When was the last time you decided to remove a product feature?
Or did you keep it because of the time already invested?
Sunk cost fallacy is something we don’t talk about enough in product management, yet it shows up more often than we’d like to admit.
It usually sounds like this:
But I’ve already spent weeks on discovery
But it’s already on the roadmap
But we promised stakeholders
But it’s a quick thing
But it's not causing problems to anyone (because no one is using it)
And before you know it, complexity starts to surface.
Technical debt.
Architectural constraints.
Features that are built but rarely used.
What started as a small decision quietly turns into long-term cost.
Pruning is part of product work
As Product Managers, our role isn’t just to build it’s to continuously shape and refine the product. Especially with AI, the urge to build becomes stronger. Knowing when to stop becomes important.
Pruning features is not a failure. It’s a necessary part of maintaining focus and continuing to deliver value to users and the business.
A simple decision filter
When deciding whether to start, continue, or stop a feature, I find it useful to ask:
Does this still contribute to the intended outcome?
What is the ongoing cost of maintaining it?
If we removed this, what would actually happen?
Are we keeping it for value, or because of past investment?
If we were building today, would we still choose to include it?
These questions help shift the conversation from effort invested to value created.
Final thought
Progress isn’t just about what we add to a product. It’s also about what we choose to remove.
So, when did you last kill a feature…