The term behavioral coaching has been used inconsistently in and outside the field of behavior analysis. In the sports literature, the term has been used to describe various intervention strategies, and in the organizational behavior management literature it has been used to describe an approach to training management personnel and staff. This inconsistency is problematic in terms of the replication of behavioral coaching across studies and aligning with Baer, Wolf, and Risley's (1968) technological dimension of applied behavior analysis. The current paper will outline and critique the discrepancies in the use of the term and suggest how Martin and Hrycaiko's (1983) characteristics of behavioral coaching in sports may be used to bring us closer to establishing a consistent definition of the term. In addition, we will suggest how these characteristics can also be applicable to the use of the term behavioral coaching in other domains of behavior analysis.