@Phil_Seeman , but that is what the OP here is describing.
It is not describing what is being launched with the Reference field MVP and what others are discussing in this thread. Thatâs why I donât think itâs beneficial to start a new thread and startover the vote count. Does that make sense?
1 Like
I donât agree, that would mean creating a new feature requests (and start gathering votes over again) each time a small part of a request is released. The original post is quite specific in envisioning an outcome, which is not achieved with the current release.
It would have been easier if the topic were split up in different topics, but it is a bit hard when youâre envisioning a certain outcome with a lot of related ideas. So I feel there should be a place for requests that are a bit bigger than just changing one thing.
@Forum-team I think this is another argument for allowing a âsolutionâ to be selected in English Forum > Product Feedback outside of launched , as this does seem a noteworthy step that deserves a spotlight.
2 Likes
Oh sorry @Richard_Sather, I got confused between this thread and their announcement of the feature release. Asana did release what they planned to for the feature, but not what you asked for in the OP of this thread, so I agree that this thread shouldnât be marked as Launched.
3 Likes
Thanks, @Phil_Seeman and for @Jan-Rienk weighing in!
Waiting for @Emily_Roman (or someone from @Forum-team) to unmark as launched and perhaps mark as considered instead.
Thanks!
1 Like
@Richard_Sather I just moved the topic back to English Forum > Product Feedback, can you just try to update the title to add what makes it different? Just so itâs clear the request is not only for the ability to have a reference custom field 
Thanks!
4 Likes
Thanks, @Emily_Roman . Iâve updated the title to make it more specific and added a PS note at the top of the original post to clarify the difference.
3 Likes
A post was merged into an existing topic: 
Introducing Reference custom fields!
+1 great proposal that will upgrade Asanaâs capabilities.
1 Like
Can someone clarify how reference fieldâs two-way syncing should work? Iâm expecting it work similar to Airtable in that if I edit Task Aâs Ref field tagging Task B, then when I go look at Task Bâs Ref Field, Task A should appear automatically in that cell.
Is it actually just one-way?
My query is pulling from something Iâm trying to figure out in my system, if it doesnât work as 2-way then Iâll need to figure out a new plan for batches/sprints. Iâll note, these tasks are within the same project, but appear in different filtered Lists based on different task types (Task vs. Content).
1 Like
Hi @Leslie_Montgomery , welcome to the forum 
Unfortunately, the current Reference field feature only supports one-way linking. Thus the reason why this thread still stands, for you and others to vote on.
The good news is that it is being considered with the hope that it will go into in-development sometime soon.
1 Like
New to the forum as we are about to start using Asana. Would love for the bi-directional Reference fields, similar to how it can be set up in Notion.
Our plan is to have a âLive Sessionâ task link to a âTopicsâ task so we can track when we presented on specific topics to our teams. One-way linking will be fine for now, but would 100% love auto-bidrectional linking.
1 Like
Fortunately, filtering objects is now possible for reference fields but it still has a few limitations. For instance, you can select tasks only within a specific project but you canât specify whether subtasks should also be included even though they arenât part of the project itself. This would be incredibly helpful to us.
So I hope this option is also planned for another feature update.
2 Likes
Hi @Cyrill , it seems like @Arthur_BEGOU also had the same idea, today!
Make sure to vote!
3 Likes
Adding an upvote here, mainly to push for a two-way link between tasks.
Currently, if I add a reference to one task, the linked task shows no hint of this connection being made.
I expected it to work almost exactly like Dependencies, in that a relationship is shown from both ends, just without the need to warn about blockers/prerequisites.
This request is in many ways an expansion of the Reference custom field.
Background
- The Reference custom field allows users to link to related tasks, projects, portfolios and/or goals, which is often used to point to relevant or supporting information.
- These relationships are not exactly dependencies, in that they donât block/arenât blocked by the references. Instead, they often inform/are informed by the references.
- Currently, adding a reference to a task (Task A) is one-wayâthe task being linked (Task B) does not display this relationship on its end.
- For one, Task Bâs home project might not have the same custom field set up.
- Task B also does not hint at this connection being made in its activity/comment log.
- The closest available solution is to manually create a breadcrumb both waysâmention the two tasks in their respective descriptions or in a comment.
- While this successfully creates a two-way connection, that link is embedded with a taskâs activity log, which is co-populated by lots of other activity (e.g. assignee changes, due date adjustments, etc.)
- Alternatively, while using Dependencies provides an easy look at connecting tasks, related tasks might not necessarily be intended to block or wait on each other, especially if the relationship is to a reference, if you will, and not a task (e.g. an entry in a project folder meant to act as a reference folder, instead of a to-do list.)
- Our team thinks it would be ideal to take the intuitiveness of adding links via Reference field and combine it with the at-a-glance visibility that Dependencies provides, by way of a Linked Tasks feature (the closest comparison I can provide here is the way ClickUp implements it, where Linked Tasks are managed similarly to Dependencies, without triggering blocking/blocked by warnings.)
Ideas
- With the Reference custom field, a way to make the relationship two-way is idealâfor linked tasks that are in projects that donât have the same custom field yet, an option to immediately add this to the project would help, though this may require a user to have permission to both tasks and/or projects.
- If we are to make this a built-in feature a la Dependencies, the immediate change is to remove the logic that triggers warnings for when a task is blocked/is blocking the linked task. A new section in the detailed task view that compiles all relationships would then be helpful, removing the need to dig through other comments/activity to find the relevant relationship.
@Stephen_Cruz I merged your post with the existing thread requesting two-way linking for reference fields. I do realize you are attempting to emphasize this request, and did a very good writeup on it; but itâs best not to dilute the votes into multiple threads for a request.
I created a separate thread because the proposed solution here sounded slightly different, but I trust your judgement here. I was worried that since this thread was from so long ago, it would unlikely see further action. Thanks for cleaning things up!
On the contrary, I canât promise anything but I know that 2-way reference fields are on Asanaâs radar screen.