals a growing trust in the Organismic Self.

• For the first time, the client realizes that emotions – even difficult ones – do not make them bad or defective; anger, sadness, fear, or resentment are no longer seen as moral failures, but as meaningful signals.

• The person is learning, often for the first time, how to stay present with their inner world.

• Clients begin to take responsibility for their emotions and their choices.

• Once a person reaches this stage, the likelihood of regression becomes minimal

• Reflects a more stable and consolidated transformation.

• Emotional insights, bodily experiences, and self-awareness are no longer fleeting moments that come and go – they are now woven into the client’s self-concept and everyday behavior; the person begins to experience themselves as more whole, flexible, and authentic.

• One of the defining features of Stage 6 is that previously repressed or avoided emotions are now fully felt in the here and now.

• What stands out is not the content of the feelings, but how embodied and immediate they are.

• A qualitative shift occurs: the person begins to accept and value both the positive and negative aspects of themselves, without splitting or denial.

• A hallmark of Stage 6 is the emergence of self-compassion.

• Many clients feel ready to conclude therapy.

• Characterised by integration, compassion, and inner harmony.

• Stage 7 represents the opposite pole of rigidity: fluidity.

• At this point, the individual is flexible, resilient, and deeply self-accepting in relation to their inner and outer experiences.

• In practice, it is rare to work with a client who is already firmly in Stage 7 within therapy itself.

• The person begins to live as a fully functioning individual.

• High degree of congruence between the aspects of the Self.

• A key feature of this stage is the ability to tolerate uncertainty and change.

• Relationships become deeper and more genuine, grounded in empathy, mutual acceptance, and respect.

• The person no longer lives primarily through old interpretations of the past, but experiences life as dynamic, evolving, and full of opportunity.

• Emotions are welcomed without judgment, and personal growth is actively embraced rather than feared.

• "Stage 7 is not a fixed endpoint. It is a dynamic, ongoing process that requires awareness, reflection, and openness. The fully functioning person continues to grow, adapt, and self-actualize – not because they must, but because growth has become a natural and desirable way of being."

"...This concept represents, in many ways, the direction of growth in person-centred therapy. And also, full functioning represents the culmination of the therapeutic process, which allows for a natural and coherent transition from the discussion of the seven stages to the present section..."

"...It’s important to clarify one thing early on: full functioning is not a final destination. It’s not a badge you earn or a permanent state you reach. Rogers was very clear about this. Full functioning is a process – a dynamic, ongoing movement. People don’t “arrive” there and stop growing. Instead, they continue evolving, responding, and becoming. In that sense, it’s not about becoming perfect, fixed, or “sorted out.” Instead, it describes a way of being in the world, a way of relating to ourselves, to others, and to life as it unfolds..."

"...To understand this, it helps to imagine the continuum. At one end, we have rigidity – emotional stiffness, defensiveness, and psychological armour. At the other end, we find fluidity – openness, flexibility, and responsiveness.

Now let’s pause for a moment and ask a very simple question: What is the function of a hard shell?
The answer is obvious – it exists to protect.

Psychological rigidity works in exactly the same way. When something feels threatening, the organism naturally tries to protect itself. And in Rogers’ theory, what feels most threatening is anything that challenges our self-concept – our idea of who we are.

This is what Rogers calls defensiveness. And at the emotional core of defensiveness, we almost always find one thing: fear. When fear is present, we close. When fear dominates, rigidity increases.

One of Rogers’ most radical insights was that therapy does not remove fear by force. Instead, it gradually replaces fear with something else: psychological safety. And safety changes everything.

When a person begins to feel safe – safe to feel, safe to be imperfect, safe to encounter their inner world – openness naturally emerges. There is less need to distort experience, deny emotions, or build inner walls..."

"...When a person lives existentially, identity is no longer something fixed that must be protected at all costs. It becomes something that evolves naturally, in dialogue with life as it is happening.

This way of being often brings a sense of aliveness – a feeling of being “in motion,” even when the destination is unclear. Rogers described this as exciting, sometimes unsettling, but deeply meaningful.

And one natural outcome of existential living is creativity.

Creativity here doesn’t only mean art or innovation. It means the ability to respond freshly to life, rather than repeating old patterns. It means flexibility, spontaneity, and the courage to meet life without a script.

To live existentially is to say: “I am here. I am present. And I am willing to meet whatever emerges...”

"...When a person trusts their organism, they experience a form of authentic confidence. This is very different from confidence based on praise, success, or validation. It’s quieter and deeper.

It sounds like this: “I don’t know exactly how this will turn out – but I trust my ability to respond.”

This trust creates courage. The courage to try. To experiment. To take risks. And yes – to make mistakes without collapsing into shame or fear..."

Together, these three characteristics — openness to experience, existential living, and trust in the organism — describe a person fundamentally oriented toward growth.

The fully functioning person is not perfect, fearless, or fixed. They are in motion. They meet life as it unfolds, remain connected to their inner experience, and trust themselves enough to learn from whatever emerges.

And perhaps most importantly: full functioning is not something we achieve once and for all. No one is fully functioning all the time — and that’s not a failure. It’s part of being human.

From a person-centred perspective, the good life is not about certainty or control. It is about the courage to be — to remain open, present, and responsive to life, again and again.

"...Rogers observed this again and again in his clinical work. People who had grown up with judgment, conditional acceptance, or emotional neglect had not lost their capacity for growth – but they had learned to distrust themselves. Their self-actualizing tendency was still there, but it had been forced to adapt in painful ways.

This insight led Rogers to a revolutionary conclusion: people do not need to be fixed.

