Hierarchy Configuration - need to assign issues types to more than one level
Asked by Mark Mayotte:

When creating levels above the default, the drop down that lets me choose the issues types to assign to the level excludes any that I have explicitly assigned to another level. We have a need to assign a couple of issue types to more than one level... how can I configure Portfolio / Jira to permit this?


Answers:
author: Ste Wright
body: Hi [@Mark Mayotte](/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/589314)

I don't believe this is possible. The hierarchy is set to allow for Portfolio to function with a breakdown of work from top-to-bottom level. Having issue types at multiple levels would make it difficult.

You'd need to consider a much more flexible option to achieve what you're looking for - such as using Linked Issues - and then using an app like [Extended Schemes for Jira](https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1214172/extended-schemes-for-jira?hosting=server&tab=overview) to control which issue types are available to which link type.

It's not something I would personally advise though as the hierarchies help with reporting, visualisation on boards / Portfolio, etc. What's the specific use case you're looking to apply to this? Happy to help you consider an alternative :)

Ste

comments: author: Mark Mayotte
body: We have some teams that work in Full SAFe, and others that work in Portfolio SAFe. That means within the Jira instance, which includes the Portfolio for Jira tool, we have a need to support both models. Each group would always follow a top-to-bottom breakdown... just some groups would exclude a level.

Using linked issues we can, and do, set up arbitrary dependency trees... it is just not conducive to visualization as you call out.


author: Ste Wright
body: Which level is it that teams exclude? If you can provide your hierarchy that'd be ideal.

Ste


author: Mark Mayotte
body: ![hierarchy.JPG](https://community.atlassian.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/69154i8B1695FD12F8E974/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999 "hierarchy.JPG")The orange icons are Portfolio-Epic \& Enabler-Epic, the blue are Capability \& Enabler-Capability. The purple icons are Feature and Enabler-Feature. The need is to also place the orange issue types at the Large Solution level of the hierarchy. This would permit organizations that do not use/need a four-level hierarchy to "skip" the use of Capabilities... and link Portfolio-Epics to Features (as is done in Portfolio SAFe). We'd ensure things are not confusing by the way we assign issue types into projects that are actually pulled into a plan... if the large solution level was not needed then there would be no project created that used them... and therefore the Portfolio Plan would be constructed without them.

The only workaround I can think of is to create cloned issue types at the Portfolio level and duplicate everything in the workflows, screens, etc. Again we'd eliminate confusion by how we construct the projects that consume the issues...


author: Ste Wright
body: Apologies it took sometime to respond - but I think your solution makes the most sense!

From a user perspective it'll seem flawless as you can control which issue types they can use at the project level.

Just remember you don't need to duplicate the workflows or screens - you can utilise the same ones by adding them to your screen / workflow schemes.

Ste


Tags: advanced-roadmaps