Project plan structure in Wrike
Hello everyone,
I manage complex projects using a WBS structure in Wrike. I work with nested projects, and I’ve noticed that in Wrike reports, it’s only possible to display the immediate parent project of a task. I’d like to pull up the root project or a higher, useful level in my reports without losing my structure.
Has anyone found methods or workarounds to get around this limitation (e.g., custom fields, multiple tagging, naming conventions)?
Thanks in advance for sharing your experiences or best practices!
Hello Claude,
Michael, PM for Analytics here. Can you please summarize to me - you want to show the full hierarchy of your WBS like you can in table view but in reports or do you need something more to achieve your goal? The first message was clear to me and sounded just like this but reading the second one, I am not sure if that covers your needs fully.
Best,
Michael
Michael Minovsky Community Team at Wrike Wrike Product Manager Узнайте о самых популярных функциях Wrike и советах по его использованию
Michael Minovsky Wrike Team member Узнайте о самых популярных функциях Wrike и советах по его использованию
In an attemp to better explain the issue here are additional informations:
It concerns the ability to structure our project plans with a clear, hierarchical sequencing system.
Specifically, we need to assign a numbering structure that reflects the project’s work breakdown hierarchy — for example, using levels such as 24-1154, 24-1154.1, 24-1154.1.1, and so on, as shown in the GSS_WBS_SEQ column in the example I’ve attached below.
This type of structured numbering is essential for us to maintain clarity in project tracking, reporting, and invoicing.
I initially tried using the task ID, but it doesn't follow the project hierarchy. A temporary solution was to create a custom field to manage this manually, but since custom fields cannot be made mandatory in Wrike, it often gets overlooked when team members update the project plan — which makes consistency difficult to maintain over time.
Given the operational impact, I would greatly appreciate your guidance or recommendations from the community on how to implement or automate this kind of hierarchical numbering within Wrike, or any possible workaround that would help us manage this reliably.
I’ve attached an example of our current project structure for your reference.
Thank you very much in advance for your help — I look forward to your advice.
Hello Michael,
Thank you for your message and for taking the time to clarify — much appreciated.
To confirm, while being able to display the full hierarchy of our WBS in reports, similar to what we see in Table view, is definitely part of the need, there’s an additional, equally important requirement on our side.
What we’re really aiming for is to maintain a structured, hierarchical numbering system — like the one illustrated in the GSS_WBS_SEQ column I shared earlier — that stays consistent and reliable throughout the project lifecycle. This numbering is crucial for us not only for reporting purposes, but also for accurate tracking, invoicing, and for generating structured exports for internal and client reporting.
At the moment, without a system-enforced structure or a way to make this numbering mandatory and tied to task hierarchy, it often gets missed when plans are updated, leading to inconsistencies that create operational challenges.
I hope this helps clarify the full scope of the requirement, and I’m more than happy to discuss it further if needed.
Thanks again for your support!
Best regards,
Hi Claude Perreault,
Thanks for sharing the details. I see you're already familiar with Custom Item Types. I have a few questions to help me better understand what level of filtering you are attempting to use in your reports and some possible methods to try in your system:
Some of our own observations about reports, tables, and dashboards:
If you're able to answer some of my questions above, I may be able to give better suggestions.
Cheers!
Trevor
Hi Trevor,
Thanks a lot for your message — I appreciate you taking the time to dig into the details. Let me answer your questions and add a bit more context based on your observations:
Yes, I’m using them, but I know I am they are not optimal at this point. My goal is to develop the right blueprint structure that supports both my project delivery workflow and reporting needs internal and external (customers).
For at least 80% of my projects, we’re working with a relatively standard number of tasks like my example given, added or removed as needed. Right now, it’s managed on a case-by-case basis, but I believe there’s potential to standardize this — I just haven’t found the right structure yet. Also, it is a bit of a discussion between commercial method and internal technical method and terminology that’s in the way making it tricky.
Correct — I have one main project container, subdivided by phases, with a mix of tasks and deliverables under each. There’s also a common block for project management & communication activities, where I capture all customer account-related work that doesn’t tie directly to a deliverable. This section is under a phase in my structure.
Ideally, I want a report that shows effort by phase and then breaks down the effort into deliverables only (value added in the view of the customer) — meaning, it would encompass both the deliverables and the time effort from tasks embedded within the deliverables or their phase.
Yes, and this is where I struggle. Different tools in Wrike (reports, dashboards, tables) don’t offer the same level of flexibility in accessing and displaying hierarchical information of filtering the same information.
Additional comment:
One of my key concerns is that this whole process lacks a Poka-Yoke (error-proofing) control. Meaning, if a user doesn’t follow the intended structure or process, the system won’t prevent it, which often leads to messy data and reporting issues. I haven’t yet found a way to enforce or control this structurally within Wrike.
Another example, I have created custom filed like the project # or customer name. It is easy when someone add not the document that field. And in some cases, it is just to replicate from the original project container.
About your observations:
What I’m really aiming for:
A clean, reliable way to report time effort:
If you have ideas, workarounds, or best practices to recommend — or know of Wrike setups with more rigid WBS enforcement — I’d be happy to hear them.
Thanks again Trevor — really appreciate your help!
Cheers,
Claude