An explanation can be useful. It can help us notice a pattern that is interfering with our choices. But it can also give us another thing to monitor, another account of ourselves to maintain. Personal development can become a permanent occupation if we let it.
There ought to be room to leave some things alone. Inconsistencies, flaws and irrational dislikes do not all need to become projects. A better life does not require us to understand ourselves perfectly, or to stay in some continuous state of improvement.
This matters when choosing somebody to work with. I would look for a practitioner who seems more interested in you than in their process. Someone who knows their scope, explains the boundaries and can tolerate disagreement. Their explanation should remain open to correction. They should not need to decide what your solution ought to be.
Certainty can look impressive. So can charisma and a long list of processes. None of these, by themselves, proves competence. There needs to be room for “we do not know”, without treating that admission as a professional embarrassment.
There also needs to be room for an ordinary ending.
A problem that once occupied half the day may eventually become boring. Someone forgets that they used to avoid the lift. A week goes by before they notice the panic did not appear. The change matters, even if they have stopped telling a story about it.
I like that. Nobody needs to keep excavating an improvement until it yields a final lesson. The person has other things to talk about.
“This helped” is a substantial claim when it is true. We do not have to enlarge it into proof of everything we believe. An explanation has served a useful purpose if it helps someone get on with their life. It does not need to become the subject of that life.