The growing demands of an aging population, a looming nursing shortage, widespread fiscal constraintsand the growing complexity of a dynamic healthcare landscape means that graduate registered nurses(GRNs) are increasingly expected to be practice ready. This term, also known as fitness to practice, has longbeen used to describe a concept that is actually unformulated. Indeed, what does being practice readyactually mean and who are the appropriate stakeholders to define it? The prevalence of the ongoingdebate about practice readiness, which has now been around for decades, indicates the issue is still atthe fore of nursing discourse. Such debate is partly reflective of a difference in opinion between nurses ineducation and those within clinical practice sectors, as to whether new GRNs are in fact practice ready.This paper describes the findings of a grounded theory (GT) study, which examined the notion of prac-tice readiness from the perspective of Nurse Unit Managers (NUMs) from the acute care practice sectorand Bachelor of Nursing Program Coordinators (BNPCs) within the Australian context. Semi-structuredinterviews were undertaken with sixteen BNPCs and NUMs from across the country. Findings suggestthat as a result of contextual influences and varying system drivers, BNPCs and NUMs in Australia inhabitdisparate realities. When it comes to practice readiness, these cohorts view new graduates through dif-ferent lenses and as such, have different perspectives and expectations of what it means to be practiceready.Practice readiness is indeed a nebulous concept. There is no clear definition and the concept meansdifferent things to different people. These findings have implications for policy, education and practiceto consider a new world where all stakeholders involved in preparing the future nursing workforce havean equal say and a shared understanding of what practice readiness means.