A recent study revealed a large variability among a group of 32 spine surgeons in the pre-operative instrumentation planning for the same 5 AIS patients. It is hypothesized that this variability may be attributed to different objectives for correction. In this new study we analyzed the objectives of correction and the related instrumentation strategies for three different Lenke curve types. Nine experienced surgeons from the Spinal Deformity Study Group were surveyed and asked to assess 11 different geometric parameters describing the spinal deformities for three different Lenke curve types (2, 3 and 5) according to their importance for an optimal 3D correction.These same 9 surgeons were asked to provide their preferred posterior instrumentation planning for three patients with the same curve types. Statistical analyses included: median, interquartile range IQR and Wilcoxon non parametric test. There was an overall agreement that sagittal and coronal balances were the most important parameters for an optimal correction. All other parameters were highly variable depending on the curve-type. Mobility was more important for the Lenke curve types 3 and 5 than for type 2 (p<0.032). A comparative analysis based on the coronal curves (Cobb) and the number of unfused vertebrae revealed a significant difference (p<0.025) between the correction objectives of the surgeons and their posterior instrumentation planning. In the three curves types analyzed, there is a large variability in scoliosis correction objectives, which is surgeon and curve-type dependent. There is a disagreement between the correction objectives and the instrumentation strategies. Optimal configuration of surgical instrumentation remains a controversial topic.