What they need is an environment that allows their natural tendency toward growth to breathe again.

This is why person-centred therapy places such emphasis on empathy, unconditional positive regard, and therapist congruence. These are not techniques designed to make something happen. They are conditions that allow something already present to unfold.

When a person feels deeply understood, accepted without conditions, and met by someone who is real and genuine, the inner drive toward self-actualization begins to move again – often quietly, sometimes slowly, but reliably.

And this is the heart of the person-centred approach: change does not come from being directed – it comes from being supported..."

"...What Rogers and Maslow did was something transformative: they turned self-actualization from a philosophical idea into a psychological principle, and eventually into a moral stance – one that continues to shape how we understand growth, therapy, and what it means to live well..."

You can explore this topic in greater depth in my book The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026), available on Amazon.com

"...When people first encounter the term non-directive, it often raises eyebrows.
Some imagine a therapist who is passive, silent, or disengaged. Others assume it means “doing nothing,” offering no guidance, or simply agreeing with everything a client says.

But in person-centred therapy, non-directivity means none of those things.

Non-directivity is not about absence. It is about presence.

At its core, non-directivity refers to a very specific therapeutic stance: the therapist does not lead, push, or decide the direction of change for the client. Instead, the therapist trusts that the client already carries an inner orientation toward growth — what Rogers described as the tendency toward actualization..."

"...It also requires courage. Non-directivity means letting go of the therapist’s need to be in control, to appear clever, or to “fix” something quickly. It means tolerating uncertainty and allowing meaning to emerge organically rather than being manufactured..."

You can explore this topic in greater depth in my book The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026), available on Amazon.com

"...The therapist does not instruct the client on what to feel. They do not push insight. They do not decide when change should happen.

Instead, they create the relational conditions in which the client can safely reconnect with their own inner process, including their emotions, values, and lived experiences.

This is why person-centred therapy is often described as facilitative rather than directive.
The therapist facilitates a space — and within that space, the client’s tendency toward growth begins to move again..."

“I trust your process – even when it’s unclear, messy, or unfinished.”

• Non-directivity.

• "Insufficient for complex or severe presentations."

• "Overly idealistic."

• "Cultural and contextual limitations."

• "Easily misunderstood and misused."

You can explore this topic in greater depth in my book The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026), available on Amazon.com

"...When we speak about limits and ethics, we are not speaking about weaknesses. We are speaking about responsibility.

Every therapeutic approach operates within boundaries – and recognising those boundaries is part of ethical, competent practice. The person-centred approach is no exception.

At the same time, it is important to say this clearly: many of the ethical strengths of contemporary psychotherapy are deeply rooted in person-centred thinking..."

You can explore this topic in greater depth in my book The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026), available on Amazon.com

"...Integration does not dilute the person-centred approach – it extends its reach and applicability. By staying true to its relational foundation while thoughtfully incorporating complementary strategies, therapists can meet clients where they are, respond flexibly to complexity, and support meaningful, lasting change.

This flexibility is a defining strength of the person-centred approach: it is not rigid, it is not prescriptive, and it does not demand uniformity. Instead, it trusts the client, honours the therapeutic relationship, and allows growth to unfold – sometimes with, sometimes alongside, other methods – always ethically, always humanistically, and always authentically.

And lastly – the person-centred approach is the most integrated and integrable psychotherapeutic approach..."

You can explore this topic in greater depth in my book The Person-Centred Approach: A Modern Return to Carl Rogers' Theory (2026), available on Amazon.com

"...Over the course of our lectures, you’ve gained a strong academic foundation in one of the most influential humanistic frameworks in psychology. You’ve explored the three pillars that make the theory both rigorous and profoundly human: the 19 Propositions that articulate Rogers’ theory of personality and behaviour, the 6 necessary and sufficient conditions for therapeutic change, and the 7 stages of the therapeutic process that guide a person toward full functioning. Each of these pillars represents a lens through which we can understand human growth, development, and the potential for authentic living.

But this course has gone beyond theory. We’ve also examined the chronology of Rogers’ thinking, tracing how his ideas evolved over time and intersected with the work of contemporaries like Abraham Maslow and earlier influences such as Kurt Goldstein. You’ve explored key concepts that form the essence of person-centred practice: openness to experience, existential living, trust in the organism, non-directiveness, and the actualising tendency. You’ve seen not only the elegance of the theory but also the practical implications for therapy, personal growth, and our understanding of what it means to live fully as a human being..."

I want to invite you to pause rather than move on too quickly.

The person-centred approach is not something to memorise or complete. It is something that gradually becomes clearer through experience, relationship, and reflection.

You might notice how these ideas show up in your work, your conversations, or the way you relate to yourself. You may find that some aspects resonate strongly, while others feel distant or unclear - all of this is part of the process.

There is nothing you need to do with what you’ve learned. Simply staying curious, open, and attentive to your own experience is enough.

As we come to the end of this course, I want to acknowledge that learning within the person-centred approach doesn’t really have a final point. It’s an ongoing process of reflection, relationship, and becoming.

If you would like to continue exploring these ideas, you’re warmly invited to connect with me in ways that feel right for you. You can find me on social media, where I share reflections on person-centred practice and relational ways of working. My IG: aleksandratsenkova

If you’re interested in a deeper exploration, my book on the person-centred approach is available on Amazon.com, and a link is provided in the description of this lecture. You’re also welcome to visit my website https://aleksandrawellbeing.com to learn more about my work, or to book a consultation if you feel that would be supportive for you at this point.

And finally - Thank you for the time, attention, and presence you’ve brought to this course.