The growth in the number of students engaging in research as part of their studies has increased dramatically and, combined with the need to provide adequate research supervision, the exploration of alternative modes of conducting research together with students has emerged. One such mode of research can be called the hyper-structured student research project (HSSRP). This mode represents supervision where the research area, as well as the methodology, is specifically defined, and where students are supported and guided through every step of the research process, with the supervisor making most of the important research decisions on behalf of the students. Although the HSSRP has delivered on the institutional requirements of efficiency and throughput, there is a need to critically reflect on these projects to ascertain whether they meet academic and professional requirements. In this article, the acceptability of HSSRP projects will be analysed from a utilitarian perspective, considering dilemmas that may arise from, but also within such projects, and focusing on the public worth which follows from such projects. Several new insights have arisen from these analyses, and it has been found that the level of public worth of the HSSRP might be less than when more traditional modes of supervision are used. It may be concluded that the higher level outcomes, such as graduateness and professional preparedness, are not achieved through the HSSRP. This article presents an evaluation of the HSSRP from a multi-dimensional utility perspective and contributes to a debate often driven by self-serving bias and limited utilitarianism. This broader understanding of HSSRP can advance research through influencing the design of structured research projects so as to permit a more even distribution of utility and to support universities in delivering to a greater extent on their societal higher goals.