In intimate partner violence (IPV) risk assessment, there is consensus that a large gap exists between research and practice. This exploratory study interviewed 13 practitioners working with IPV victims to generate ideas about the nature of this gap, and found that only 2 conducted standardized risk assessment. Others felt imposing structure might detract from the quality of their work. Results support the need for different techniques in different contexts; some adjust only speed of services according to their risk perception, whereas others use in-depth information to customize services. Perspectives appear particularly disparate regarding victim minimization of risk. Implications for future work are discussed. (Published Abstract)