The following is an interview between Elvin Geng and Roman Xu, Editors-in-Chief of Implementation Science Communications, and Bo.
Elvin: Bo, thank you so much for joining the journal as an AE! Your work has shaped how this field thinks about measurement and support for implementation in fundamental ways. You advanced Matrixed Multiple Case Study (MMCS) methodology for example — which is a really innovative approach to cross-case analysis that lets researchers draw structured comparisons across complex implementation contexts.
Roman: We would love for you to say a word or two about MMCS: what gap were you trying to solve when you developed it, and what has surprised you about how the research community has ended up using it?
Bo: The Matrixed Multiple Case Study (MMCS) method grew out of a challenge many implementation researchers face when studying programs across multiple sites. Case studies allow us to understand local context deeply, but they don’t always provide a clear structure for learning systematically across sites.
MMCS was designed to support what I like to call structured cross-site learning. The matrixed approach aims to preserve the richness of individual cases while organizing insights across sites and analytic dimensions so researchers can identify patterns in how implementation unfolds.
More broadly, the approach hopes to reflect a methodological need in the field: tools that allow us to balance contextual depth with systematic comparison across complex implementation settings. What has been most rewarding is seeing researchers adapt the method beyond its original context – for example, using it to facilitate cross-site learning in learning health systems and generate insights that travel across diverse implementation environments.
Elvin: I noted that you are currently serving as Board President of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC). SIRC plays such an important connective role in our field. What drew you to that leadership, and what are you hoping to move the needle on during your tenure?
Bo: One of the things that makes SIRC special is that it intentionally brings together people working across the entire evidence-to-practice continuum – including and beyond researchers, practitioners, health system leaders, and trainees. Implementation science is inherently collaborative, and SIRC has played an important role in building that shared intellectual community.
During my tenure, one priority has been strengthening SIRC as a space where different parts of the implementation ecosystem can learn from one another. This includes supporting initiatives that highlight emerging areas of the field, expanding opportunities for trainees and early-career scholars, and building infrastructure that allows implementation researchers and practitioners to collaborate more effectively.
I’m particularly excited about efforts that foster conversations around implementation in complex service ecosystems, including cross-sector work that spans health care, social services, and community systems.
Roman: As you step into the associate editor role at ISC, where do you see the biggest white spaces in the current literature? What kinds of manuscripts are you hoping to champion?
Bo: One area where I see substantial opportunity is research that examines implementation across service sectors, not just within a single health system. Increasingly, interventions that influence health outcomes involve collaborations among and beyond health care organizations, social services, housing programs, and legal services.
I often think of this emerging area as cross-sector implementation science. Many drivers of health, such as housing instability or economic insecurity, sit outside the traditional boundaries of health care, yet most of our implementation frameworks still focus primarily within health systems.
I would be especially excited to see manuscripts that examine how implementation unfolds within these interconnected service ecosystems and how cross-sector partnerships can support more equitable outcomes for underserved populations.
Elvin: If you had to name one conceptual or methodological shift you would like to see the field make in the next five years, what would it be — and why?
Bo: One shift I would love to see is deeper integration between implementation science and systems thinking. Many of the interventions we study operate within complex service ecosystems involving multiple organizations, policies, and funding streams.
Implementation studies often focus on individual programs or interventions, but understanding how those efforts interact with broader systems is increasingly important. Approaches drawn from systems science and engineering can help us examine feedback loops, cross-sector dynamics, and unintended consequences that might otherwise remain invisible.
Advancing this kind of systems-informed implementation research could help the field generate insights that are not only scientifically rigorous but also more actionable for leaders working to improve complex service systems.
Roman: What is a paper you have read recently in implementation science that excited you, and why?
Bo: A recent paper that I found particularly exciting is the Measurement Roadmap article by Martinez and colleagues (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43477-025-00189-z).
One persistent challenge in implementation science is that strong measurement is essential for learning from implementation efforts, yet selecting appropriate measures can be surprisingly difficult for practitioners. The Measurement Roadmap provides a practical guide that helps implementation teams navigate that process – from identifying relevant theoretical constructs to evaluating the psychometric and pragmatic qualities of measures.
What I especially appreciate about the paper is its emphasis on making implementation science more usable for real-world teams. That focus on practical decision-making resonates strongly with efforts to support learning health systems and structured cross-site learning.
Elvin: Anything else you would like us to know about you?
Bo: One thing people may not know about me is that I’m a big animal enthusiast – I’ve always enjoyed learning about wildlife and the ecosystems animals inhabit. It’s something that reminds me how interconnected different parts of a system can be.
In many ways, that perspective carries over into how I think about implementation science. The interventions we study don’t operate in isolation; they function within complex service ecosystems involving and not limited to health systems, community organizations, and social service providers.
Going forward, I intend for my work to increasingly focus on understanding how implementation unfolds within these interconnected environments, particularly when collaborations span multiple sectors such as health care, social services, and community systems.
Ultimately, I’m excited about a future where implementation science helps complex systems learn – across sites, across sectors, and across disciplines – how to better support the people they serve.
📝 Explore the journal and submit your manuscript.
📢Sign up to receive article alerts from Implementation Science Communications