The “Go to Workflow” action runs in parallel with the current workflow and while this decreases the runtime it is not always what you want.
If the next steps on the current workflow are dependent on the steps of the second workflow, there are issues when the two are running concurrently, I set up workflows like this regularly and find the only reliable way workaround is with a delay and a second property, which just clutters the workflow and CRM.
There is a built in ‘delay’ with a ‘unenrolled’ trigger, but you are not even able to change the number and date filter, so if I understand correctly it will always be true if the workflow has ever been completed.
What would be useful, instead of workarounds, is to simply add an “Output” to the “Go to Workflow” action, that can specify either the step, status, or outcome of that action, which can then be used to control the delay in the parent workflow.