# Fibery Product Workspace **URL:** \ **Category:** Fibery Showcase\ **Created:** [November 2, 2020, 12:34pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/fibery-product-workspace/1120 "2020-11-02T12:34:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 6
**Author:** ![B\_Sp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e8c25b/32.png) [@B\_Sp](https://community.fibery.io/u/B_Sp)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2020, 11:59pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/fibery-product-workspace/1120/6 "2020-11-12T23:59:37Z")
Ok thank you for the response. This is actually, from what I can tell, a common theme in this set up. There are many instances where “up the hierarchy” you have direct relations to the same Type in each Type in that hierarchy, instead of using a LookUp. I have come across this situation in my Fibery Instance, and in some cases I would have a relationship with an Idea and Story that I’d like to use a lookup to see up to the “Product Area” for that Idea. So I have the lookup to pull that in, but also I can have a direct relation to the Product Area out of that Idea. The problem I find is I get _every_ Idea with both these fields. This is also true in your “Bug” example. So this leads to Field proliferation and I have always struggled with getting comfortable with this “multiple direct relations” to the same hierarchical group. I have thought about two things I’m hoping to see one day in Fibery that could help solve this: - [Polymorphic Relations](https://community.fibery.io/t/polymorphic-relations-when-creating-relation-ability-to-have-entire-app-from-which-to-choose-and-not-just-type/425/14) which are talked about frequently here, and - Some kind of better handling of a “subtype,” which would be a one-to-many relation within a Type, which could be used in “lighter” cases where you don’t want to create a full relation, perhaps something like “task/subtask”. That latter need might also be handled by Polymorphic as well. And in case it’s useful to share this, I also have an Idea Management set up in my Fibery, and sure enough I have seen the need for Ideas to be categorized around essentially the same stuff you guys are proposing: Work, Features, Goals, etc. What I did was use a dropdown to categorize them: ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/fibery/original/2X/5/53b598418ddfb90e8797c472f82f7e69ea8bda3a.png) Then, I will try to limit the relations to this “Idea” Type to just those Types in my system, using the terminology of “promoted to” to describe the relation. A great ability I’d like to see is then to have the status of the Idea “follow” the Entity it was converted to. Aha can do this. Here is my request about that: > [@Create related issue on workflow transition](https://community.fibery.io/t/create-related-issue-on-workflow-transition/243/4): > > In order to get the best traceability, I’d like to be able to “promote” the idea to whatever new type and entity we deem fit. Then, keep a relation to the initial idea, because the “promoted” entity will still need work. Let’s say we have an idea for a new feature. We “promote” to the feature and begin work. If I close the idea at this point, it will show up in my idea list as “completed,” as if it was “done”. In this case, since it’s for a feature, it would appear that the feature was actually completed. But in fact this is just the start of the feature. So I’d like the idea to stay in some “in tandem” states along with the feature development, and only close, for example, once the feature reaches a state of “deployed” or similar. Since you guys are building this set up for Product teams, perhaps you could look at this capability, or later provide some guidance on how to do it with Automations? I think it would be very useful for Product Teams to see how they are tracking with actual execution of the Ideas they have decided to work on. Cheers! --- _[View the full topic](https://community.fibery.io/t/fibery-product-workspace/1120)._