Another vote for Option 2 -- the current limitations make for an unwieldy list of folders at the top level of the file hierarchy. Thank you for your efforts.

I would vote for option 2- I would like to file the 'shared folder' into my own folder structure. So that all items on the same topic are in one folder.

It would be very helpful to me if something like Option 2 existed. Using Box Sync can result in confusion with respect to ownership, especially with some projects that have both shared and private folders on similar projects.

I work on multiple multi-institutional projects (both with industry and academia) where there needs to be a distinction between private and shared folders (which is not always obvious via box sync) and cannot solely rely on a naming schema because of differing mindsets when it comes to approaches to filing/etc

I appreciate that there are probably reasons that make this difficult to do and that are outside of our view, because it depends on the actual data structure.
So, I will just add my voice to say that not being able to "relocate" and "rename" folders that are shared with me makes Box very cumbersome to deploy properly in enterprise situations, no matter the recommendations and work-arounds provided.

Not sure why this has been "researched" since 2017, users have been asking for option 2 since at least 2015. Is it really so hard to code a way for users create a folder structure in their own Box for shared content?

I think Option 2 is well-needed. I don't think having one "shared with me" folder will resolve the issue, as then the "shared with me" folder will be the cluttered folder. I would like to be able to organize my folders in the way that I want. The way that everything is in the root folder makes Box almost unusable.

Option 2 would drive great value, option 1 less so. Folder sprawl is the most urgent request from our organization and currently the greatest obstacle to adoption.

This becomes more of an issue every week, as collaborators invite me to share box folders for which the names are becoming more difficult to distinguish. We need a way to organize these folders in our own folder structure. Since it has been almost 2 years since this was classified as researching, can you give us any indication if Box will address this limitation?

Option 2. I need to organize the folders shared with me by project or person or other criteria. Moving them all from root to 'Shared with Me' is only a very slight improvement. I still end up with a mess to navigate in 'Shared with Me'.

Absolutely. Content sprawl is the number 1 issue for our organization.

Option 3: Allow me to organize my shared folders where I want them to be within other folders.

Google has a shared with me view and is a preferred folder view for our users. This helps with content sprawl.

This would give users the 'official' folders provided by it and a separate tab for folders and files 'shared with me'. This way they can easily understand what is official and what is collaborated

In addition to Recents, Favorites, and Synced to Desktop there should be a "Collaborated Folders" section to make it easier to view only folders that have been shared with an account.

User would like a way to be able to, at a glance, distinguish between collaborated folders that they own versus folders owned by others.