In this rejoinder, we discuss the commonalities and differences of the commentaries to our target article. Each commentary agreed with our basic message that intervention science needs to move from the DSM-governed protocols-for-syndrome approach to process-based treatments. Functional analysis has been a guiding principle since the early days of behavior therapy but lost its dominance with the rise of the latent disease model of psychiatry. This model gave rise to disorder-specific treatments with limited benefit to patients and science. We now have the tools and expertise to study human complexity grounded in an understanding of processes of change drawn from and fully applicable to the psychological level of analysis.