The wider field and my own phenomenological field, which were instilled from birth, taught me that you are measured by your contribution to the greater good, and that the highest value is volunteering. This has guided my life’s journey. Thus, for better or for worse, paying attention to social change is inherent in how I relate to an organization.My “tribe” has contributed to social change in many ways. My family produced a fighter for labor rights, an entrepreneur of a new integrated schooling system, a reviver of Hebrew as a common language, a researcher exploring the impact of judicial rulings on social change, and more. Then, there is me . . . an activist in a youth movement, a welfare officer during my compulsory army service, a dedicated therapist to cases of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and a developer of leadership skills with school principals. All of these experiences led to and influenced my 43 years of Organizational Development work. During this time, I have always attended to fixed gestalts reflected in the social relationships within, between, and outside the organizations and the context in which they reside.That interventions impact the wider field is a known phenomenon. How much, for how long, and how, are the questions. The Gestalt Philosophy of Being provides us with a ground on which to base a different approach to the whole. It deconstructs the notion that “work” and “life” are polarities. A relational skill gained at the workplace and internalized becomes a part of one’s toolbox, thus impacting the wider field. In retrospect, my background heightened my awareness of the cost of dividing life and work. The military welfare system introduced a middle ground—the value of looking at both the workplace and the context—to the ground. As I look back, my background, particularly in the military welfare system, heightened my awareness of the cost of dividing life and work. So, I came to appreciate the value of looking at both the workplace and the context.I have been blessed to work with Fortune 25 companies that were devoted truly to incorporating “work” and “not-work” into one, and with complex family businesses shifting to view themselves as business families. In both cases, a paradigm shift was required. Here is a brief example of a small intervention that inspired a major and lasting shift; an intervention founded on my inherent attention to the social aspect. The semantic shift from “work–life balance” to “life balance” marked a shift toward integration. After hearing a director’s brave request to leave a meeting early to attend a school play, I facilitated a discussion about the value of such an action. This then resulted in the meeting being adjourned early, and the beginning of a new era. In fact, family affairs were given a place of honor next to job demands, which together were reframed as a vibrant coexistence that could be negotiated at any given time. This change, which impacted 180,000 employees and their families, was no small thing.The other polarity is business families, where boundaries are almost nonexistent compared to common businesses, where a division between work life and family life is sacrosanct. Here, too, the first step is seemingly semantic. The common term family business focuses on the business, while business family shifts the focus to the family. Within the business and outside of it, this highlights that every member of the family is differently involved in and impacted by the whole. It takes a sound consultant with stable therapeutic skills to support such systemic change.In conclusion, our unique perspective resides in adhering to the field phenomena by using the dialogic stance of relationships. We clearly facilitate social change when a leader goes home early to bathe his or her newborn and presents this to 35,000 employees as a desirable action, and when a son is acknowledged as an integral part of the whole (i.e., the family) even when he chooses to stay away from the business.