The problem with “pressing pause”
Why organisations put struggling projects on hold, and how a temporary pause can become a way of avoiding difficult decisions.
Have you noticed how often organisations talk about ‘pressing pause’ on projects?
It’s a useful expression. Nothing has been cancelled or abandoned. The work is simply on hold while someone considers what happens next.
I’ve used the phrase myself in my work as a communications professional. And sometimes it’s entirely reasonable. Circumstances change, resources become limited and projects don’t always achieve what was expected.
But I’ve become more and more aware of how often the phrase is used, and I do think that ‘pressing pause’ often serves another purpose. It can allow an organisation to postpone a difficult decision without necessarily having to explain what’s gone wrong.
Ending a project requires a decision, and decisions invite questions. Why didn’t it work? Was it the right thing to do in the first place? A pause allows those questions to be deferred. It doesn’t necessarily mean anyone is deliberately avoiding them, but it does provide a way of putting off a difficult conversation.
One of the difficulties with announcing a pause is that it doesn’t tell your audience very much. In fact, it probably imvites more questions. Has something gone wrong? Is the project being reviewed? Is there a problem with funding? Has the organisation lost confidence in the original idea? Or has a decision already been made to end it, but nobody wants to say so?
Get Matt Batten’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
For those making the decision, a pause may offer some welcome breathing space. But for those who have invested time, energy and trust in a project, or who depend on what it provides, it can mean months of uncertainty, frustration and unanswered questions. People are not stupid. They know when they are being given carefully managed messages rather than honest answers. And while the truth may be uncomfortable, vague reassurances and corporate language rarely make a difficult situation any easier. When organisations communicate change, they owe people more than a carefully worded statement. They owe them honesty about what is happening, why decisions have been made and what remains uncertain. That doesn’t mean having all the answers, but it does mean being open about the ones you don’t have. Trust is not built by telling people what an organisation thinks they want to hear. It is built by treating them with enough respect to tell them the truth.
When an organisation announces a pause pending a review, there can be an expectation that questions should wait until the review is complete. That’s reasonable, provided the review happens and its findings are shared. But what if months pass without any explanation?
The longer a project remains on hold, the less likely it may be to restart. What was announced as a temporary pause can become a permanent ending, without the organisation ever formally acknowledging that decision.
Perhaps there’s also a hope that, given enough time, the project will simply fade from people’s attention. And the longer questions go unanswered, the more difficult it can become to maintain confidence in the organisation and its leadership.
Trust is not built by telling people what an organisation thinks they want to hear. It is built by treating them with enough respect to tell them the truth.
We tend to celebrate the launch of new initiatives, particularly when they promise change or improvement. There’s less enthusiasm for explaining why those initiatives didn’t deliver what was expected
Of course, not every project will succeed, and there are perfectly good reasons why organisations sometimes need to change direction or bring something to an end. The problem isn’t necessarily the decision itself, but the reluctance to explain it.
So, the next time you’re preparing to announce that an organisation is ‘pressing pause’ on a project, it’s worth asking whether that really is what’s happening. Is there a genuine intention to review the work and decide what happens next? Or is ‘pressing pause’ simply a more comfortable way of avoiding a difficult decision and hoping no one notices?
As communicators, we don’t always get to make the decisions. But we do have a responsibility to question how those decisions are explained. If a project is unlikely to restart, are we being honest by calling it a pause?
