“Doing” Therapy Isn’t a Competition—It’s a Cooperative Game
The field of psychotherapy has a habit of dividing itself into factions. There are the CBT therapists, the psychodynamic therapists, the ACT therapists, the trauma specialists, the somatic workers…ad infinitum. Each group claims a corner of the field and then the corresponding academics line up to prove their approach is the most effective, relative to the others.
Though understandable—every theory wants to show its worth—problems arise when therapy gets treated as a competitive race, where different models are pitted against one another as if only one can emerge victorious. But, the reality is more complicated (see the famous Dodo verdict).
Because those studies just don’t capture how change works in the therapy room.
It’s my view therapy is a cooperative game. No single theory holds all the answers, and no one approach is inherently superior. What works best depends on the client, the therapist, the specific problem at hand, and the moment in time.
Functional Psychotherapy acknowledges this complexity and rejects the notion that therapy should be played like a zero-sum game. Instead, it operates on the assumption that many approaches have something useful to say—sometimes in isolation, sometimes in combination, and sometimes not at all, depending on the case.
The Illusion of Theoretical Purity
Therapists, like anyone else, become attached to their views. A psychodynamic therapist sees unconscious conflicts in every struggle. A CBT therapist sees cognitive distortions. An ACT therapist sees avoidance of emotions. And within their respective frameworks, they’re not necessarily wrong—but it still can be limiting.
Too often, the problem with academic research is that—to examine the mechanics of a particular approach—people must be put into overly stringent conceptual boxes. Yet, that isn’t how things work in the real-world.
Imagine a client struggling with panic attacks. A CBT therapist might focus on thought patterns that amplify anxiety. A trauma therapist might investigate early life experiences that set the stage for hypervigilance. A somatic therapist might work with body awareness and nervous system regulation. Any of these approaches could work, but none is guaranteed to.
What’s needed is flexibility.
Functional Psychotherapy asks:
What do we actually know about this person?
What’s the best hypothesis based on the data at hand?
If this approach isn’t working, what else might?
Instead of clinging to a single theory, a Functional Therapist continually tests and refines their approach, adapting based on new information rather than rigidly applying a predetermined method.
Why Over-Reliance on One Model can Fall Short
Clients don’t present with theoretical problems. They present with real-life suffering. When therapists rigidly adhere to a single model, they risk forcing the client’s experience to fit their framework rather than adapting the framework to fit the client’s experience.
Consider two people with the same diagnosis—let’s say, depression.
One has unresolved grief from a traumatic loss.
The other is stuck in a job they despise but are too afraid to leave.
If both see a therapist who only knows how to “treat depression” say, by focusing on behavioral activation and cognitive restructuring, one of them might improve while the other remains stuck. Why? Because their depression is not the same problem.
Therapy is not about treating diagnoses; it’s about treating people.
A Functional Therapist recognizes that different cases demand different interventions. Sometimes a present-focused, problem-solving approach is best. Other times, deeper work is necessary. The key is not to decide in advance, but to respond intelligently in real time.
Why Therapy Is a Cooperative Game, Not a Competition
The language used in psychotherapy often reflects an underlying sense of competition. Therapists debate which theory is best, which interventions are most effective, which models are scientifically superior. Research studies pit one modality against another as if therapy were a contest with winners and losers.
This is the wrong metaphor.
Therapy is not a race—it’s a cooperative game. The goal is not to see which theory "wins" but to use whatever theories and corresponding methods are best-suited to help the client reach their goals.
This means:
Acknowledging that multiple truths can coexist. CBT’s focus on cognition is valid. So is psychodynamic theory’s focus on unconscious conflict. So is somatic work’s focus on the nervous system. These perspectives are not mutually exclusive—they are different angles on the same human experience.
Recognizing that sometimes the most effective therapy is a hybrid model. Many of the best interventions borrow from multiple theories. A Functional Therapist might start with behavioral techniques, shift to emotional processing, and incorporate relational work—all within the same case.
Letting go of theoretical ego. The best therapists are not loyal to a theory—they are loyal to the client’s progress. They change their approach when necessary, challenge their own assumptions, and remain open to different ways of thinking.
The Takeaway
Therapy is not a debate, and it is not a contest. It is an evolving, dynamic process that must be tailored to the individual.
The best therapy is the one that works. And what works will vary—not just from person to person, but even from moment to moment within the same case.
Therapists who operate with an appreciation of these dynamics might be more effective than those who rigidly adhere to a single model.
Because, at the end of the day, therapy is not about proving a theory right. It is about helping people heal.
