# Is there a way to hide unused fields and features on Pipedrive deal records?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Custom fields in <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/pipedrive/reviews">Pipedrive</a> can be added, reordered and set as required or optional, and layouts can differ per pipeline. What is less direct is removing or hiding the fields and features that ship by default, which is where the question usually starts.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">That design makes a certain amount of sense once you think about who shares a deal record. Across <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/crm">CRM</a> tools generally this is a shared-record problem rather than a Pipedrive one. If every rep could strip their own view back to four fields, the data nobody considers essential stops being filled in, and six months later the reporting has holes in it. Consistency across a shared pipeline is the thing you trade away first.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Still, a rep who only ever touches five fields is scrolling past twenty, and that has its own cost.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">Some things I would genuinely like to know from people running this day to day:</p><ul>
<li>Whether marking fields optional rather than required gets you most of the way there</li>
<li>Whether separate pipelines are being used mainly to achieve different layouts</li>
<li>How you handle reps who want a minimal view when managers want full data</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">One thing I noticed while reading around this: the question comes up far more from teams who inherited a Pipedrive setup than from teams who built their own. That might be the real variable.</p><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">If you have simplified a Pipedrive deal view, what did you actually change, and did reporting suffer for it?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 2 days ago
- Author title: Marketing Executive
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

Making most fields optional and keeping only the essentials required got us most of the way there. Reps were happier and the reports still had what managers needed.

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: about 7 hours ago
- Author title: Jr. SEO Specialist





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4