The world is flowing over by “definitions” of reflexology. Most organisations and significant teachers have their own. This is a problem when it comes to research. The conclusion of a study will not gain support from other studies that is based on other definitions. Making meta analysis comparing apples and bananas will never be useful. Also when it comes to regulation the variety of definitions makes things difficult. Both for governments, schools, organisations and practitioners. Both clients and practitioners will be the victims.
But the problem is even more severe. Lots of the “definitions” are not really definitions. They are more political or promotional statements, telling that I/we do things in a specific way. They have been used in dispuets about who are the best practitioners. A statement does not become a definition just because someone claims it to be one. Some can also be viewed as rules for an organisation.
At this time the initiative consists of two approaches.
In the future, reflexology terminology might be included.
You might also find Christine Issel's text about this issue interesting.