[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 26(2) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2014-10320-001). A study from Ackerman, Hilsenroth, Baity, & Blagys (2000), Hilsenroth, Ackerman, Clemence, & Strassle (2002), and Hilsenroth, Peters, & Ackerman (2004) was misrepresented in the original text. The text stated that the therapists and the assessors in this study were not the same person. The evaluation of this study should appear as follows: "It is noteworthy that the therapists and assessors were the same person, indicating that the techniques practiced by TA providers foster a therapeutic alliance that is sustained in subsequent psychotherapy and might aid in treatment readiness and success."] The field of clinical personality assessment is lacking in published empirical evidence regarding its treatment and clinical utility. This article reports on a randomized controlled clinical trial (N = 74) allocating patients awaiting treatment in a specialized clinic for personality disorders to either 4 sessions of (a) therapeutic assessment (TA) or (b) a structured goal-focused pretreatment intervention (GFPTI). In terms of short-term outcome, TA demonstrated superior ability to raise outcome expectancies and patient perceptions of progress toward treatment (Cohen's d = 0.65 and 0.56, respectively) and yielded higher satisfaction (d = 0.68). Moreover, patients reported marginally stronger alliance to the TA clinicians than to GFPT clinicians (d = 0.46), even though therapists perceived the alliance as equally positive in both groups. No differences in symptomatic ratings were observed. Results are discussed with reference to treatment utility in this particular patient group. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).