In the life of a research program, new projects often start with excitement and possibility. But over time, some initiatives lose their momentum. They continue to demand your team’s time, energy, and funding, while the path to a meaningful outcome becomes less clear. Letting go can feel like admitting defeat, but in the strategic “business of research,” choosing to stop is not failure. It’s a mark of leadership. Thoughtful de-prioritization is an essential skill for stewarding resources wisely and keeping your program focused on the work that aligns with your vision and provides strategic value.

Of course, making that call isn’t easy. Projects are often tied up with people’s hopes and effort. A student or postdoc may have poured months or years into it, and they need something tangible to show for that work. As a mentor, you may be weighing the value of the learning against the reality that junior researchers often need a paper more than the experience of having learned when to shelve a project. These are hard, human trade-offs, and they deserve careful consideration.

With that in mind, here are five questions to guide the decision. They’re meant to help you step back, see the bigger picture, and find clarity about whether to move forward or hit pause.

1. What Have We Learned?

Every project generates knowledge, whether or not it delivers the outcome you first imagined. Sometimes that knowledge supports the original idea. Sometimes it points in a different direction. And sometimes it simply clarifies what doesn’t work, which is still valuable progress.

Revisit the core purpose of the project. Has it answered the initial question, even if the answer wasn’t the one you hoped for? Did it surface new complexities or unexpected insights that might be better pursued through a different approach?

Framing the conversation around what has been learned, rather than what was “proven” or “disproven,” helps shift perspective. The question becomes: is this project still the right vehicle for pursuing those insights, or is it time to carry the learning forward in another way?

2. How Does This Project Align with Our Core Program Goals Now?

Research programs evolve. A project that was perfectly aligned with your goals two years ago may now be a peripheral effort, especially if your funding landscape or research priorities have shifted.

Be honest about the fit. Is this project a central pillar supporting your main objectives, or has it become a satellite? Core-aligned projects typically justify the effort, even if a temporary pause is needed to re-strategize the way forward. Peripheral projects, no matter how interesting, must be evaluated with stricter criteria, as they can dilute your program’s focus and impact. [Read up our post on  Building a Research Legacy: How to Make a Long-Term Impact].

This is not to say that peripheral projects aren’t worth pursuing; after all, these can seed entirely new directions. Here, we’re focused on evaluating work in progress that has become less aligned over time and may not be producing outcomes that outweigh the resource investments.

3. What is the True Opportunity Cost of Continuing?

This is perhaps the most crucial strategic question. The resources (physical and mental) tied up in this project are not available for other opportunities. Conduct a simple but powerful assessment:

• If we keep this project going for another 6–12 months, what other opportunities will we be delaying or passing up?

Sometimes seeing the invisible cost laid out—missed grants, postponed collaborations, delayed higher-impact studies—makes the decision clearer.

4. If We Were Not Already Invested, Would We Start This Today?

This thought experiment cuts through the sunk cost fallacy, that tendency to continue an endeavor simply because we’ve already invested resources in it.

Pretend this is a brand-new proposal, presented with the current data and challenges. Would you choose to start it today, given all the other priorities on your plate?

If your honest answer is no, then the desire to not “waste” what’s already been invested may be the only thing keeping it alive.

5. What Would a “Successful Stop” Look Like?

Ending a project doesn’t mean abandoning it. A well-planned conclusion can still deliver value. This may be particularly important where junior investigators are involved. Ask yourself:

• Could this be written up as a short communication, technical note, or preliminary finding?

• Can the data contribute to a future analysis or serve as pilot evidence for another grant application?

• Can the methods or tools developed be redirected to a more promising avenue?

Defining a graceful endpoint can capture strategic value, give closure for the team, and free resources to redirect with intention.

Moving Forward with Confidence

Deciding to stop is not about giving up, but about exercising clear-eyed leadership over your portfolio. It’s about making sure each project has a strategic reason for being there.

And for trainees, the decision itself can be a powerful lesson. Learning when and how to pivot is just as important as seeing a project through. Balancing that learning with the need for tangible outcomes is part of the mentorship challenge—and leadership growth—for both PI and trainee.