Make Lists Optional
complete
Josh Newland
I find that I'm just making a single list under many projects because the system forces me to, and then I'm slowed down on task creation because I have to select a list. I'd recommend that adding lists are optional, and that you're able to have a project with no lists.
Log In
Zeb
complete
Neil Hart
Zeb: How is this now complete? Just had a look and can't see how it works (e.g. create new task simply drops it in existing list? Thanks.
Bruce Cannon
Ideally everything would be mutable. We would be able to decide at any point in our workflow to elevate or delegate an object anywhere up or down the hierarchy, and skip hierarchy levels as we like for our own workflow.
In other words, a checklist item, a reminder, a task, a list, a folder, etc. should all be mutable and optional.
So we can throw ideas into the system without friction, then as those ideas are analyzed, decide whether they are actually tasks, projects, goals, initiatives, etc.
And, as we dig into an item, we often find that it is much more complex than we thought and needs to be elevated to a larger bucket.
And sometimes, that thing we thought was really big is actually quick, and would be better off as a sub item in an existing grouping.
Someone below mentioned that the current hierarchy is needed for custom fields and other features. I don't think so. If you move an item down the hierarchy and shed some components, so be it. We could optionally get a warning.
I think it's telling to watch ClickUp tutorial videos and note that even internal team doesn't use List element as actual data. Even though many docs say "you'll thank us we forced you to use the List element," in videos instructors most always make a folder "name" and a list "variant of same name" and then the target task.
R
R C
Bruce Cannon: This is great insight! You are touching Bruce on another feature I would really love - ability to move an "item" - for now a task but hopefully ClickUp expands and adds item "types," of which one could be an "idea" - and 'promote' to a list, goal, or even space, or possibly demote. This way you can get stuff into ClickUp, then work through it as the idea evolves, and keep traceability as to the germination of the idea. For example, did it come to life in a meeting? With the ability to link to that meeting (run in ClickUp of course), you never have to answer the question "where did this come from?"
And agreed I think there is huge benefit to being able to put something in the system without forcing it into a list - that requires a lot of thought and has tripped up my team a lot.
And I just got an email that this is "complete" but I tried it out in ClickUp and I'm still forced to add a list. Anybody else seeing this? Or have I misunderstood this feature request as something else?
Christoph Alexa
I am testing Clickup for 3 days now but I already worked myself throug the documentation: A list is used to represent a project. A folder is used to group lists. This is useful because you can separate sales projects from internal routine projects and internal strategic projects. Every task is part of a project, respectively a list. Without this hierachy you could not organize custom statuses and custom fields. Possible solutions to simplify: 1. Why not rename 'list' to 'project' for easier understanding of the Clickup hierachy. 2. Let the user set a default project =list where every task is created until you specify a certain project or another default project. The default project could be named 'inbox' (like remember the milk) or 'tasks without project' as some users prefer.
Neil Hart
Almost another month has passed... Great to see this is in progress, but urgently need at least a ballpark but realistic ETA (e.g. Q3, Q4??). Thanks.
R
R C
I agree wholeheartedly with @n@neil-hart, I'm jumping back in here now, since I last posted my onboarding of Clickup has stalled a bit due to this limitation. I find Asana significantly inferior to ClickUp in a number of ways, but this is a big benefit vs. ClickUp, another "legacy" tool, Wrike, had the same benefit vs. ClickUp, because it doesn't force a list. You guys have made strides by changing folders to optional.
And to echo Neil, would love to find out what the ETA here is as with this not being in 2.0, and also being a post that started well over a year ago, I'm anxious to find out where it is on your guys' priority backlog!
Sorry to get long-winded, but I think Goals are a great opportunity here, if you could fire up a Goal quickly, adding in tasks that did not have to be assigned to a list initially, it would be a great way for teams to build out actual "Projects" with a start/finish. Particularly in the case of Agile, with Epics and Sprints that will span across various lists and tasks.
Thanks guys and hope that was useful!
Neil Hart
Totally agree with this. Hadn't originally realised how this was required but really slows down the process of quickly building up a project.
I've used Asana for years in different orgs and this has always been one of its biggest advantages: you can rapidly add tasks as part of a project or better yet, in total isolation. Once added, you can then reflect and decide which projects each task or group of tasks belong to; then separating these within individual projects (only if you want or need to) using Asana sections (which I guess are effectively lists in ClickUp).
Any ETA on this yet, as I've just started a new job and keen to get my team (and ideally wider department) using either Asana (very familiar/confident to roll-out) or ClickUp?
Thanks.
R
R C
I would also like to see more flexibility with lists being optional. In fact, as I move forward with Clickup and feel encumbered with this requirement to be frank, I'm reminded of Jira, which I migrated from, and the fact that Jira actually DOES have lists in essence. On your comparison chart here:
You claim there are no lists in Jira. Jira has something called "components" in each project, which are only applicable to a single project, and can't be used cross-project, which I found a limitation of components. However, not only are they a way to group items inside projects like lists, but they are optional, which was a great benefit as they weren't forced on the user.
I'm finding that it's costing my team a lot of cognitive resource, and some frustration with speed of entry, when it comes to being forced into choosing not only a project, but a list, when entering a task. This is especially true with our Agile flow, as bugs, or one-off ideas, come up all the time. I posted elsewhere about the request to have even the project optional, which would give us the chance to enter tasks very quickly, they later triage to projects, spaces, lists, anywhere. This would provide a todoist/Google Tasks-like functionality that could be very useful, for example when a quick idea hits and you'd like to enter it via the Chrome Extension, and worry about categorizing later.
I do hope that with 2.0 there is much more flexibility to both use Projects, and tasks cross-Space. Or, use Goals much more quickly and easily, as goals have cross-space functionality already. My ideal situation would be for tasks to only need to go into a Space, the very top level, and then projects and lists could be used on their own, and not necessarily be forced into one space. This is great if you have an initiative that contains elements of Marketing, content, dev, sales. Those are most of the initiatives that my company happens to run!
Thanks as always guys for listening, simply cannot wait to see what you have in store with 2.0!
Tarak Gorai
I Love the deep mesh of hierarchy .. which helps me to make Team- Space-Project-List-Sublist-Checkbox... awesome to create a nested and deep projects
N
Nigel Thomson
Zeb Hi Zeb. 👍👍. Part of Clickup 2.0 or further down the line?
Zeb
Nigel Thomson: Yep, 2.0!
N
Nigel Thomson
Zeb: Liking it 😀👌
Lazhar Ichir
OH YES PLEASE. The hierarchy is so, soooooooo heavy.
Load More
→