Recurrent implantation failure is a frustrating condition for clinicians and patients alike. The number of potential therapies offered to patients in order to overcome this problem is increasing, and more research is needed to establish which of those treatment options is truly beneficial. Improved understanding of their value is more likely if the same definition of recurrent implantation failure is used across future studies. In this article, the inconsistency present in current literature is examined and the case is argued for a standardized definition for the condition.