Varying models of integrated care have been successfully developed in different health systems to deliver value-based care; yet many of these models face challenges in scale-up and spread. One critical theme with limited consensus is the extent to which practices and programs should be standardized for effective spread. Barker 2016 argues that transfers of effective programs and practices into different settings are greatly facilitated by a detailed understanding of the core work and the supportive resources needed for effective programs in order to identify the “scalable unit”. Other researchers see healthcare services as “complex adaptive systems”; scaling-up thus requires that the design of interventions be adapted to local contexts, In this view the straightforward replication of effective programs and practices is replaced with local sensemaking, focused experimentation, and participation by local actors in determining what works. This tension between the core elements of an intervention and an adaptable periphery is a key component in Damschroder’s Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. However, there is limited study of providers’ and managers’ views of standardization and little evaluation of the extent to which views on standardization or local adaptation support or hinder effective implementation.