# Group by fields in hierarchical views **URL:** \ **Category:** Ideas & Features\ **Created:** [August 24, 2022, 12:06am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/group-by-fields-in-hierarchical-views/3206 "2022-08-24T00:06:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 3
**Author:** ![cannibalflea](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/cannibalflea/32/318_2.png) [@cannibalflea](https://community.fibery.io/u/cannibalflea)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2023, 2:46am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/group-by-fields-in-hierarchical-views/3206/3 "2023-01-25T02:46:25Z")
@Oshyan , sorry for the delay in getting back to you. I’ve actually been playing around with the entity views quite a bit and they are really powerful. And because of that power, I think our expectations keep getting bigger 🙂 One example is tasks associated with a project. Currently, you might be able to use a list view to see all the tasks (and possibly subtasks) in a hierarchical view. However, if you wanted to have a list view that groups and organizes the tasks by their state/workflow or people they are assigned to, you can’t do that with the list view. The only options I can think of are to: - Sort list by those columns to at least get the same items together (and then scroll to the right section), or - Create multiple list views that are filtered and sorted in particular ways. These would be static lists (difficult to maintain) and would be impractical if you have too many combinations. - Use a board view to put things into bins. However, in board view you can only use one field as the bins whereas a list/hierarchical view can give you multiple levels of grouping. So you can group by status first and then be assignees. I think the setup that @calh-fsp showed [in this post](https://community.fibery.io/t/single-project-task-entities-across-entire-workspace/3051/3), would be another example: > [@Single Project & Task entities across entire workspace](https://community.fibery.io/t/single-project-task-entities-across-entire-workspace/3051/3): > > Projects/Tasks folders filtered by Team as and Status, Team folders containing team members, Customer folders containing contacts. It’s such a neat feature that just makes so much sense in my mind and the way I operate in general - structuring work in a way that minimizes wasted time “finding” things. > > ![CleanShot 2022-07-08 at 04.13.30@2x](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/fibery/original/2X/2/293e91bad4ca335c9a63a41cf633015bf9ff3743.png) In that example, this structure had to be built by hand and when you add new status types, then you will need to ensure that new smart folders are created. Ultimately, I think hierarchical views (and smart folders) might currently too rigid in how the users can define the levels which actually limits their usefulness (see also my prior discussions on [multi-level recursive lists](https://community.fibery.io/t/done-many-to-many-relationships-should-be-usable-for-levels-in-lists/1624/16) and [here](https://community.fibery.io/t/representing-nested-relations/1405/7)). --- _[View the full topic](https://community.fibery.io/t/group-by-fields-in-hierarchical-views/3206)._