Thanks, Inga! 

Some studies show that approaches integrating different types of techniques might be more effective than approaches using just one type

Yeah, a major reason why I like CFT and ST is that they are highly integrative therapies that use many different types of techniques and insights adapted from other therapies or disciplines (e.g., CBT, attachment theory, Gestalt therapy, evolutionary psychology, neuroscience, meditation, etc.).

To me, this post sounds like individual differences of the patient and the mode of therapy are the only key ingredients.

We definitely did not want to suggest that. I strongly agree that the individual skills, traits and “general style” of therapists vary widely even within a single therapy school and that these variables are extremely important. Research has shown that the individual relationship between a client and a therapist (the ‘therapeutic alliance’) is one of the most important variables in predicting therapy success. (One of the reasons I like ST and CFT is the strong emphasis they put on the therapeutic alliance.)

One can probably rank therapists in terms of overall skill/empathy, and this matters perhaps even more than to which therapy school they belong to. (That being said, people vary in their preferences so there isn’t a therapist that is optimal for everyone.)