A note of thanks to Drs. Ross and Rotgers for opening this forum for discussion. Our team at ISTC is excited about shifting the focus of treatment toward the client (their strengths and resources, their view of the relationship, and their theory of the change process). One way that we are doing this is by using empirically valid and relaible measures of how well the therapist's activities square with clients' experience of what the research says "works." I am not a fan of the Emprically Validated Treatment movement inside of APA (see the latest issue of Psychotherapy Research for a thorough review of the problems with this orientation). Our team believes that the biggest challenge facing mental health professionals is proving the efficacy of our work on a day by day, client by client basis. We know from the research data that: (1) the variance attributable to the therapist is roughly two times that of the particular model or technique; (2) a huge study of real world clients coming out in our new book (The Heart and Soul of Change [APA Press) finds like most other studies that the model of therapy a therapist uses does not aid in differentiating effective from ineffective treatment relationships. For this reason, our emphasis has shifted to measuring session by session outcome and process variables. On an exciting note, the data indicate that we are able to predict with high accuracy the outcome of a treatment relationship by the 3 or 4th visit.