AbstractPursuing multiple goals with limited time often leads to goal conflicts that can be resolved by prioritizing some goal pursuits over others. This research examines proximal outcomes of two approaches to goal prioritization: Goal shelving (temporarily withdrawing from a goal) and goal disengagement (permanently withdrawing from a goal). We conducted an experiment (N = 214) to compare motivational and emotional consequences of resolving goal conflict through goal shelving and disengagement. Results suggest that goal shelving and disengagement are similarly effective at reducing different facets of experienced goal conflict, but people regret shelving goals less than disengaging from them. Together, these findings provide first evidence that goal shelving may allow people to “have their cake and eat it too:” to reap the benefits of goal prioritization while minimizing its costs.